Well, New York has wasted no time whatsoever

[Metal god]

I forget now , where does all this stand in NY . Did the new law go into effect ? Was there a suite filed against , is there a stay/preliminary injunction etc etc ?

[heyjoe]

yes the new law has gone into affect. There are 5 lawsuits filed already. there is no stay or preliminary injunction

[ViperJon]

Things could get interesting shortly as the same judge who ruled in the previous decision the plaintiff did not have legal standing but that much of tjhe CIAA was unconstitutional is about to rule on the case again with plaintiffs who clearly have legal standing. We are holding our breath here in NY.

[44 AMP]

Colonial era re-enactors in NY are concerned the law will be used against them, as their firearms (yes, muzzleloading flintlocks) are covered by the law.

And, while the Governor's office is (currently) saying re-enactors are "ok" and can continue, the actual LAW does NOT say that.

I was also told that the firearm prohibition in state parks section of the new law also covers the entire Adirondack park, which is the majority of the northern part of NY state, and includes numerous towns, cities and private residences.

IF so, and if upheld, that would essentially end all hunting there, and that would deprive the NY state conservation dept of a huge percentage of its funds, along with a host of other unforeseen consequences.

I think its a bad law. We'll see what the various courts say about it...

[wizrd]

The situation in NY is way worse than any of you may perceive. New laws create a 'special class' of firearms owner - those who would like to buy a semi-automatic long gun. If you DO NOT HAVE A NY STATE PISTOL PERMIT - it will take you 6 months (average waiting period) in my county, (Oneida) to buy a new semi-automatic LONG GUN, (rifle OR shotgun) at this time. You have to apply for a permit - at the local pistol office - a 4 page application requiring you submit 4 character references, make arrangements to be fingerprinted, etc. The same as you would be required if you were a new pistol license applicant.
Again, this application period takes about 6 months.
If you now have a NY state pistol permit - a trip to the pistol office is still necessary - as they WILL STAMP the back of your present permit - 'Semi-Auto Long Gun permitted' - or some such other meaningless tripe. All I can say about NY right now - it's a good place to be FROM!

[mikejonestkd]

to buy a new semi-automatic LONG GUN, (rifle OR shotgun

A quick correction- the NYS semi auto rifle law does not apply to shotguns

https://troopers.ny.gov/system/files...22-final-1.pdf

[ViperJon]

Temporary restraining order issued today. There is hope. The judge has basically gutted the so called CCIA in NY. Now it remains to be seen how the NY appeal goes. Goodbye social media background checks, goodbye the "Everywhere is a sensitive area" provision.

https://www.kktv.com/2022/10/06/fede...s-new-gun-law/

[wizrd]

Federal judge just blocked Hochul's new NY state gun laws.

[44 AMP]

Saw something in the media about the ruling and the "sensitive zones" and the media quoting..

Dr. Jaclyn Schildkraut, National mass shooting expert SUNY Oswego

Dr. Schildkraut said evidence has shown that bringing guns into heavily populated places like Time Square can lead to an increase in bystander casualties, citing an incident in 2012 where bystanders were injured during a shooting at the Empire State Building.

This really made me question what kind of idiot is given the title "National mass shooting expert" by SUNY...

I remembered the incident, but looked it up to be sure. Yes, there was a shooting at the Empire State Building in 2012. Bad guy shot and killed one person down the block, and was stopped by the police at the Empire State Building. The police fired 16 rounds, the bad guy didn't shoot any. Bad guy killed and NINE BYSTANDERS wounded by the police gunfire.

No mention of the bad guy being a legal permit holder, so I believe he had the gun illegally to begin with, before committing murder with it. SO, a criminal being shot by the police resulted in 9 (NINE) innocent bystanders being injured. And this "expert" is using that as justification for the NY law prohibiting legal PERMIT HOLDERS from carrying in "sensitive areas" such as Times Square.... wow....just...wow...

Always remember this, when you read the press coverage of the NY law, it was, and STILL IS ILLEGAL in NY to carry or even possess a pistol without a valid NY pistol permit. And the state permit is no valid in New York City, only NYC permits are valid there.

Generally New Yorkers know this, I am pointing it out for the benefit of the readers from other states who may not realize it. The press isn't telling you the whole truth.

[Metal god]

The press isn't telling you the whole truth.

Err wait whaaat ? The press misleads the public oops I mean don’t report the whole truth ?

