|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 13, 2013, 07:35 PM | #276 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 2, 2008
Location: Fairport, NY
Posts: 165
|
It's been adjourned until 6/13
|
May 14, 2013, 12:01 AM | #277 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2010
Posts: 7
|
Case adjourned...
.... Meanwhile, legal pistol owners are being arrested for having 7+ in their magazine:
http://www.news10.com/story/22236238...in-new-lebanon |
May 24, 2013, 09:47 PM | #278 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 1, 2011
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 864
|
Quote:
The whole story is here http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...-join-lawsuit/ |
|
June 13, 2013, 07:41 AM | #279 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 20, 2009
Location: Champlain Valley, Vermont
Posts: 161
|
Well it's the 13th. Hopefully there is some actual news today instead of procedural delays.
|
June 13, 2013, 07:56 AM | #280 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 941
|
We New York state dudes have been anxiously awaiting this day. The lawyers (Tresmond, etal) are confident. I hope they are correct.
__________________
Jim Page Cogito, ergo armatum sum |
June 13, 2013, 08:00 AM | #281 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 26, 2004
Posts: 225
|
Quote:
Staying tuned, just in case. I, too, am impressed with interviews I've heard and read with Jim (and Max) Tresmond. I'm sure the anti-SAFE act people are on solid constitutional ground (Heller, etc). I just hope that the judge sees it that way. Here in NY, you never know. |
|
June 13, 2013, 08:45 AM | #282 |
Member
Join Date: March 8, 2005
Location: ny
Posts: 87
|
yes, as posted on NYfirearms.com, today is just a pretrial conference so there wont be much news from today.
you can read here. http://www.nyfirearms.com/forums/law...oaching-6.html the member nyshooter is working with the tresmond team and keeps us regularly updated with real info. |
June 21, 2013, 12:58 PM | #283 |
Member
Join Date: June 19, 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 39
|
Today's developments: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/06/...-state-senate/
|
June 21, 2013, 01:04 PM | #284 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
From the article, I'll paraphrase and a quote - basically someone snuck a provision into the bill in the Senate exempting retired LEO's from the 10 round limit.
"St. Sen. Martin Golden, also a Republican and a retired cop, said the measure gives comfort to those who might encounter people they once arrested out on the street." I guess those are the only folks deserving comfort. Regular John Q. Citizen gets to fight it out with the bad guys on a shorter playing field. |
June 21, 2013, 01:08 PM | #285 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2005
Posts: 3,733
|
Wow, screwed once again by our "allies". Granting an exemption to JUST retired LEOs but ignoring the rest of us. In one fell swoop we have lost our best bargaining chip and reinforced the LEO, including retired LEO, privileged class distinction.
That's alright, those who are part of the govt and responsible for enforcing govt will would never abuse their power despite all recent evidence to the contrary.
__________________
"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." Thomas Jefferson "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin |
June 21, 2013, 10:24 PM | #286 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Posts: 438
|
that article is very poorly written. there is no blanket exemption of retired law enforcement from the ten round magazine/7 rounds loaded restriction. if you qualified with a firearm that takes a larger than ten round magazine in your last year on the job and if you requalify with it every 3 years thereafter than you can carry that gun. you cannot carry another gun with more than a ten round magazine. if you are like me and a great number of retired law enforcement and did not qualify with a firearm that takes a greater than ten round magazine in your last year on the job then this bill does nothing for you. it does nothing for out of state retired or active law enforcement.
I continue to advocate for and contribute to the legal fight to have the SAFE Act overturned. |
June 22, 2013, 08:12 AM | #287 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 17, 2007
Location: Western NY
Posts: 925
|
Heyjoe. .. Thanks for clarifying. Problem still remains, they keep trying to make segments of population happy so we loose our overall momentum to defeat entire law.
__________________
See Ya! |
June 22, 2013, 07:26 PM | #288 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 26, 2005
Posts: 2,860
|
Registration Of So Called Assault Weapons
LEO's are allowed to carry high cap mags in their service weapons, does that also include handguns that are not part of their authorized service handguns?
Second question: If their private collection of so called assault rifles are not part of their required inventory for their job, are they required to register them like everyone else? |
June 22, 2013, 08:44 PM | #289 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Posts: 438
|
active yes. retired no on both counts.
|
July 25, 2013, 07:28 AM | #290 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 26, 2004
Posts: 225
|
Has anyone heard any news, progress, or the next date for something to possibly happen?
Thanks. |
July 25, 2013, 12:47 PM | #291 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 19, 2012
Location: Western, Ny
Posts: 190
|
I don't think anybody has heard anything, I have been watching ecourts for an update but nothing yet. Kinda getting anxious for some news myself.
__________________
"Si vis pacem, para bellum". If you want peace, Prepare for war!!!! |
September 25, 2013, 10:44 AM | #292 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 17, 2007
Location: Western NY
Posts: 925
|
This is very frustrating...
We are getting ever closer to NY State D-Day where all this other crap kicks in and it seems we have not had any momentum. Are there any positive or negative updates anyone from the legal realm can provide us????
__________________
See Ya! |
September 25, 2013, 11:42 AM | #293 |
Member
Join Date: March 17, 2012
Posts: 32
|
One case (NYS) is scheduled for Jan 16th, tentatively.
The federal case is slated for arguments (IIRC) in October. |
September 25, 2013, 12:02 PM | #294 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
I sent a PM to Max to see if there's anything new he can tell us.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
September 25, 2013, 02:07 PM | #295 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 17, 2007
Location: Western NY
Posts: 925
|
Thanks Brian - trying to maintain hope, but light is getting really dim.
__________________
See Ya! |
September 25, 2013, 02:42 PM | #296 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
I wouldn't worry too much. The legal system is best characterized as "Glacial".
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
November 27, 2013, 11:40 PM | #297 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2011
Posts: 356
|
Bump. It has been months, and with the confiscation orders being issued, it would be nice to know what is happening in the Tresmond cases. Any news?
|
November 28, 2013, 12:30 AM | #298 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
The last that I heard was that there would be oral arguments on the injunction on Jan.16th.
Max hasn't communicated with anyone on this board for quite sometime. He has his reasons, I suspect, and I know he is awfully busy (working with his dad on several semi-related cases) so I won't bother him. |
November 28, 2013, 09:04 AM | #299 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Dywinski v. State Of New York (SAFE Act Challenge)
The "confiscation orders" are essentially a myth. They are in NY City, not the rest of the state, have been issued under similar circumstances for years and have nothing to do with the SAFE Act.
|
|
|