Posted on 01/21/2013 2:56:23 PM PST by neverdem
In my column this week, I asked why police officers should be allowed to have so-called high-capacity magazines if they have no defensive value. Since "no one needs" to fire more than X number of rounds before reloading (and assuming that "need" should define what people are allowed to possess), why not apply the same limit to everyone? It looks like the New York legislature, which this week reduced the state's magazine limit from 10 rounds to seven, did take an evenhanded approach—but only by accident. According to DNAinfo.com and WABC, the ABC station in New York, legislators were in such a rush to impose new gun restrictions that they forgot to exempt active-duty and retired law enforcement officers from the new magazine rule. Whoops.
Cops are complaining about the lack of a double standard:
"As a law enforcement officer for over 20 years, I understand the importance of instituting a new policy on mandating the limits of bullets that a regular citizen can possess, but as a matter of fact the bad guys are not going to follow this law," said Norman Seabrook, president of the correction officers union, the city's second largest.
"The way the current legislation is drafted, it actually handcuffs the law enforcement community from having the necessary ammunition needed to save lives," he said. "We must not allow this to happen."
Roy Richter, president of the Captains Endowment Association and a lawyer, said, "It puts retired officers in a position that the clip they were issued by the NYPD, carried for their careers and were fully trained on, is now considered contraband."
Michael J. Palladino, who is head of the NYPD's 6,000-member detectives union and president of the state's Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, which represents 50,000 members, joined in calling for Cuomo and the legislature to immediately amend the law.
"Gun reform must prevent criminals and the deranged from getting illegal weapons—not restrict law-abiding retired cops from protecting themselves and the public," Palladino said.
"I support the governor in gun reform, however the new legislation restricts law enforcement officers who retire, and that could jeopardize the safety of the public."
DNAinfo.com calls the absence of a law-enforcement exemption a "loophole in the law," but in fact it is the very opposite of a loophole: Cops are outraged at the possibility that they might be treated the same as "a regular citizen" under the law. One has to wonder: If, as Seabrook says, the new magazine limit will have no impact on criminals and if, as Seabrook and Palladino agree, more than seven rounds sometimes are necessary to "save lives," what justification can there be for imposing this arbitrary restriction not just on "law-abiding retired cops" but on law-abiding citizens in general?
A spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo told WABC, "We are still working out some details of the law, and the exemption will be included. Currently no police officer is in violation." I'm not sure why he says that, since the part of the law that bans pre-existing magazines holding more than 10 rounds is "effective immediately." According to WABC, "Nearly every law enforcement agency in the state carries handguns that have a 15-round capacity." The provision covering magazines that hold eight, nine, or 10 rounds takes effect on April 15. Contrary to what Richter says, such magazines won't actually be "contraband" for people who already have them, but their owners will be expected to put no more than seven rounds in them at a time. I am serious: That is what the law says. A prohibited "large capacity ammunition feeding device" is, among other things, a magazine legally obtained before April 15 that "contains more than seven rounds of ammunition."
It is implausible enough to suggest that a criminal—who by definition has no compunction about breaking the law, who is not legally permitted to possess firearms to begin with (if he has a felony record), and who is highly motivated to obtain the tools of his trade—would be deterred from obtaining a 10-round magazine by the legislature's new dictate, especially since plenty of them will remain in circulation. It is beyond fanciful to suppose that, having obtained a 10-round magazine, a criminal would think twice about putting more than seven rounds in it because legislators said he shouldn't. But in New York state, that whiff of a pretext suffices to abridge people's Second Amendment rights and, according to the cops clamoring for an exemption to the new limit, put lives at risk.
The Patrolmen's Benevolent Association says it is "actively working to enact changes to this law that will provide the appropriate exemptions from the law for active and retired law enforcement officers." State Sen. Eric Adams (D-Brooklyn), who is a former NYPD captain but nevertheless does not know which constitutional amendment protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures, told WABC he will introduce legislation restoring the double standard to which cops have become accustomed. "You can't give more ammo to the criminals," he explains. I thought that was the whole point of this law.
“Just asking the fastest badge-licker (you)-—”
-
Classy !
.
Hey I know, how about exempting those cops from the new laws who recite an oath of allegiance to Obama? It would have the added benefit of weeding out the troublemakers too.
Don’t understand why a cop would need more than 7 rounds while a citizen wouldn’t.
Most criminals try to avoid cops. But, they actively seek out citizens that they can overpower.
So, who needs high capacity magazines more?
What a great question. I have no sympathy for these LEOs sorry. They still think they should be treated different than the average citizen, even once they retire and join back in the ranks of the average citizen. Elitists indeed.
Or, a chihuahua and an African immigrant holding his wallet in the air ~ those bad boys would run out of bullets long before the chihuahua had given up the idea of biting their buttzoff!
So, I guess you don’t see the double standard then? Cops need high capacity mags’ to defend the citizens but citizens don’t need high capacity mags to defend themselves?
Some pigs (no disrespect intended look it up) are more equal than others. That’s just great.
And yes, I find the comments by the various police spokesmen very interesting. And revealing. But for the ones who need to get the message, It’ll go right over their heads.
Like you for instance.
The Irony and Idiocy abound.
If you want a cop in NY you will have to go to a ‘Gun Free Zone’ as we know the bad guys will pay attention to that part of it.
It does. A lot.
I say - good!
Let them be reduced to carrying .38 Special revolvers, or at least make them observe the 7-round limit when carrying outside of regular duty hours.
“Oh goody,another FR cop bashing thread.”
Nah, it’s an “elitist-excops who whine that the law is going to be applied to them the same as the little people.” This is a sub-category of cops.
What about me? Give the cops revolvers and regular people the glocks.
"The way the current legislation is drafted, it actually handcuffs the law enforcement community from having the necessary ammunition needed to save lives," he said. "We must not allow this to happen."
"After all, we are elite government officials, and our lives are worth four times more than regular citizens, as everybody knows."
(Okay, I made up that last bit. But it's what they mean.)
Bttt.
That's what got this started. In LA there was a bank robbery and three guys were able to hold off the entire LAPD. The cops were hopelessly outgunned with their revolvers against these bank robbers.
They won't be under armed again. But they expect us to be.
And to think that if they *really* passed what they wanted, as a state rep has revealed, of complete confiscation... would be amazing to see the looks on the cops faces as their gov made this “mistake”, and outlawed ALL their firearms.
[... and they’d have to disarm themselves, to boot!]
In a tragi-comic way it’s damned near hillarious. BTW, never let a cop tell you, you are a civilian. They are too.
How many politicians have a wife and more than six kids? Seven round mags are fine.
They are limiting magazines in NYC and the ACLU is silent. Newsweak folded and Time is getting skeered.
In this case, richly-deserved.
while there has been one or two nuts individually start a shootout in a police station, home invasions by one or more bad guys happen much more often.
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.