[Bernie K]

Bill 2994, gun registration in NY State it

A bill in New York would require gun owners to register their firearms and pay yearly ownership fees.

Senate bill 2994, introduced by Senator Eric Adams (D- Brooklyn), requires gun owners to register each firearm currently owned with their local county clerks office or local precinct station. The bill also requires that any firearms acquired in the future also be registered with the state, including such information as to where and how the gun was acquired.

Under the measure, gun owners would be required to provide the serial number of each firearm owned, in addition to their name, address, phone number, and the location of the firearm when not in use.

The bill also calls for a fee of $15.00 for each initial gun registration, In addition, gun owners would face a $10.00 a year renewal fee per gun.

Is this even legal under the constitution? BernieK

 

[kgun_shooter]

Probably not, but they don't care!

 

[timb99]

And their reasoning for this law?

Safety? It will keep us safer, exactly, HOW?

Its nothing more than a new tax, and many people will support it because it doesn't affect THEM.

And then they'll find out that it costs as much to administer the records as they're getting from the income. Net loss. Not a bit more safe (and still wrong even if it did make someone more safe.)

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

[W.P.T.]

NeW York much like Chicago don't care about the Constitution, with Obama in the White House its even worst because he don't care about it either ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

[cle]

And my oh my........would anybody be surprised if Sen. Adams' wife or son or brother-in-law just happened to "own" a company that was at the top of the list for the NY state contract to manage and administer the registration system............or is it only in IL that state business is done that way?

 

[willing]

I thought that New York City had that law now???

bill

 

[Jon Reitz]

Barney,

Thanks for the heads-up.

Jon Reitz

 

[Brian in Oregon]

Gun registration accomplishes this:

Generate more taxes and bureaucracy;

Make the cost of gun ownership go up;

Make gun ownership expensive for the poor;

Make large collections very expensive to own or cause them to be sold;

And above all else - provide a ready confiscation list.

It will do nothing for crime. The Supreme Court ruled a long time ago that criminals have no legal obligation to register their guns because that violates their Fifth Amendment right of no self incrimination. (So why do criminals get more rights than law-abiding citizens, hmmm?)

 

[dhip]

I want to help..ANYONE who has arms they don't care to register,ship them to me.I'll be sure they are never associated with you,your family or anyone dear to you. You won't have to worry about the government knocking on your door. I'll take all responsibility of that.Especially arms not registered in any way,they take priority on my list to help you out with this problem.P.M. me and I'll give you an address to ship them to.

Doug H.

 

[Beretta687EELL]

Look at the Canadian experience ... $2 to $3 billion spent and hasn't stopped or help solve any crime.

If the bill does pass, there are lots of ways to stymie the bureaucrats. Bill Malcolm

 

[Brian in Oregon]

A little math for a hypothetical gun collection...

Joe Collector is 40, and he has a nice collection of 75 guns. Joe can expect to live another 40 years, maybe more if ObamaCare doesn't ration his health care too much. Joe is going to wind up paying $1125 the first year, and $750 per year for the next 39 years, total for all 40 years being $30,375.

Meanwhile, Dan Dopedealer pays nothing, since the Supreme Court ruled he doesn't have to register his unlawfully owned handgun.

Please explain to me how this keeps us safe?

 

[Brian in Oregon]

Is this bill DOA already? The number doesn't turn up.

 

[Bernie K]

Brian, I just got this last night dated the 17th of this month. I took all the info off their web site ussportmen'salliance.org. I just tryed to go to that site and it comes up empty. I don't know what the problem is but I have gotten info from them before and it's been right on. Bernie

 

[Ontario Chris]

Barney,

I believe that the NYS Senate is controlled by the Republicans and would be surprised if it passed.

Chris

 

[870]

It is there. Was referred to Codes on 2/4/11. Not sure if anything happened since then. I believe he has introduced this at least 3 other times in the past and it died. Hopefully the same will occur this time.

 

[Brian in Oregon]

Depends on how many RINOs are in the NY Senate.

 

[Hawk46]

If Adams had introduced that bill here in Texas, he'd still be running for his life, LOL.

 

[KeepWoodOnWood]

From the bill "There are many firearms that are illegally possessed in New
York State but by implementing a constant registry of firearms we can
come a step closer to identifying those illegal firearms."

