All about guns, legislation and politics in New York
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.
The Buffalo News reports on the NYSSA support for the NYSRPA lawsuit, “Sheriff Howard on SAFE Act: ‘I won’t enforce it’“:
“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:
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?
I have seen a third pro-Cuomo ad running in the NYC media market. It starts off touting the SAFE Act then moves into the women’s lib crap he talked about during his State of the State.
Crain’s NY Business senses a chill in the air at the capitol:
“A state legislative session chilled by a gun-control backlash and corruption scandals took on new life last week when Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced he would push for approval of casino gambling now, rather than postpone that effort until 2014. Meanwhile, legislative leaders were moving toward agreements on a response to the scandals and on the governor’s women’s rights agenda. Albany had been in a standstill since its rushed passage of a gun-control law earlier this year sank the Democratic governor’s popularity upstate and inflicted Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos with buyer’s remorse …”
The media has repeatedly stated there is overwhelming public support for Cuomo’s gun control law. If this is true, then:
“… When Mr. Cuomo met several weeks ago with Mr. Skelos, the governor found the Long Island lawmaker determined to avoid another gun-control scenario. “Skelos said, ‘You’re not leading me down that path again,’ ” one Albany insider explained. Translation: The governor won’t get public financing of political campaigns, an expansion of abortion rights, decriminalization of low-level marijuana possession or anything else that smells funny to Senate Republicans …”
Why not? If SAFE is great and the public loves it, why not do it all again for other issues? A creditable news outlet would ask these questions. This leaves out tabloids like the Daily News and Journal News.
Another Cuomo is having flashbacks to the 90s, the Governor’s sister Maria:
“On this Mother’s Day, it is hard not to feel inspired and hopeful by the robust and sophisticated grassroots movement building of moms across America who have organized to fight for safer gun law legislation. And although disappointed by the lack political leadership on the issue, Mother’s Day offers a chance to recognize the undeniable force that is growing since the Newtown tragedy. If nothing else, we, moms, know how to get things done. On Labor Day 1999, My friend advocate mentor, and Million Mom March founder Donna Dees launched an unprecedented political gathering of mothers in D.C. With nothing more than a website and a permit to march, 25 moms and a NYC police lieutenant joined Donna at a press conference to announce that they were giving Congress nine months to pass sensible laws …”
That is patently false. Donna Dees-Thomas was a bigwig at CBS and BFF of Hillary Clinton. The whole MMM was professional dog-and-pony show put on with the help of the Clintons and their cronies. Then, like now, the antigunners were trying to fool politicians and the public with astroturf.
Legislative Report #7 is now online.
The Cuomo-controlled committee New Yorkers for Gun Safety is running at least two different television ads touting the SAFE Act.
There really isn’t any reason to do that other than to try and push up his poll numbers. Support for any federal gun control proposal is guaranteed by both Schumer and Gillibrand so it’s not as if he’s helping to revive the issue in Congress.