Dywinski v. State Of New York (SAFE Act Challenge)

^^^^


Such possession shall not, except as provided in subdivision one or seven of section 265.02 of this article, constitute a violation of this subdivision if such possession takes place in such person's home or place of business.



Not in your house... I guess you can take 5 to the range but not more.



Willie


.
 
No, and I think the comment on it is one on this thread. I forget.

The sloppy way they wrote the law is another reason it should be canned.
 
So when the Suffolk County busts my cajones at my next permit renewal and requires I transport all my handguns to their office for confirmation during my renewal will I be a felon for transporting them there?
 
On the NY Firearms website (which I can't access at work today) Jim Tresmond posted (under Max's screen name) that good things were coming.

Any update, Max?
 
There will be updates coming as things become more solidly established in the next week and a half.

One of the biggest problems with the NY SAFE Act is the confusion it's created among dealers. A lot of dealers are refusing to sell guns that they have no problem selling, even under the NY SAFE Act and it's putting a damper on their business and the ability of New York residents to purchase guns. It's a good idea for gun dealers to retain a lawyer familiar with the various provisions of the act as it relates to the sale and transfer of guns to sit down spend some time with them explaining what they can and cannot do right now. The $500-$800 that a 1-2 hour consultation costs is well worth the confidence and boost to their business it will provide. As things develop here, dealers may in fact be in a much clearer position than they are today.
 
Sounds like the dealers need to get together and see if they can find an attorney willing to give a group consultation.
If done as a cooperative thing by county or region could be very helpful for everyone.
 
It's certainly a worthwhile option. Tresmond Law, of course, knows the NY SAFE Act inside and out, but there are plenty of competent attorneys for dealers located in other areas of the state. Gun sales are not going away any time soon in New York. Mistakes made by firearms dealers (i.e. if they're too restrictive and won't sell or transfer guns that they are legally able to transfer) can be costly; clients may never return and they may tell their friends to steer clear from that dealer. Bad news spreads faster than good news, and FFLs depend upon a good reputation for business.
 
I posted somewhere a NY Times piece discussing the issue and that the Times writer thought Cuomo and company were pretty stupid to mess up their law (well, isn't that too bad).

I saw the same piece and asked Brian what he knew but haven't heard yet.

Glenn - off to work.
 
Wait a minute, they pass and sign a law, and all they need to do to change it is just say "never mind this provision, or disregard that provision"?

They now look even more foolish than before. It should call into question the half-baked, ill-considered ramifications of the entire bill. This gives weight to efforts to strike the whole thing.
 
maestro pistolero said:
Wait a minute, they pass and sign a law, and all they need to do to change it is just say "never mind this provision, or disregard that provision"?
Click to expand...
Two things come to mind: (1) virtually every bill will have (or should have) a severability clause, which says something to the effect of "should any provision or clause of this law be found unconstitutional or unenforceable, it shall be severed, leaving all remaining clauses intact;" and (2) if they're amending the bill, delaying it, or what have you, that will still need to go through some legislative process. Exactly what? I'm not sure.
 
Obviously they put a lot of thought into this bill and it was not just a knee-jerk reaction by finger-in-the-wind pols and agenda driven fanatics.

:rolleyes:/sarcasm
 
Wait a minute, they pass and sign a law, and all they need to do to change it is just say "never mind this provision, or disregard that provision"?
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the suspension provision was added to the budget bill. I know nothing about NY's bill process but, in Kentucky, you can do about anything in the budget bill so long as it even remotely effects the budget. For example, enforcing a 7 round mag limit might cost the state money in legal fees because nobody makes them (for many guns).
 
Any updates

I thought we were going to hear something about this case yesterday?? I may be getting the different cases mixed up?? Anybody know?
 
They didn't even manage to give an Mag exemption to LE, why should you think they have a severability clause Spats... This was so rushed they didn't even read it...and who knows who from the Brady bunch wrote the thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top