Didn't work down State, perhaps Schneiderman thinks it'll work in Western NY:
http://www.twcnews.com/nys/rochester/crime/2016/11/28/former-henrietta-firearms-dealer-in-court.html

Given that there is no concrete information available to dealers as what constitutes an Unsafe legal semi auto weapon this could get interesting.  A lot depends on the intestinal fortitude of all the defendants and how far they are willing to gamble their freedom.

FIFY.    Most court cases are a matter of fiscal, not moral or even legal, matters.   Schneiderman has millions to spend.   Jackson, not so much.   The legal system is designed to bleed the defendant dry so they can't put up a fight.

Here is another article:

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2016/11/28/two-men-arraigned-safe-act-violations/94556546/

I plan to donate to his legal fund. Cordell is  one of the good guys.

Who's the dumb fucks that let the purple tie gestapo check their rifles? Untaxed cigarettes!? This whole thing is a shit show and more people should be up in arms over this bullshit.

Government should be given the same budget as the defendant when exhausted that's the end, no more unlimited persecution by government or it's agents.

Couldn't get the audio to play and didn't see any mention in the article.  Any idea what he was selling that are being classified as Assault Rifles?

Isn't this an opportunity to go to the supreme court and have this fucking bullshit unsafe act thrown out?

Its all bullshit total fucking bullshit

"allegedly observed three illegal high-capacity ammunition feeding devices in plain view,”

Tagged for a Legal Defense Fund

Absolutely one of the greatest truths to avoid artificial incarceration.     If you want to read a great (true) story about government blowing millions on a malicious persecution read Rex Appeal about an archy who dug up a T Rex that the government wanted- and when he fought back the government taught him a lesson.

Yet another example of why  the Founding Fathers placed so many limitations on the Federal Government:  "...those powers not specifically enumerated ...are retained by the State."  
On a tangent (and not favorable to NY, yet overall liberating) is the case in Kansas where the State passed Laws allowing Firearms made in Kansas exemption from the Federal Govt.  If won, it would gut all Federal Firearms Laws, relegating those Laws to the discretion of the State....This was my major concern over un-SAFE ie. States Rights vs Federal Laws.
Back to the subject at hand; This will be a protracted case and like the one Five-Head blew down in Long Island.....when they  know there're going to loose, they will offer a plea deal, and a change of venue.....watch for it.  

Was that story on TV a while back?

Sounds good in theory but doesn't work so good in reality.
Investigations cost money, prosecutions cost money
This state bends over backwards for defendants.
Now we're providing legal counsel at initial arraignment, something we never did.
In this state you can't set foot in a jail without seeing a judge first, unlike other states where you can be held for days before seeing a  judge.
We're spending a  ton of money on ATI programs
On top of it all once convicted, the most serious criminals don't even face a real punishment like the death penalty
Slaps on the wrist are more common than not

I don't have all the answers but, hurting people who haven't hurt anyone via fine or jail for what ever you consider a crime is way out of control. I'm not trying to pick a fight, and yes we do need a few laws, but we need to get rid of a ton of laws and we also need our leaders to stop writing new laws, at least until they get a handle on enforcing the laws we already have.

I swear this is what they wanted all along. A law that no one really knows how to enforce so they can enforce it any way they want.

Let me ask a question. If there are a few attorneys right here and now posting why aren't they contributing sometime? To post here we all have much in common I believe for one and foremost we are all pro 2nd amendment.. With that being said our constitutional rights have been gutted on many fronts.  Scalia Ruled that burning the American flag is a first amendment right of free speech. When Trump made a comment about  flag burning Obamas press secretary comments interpreted the 1st amendment like he was a constitutionalist. If Obamas press secretary interpreted the 2nd amendment like the 1st amendment these unfortunate guys would not be in this disgraceful situation.  Inasmuch as I feel I am not as scholarly like many of you guys I find we do lots of talking with little to no action when it comes to supporting our arguments.

Laws are loosely interpreted to fit the narrative which is fine line between the criminal and legal system.

So you're Ok with all crimes as long as there isn't a "victim" eh?
So how far does this victimless crime thing extend for you?
Our DAs office now defines burglary as a victimless crime.
I remember being 14 and coming home to a burglarized house. I'm pretty sure I felt victimized.

I'm all for having laws reviewed periodically. Not that they all have a sunset date built in, but a periodic review is a good thing.
Getting rid of a ton of laws..well, I am guessing that most of those laws you want to get rid of are there because people in adequate numbers either believe in them or haven't had a reason to demand their being rescinded.
Not looking for a fight when I say that, just saying what is reality.

Bro I understand, you misinterpret my meaning. Obviously if someone steals from you whether it be an individual or a giant corporation they should be held to account. That is not a victim-less crime, you sir know what I mean. There are lots of laws that make every single one of us a criminal in one way shape or form every day we exist, that needs to cease. Own a piece of property, just owning something in NY can get you put away there is no recourse, no redress to having these laws thrown out if you don't agree NY isn't for you. I'm certain Andy boy said that. So what do you say we should do about it? Seriously?

This case is an excellent example of government abuse of the system on so many fronts.

The fact is NYS has so far spent how much?   $200k maybe?  to investigate this purported crime.    And they'll spend much more.

Meanwhile, the victim has had his business (that's income) terminated, untold value in assets seized, PCs and other records seized.    The latter alone can account for untold hours to recover.   So the victim starts with no money, no assets, and no records.