I’M SHOCKED

From what I read that law was pretty much gutted with very little left of it . Other then the sensitive places we all have had to deal with for years - Fed & State buildings , schools and a couple other narrowed places . The rest of the law is unenforceable. Judge put a 3 day stay on his order to allow the state to appeal .

What do we think the appeals court will do and “if” they don’t reverse his order , does that mean NY is a shall issue state on Monday ? I think the appeal will be successful.

[44 AMP]

What do we think the appeals court will do and “if” they don’t reverse his order , does that mean NY is a shall issue state on Monday ? I think the appeal will be successful.

New York will NOT become a shall issue state on Monday, or any other day because of this ruling.

This ruling is a "stay", ordering the state not to enforce the law, until the order is vacated. It changes nothing about the law, only prevents the state from using the law until the challenges claiming the law is unconstitutional are resolved. The appeal in the "3 day window" allows the state the opportunity to have another court rule on the "stay ruling" and POSSIBLY "stay the stay", or allow it to proceed.

Remember that none of what has happened, since the Supreme Court ruling has changed the basic NY permit law. What the SCOTUS ruling did was strike down ONE PROVISION of the NY law, the one requiring applicants for a concealed permit to provide a special reason(s) why they needed a concealed permit. The SCOTUS ruling also set up a "new framework" to be used when judging gun control laws, but that part doesn't directly affect existing NY law, until/unless they are challenged in court.

NY's counter to the SCOTUS ruling was to pass (within a month) a new law, one which kept all the original provisions of their permit law, minus the part the court struck down, and then ADDED a huge host of ADDITIONAL requirements on top of the previously existing ones.

Even if (when, hopefully) ALL those new requirements are struck down, the existing NY law will still be in place, and in effect, and that is a "shall issue" law, always has been.

[ViperJon]

There are dozens of lawsuits filed and being filed that will chip away at the remaining CCIA's worst overreaches. The door has been opened by Judge Suddaby and he will weigh in again on Oct 20th.

[Metal god]

44 correct but this Federal court just stopped them from enforcing all the crap enacted and they no longer can use good cause . If the 3 day stay comes and goes and someone applies next week for a CCW permit . What current laws do they have not being TRO’ed of found to be unconstitutional do they have to say no you can’t have a permit?

If they can’t enforce the laws they want , what happens when someone applies ?

Because of Bruen the San Diego Sheriff has dropped the good cause and references requirements and it appears to be a shall issue county right now . Only problem is the 9 month wait for finger printing and background check . They are only allowing 2 people an hour one day a week to come in . I just checked the other day and think it’s closer to 11 months for the appointment now .

[44 AMP]

44 correct but this Federal court just stopped them from enforcing all the crap enacted and they no longer can use good cause . If the 3 day stay comes and goes and someone applies next week for a CCW permit . What current laws do they have not being TRO’ed of found to be unconstitutional do they have to say no you can’t have a permit?

If they can’t enforce the laws they want , what happens when someone applies ?

I'm not a lawyer, don't pretend to be one, the only answers I have are what I expect to be common sense, however, in legal matters,sometimes, common sense is not applied the same way it is in the "real world".

The 3 days stay is not a stay on the law for 3 days, it is 3 days between the judge's ruling and the stay on the NY law going into effect. After the 3days (meaning next week) if there is no appeal or if the state's appeal is denied, then the stay on the law goes into effect.

Seems to me that, IF that stay ruling does go into effect, then NY cannot use the requirements in their new law, leaving them with the requirements and processes of their old law, minus the "show special cause" provision that was struck down by the SCOTUS ruling.

Here's another point, being misrepresented in the popular media, the NY requirement for an applicant being of "good moral character" being struck down. IT was not. Being of "good moral character" has been part of the NY requirements since before I was born and likely since the beginning of their gun control laws around the turn of the 20th century.

And, its not altogether, and automatically the bad thing its made out to be. I got my pistol permit in NY in 1975, and the application required 5 sets of fingerprints, 4 photographs (passport type) and 3 character references (who were not family members). This, along with results from investigation by all applicable law enforcement agencies was sent to a Judge, and that judge ruled either to approve or deny the application.

what the new NY law did was add a host of additional requirements to this process, including personal visit and interviews with your character references, and such things as identifying everyone in your household, access to your social media history and other things which the Fed Judge is putting a stay on. NONE of the new law (as far as I can see) made any change to the authority of the issuing NY judge to decide yea, or nay.

A shall issue law sets certain disqualifications, and requires the issuing agency to issue the permit if none of those disqualifications are met.