I know this is a rhetorical question, but did they think about that before they wrote it? How do they propose to identify the "illegally possessed" firearms that aren't registered? By definition, doesn't excluding a firearm from registration make it illegally possessed and thus the largest number of illegally possessed will be those that this law renders possessed illegally. Wait, maybe they did think about this. When they find a firearm that otherwise would have been legally possessed prior to this bill becoming law, they can confiscate it and tout the large number of illegally possessed guns they've taken off the streets.

Clever buggers!

But I still doubt they put that much thought into it. I don't think they can connect the dots that those that are already possessing the firearms illegally won't register them.

Ron

 

[Brian in Oregon]

They simply want control over law abiding gun owners, and they see law abiding gun owners as a cash cow.

I wonder how many New Yorkers will wind up registering a token gun or two, with the rest hidden? It's estimated that in Commiefornia only 10% of the "assault weapons" got registered.

The updated version of the old joke will be: Why do new Yorkers oil their garden? Because their guns are buried there.

 

[shotgunpeople]

AND BERNIE,

My new state wants to loosen the laws...Story below...

Soooo glad I got out of NY...

It was 80 here yesterday tooo.

Shooting ATA at the club this morning in 70 degree weather..

A lot of pluses for this move...

Dave in SC

SC may allow concealed guns without permit

By JIM DAVENPORT, Associated Press The Times and Democrat | Posted: Thursday, February 17, 2011 6:30 am | (3) Comments

COLUMBIA - A House panel on Thursday will take up a bill that would allow anyone who can legally own a firearm in the state to carry a concealed weapon without a permit.

The move to loosen gun laws comes in the wake of the Jan. 8 Arizona shootings that killed six and left U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords recovering from a gunshot wound to the head, as well as a Dec. 14 incident in Florida where an armed man threatened school board members before he was fatally shot by security.

But rather than seeking to tighten gun restrictions, as some Democrats have urged President Barack Obama to do on the federal level, South Carolina lawmakers are looking at how to make it easier to carry weapons for protection.

A House panel last month rejected efforts to give public officials more freedom to carry guns to protect themselves because gun rights advocates said they shouldn't be singled out for special treatment. Instead, that House panel now will consider doing away with the permit requirements for carrying concealed weapons. The measure has 36 of the House's 123 members signed on as supporters and few vocal opponents.

"People have a constitutional right by the Second Amendment to keep and bear - not just keep, but bear - arms for self protection," said state Rep. Mike Pitts, a Republican and retired Greenville police officer who introduced the bill Jan. 12. Pitts noted that recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions have affirmed rights to carry guns for personal protection. "This would be a purist form of the Second Amendment."

But it's a trip to the Wild West, said opponent and state Rep. Joe Neal, a Hopkins Democrat. "We have descended into the depths of madness," he said.

The legislation also would give concealed weapons holders a break. For instance, they now can't go to place that serves alcohol even if they're just eating a meal. Pitts still wants to keep guns out of bars, but says they should be allowed in restaurants that serve alcohol, unless the business prohibits concealed weapons.

Concealed weapons permits would still be needed for people who travel to 17 states that recognize South Carolina's gun permits, including Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.

Pitts said the looser gun law is needed because "the world is becoming a more and more dangerous place and law enforcement can't be everywhere."

Even as a retired police officer, Pitts said, concealed weapons are an equalizer. "No one should ever be put in a position of having to watch their family hurt or killed by anyone and not have the ability to stop that individual. No American citizen should be put in that position," Pitts said.

But Neal said the change would lead fewer people to get concealed weapons permits and go through the safety and background checks that go with them.

"At least you've got to prove that you can handle a weapon safely and not endanger the public or yourself, Neal said. "How does this make us safer if everyone is armed everywhere so when someone gets angry they have a gun right at hand?" Neal asked.

Robert Butler, a lobbyist for South Carolina GrassRoots GunRights, said the legislation moves in the right direction, but has problems.

For instance, Butler notes, it could lead people to break federal laws covering how guns must be locked up at places like school property. Violating the federal law could send someone to prison for five years and mean they can never carry a gun again, Butler said.

Butler argues that there's no reason to prohibit carrying guns into places that sell alcohol. That's allowed in nearly 40 states, Butler said. "Why do we think we're morally and genetically inferior to the rest of the United States that acts responsibly?" Butler asked