Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 3/11/2001 11:34:23 AM EDT
Does anyone know if this B.S. law went into effect ? I was talking to a leo the other day and she said she thought it had passed.If it is true , I guess I will be looking for a place in PA. Probably due to Mrs. Klinton!  Thanks Guys
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 12:03:14 PM EDT
It went into effect on November 1, 2000.  From what I've been told, the law mirrors the federal AW ban only the state law has no sunset provision.  So, even if the federal ban expires in 2004, things will still be the same in NYS.

If that does happen, that is when I leave NYS for sure.

Actually, this had nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.  This is state law.  It had everything to do with our wonderful sellout Republicans like Pataki, Bruno, etc.
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 1:12:54 PM EDT
Ditto to what the man said.  No reason to move out of NYS, it's still business as usual.  But 2004 is a different story... If the fed ban expires without being renewed, that'll be the time to get the flock out of NYS!

Link Posted: 3/11/2001 2:35:39 PM EDT
OK guys, some clarification here please, are we taking New York City or the whole state?  All of my post military plans for school ect are going up in smoke if you cant have ARs and AKs in New York State.

Link Posted: 3/11/2001 2:54:13 PM EDT
Its the whole state lucas. However, as the others have said, its still 'business as usual'

The wording in the NY state ban does say 'possessed' as opposed to 'manufactured' regarding the Sept 94 date, but word I have gotten from several state legiscritters is that the 'intent' of the law was to mirror the fed ban. You'll find that several dealers in the state are a bit leary selling/bringing in preban rifles as well as some postbans. But the majority are conducting things as usual.

I highly doubt the fed ban will sunset, especially with it being an election year. Whats the point in 'running' anymore - pretty soon theres going to be no place to hide. Buy everything you can, as soon as you can [;)]
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 5:12:02 PM EDT
so how does this law affect someone moving to New York state?  Is it illegal to bring these guns into the state?  
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 6:00:57 PM EDT
As long as the weapon(s) is legal according to the federal AW ban as either a "grandfathered" pre-ban assault weapon or a post-ban legal version of the same, it is perfectly legal according to state law to own and use.  This applies to people moving into NYS as well.  They can bring in as many semi-auto AR-15s, AKs, etc. as they want.

The only other thing I want to mention is that the above is true for semi-auto guns only.  Residents of other states where Class 3 automatic weapons are legal with permission cannot bring them into NYS.  It is unlawful in the state to own or possess Class 3 weapons, regardless of federal policy.

I mention the last part because I was asked this question by someone recently who legally owns an automatic rifle in another state and is moving to NY soon as part of a job transfer.  He was pretty disappointed, to say the least.

Link Posted: 3/11/2001 8:28:14 PM EDT
NYC law overrides NY State law. I use to live there.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 3:22:24 AM EDT
Yes, NYC ordinances can be more restrictive than state law, but I think "override" is the wrong word.  If NYC was to pass an ordinance allowing residents to own Class 3 weapons with federal permission and police chief sign off (yeah right) they still couldn't because of the overriding state law (superior clause).  It's the same as the relationship between federal and state law.  A state law which is more permissible than federal law is invalid.  Of course, this is only theoretical because we all know NYC is more restrictive for anything than NYS.  NYC is as close to a "police state" as you can get in the US.  

So, the spirit of what karlozg has said is correct in that what is legal in areas of NYS outside of NYC may not be once you cross over into one of the boroughs.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 6:54:10 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 7:21:28 AM EDT
All the above is what the present thinking or interpretation of this law are.
Lets not forget no court case has been heard on this issue. The NYS justice department has stated the intent of the law is a mimic of the federal law but reading the law says other wise. Such vagueness of this law should be enough to void it. Nobody has yet given a straight answer to the full meaning of the law. No court case has been heard to challenge the law. I personally still do not trust NY State on this issue. I don't feel threatened by it. Being should I be charged with any of the points of the law I am well with in the legal parameters.
More or less it seems everyone is waiting for the poor person to be nabbed and tried under this law to see what the court has to say. Kind of F---ed up if you ask me.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 8:07:10 AM EDT
Several people on this thread have said it correctly, the NYS law mirrors the Federal one without the automatic sunset provision.  Here is the relevant language straight from the "Sponsor's Memo" which defines the intent of the law.

S8234 PADAVAN (Assualt Weapons Ban)

STATUS:  Passed  (see page 20 for Sponsor’s memo indicating “intent” of this law)

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: (from Sponsor's Memo, this is the important part)
§ 265.00.  Subdivision 21 defines "semiautomatic." Subdivision 22 defines an "assault weapon" as meaning a named list of federally barred firearms and semiautomatic rifles, shotguns or pistols that possess at least two specified characteristics, including features such as a fold-ing or telescoping stock, a bayonet mount, a flash suppressor or a silencer. The term expressly excludes rifles and shotguns that cannot accept a detachable magazine holding more than five rounds and weapons as manufactured on October 1, 1993 which are set forth in a listing under federal law.  Subdivision 23 defines the term "large capacity ammunition feeding device" to mean a magazine or similar device manufac-tured after September 13, 1994 which has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition, but does not include a tubular device which only accepts .22 caliber ammunition. [red]The definition of "assault weapon" and "large capacity ammunition feeding device" mirrors federal law and is not intended to prohibit possession of any weapon that is not prohibited under federal law.[/red]

Now all this doesn't mean that some SOB DA can't try and interpret something else from this POS, but it should give them pause.  All it means it that we're not YET the PRNY.  But hey, give Chuck and Hillary a chance.  I'm sure they will try and come through for the elite, and with Republicans like Pataki and Bruno, they might just succeed.

Democrats:  THREAT or MENACE?  You choose.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top