NY law doesn't do that, and never did. The issuing agency (usually a county judge) uses their own discretion and judgement, and (to date) no ruling or stay of requiring specific things in the application process has changed that.

The Judge having the final say is, as I have mentioned, not automatically a bad thing, though in practice it often is due to the personal beliefs of many of the judges, and particularly these days. Again, my personal experience with the system is from back in the 70s, and while today it may be uncommon, the possibility of sanity still exists....

The authority of the Judge to be the final arbiter can result in qualified people being arbitrarily denied, but the other side of the coin is that the Judge can also approve people outside of the usual standards.

I got my permit at age 18. Not 21, which was the usual age. The judge had the authority to do that. I know of one case where a judge approved a pistol permit to someone as young as 14.

I also know of a case where an applicant was denied, because even though he had nothing requiring denial in his record, he did have a history of 20+ speeding tickets (and unpaid, mostly, I heard). The judge denied his aplication because the judge felt his history showed a pattern of disregard for the law. That decision did turn out to be a good one, as a couple years later that fellow was committing actual criminal offenses that did disqualfy him from legal firearms possession....

The situation in NY, as I understand it, is that what has been struck down is gone, and what was added by the new law may be under stay next week, but all the previous laws and requirements are still in effect.

SO, no, they aren't going to deny permit applications, or become a shall issue state, at this time.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it. If any of our legal scholars find my analysis incorrect, please do inform us. I'd be curious to know if/where I got any of it wrong...

[Metal god]

Seems to me that, IF that stay ruling does go into effect, then NY cannot use the requirements in their new law, leaving them with the requirements and processes of their old law, minus the "show special cause" provision that was struck down by the SCOTUS ruling.

I believe that to be accurate . My question was what in there current law allows them to say no . CA had all there eggs in the good cause basket and since that's now gone they have nothing . I agree that doesn't mean CA is a "shall" issue state right now but there is nothing in there current law that allows them to deny an app if the applicant is a law abiding citizen . I was just wondering if NY is now in that same boat ?

Correction CA still requires 8hr training class and guns you want to carry be on your license and things like that but there is nothing that allows them to simply say nope you're not special enough like they used to be able to . If you refuse the training or don't add specific gun to your permit you can't carry but it's nothing like it was before < at least in San Diego it's not . who know what they're doing in LA or SF

[Aguila Blanca]

I suggest y'all go back and read the article about the judge's order again. He didn't completely invalidate the new NY state law, only parts.

In a ruling that doesn’t take effect immediately, U.S. District Judge Glenn Suddaby struck down key elements of the state’s hurried attempt to rewrite its handgun laws after the old ones were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in June.

The state can’t ban people from carrying guns in New York City’s subway system or Times Square, the judge ruled, though he said it did have a right to exclude guns from certain other locations, including schools.

Several of the state’s new licensing rules went too far, he wrote, including one that required applicants to be of “good moral character,” and another that made applicants turn over information about their social media accounts.

That leaves NY State's licensing law in effect, but without the "good cause" provision and without the "moral character" provision.

[ViperJon]

The most important aspect of Suddaby’s ruling is the current default ALL private property everywhere is a sensitive restricted area where guns cannot be brought into under punishment as a felony. NY tried to flip the script on that contrary to history and every other states sensitive area definition. He said no…..the default is guns can be brought in unless the property owner specifically banned them. The NY law made it a felony to stop into a gas station along your way which was ludicrous.

[44 AMP]

The state can’t ban people from carrying guns in New York City’s subway system or Times Square, the judge ruled,...

Two points about this...

first, the NY law's ban on guns in "sensitive" public places is a ban on ALL firearms (not in the hands of police) INCLUDING concealed carry by licensed permit holders. The effect is that a legal, licensed concealed permit holder is now facing a felony charge in September, for doing exactly the same thing in the same place it was legal in August. The ONLY change was the new law, creating a new firearm restricted "sensitive place" where one didn't exist before, and also doing it as a blanket rule, giving the actual property owner no say in the matter.

The other point, and the one where I can actually see a valid argument, is about NY state making rules for NY CITY property. New York State, and New York City have a rather unique relationship when it comes to firearms laws.

New York State pistol permits are NOT valid in New York City. Only a NYC issued permit is valid in NYC. SO, we have a long established precedent that NY gun laws are not valid in NYC. Therefore, it is entirely logical that the STATE does not have the authority to regulate guns in/on New York CITY property. The city had the authority there, the state, does not.

