"The Resistance Begins: New York Gun Owners Refuse to Register"

[lee n. field]

http://gopthedailydose.com/2013/01/26/the-resistance-begins-new-york-gun-owners-refuse-to-register/

Take it for what it's worth.  It's on the Internet, so you know it's true.

[Waitone]

Keep kicking dog and sooner or later it will turn and attack you.  The fact that resistance begins in Noo Yark is encouraging.

[slingshot]

I find this encouraging as well. 

[Blakenzy]

Stories of disobedience should be published far and wide. People need the inspiration.

[Perd Hapley]

Here's some more info on that Missouri bill they mentioned. It would require parents to inform their kids' schools that they own guns, and then impose some kind of safe storage regime. I'm not going to worry too much about the details, since it is likely not going anywhere.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/23/missouri-lawmaker-introduces-bill-criminalizing-failure-to-report-gun-ownership-to-childs-school/

[Tallpine]

Here's some more info on that Missouri bill they mentioned. It would require parents to inform their kids' schools that they own guns, and then impose some kind of safe storage regime. I'm not going to worry too much about the details, since it is likely not going anywhere.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/23/missouri-lawmaker-introduces-bill-criminalizing-failure-to-report-gun-ownership-to-childs-school/

The "Show Me Where Your Guns Are" state 

[Perd Hapley]

So we can forever put to rest the idea that gun registration is a "common sense" measure that won't lead to confiscation.

http://www.therightsphere.com/2012/12/ny-gov-cuomo-gun-confiscation-could-be-an-option/

In the interview, Mr. Cuomo did not offer specifics about the measures he might propose, but, while discussing assault weapons, he said: “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option.

I guess he figures that talking about confiscation will make gun owners think that registration might not be so bad, after all. Or does he want to foment civil disobedience, so he can arrest them?

[Perd Hapley]

The "Show Me Where Your Guns Are" state 

Nope. It will die a fast and painless death.

[geronimotwo]

still calling my reps,  funny how they're not answering their phones anymore (aside from bonacic who voted against the bill.), and they don't return my calls.  

the "NYSRPA" is worth supporting, imo.  they seem to be more in touch with ny reps than the nra.

[red headed stranger]

So we can forever put to rest the idea that gun registration is a "common sense" measure that won't lead to confiscation.

http://www.therightsphere.com/2012/12/ny-gov-cuomo-gun-confiscation-could-be-an-option/
I guess he figures that talking about confiscation will make gun owners think that registration might not be so bad, after all. Or does he want to foment civil disobedience, so he can arrest them?

Add that to the fact that registration DID lead to confiscation in CA, and you have enough to call BS on those that say "they aren't going to take your guns!" 

[CNYCacher]

still calling my reps,  funny how they're not answering their phones anymore (aside from bonacic who voted against the bill.), and they don't return my calls.  

the "NYSRPA" is worth supporting, imo.  they seem to be more in touch with ny reps than the nra.

I was thinking about Joining SCOPE, but not so sure after talking with their VP.  Any experience with the NYSRPA?

[brimic]

Add that to the fact that registration DID lead to confiscation in CA, and you have enough to call BS on those that say "they aren't going to take your guns!"

Don't forget that it also happened with the Sullivan Act in NYC.

[brimic]

A particular prescient post in the comments section:

"I believe they want people to rise up. They passed this in one area of the Country so the people will rise up and give them a reason to declare martial law! The rest of the Country needs to stand up along with New York! We cannot let them use New York to teach us all a 'lesson'! If one goes down the rest will follow!"

In any other time in the recent era, that comment would be all tin-foil hattery, not so much anymore.

Obama isn't going to overtly push gun confiscation, but he will play the reluctant rescuer when when of his minions in the Party push too hard, too fast. Its been his MO all along to let his surrogates do the dirty work when it comes to changing the fundamental character of our country.

[geronimotwo]

I was thinking about Joining SCOPE, but not so sure after talking with their VP.  Any experience with the NYSRPA?

i haven't dealt with scope, but i like the nysrpa.  they work closely with the nra, but keep their focus on ny issues.  they also sponser different shooting events,safety, and youth groups in my area, including a free bb gun shooting booth at the county fair.

here is an excerpt from their current endevour:

NYSRPA, in co-operation with the NRA, are having the Cuomo law reviewed by a highly qualified legal team.  We ask that no other 3rd party legal action be taken without prior consultation.  We realize that this law impacts a large number of people, but a proper legal review will take some time.  NYSRPA/NRA will be filing a Notice of Claim prior to submitting a brief on the merits of the constitutionality of the new gun law.  Involved in the lawsuit will be two of the nations best 2nd Amendment attorneys.  This is a very important proceeding and must be handled properly with the best lawyers.  We will not win without support from gun owners.

[Nick1911]

Here's some more info on that Missouri bill they mentioned. It would require parents to inform their kids' schools that they own guns, and then impose some kind of safe storage regime. I'm not going to worry too much about the details, since it is likely not going anywhere.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/23/missouri-lawmaker-introduces-bill-criminalizing-failure-to-report-gun-ownership-to-childs-school/

Yeeeaaaaa....

In Missouri, that legislation is laughable.

However, I am becoming increasingly concerned that the current administration really does want to bait some fringe case nut jobs into a few high profile assassination attempts.  It would further the agenda - anything that could be labeled as true domestic terrorism would be a reasonably palatable reason for a sweeping power grab against a variety of civil rights.   

