New York passes toughest gun laws in the nation

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

NY seals 1st state gun laws since Newtown massacre

ALBANY, N.Y. — New York lawmakers agreed to pass the toughest gun control law in the nation and the first since the Newtown, Conn., school shooting, calling for a tougher assault weapons ban and provisions to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill who make threats.

"This is a scourge on society," Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Monday night, six days after making gun control a centerpiece of his progressive agenda in his State of the State address. The bipartisan effort was fueled by the Newton tragedy that took the lives of 20 first graders and six educators. "At what point do you say, `No more innocent loss of life'?"

The measure also calls for restrictions on ammunition and the sale of guns. It is expected to pass Tuesday.

"This is not about taking anyone's rights away," said Sen. Jeffrey Klein, a Bronx Democrat. "It's about a safe society ... today we are setting the mark for the rest of the county to do what's right."

Under current state law, assault weapons are defined by having two "military rifle" features. The proposal would reduce that to one feature and include the popular pistol grip.

Private sales of assault weapons to someone other than an immediate family would be subject to a background check through a dealer. Also Internet sales of assault weapons would be banned, and failing to safely store a weapon could be subject to a misdemeanor charge.

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.

In another provision, a therapist who believes a mental health patient made a credible threat to use a gun illegally would be required to report it to a mental health director who would have to notify the state. A patient's gun could be taken from him or her.

The legislation also increases sentences for gun crimes including the shooting of a first responder that Cuomo called the "Webster provision." Last month in the western New York town of Webster, two firefighters were killed after responding to a fire set by the shooter, who eventually killed himself.

The measure passed the Senate 43-18 on the strength of support from Democrats, many of whom previously sponsored bills that were once blocked by Republicans. The Democrat-led Assembly gaveled out before midnight and planned to take the issue up at 10 a.m. Tuesday. It is expected to pass easily.

The governor confirmed the proposal, previously worked out in closed session, also would mandate a police registry of assault weapons, grandfathering in assault weapons already in private hands.

It was agreed upon exactly a month since the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy.

"It is well-balanced, it protects the Second Amendment," said Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos of Long Island.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20130115/US.Gun.Control.NY/

I am sure California will soon respond in kind, to make America safer.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I am sure California will soon respond in kind, to make America safer.

Things on the California list include requiring permits for ammunition sales effectively killing online sales.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I am sure California will soon respond in kind, to make America safer.

Sorry, only more guns will accomplish this.

[^_^ 5,021]

You know how they sell alcohol in Ontario. Through those lame LCBO stores? Maybe that is where we are going in America for guns. You can buy, but only from the Federal Government. That way they know who has what.

I only hope when the ChiComs invade the Federal Government doesn't just hand over an Oracle client with the necessary username/passwords. That would be bad.

[Teddy B 17,252]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358273781' post='5923443]

You know how they sell alcohol in Ontario. Through those lame LCBO stores? Maybe that is where we are going in America for guns. You can buy, but only from the Federal Government. That way they know who has what.

I only hope when the ChiComs invade the Federal Government doesn't just hand over an Oracle client with the necessary username/passwords. That would be bad.

But the guns are neccessary to form a well regulated militia and fight against the tyranny of the Feds. We can't turn over control of our guns to the very same people that are destroying our freedoms.

[^_^ 5,021]

But the guns are neccessary to form a well regulated militia and fight against the tyranny of the Feds. We can't turn over control of our guns to the very same people that are destroying our freedoms.

Well, then maybe the states can run it.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[quote name=' timestamp='1358274776' post='5923481]

Well, then maybe the states can run it.

States will need to defend their own borders. I see a wall being built along the Mason-Dixon line, and around Vermont, by the northern states.

[^_^ 5,021]

States will need to defend their own borders. I see a wall being built along the Mason-Dixon line, and around Vermont, by the northern states.

The Mason-Dixon line is obsolete. The forces of good now extend well below that line. Evil still exists, but further south.

[lostinblue 1,989]

NY state senator after the vote

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

We all know this one is going to court. One thing I've noticed about the legal teams here in California is that they are holding their cards much closer to their chest now. The days of any negotiation on this topic are long gone, so instead of debating legal problems with the laws they are staying silent and simply waiting for them to be signed before filing for injunctions. With no incentive for compromise, its better to let the lawmakers write bad laws that are more easily challenged.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

But the guns are neccessary to form a well regulated militia and fight against the tyranny of the Feds. We can't turn over control of our guns to the very same people that are destroying our freedoms.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

[Penny Lane 8,159]

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

And who is saying someone shouldn't be allowed a gun in their home to defend themselves?

This isn't 1764. Guns are much more powerful and there are way more of them now. Times change, rules need to change.

People talk about cars killing so many people a year. Look what they've done to make cars safer. They've put rules in place, safety requirements, etc. Just to drive a car, you need a license. You need your eyes checked, there's a written exam, someone has to take you out and you have to prove that you can operate that vehicle properly.

Yet when anyone wants to put rules and regulations on gun ownership, people cling to the constitution without wanting a serious discussion about it.

We get it. You have the right to keep and bear arms. Does that mean there should be no rules about the kind of arms you bear? Or how many weapons you keep?

Why can some crazy guy stockpile a bunch of weapons and walk into a building and open fire? Why isn't it happening in other countries at the same rate? Video games?

Edited January 15, 2013 by Evylin

[Teddy B 17,252]

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

Good for you. Now shut your computer off, give all of your luxury items away including your vehicles, shut off your heat, hot water and electricity, get yourself a good horse, and go live in the year 1764. For anyone with half a brain to believe that the written word from over 240 years ago applies in the modern day world, is simply bizarre.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Good for you. Now shut your computer off, give all of your luxury items away including your vehicles, shut off your heat, hot water and electricity, get yourself a good horse, and go live in the year 1764. For anyone with half a brain to believe that the written word from over 240 years ago applies in the modern day world, is simply bizarre.

Ok then... I guess we need to limit free speech, Info is too easy to share nowadays.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Ok then... I guess we need to limit free speech, Info is too easy to share nowadays.

Free speech, another amendment that has its rules and regulations. Can't go saying whatever you want wherever you want.