If you accept the reasoning that the judge put a stay on enforcement in those areas of NYC, not because of the regulation of firearms there, but because it was the STATE acting outside of its authority, then it makes sense.

[heyjoe]

In NY sections of the old gun law were repealed when the new gun law was passed and signed. They can not just go back to them, the legislature would have to pass legislation to reinstate them which would immediately be challenged in federal court. The recent vacating of massachusetts requirements for a permit to possess and purchase a handgun by the supreme court sets the stage for new yorks similar requirements to be challenged in federal court.

[Metal god]

That leaves NY State's licensing law in effect, but without the "good cause" provision and without the "moral character" provision.

and list of family members and co-habitants of your residence and in person meeting requirement and the restriction on carrying unless the owner of property/establishment allows it and the areas of entertainment as well as places that serve alcohol and the parks and public places as well as adjacent areas to events sensitive places restrictions and public transportation restrictions and time square restrictions . And I think there's a couple more haha

[gwpercle]

The end goal is to disarm the people .

The first step in controlling a nation is to disarm the people .

Armed men can't be enslaved or controlled .

Look at the big picture ... concealed or open carry is merely a tiny step in the complete process .

My father a WWII vet who saw a lot of what the Nazi's did always told me never give up your right to keep and bear arms ... it's will be the beginning of our end .
Gary

[44 AMP]

Armed men can't be enslaved or controlled .

No, but they can be declared criminals, and arrested (or killed).

News reported the NY AG is asking for the law to stay in place (of course) while the issue is decided. Have seen no report of a decision on this, yet.

[heyjoe]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

No, but they can be declared criminals, and arrested (or killed).

News reported the NY AG is asking for the law to stay in place (of course) while the issue is decided. Have seen no report of a decision on this, yet.

we will see if the second circuit has gotten the message from the supreme court yet.

[Metal god]

The second circuit has granted a temp stay on the Fed judges order until they hear the states appeal .

The thing I don't understand is why do judges rule on keeping the status quo even when the SQ has only been that for barely a month ? Many people will be harmed by leaving this new law in place where as if you just go back to what had been the law for many years just a month ago . That would be much more reasonable since everybody knows and understands the old law and that region has acclimated to that law . That seems much more logical then keeping a brand new law on the books that has already been shot down by one court .

[44 AMP]

We are (as usual) having a problem with clarity of understanding, between the actual legal processes and the press reporting of what is, and isn't going on.

Those of us not fomally trained in the legal system can easily be confused, myself included...

In NY sections of the old gun law were repealed when the new gun law was passed and signed....

This is possibly true, I don't know, with certainty, but such a statement, without any further references or clarification is essentially worthless to the discussion.

WHAT sections were repealed, WHAT sections remain in effect? SCOTUS struck down the section requiring a special need requirement to obtain a concealed permit, and as far as I know, that's all they did to the NY law. They also set up a new framework under which the justice system must operate considering future gun control law cases, but that new system isn't a change to the NY law, directly, and won't affect the existing (pre Sept 1) law until/unless legal challenges reach court to be considered.

IF the new law did supersede ALL of the old one, rendering the old law invalid, the question is which parts of the old law were incorporated into the new one, along with the new additional requirements??

As I understand it (and its entirely possible I am in error) it is some of the new, additional requirements, that are being challenged, and those are what is being put on hold by the judges "stay" ruling.

Internet news today (Reuters) is reporting that a Federal judge has put a stay on NY's ban on firearms in places of worship, while the matter is being fought over, in court.

Personally, I think that is entirely the correct thing to do. NY's unilateral prohibition of firearms, INCLUDING ones carried by legal licensed permit holders and without any consideration of the wishes of the OWNERS of those places of worship is, IMHO just wrong.

IF the members of the congregation, its leaders, the property owners, etc., say "no guns here", then that is their business, (and no one else's) and the rule is then "no guns there"..

BUT, if those people don't say that, or even welcome gun carriers, then the STATE has NO BUSINESS declaring a blanket prohibition, claiming ALL houses of worship are "sensitive locations.

The state has the lawful authority to do that with STATE PROPERTY (whether they should, or not is a separate argument) but they don't have the authority to do so in private houses of worship, any more than they have the authority to determine what should be worshipped or how.

I believe the state's fiat prohibition is a usurpation of civil rights, in this case, both 1st and 2nd Amendment rights are flagrantly being infringed.

Just my opinion, and worth what you paid for it, or, possibly, less...