The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 22, 2013, 07:45 PM   #1
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?

My questions pertain to NYS and The Safe Act.

Last edited by TPAW; June 22, 2013 at 10:10 PM.
TPAW is offline  
Old June 22, 2013, 07:48 PM   #2
Tom Servo
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 12,154
That depends on state and local laws, which vary greatly. Many states have no registration requirements, nor do they have limits on magazine capacity.
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old June 22, 2013, 07:55 PM   #3
Glenn E. Meyer
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 18,734
NY has been altering its law to deal with their self-inflicted LEO restrictions. It's in another thread. It's been pointed out even by antigun folks in NY that Cuomo was an ignoramus in designing the gun laws. But 'fixing' them for cops doesn't mean anything for the general public.
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Being an Academic Shooter
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old June 23, 2013, 07:34 PM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: September 27, 2010
Posts: 654
I spent a while on the phone with the hotline the other day... all LEO's are completely exempt from every part of the safe act whether its for their duty weapons or their personal weapons. So long as they are residents of NY state... as a LEO who lives in AZ when I visit I am not exempt anything and can only bring my issued sidearm with my creds which federal law would trump even if they didn't want me to...

Currently when you retire you would theoretically have to get rid of your weapons and or register them.
Polinese is offline  
Old June 23, 2013, 08:37 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 941
In all likelyhood the SAFE Act will have an injunction stopping its enforcement before the year ends. The avenue then will be the SCOTUS. Registration doesn't take effect until sometime in early 2014. To register now is folly as then they will have the info they want to suppress your rights.
I also doubt that Cuomo and his thugs will survive the next gubernatorial election.
Jim Page

Cogito, ergo armatum sum
JimPage is offline  
Old June 26, 2013, 12:30 PM   #6
44 AMP
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 17,260
Unless specifically exempted, by statute, we are ALL subject to the same laws.

I heard the original NY SAFE law (right after the Sandy Hook shootings did not exclude LEOs, and after a bit of scrambling, an exemption (for at least some things) was added.

Back when California put the SKS carbine on their list of banned guns more than a few were owned by LEOs privately. They were not excluded. Heard one report of a cop, when he turned in his SKS, as the law now required, was actually arrested for possessing it.

Never did hear how that one got resolved, but I suspect they quietly dropped it when someone finally realized that arresting people (particularly a serving cop) for OBEYING the law was sending a poor message.

I'd say it all depends on the particular state, the specific laws language, and the zealotry of the prosecutor's office.

Why is it you (outside of the gun community) never hear of the REAL "Gun Control Loophole"? You know, the one that is usually put in that exempts police, military, etc from certain laws?

It was a source of amusement to me back when the Lautenberg law forced so many agencies to have to pull officers off the street. Under that law, ironically written and passed without any of the usual "loopholes" (even for on duty possession), as they could no longer be legally armed.

The law of unintended consequences applies to everyone. Too many of those crafting and supporting laws apparently can't understand that, or don't care.
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08302 seconds with 7 queries