[Tallpine]

anything that could be labeled as true domestic terrorism

For instance, the fed.gov 

[AZRedhawk44]

i haven't dealt with scope, but i like the nysrpa.  they work closely with the nra, but keep their focus on ny issues.  they also sponser different shooting events,safety, and youth groups in my area, including a free bb gun shooting booth at the county fair.

here is an excerpt from their current endevour:

NYSRPA, in co-operation with the NRA, are having the Cuomo law reviewed by a highly qualified legal team.  We ask that no other 3rd party legal action be taken without prior consultation.  We realize that this law impacts a large number of people, but a proper legal review will take some time.  NYSRPA/NRA will be filing a Notice of Claim prior to submitting a brief on the merits of the constitutionality of the new gun law.  Involved in the lawsuit will be two of the nations best 2nd Amendment attorneys.  This is a very important proceeding and must be handled properly with the best lawyers.  We will not win without support from gun owners.

The gall.

The NRA tried this horse-$#!+ with Heller.  Thank $deity that Cato ignored that.  Or we wouldn't have the Heller decision.  Or McDonald.

[RevDisk]

Wonder if it'd break any fed laws to refuse to honor any NY firearms convictions that would be legal in PA, and refuse to extradite anyone falling under that category to NY?  Not that NY could really dispute the matter. If it comes down to it, Pennsylvania has significantly more ground troops than NY. 

PSP vs NYPD would be interesting. PSP are used to long range and rural operations, which NYPD totally lack. PSP have some urban training, but probably not nearly as much as the NYPD. Basically, both sides have a huge home turf advantage.


Reality is, I hope the whole thing is thrown out by the Supreme Court before anyone does anything stupid.

[SteveS]

Wonder if it'd break any fed laws to refuse to honor any NY firearms convictions that would be legal in PA, and refuse to extradite anyone falling under that category to NY?  

Probably.

US Constitution
Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2:
A person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.

and,

18 USC § 3182

Whenever the executive authority of any State or Territory demands any person as a fugitive from justice, of the executive authority of any State, District, or Territory to which such person has fled, and produces a copy of an indictment found or an affidavit made before a magistrate of any State or Territory, charging the person demanded with having committed treason, felony, or other crime, certified as authentic by the governor or chief magistrate of the State or Territory from whence the person so charged has fled, the executive authority of the State, District, or Territory to which such person has fled shall cause him to be arrested and secured, and notify the executive authority making such demand, or the agent of such authority appointed to receive the fugitive, and shall cause the fugitive to be delivered to such agent when he shall appear. If no such agent appears within thirty days from the time of the arrest, the prisoner may be discharged.

Federal courts can enforce these and I believe that they can only be refused in narrow circumstances.

[RevDisk]

Probably.

US Constitution
Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2:
A person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.

(snip)

Federal courts can enforce these and I believe that they can only be refused in narrow circumstances.

Which brings to question, what if it's not a crime in the one state (and actually a protected right) and is in the other state? Closest I can thing is slavery. Were northern states mandated to deport escaped slaves? I'd expect normally under those circumstances, a contested extradition between states goes to federal court. Assuming you don't have judges that ignore the law, NY's law blatantly violates Heller and McDonald.

I'm curious how the process would go...  Or rather, likely how WILL it go.

[Tallpine]

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/01/26/will-you-submit-obey/

[Hutch]

Which brings to question, what if it's not a crime in the one state (and actually a protected right) and is in the other state? Closest I can thing is slavery. Were northern states mandated to deport escaped slaves? I'd expect normally under those circumstances, a contested extradition between states goes to federal court. Assuming you don't have judges that ignore the law, NY's law blatantly violates Heller and McDonald.

I'm curious how the process would go...  Or rather, likely how WILL it go.

I think Dred Scott addressed this.  IIRC, yes, the free states were required to return the "property" (gag) that had escaped from slavery.

[Perd Hapley]

I think Dred Scott addressed this.  IIRC, yes, the free states were required to return the "property" (gag) that had escaped from slavery.

If I correctly recall, the Constitution actually addressed it. And not in favor of the escaped slave. On my phone right now. Here's something:

 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Clause

It was also a contentious issue in the Compromise of 1850.
 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1850

Legally, they had to be returned, but the law was often ignored.

[Blakenzy]

A particular prescient post in the comments section:

"I believe they want people to rise up. They passed this in one area of the Country so the people will rise up and give them a reason to declare martial law! The rest of the Country needs to stand up along with New York! We cannot let them use New York to teach us all a 'lesson'! If one goes down the rest will follow!"

In any other time in the recent era, that comment would be all tin-foil hattery, not so much anymore.

Obama isn't going to overtly push gun confiscation, but he will play the reluctant rescuer when when of his minions in the Party push too hard, too fast. Its been his MO all along to let his surrogates do the dirty work when it comes to changing the fundamental character of our country.

Not the first time, huh?

[SteveS]

Which brings to question, what if it's not a crime in the one state (and actually a protected right) and is in the other state? Closest I can thing is slavery. Were northern states mandated to deport escaped slaves? I'd expect normally under those circumstances, a contested extradition between states goes to federal court. Assuming you don't have judges that ignore the law, NY's law blatantly violates Heller and McDonald.

I'm curious how the process would go...  Or rather, likely how WILL it go.

This is way outside of my area and I am trying to remember back when I had to study this stuff.  IIRC, it doesn't matter if it not a crime in the state being asked to give up the person.  A state that wants a fugitive back makes a request to the governor's office of the state where the person fled.  If they governor refuses, then the state has to file an action in federal district court.  From what I could tell, there are only limited circumstances that can be used to refuse, such as if they are already serving time or there is something wrong with the paperwork.  Up until 1987, federal courts did not have the power to enforce extradition requests and governors could just refuse.