NYS meanwhile goes after his customers and scares them into giving statements and cooperating.   What does the victim have for defense?   Nothing.

Then, every stupid piece of paper needed, every document filed, all that NYS charges for!   And then there's the dance.  How many court appearances?    How much legal research (THAT you don't get with the public defender.)  

The problem remains- government has virtually unlimited resources, the accused does not.    If nothing else, if we want to make things "fair' the prosecutor should pay the defense attorney at the attorney's current rates.   That won't happen- because it's all part of the racket.     And, if the defendant wins the case, he walks- but in all cases the cops, prosecutor(s) and judges also walk- doesn't strike me as fair.

Well I have two comments: 1) It's astounding on how many crimes are charged as felonies: Some really don't give a crap if they have one or not, but it's overkill in too many cases.

2) Be very careful with that "enforcing the ones we already have" as one is un-SAFE. and a good many others are over-reaching prior restraint.  Like out Tax system, it should be scrapped and start back out simple, fresh, and within the constraints of both the States and the Federal Constitutions.  

Your

 
a little late to the party. http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=8&f=9&t=602865

I remember that and donated after I read the story. I can only hope those who have their hands in this get the same treatment before they shuffle off.

While I am sure you're focusing on the SAFE act in your comments because of the thread topic. I've already pointed out one area where people are going to disagree with your definitions. Obviously you and I agree that there is a victim in theft. The DA here doesn't.
OPs definition of excessive punishment is anything that results in a fine or imprisonment if you fail to follow the law in question. Such an overly broad definition encompasses just about every law out there.
Is, lets say, failing to maintain insurance on your vehicle truly "victimless" that should be allowed without any penalty? The People through their representatives say that you need to have vehicle insurance if you operate your car on the road. People who can't seem to follow that rule get fined. Simple. Someone who gets run into by another person should be able to get compensation from the at-fault party without taking them to court. That's what the insurance is required for.

And the list goes on from there
The People through their representatives set certain rules on society and how we conduct ourselves. if you disagree with a particular law or think it needs to be changed, fight to do so. I personally think that many of our laws that set a particular charge based on dollar amounts need to be updated to take inflation into account. Other states are doing so; so should NYS. There are many inefficiencies that can be addressed without going full libertarian and declaring that everyone is literally on their own when it comes to laws on the books.


I agree that there is a trend towards over-felonization. You and I both know why they're doing that. They are trying to create as many prohibited persons as they can manage. No way should a 30 round magazine or an AR15 in its original intended form absent any criminal use be a felony in this state.

Representative government doesn't work, those in power only represent their own interests in order to maintain power, the proof is right in front of us it starts with our fair governor and continues on down, to me it seems more like a slow enslavement. This is only my opinion, and I stress that it is mine if you share this opinion cool, if not then let it roll. Like water off a ducks back.

It's worked well throughout history for petty tyrants to iron fisted dictators. "1984" clearly enunciates this, should one be able to read, understand and throughput context.

Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell (1949-London)

Most "get it" and as before this is a double edged sword and ironically enough the Country appears  split right down the middle (social engineering?)  Look at Election results: they are invariable shown with margins as close as a NASCAR race, same goes for our elected: it's 99% Party "A" or Party "B" with minimal crossings of the isle, Hell even SOCTUS is a dead split between following the Constitution as written or it being a "Living Document".
Matters not what the incoming administration says, it'll be rebuffed by the current one. (again polar opposites) Our Freedoms come with responsibility and to borrow a hypocritical term of "tolerance" the burning of the American Flag in protest is upsetting to those of us who've pledged to it, however just as yelling "fuck-you" to a Politician is reprehensible but legally protected free speech, we have to accept that Flag burning as such...course we could  always write a ticket for illegally setting a fire without permit, or attempted arson.  

It is my sincere hope the Trump Administration coupled with a new crop of Republican/Conservatives dominating Congress that the Country will revert from its errant ways and return (in time) to the principles that made this Country GREAT in the first place; repeating History isn't always a bad thing.  

The divide in this country is truly amazing.  It is so narrow that we flop back and forth between the left and right with just an ever so slight change in turnout on one side or the other.  Unfortunately, if the Republican's read this current election as a mandate, the same mistake the Democrat's made of the 2010 election when they foisted ObamaCare upon us, they will overreach and be rewarded with a loss of the House of Representatives in 2018.  Possibly even the Senate if they hold the Democrat's hold the seats they need to defend and take several of the 8 the Republican's are defending.  

I have no idea what the top legislative priorities are for the new government in January but I would bet good money gun rights is not on the top of the list in the first 100 days.  They want to roll back ObamaCare, convert Medicare vouchers for those not yet receiving it and scale back the EPA to start. Also Dodd-Frank and other financial regulatory laws will be gone too.  My gut feeling is it will be the same old dog and pony show we have seen for years.  The Republican's call out the gun owners for contributions and votes because "who else are you going to vote for", and then find something else to amuse themselves when they get in power only to solicit more contributions at the next election cycle.  The New York State Republican's played that game for years before Skelos dropped all pretense and passed SAFE.

Just remember, Obama went into office all wide eyed and bushy tailed 8 years ago with "hope and change".  We lost hope and got little change for the good.  The same forces that kept him at bay will continue to keep the new administration in check too.  It is the nature of the bureaucracy.