Bad news from California. Microstamping goes into effect for all new handguns sold in the state.
Cal DOJ certifies microstampingpatents open and microstamping mandated for all new handguns. oag.ca.gov/sites/all/file…?
— Jason Davis (@calgunlawyers) May 17, 2013
This is going to embolden it’s proponents here.
“It’s no secret Sheriff Timothy B. Howard is opposed to New York’s new gun-control law. But Howard, who is running for re-election this year, is now ratcheting up his opposition by filing a friend of the court brief in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the SAFE Act and, even more important perhaps, by suggesting the law not be enforced. “I’m more than reluctant,” he said of the new law Thursday. “I won’t enforce it.” …”
I have never heard an elected official from New York say that about a gun law.
“… Howard is not the only sheriff to oppose the law – his brief was filed by the New York State Sheriff’s Association – but his stance on enforcement does put him at odds with some of his like-minded peers. ”I don’t get to pick and choose what laws I enforce,” said Putnam County Sheriff Donald B. Smith, a former president of the association. “That’s exactly why we filed the amicus brief. We need to change this law.” Smith, like Howard, does view the SAFE Act as a step backward and a blow to law-abiding citizens, especially gun owners. The law, he said, may prove successful in limiting the type of weapons the general public can buy, but it will have little or no impact on what drug dealers, gang members and other criminals can get their hands on. “I actually call it the not-so-safe act,” Smith said. “Ultimately, why would we put our citizens at a disadvantage to the criminals.” …”
The Albany Police Union’s letter to the Governor answers that question: “You know that this shameful SAFE Act was about ideology and politics and not making anyone safer.”
“… Assemblyman Sean Ryan, D-Buffalo, almost couldn’t believe his ears when told of Howard’s public stance. “He said that?” Ryan asked incredulously. “There are all sorts of principled ways of going about this. Law enforcement officials aren’t allowed to pick and choose.” …”
It is a well established leftist tactic to refuse to enforce laws they don’t like. Ryan, who voted for SAFE, is just upset because the NYSSA’s stance makes both him and Governor Cuomo look bad. Speaking of which, I have been informed that the Governor has signaled to Democrat Chemung Co. Sheriff Christopher Moss that he will try to remove him from office if he does not enforce SAFE. Moss has also been critical of SAFE.
The New York Sheriffs Association has filed a amicus brief supporting the NYSRPA lawsuit against the SAFE Act. Their legal counsel is C.D. Michel, a well known gun lawyer from California who has worked with CRPA and often appears on NRANews. He is author of the book, “California Gun Laws – A guide to state and federal firearm regulations.”
Governor Cuomo has to be very angry over this.
Here is the latest update on NYSRPA’s lawsuit against the SAFE Act:
- We have filed both a Complaint and an Amended Complaint in the USDC for the Western District of New York. Our Amended Complaint claims that the SAFE Act is unconstitutional in that it violates the Second Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause, and is unconstitutionally vague.
- Subsequent to the filing of our Amended Complaint, we filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction asking the Court to Order all defendants to cease the enforcement and prosecution of the SAFE Act. The Court has not yet decided our request.
- After a hearing to establish a briefing schedule, Judge William Skretny issued a Scheduling Order. Under the Order, the following deadlines were set: the time for all defendants to file an Answer to the Amended Complaint was stayed until June 7.
- All defendants have until June 7 to respond to our motion for preliminary injunction or cross-move for dispositive relief.
- The plaintiffs have until July 8 to oppose any cross-motion by the defense and/or reply to any opposition to the motion for PI; and the defendants’ time to reply to any opposition filed by the plaintiffs was not decided, but will be addressed by the Court at a later date.
- The Court set August 23 as the next date for the parties to return to court, characterizing this date as a “status conference/hearing date, with emphasis for now on status conference.”
- To date NYSRPA has spent $164,000 on the suit and have received an additional $80,000 from the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund.
Some of the dumbest political analysis from Bob Lonsberry, “Pro-Gun Equals Anti-Casino“:
“Sorry, Andy, but it’s a no-go on the casinos. Upstate is not going to back you. It’s called payback, and it’s about to bite you on the arse …What am I talking about? About the convergence of two issues – the gun-banning New York SAFE Act and the governor’s plan to legalize casino gambling in New York … Somehow, as Andy sees it, three upstate casinos will turn around the economy of everything north of Westchester … The problem is, New York City isn’t behind him. To get the thing passed, he needs upstate … Which gets us back to his gun law … Pro-gun people across upstate must oppose the legalization of casino gambling … It’s about using this leverage to force a deal … It creates our best opportunity for using political pressure to get the NY Safe Act repealed …”
Nobody with any creditability seriously believes the Governor and legislature are going to do a 180 on SAFE. That simply is not going to happen. The issue of legalizing casinos is not a big deal either with politicians or the public. Lonsberry himself even acknowledges this. Why then assume the issue can be used for any sort of leverage?