More gun control in New York
Republicans sold New Yorkers out and caved on some of the most onerous gun laws seen to date. One thing the bill does is it moves the arbitrary number of rounds a magazine should hold according to people who don’t know guns from 10 to 7. No grandfathering, in some cases. Your Ruger 10/22 factory magazine is now illegal.
All sales must be background checked. And your therapist can report you if they think you’re a danger. And background checks (and fees) on ammo buys.
One one hand, I find that the restrictions being so onerous makes them ripe for a court challenge. But Jacob says NYers are fucked.
All you gun companies located in NY should pull out.
Update: Sebastian:
The new law in New York does not outlaw magazines that hold more than 7 rounds. You can still own a magazine that holds up to ten. It’s just that if you put more than 7 rounds in the magazine, you’re a criminal.
That’s about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
January 15th, 2013 at 12:09 pm
The only difference between Dems and the GOP in NY is that the Albany Times Union hates the GOP.
All NY pols are feckless, dishoneat and utterly corrupt.
January 15th, 2013 at 12:20 pm
7 rounds? Why everybody knows you only NEED 3 rounds if you hunt. Ban 7 round assault clips now!
January 15th, 2013 at 12:42 pm
Hmm, where do I find a 7 round magazine for a M1 carbine and a 7 round clip for a Garand?
January 15th, 2013 at 12:56 pm
Markie Marxist sez: “Hmmmm. I think maybe we’ll go after sniper rifles for a while now, and then maybe those rapid-fire lever-actions, pump-actions, and magazine-fed, bolt-action rifles, you know, the ones that fire almost as fast as a banned assault rifle. Then we can revist the magazine restrictions. I’m thinking maybe 4 rounds. Everyone expects us to go to 5, but they were expecting 10 and we got 7, so we might as well go 4. Of course, a .50 caliber rifle ban is a foregone conclusion, so we’ll accomplish that by banning anything over .40 caliber, even handguns. Boy! This gun control thing has suddenly become a real walk in the park, hasn’t it? Ha! Ha!”
January 15th, 2013 at 1:09 pm
The actual text of the law can be found here. It’s 67 pages long.
Will Garands work without a clip (can you just load the magazine directly)? It looks like the rifle itself might not be covered, just the clips. OTOH, I may be reading that wrong – I’m not sure if the phrasing in that section amounts to a distinction between a fixed magazine and a detachable one or not, but they do specifically make that distinction for shotguns.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:11 pm
No grandfathering? Thats a court chalenge on account of ex-post-facto law.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:13 pm
Our politicians in this state are ex-post-facto douchebags.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:24 pm
As you may have noticed with Schumer, Gillibrand, Cuomo, Hillary, Bloomberg and others, New York is not really part of the United States of America, and hasn’t been for some time. I think that it has a spiritual connection to the former East Germany. I hope to escape from New York some day, if I can get over the wall.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:27 pm
No, you need the clip to make the gun work, although ISTR you can single load the chamber without a clip, at even greater risk to you thumb.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:39 pm
Okay, I had read that the mag would have to be modified to limit it to 7. However, if you have a mag that can hold up to 10, and you have 7 rounds in it, and one in the chamber, the police could take that one round and put it in the magazine “for you”, right?
This is going to be a mess.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:41 pm
I think it was intended to be a mess. Throw a mess of rules together and laugh while the people who are trying to avoid incarceration stuggle to sort it out, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
Nice people, those liberals.
January 15th, 2013 at 1:53 pm
DocMerlin —
No, an ex post facto law is one that criminalizes behavior undertaken BEFORE the law went into effect.
Banning something that previously was legal to possess is not ex post facto, even if there is no grandfather clause. It just means you have to dispose of your stuff before the law takes effect and makes it contraband.
You could try to make a “de facto” ex post facto argument, if the law went into effect IMMEDIATELY, with no delay and no amnesty period to permit you to lawfully surrender your stuff WITHOUT penalty, so that you had no reasonable opportunity to dispose of your stuff before it became contraband.
January 15th, 2013 at 2:12 pm
Most anywhere I’ve been, a gang of men meeting in the dead of night to deprive the honest of their property and rights would be called criminals.
In New York, apparently they are called Senators.
January 15th, 2013 at 2:14 pm
Dumb. And maddening. So much that if I were a NY, at least until my plans were finalized to *leave* the gawdfersakin place, I’d probably spend 15 minutes every day taking a 10 round mag with 7 rounds in it and keep inserting an 8th round and removing it, saying “F*** you Cuomo” every time. Just because.
Sorry. Sometimes evil being thrust upon makes think of doing irrational things.
January 15th, 2013 at 2:18 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/ny-poised-1st-pass-post-massacre-gun-bill-181248937.html
“Ammunition magazines would be restricted to seven bullets, from the current 10, and current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. An owner caught at home with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge.”
So for a year the mags are OK as long as you just put 7 into them. Owners can sell the mags out of state. Too dangerous for NY residents but not for others… ???
January 15th, 2013 at 2:23 pm
Re. the M1 Garand clips (wow, and actual, bonafide, legitimate use of “clip”, woohoo!), you can get 2 round and 5 round clips, and also a ‘sled’ that allows for safer single loading (loading a round in the chamber has, I’m told, some risk of a slam fire without the sled). But the stock eight rounders are relatively cheap, plentiful, and ubiquitous. The others, not so much.
January 15th, 2013 at 2:26 pm
No more than 7 rounds in the magazine or you’re f***ed, eh? Better count those rounds twice, amigos!
