NY - Battle to resume over gun control !

[Rich-D]

"We are hoping for progress in the Senate," said Jackie Hilly, executive director of New Yorkers for Gun Control.
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=794599

Rich

[d90king]

How many more "restrictions" can NY come up with before just banning them entirely.

[Rich-D]

Bills that would require renewals of handgun permits and a system to tag and track spent shell casings have touched off the first gun-control battle in years at New York’s Capitol.

The Democrat-controlled Assembly approved both measures this week. And they face a better chance at becoming law now that the Senate also is controlled by Democrats.

Full Article: http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/apr/30/0430_guns/


Rich

[Patriotic]

d90king,

The New York Constitution has the same wording as the 2nd Amendment in the US Constitution, so they cannot abridge that right. However they do seem to have a problem with the “shall not be infringed” portion. I guess their idea is that they are not taking away your right only making it extremely difficult to exercise that right.

[Aguila Blanca]

Patriotic -

I have read elsewhere that the constitution of the state of New York does not include a right to keep and bear arms. I just looked, and I don't see it in the document. If you know it's there, please cite the section and paragraph.

http://www.dos.state.ny.us/info/constitution.htm

[Patriotic]

I guess you are correct Aquila Blanca. It seems my observation was dated.

From the New York Ratification Document (1788): That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state.

The second Constitution of NY State in 1821 changed the wording to:

§ 5. [Militia to be maintained; who may be excused from service.]—The militia of this state shall at all times hereafter, be armed and disciplined, aid in readiness for service; but all such inhabitants of this state, of any religious denomination whatever, as from scruples of conscience may be averse to bearing arms, shall be excused there from by paying to the state an equivalent in money; and the legislature shall provide, by law, for the collection of such equivalent, to be estimated according to the expense, in time and money, of an ordinary able-bodied militia-man.

There were 2 or 3 other Constitutional Conventions which changed the NY Constitution. I guess my question now is if the NY Constitution no longer contains any reference to owning and bearing arms, does the Law of the Land (US Constitution) now take precedence? Also, what about Article 4, Section 1 of the US Constitution in which each state must honor the law of other states? If you are licensed to own and carry a firearm in lets say in Ohio, shouldn’t that be recognized in New York State? After all, a drivers license is recognized. Why not a CCW permit?

[Aguila Blanca]

The current NY state constitution reads as follows on the subject:

ARTICLE XII

Defense

[Defense; militia]

Section 1. The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.
NY appears to have foresworn the right of its citizens to keep and bear arms in favor of the "militia" -- by which they probably mean the National Guard. Does the 2nd Amendment of the Federal Constitution take precedence? According to a recent case in the western U.S. (the 9th Circuit Court), the answer is yes. Expect that decision to be appealed.

The issue of "full faith and credit" is one that has not yet been tested in the courts. And the drivers' license parallel has been raised on other forums; legal beagles usually respond that this isn't a parallel, because there are agreements among the states to honor each others' drivers licenses, thus reciprocity for same does not rely on the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution.

I am not a lawyer, so I just read the words. To me, the words of the full faith and credit clause tell me that if Georgia issues me a permit to carry a concealed handgun, every other state should recognize it. Beyond that, however, the words of the 2nd Amendment tell me that I should not need to ask any state for permission to carry a handgun, rifle, shotgun, or Tomahawk missile any way I choose. "The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." It doesn't say "shall not be unreasonably infringed," it says "shall not be infringed."

Sadly, the Heller decision stated outright that regulation is permissible. But the Supremes didn't define how much regulation is permissible, so we'll be battling that one in the courts for the next 25 years. I think that part of the Heller decision was completely wrong-headed and I don't think Mr. Justice Scalia really believes that, but he had to write something that was sufficiently wishy-washy to get a fifth vote. So we got what we got ... an individual right, subject to regulation.

[d90king]

You will notice a "not mentioned" in NY's slot in the RKBA sticky...

[Patriotic]

Thank you Aguila Blanca for your response. Have you ever entertained teaching Constitutional Law?

I realize there are agreements between the states to honor driver’s licenses from other states but consider other legal documents such as marriage and devoice decrees, titles to property, adoption papers, diplomas and state college degrees. It would seem every legal document is recognized between states but those dealing with firearms.

I remember when I returned to my home state of New York after serving 3 years in the military, I brought back a pistol I purchased overseas. I had to get a permit to bring the pistol into the country issued by the ATF. When I tried to register the pistol in New York State I was told I could not do so because I already owned the pistol. The process was to apply for a permit to purchase then buy a pistol in New York State and apply for a permit to own the pistol. I was told I would have to surrender the pistol and buy a new one. For 20 years the pistol was locked in a strongbox completely disassembled. I since took up residence in Ohio and became a lawful owner of the pistol with a CCW permit.

In Ohio and under Federal Law, I am a legal citizen that can own and carry a firearm but my family still resides in New York State and when I go back home, as soon as I cross the state line with my firearm, I am considered a felon. This in spite of the fact that in order to receive a CCW permit in Ohio, I must submit fingerprints, take NRA authorized CCW training and pass a background check including a background check from the State of New York. That to me does not make sense.

Where is the ACLU on this issue?

[d90king]

NY is very tough... I believe the only two exceptions are traveling through the state in route to a destination where it is legal to have the firearm (I believe you may only stop for fuel), also to attend a sanctioned training event. The latter I believe requires a written letter from the training course...

[Tom]

Yet another reason why I could never move back to New York.

[Aguila Blanca]

NY is very tough... I believe the only two exceptions are traveling through the state in route to a destination where it is legal to have the firearm (I believe you may only stop for fuel), also to attend a sanctioned training event. The latter I believe requires a written letter from the training course...
The first of your two exceptions isn't really an "exception" vis a vis New York. The right to transit through NY state with firearms derives from the federal Firearms Owners Protection Act, often abbreviated as FOPA. New York itself does not sem to make any provision for such travel. Even other notoriously gun-unfriendly states as New Jersey and Massachusetts specifically provide in their statutes that out-of-staters may lawfully travel through their states with firearms. The New Jersey statute, in particular, is virtually a verbatim copy of the Federal law.