Posted on 10/20/2015 5:55:07 AM PDT by EXCH54FE
On Monday, the Court of Appeals for the Second U.S. Circuit issued a long awaited decision on the constitutionality of the most drastic gun control law in U.S. history, the New York SAFE Act of 2013. The Second Circuit ruled that nearly all of the law does not violate the Second Amendment.
The SAFE ("Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement") Act was presented to the New York State Senate and passed into law in 15 minutes. No debate was allowed, and senators did not have time to read the bill before voting it into law.
The SAFE Act is a complete ban on the sale or transfer of all military-style semi-automatic rifles manufactured within the past several decades. It is a total ban on the AR-15, AK-47, M-14/M-1a, HK G3, Steyr AUG, and many other civilian copies of military firearms. Prior to the passage of the law, Gov. Cuomo publicly stated that he was considering "confiscation" of existing rifles, but the final version of the law allowed existing owners to keep their rifles as long as they registered them with the State. Upon the death of the owner, the rifle will be confiscated; it cannot be transferred to an heir within New York State.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Not sure I want this case before USSC right now. The verdict is based on the notion “yes you may have such a weapon, so long as it doesn’t have one of these cosmetic features [which may be banned because they make it more deadly].” Given the suspicion that the Obama administration is persuading USSC judges to produce certain outcomes, and the already close balance of the court, it would only take coercing 1-2 people to approve the 2nd Circuit’s verdict.
We had a full-on federal ban much like the NY SAFE law for 10 years - no USSC case arose, pro-gun types spent the whole time either ignoring the law or tying themselves in knots trying to comply, and the ban ended only because there was a sunset clause.
USSC won’t take the case because it’s not actually about a blanket categorical ban; instead, it’s about “cosmetics” banned on the premise that they make a category trivially more dangerous. They’ll only take it if another Circuit Court overturns a practically identical law, and a plaintiff is somehow affected by both conflicting rulings.
They can’t vote crooks out of office. They,re crooks!!
That’s why they keep harping on “reasonable restrictions” and contending there is ALWAYS some sort of infringement which trumps “shall not be infringed” (say, using taxpayer dollars to purchase machineguns for clinically insane incarcerated mass murderers for in-prison unrestricted use - “you can ‘infringe’ that, right?”).
“Never mind that “grenade launchers and silencers” are, for all practical purposes, never used in crimes.”
Politicians are not concerned at all about “crime” against citizens. Politicians are afraid these weapons are going to be used against “them.”
I cannot fathom why any responsible legislator would vote for a bill that he had not read.
Yup. In order to confiscate a weapon you have to know it exists and who has it. CT’s estimations had a range of a couple hundred thousand weapons. IOW the state wouldn’t even know where to begin to go looking for them.
And, as it is, there are loopholes even in laws like NYSAFE. I’ve seen pictures of various AR-15 mods that bring them into compliance. They’re pretty funny in both their simplicity and purely cosmetic nature, actually.
The 2nd Circuit has made its decision. And I have made mine. I will not give up my guns without dying first. I will not. There is a line which civilized people do not allow governments to cross, as history has taught us, without being in peril of death, or worse. That line is disarmament. I will not let these people take my birthright. Join me. We must stick together, and stick to our guns.
“I believe that the anti-gunners have been trying to expunge the meaning of the word “infringe” so that they, and they alone, get to determine what is acceptable infringement.”
The phrase “right of the people to keep and bear arms” and the phrase “shall not be infringed” are both important.
The Supreme Court has been refusing to hear these cases.
I suspect that neither side knows for sure which way Kennedy or Roberts will jump.
Do we really want the Court to hear such a case with President Obama in power? He has the full force of the NSA, CIA, and the FBI to bring to bear on a Justice, if it is needed to get the decision that he wants.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
District of Connecticut
Eastern District of New York
Northern District of New York
Southern District of New York
Western District of New York
District of Vermont
Carter 2
Reagan 1
GHW Bush 2
Clinton 7
GW Bush 5
Obama 5
Democrat 14
Republican 8
My point is that I don’t worry about it until the scotus weighs in.
Besides the obvious Second Amendment infringement, I have never understood how a gun ban that grandfather possession of currently owned firearms can be constitutional under the equal protection under the law right.
More than that. Any proposed bill should first be put up on a website, for at least two weeks. Let the average citizen read it.
Yep, too late.............
“Let the average citizen read it.”
Agreed. But that is transparency.
The least transparent people in any society are those that are the most evil, crooked, power hungry wastes of human flesh any society can possibly have.
When they wind up in government and have an effective propaganda machine (the MSM) they eventually create scenarios where a Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot or Mao will emerge and just simply take over.
What is truly the saddest part is the people just don’t care.
Lets face facts NY and most of the NE are the Democratic Socialist states of America. Its not like NY is really even part of America anymore like CA. Down here in the South we hardly even recognize their existence. There is an intellectual disconnect that eventually is going to lead to the physical disconnect. Our guns are never going to be taken away or restricted. Not in a million years.
Precisely. And "no", I didn't lose them in a terrible boating accident.
You need to understand, because it's of tactical importance: Don't be distracted by the paper tiger. The Leninists are only in the big cities. For instance, look at "blue states" like Oregon, Calif., Penna., Conn., New York State. Vast areas of land, with economies dominated by agriculture, where the dominant outdoor sport is hunting, with millions upon millions of NRA-member gun owners.
Many of those counted as Democrat "voters" in those cities didn't even cast a vote themselves—they're either dead or didn't show up at the polls due to age or drug use, and their vote was cast for them by the Democratic machine.
“I just cannot possibly fathom why bills are not allowed to be read before voting.”
Why don’t they refuse to vote or vote “no”. That would solve the problem of these sneaky bills.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.