Let us not forget two things in all this.
First, the push for this garbage is coming from the PEOPLE of NY (City and State). No, not all of them, but the majority. No need to sugarcoat the truth: there are some states where the bulk of the residents DEMAND gun control, higher taxes, and more regulation. NY is high on the list.
Second, there are a lot of people migratin’ out of NY who just looooove ’em some gun control and they’re taking up residence in otherwise-sane states. You know who they are — the same ones writing letters to the editor demanding TN/GA/FL/VA politicians “do something” to ban guns, get rid of concealed carry, and make it illegaler to carry a gun in school. They crapped in their Wheaties bowl up north, found the taste not to their liking, and now they arrived to crap in YOUR bowl so you can share in all the yummy goodness. “For the Children”, of course….
January 15th, 2013 at 4:43 pm
What about a Winchester 1873? That has a 15 round magazine.
January 15th, 2013 at 5:40 pm
“An owner caught at home with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge.”
And anti-gun, Albany County District Attorney, David Soares, who spoke in support of gun control at the recent Saratoga gun show, is just the man to do that, if he can prove that you shot at his Marxist/warrior/hero/criminals more than 8 times.
I think that part of this is about disarming down the suburbs and rural areas, so that the drug gangs can move in. They pay off your local police, and you legally have a double-barrel shotgun against their state of the art, illegal firepower. Try not to get killed, while they sell drugs to your kids, who then want to join the “really cool” gang instead of going to school.
January 15th, 2013 at 6:06 pm
So are you going to be able to top off a mag? So I put 7 rounds in my 8-round 1911 mag, chamber a round, then top it off. Am I a criminal, or do they even realize that I can do that?
January 15th, 2013 at 6:38 pm
Every canary in the coal mine, dead as a hammer.
January 15th, 2013 at 7:08 pm
I’ve stated it before and I’ll state it again:
Where the Hell is the Punisher when he’s needed right now?
Because that’s exactly the way I see New York is headed.
SOME people are going to realize that with all the corruption that the elected politicians refuse to deal with, the only hope for cleaning up the city, and then the state, is for someone to completely abandon all pretense of rule of law – and start wiping out the corruption by means of cold blooded, calculating, merciless violence.
Horrible idea? Most certainly.
Disgusting? Of course.
Is it inevitable? I think yes, it is.
Why? Because ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE over the past 30 years has done a single damn thing to break the death-grip that liberal corruption has on New York.
Case in point? Somewhere back in time, someone put an inviolable rule in place, to wit: NO politician, under ANY circumstances, may be elected Mayor for more than TWO terms.
Guess what? The New Yorkers could not enforce even THAT idiot-simple rule.
And also, if these mentally decrepit citizens think that airtight gun control laws can stop a prospective Punisher, then let them make their arguement after hizzhonor the Lord High Bloomberg does a swan dive out of a window 40 stories above the sidewalk – when they finally realize that nobody needs a gun… to remove a corrupt politician from power.
Am I looking forward to that day? Hell, no. It’s going to be uglier than September 11th, 2001 if and when it finally does happen.
And my overall point of my ranting, people?
Simple.
It’s the price WE ALL are going to pay for being tolerant of corruption.
Here ends my impromptu lecture.
God and martyrs, I really need a stiff drink right now.
January 15th, 2013 at 7:23 pm
OK, so does that mean I may legally load only 7 rounds in my S&W 627? Or, can I load 8 individual rounds in the cylinder, but may only load 7 rounds in a moon clip because it’s an “ammunition feeding device”?
I am astounded these people are smart enough to feed and dress themselves.
January 15th, 2013 at 7:34 pm
Its now a misdemeanor to miscount.
January 15th, 2013 at 9:36 pm
I’ve argued against it in the past… but I’m really starting to come around to the notion that certain states should be sacrificed to the insanities of socialism/liberalism so that the rest of us can be saved.
January 15th, 2013 at 9:38 pm
@Chas
“I hope to escape from New York some day, if I can get over the wall.”
I’ll be in that area in early February. I haz a big suitcase, going south to a free’r land.
January 15th, 2013 at 11:07 pm
“I think that part of this is about disarming down the suburbs and rural areas, so that the drug gangs can move in.”
The first part definitely — notice there’s no mention of actually going after the people responsible for most gun violence. No more money for going after felons in possession, just bans on things of no interest to a gang banger or a hold-up thug.
I was amused to see a lefty over at NRO endlessly repeating that “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines are used in crimes EVERY DAY! Clown college must be proud of him.
January 16th, 2013 at 7:30 am
“That’s about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.”
It allows a gun owner to think that he’s complying with the law, until the police top off his magazine for him and make him into a criminal.
The antis know exactly what they’re doing. They spend a lot of time thinking about how to use the government to abuse us.
I don’t think that this 7-round thing just popped out of nowhere. There are people who hate the Second Amendment who have spent a lot of time carefully engineering our destruction by legislation. We’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg. I don’t doubt that Bloomberg has government-connected gun experts on his payroll to advise him and his MAIG on exactly how many rounds to ban down to, and the particular effects of each specific number.
I haven’t heard how this is supposed to work with Garands. They take 8 round clips, but the new limit is 7. The M-1 Garand is now banned in New York State.
Like the delayed death of crucifixion, this is meant to be punishment. We’re supposed to suffer confusion about what the law means. They do not have our benefit in mind; they do mean to destroy us eventually.