Rockland County Judge Victor Alfieri violates citizens rights!

P

PATH

New member
A local Rockland County man has been denied the right to purchase and own a handgun because a Judge Victor Alfieri Jr. has decided on his own to make his own laws! Judges, he feels, should limit the number of firearms we own!

The original letter sent by this judge.
Alfieri1.jpg


A follow up letter sent by the judge telling the firearms owner to go ahead and challenge him!
alfieri2.jpg


You may contact the Judge by mail: Honorable Victor J. Alfieri, Rockland County Court House, 1 South Main Street, New City NY 10956
 
Writing letters or contacting a Judge over an issue like this with potential court proceedings pending and IMPORTANT second am issues at stake is the DUMBEST THING, gun owners can do, PATH.

Rather, let us know who the guy aggrieved is, or who his lawyer is and what they intend to do court wise. I'll contribute $$.

This could be the one for you NYers in light of Parker.

WildwowAlaska
 
Dude that is the ONE, based on the meager facts before me....the one!!!!

Ya ought to take the phone numbers down before someone spoils it.

WildimspeechlessforonceAlaska
 
thats an outrage

I dont know of any such limits on the purchases of handguns but i dont know the laws of your state. From the looks of it neighther does that judge at no time in the documents he sends does he include a number of guns that he is allowed to own just what he thinks he should be able to own. A judge is supposed to make his judgements according to the law and unbiased to his own personal opinion. :mad::barf:
 
Holy crapola!

We need a fleet of lawyers on this right now. This one is going to be a wild ride for this judge. It's a fourth of july gift for the NRA lawyers. If those guys are not carving this thing to pieces within the week, they are slacking.
 
I don't see where the judge is violating the citizen's rights, not so much as he is acting within New York law. Handgun ownership within New York City is by permit, is it not? The permits are not on a shall issue basis, but may issue basis. As such, he went with the "may not" option.

I don't like it either, but it appears to be within the judge's legal powers to deny the application.
 
The permit is "may issue" but the man has had a permit for over 30 some odd years and is an avid collector and shooter. Previous judges have had no problem with his collection. There is no law in New York State that specifies how many guns you can own. The judge is overreaching!
 
ownership within New York City is by permit, is it not?
Click to expand...

Yes, but this is not New York City; this is New City (Rockland County). Its a little further out from NYC than even Scarsdale or White Plains. And while there is some level of discretion in issuing permits, it can't be completely arbitrary and capricious as this denial was. Exactly how many handguns is "too many" for target/sportsmans use; 150? 151? 149? 167?

Also funny how the judge suggests applying for an FFL - an act which would be in violation of the law for the purposes of this collector (which is simply collecting guns, not engaging in an ongoing business of buying and selling firearms).
 
Let us know where to send funds for the constitutional challenge that this may entail.

I'm with Wild though, don't write to him! Let the lawyers waste the trees.

B

Dec 15, 1791
 
Personally, I would contact the NRA on this one. While the judge did exercise his right to deny a permit, giving such an explicit and detailed (and BS) reason just opened the door for legal recourse. If he had just sent back a letter saying that unfortunately, you have been denied at this time, that would be one thing. But to go off on a tangent blatantly telling a citizen that he cannot purchase a gun because he has too many? That is way beyond the scope of any law in any state I am aware of. IMO, he is asking to be challenged. I honestly feel that the NRA is the best bet for help in this one.
 
I'm not familiar with NY law, but I expect the purchase requestor will have to exhaust all administrative avenues of relief prior to filing a civil action. He may also ultimately prevail at the hearing or on appeal that are referenced in the letter denying permission to purchase the firearm in question. If so, then the impediment to his current firearm purchase will be removed and he will no longer have a legal grievance.

Please let us know what happens at the hearing. He should either be granted permission to buy the firearm or given a reason for the denial. Being unfamiliar with NY law, there may not be much guidance provided in the law for judges to follow. This seems the case as the judge cites no specific reason for the proposed purchaser's disqualification and opines on the dearth of law applicable to the situation. Even discretionary authority must be guided by more than simply a judge's personal opinion.

Does anyone know the statutory language that created this whole rigmarole that gun buyers must endure before making a purchase? Although it appears that this judge is agitating the process for political motives or out of personal conviction, it may also be true that the statute is ambiguous as to what factors should be considered in making a determination with regard to permission to purchase.

While I think the whole idea of having to ask the state permission is :barf:, as a native southerner, I believe NY is perfectly capable of governing New Yorkers but can only hope and pray that outsiders won't come and try to convince us of the error of our ways. ;) Truthfully, I have had many enjoyable vacations north of Virginia, but have never had the opportunity to spend much time in the mountains of NY - I hope to remedy this in the near future. :)
 
I'm not familiar with NY law, but I expect the purchase requestor will have to exhaust all administrative avenues of relief prior to filing a civil action. He may also ultimately prevail at the hearing or on appeal that are referenced in the letter denying permission to purchase the firearm in question. If so, then the impediment to his current firearm purchase will be removed and he will no longer have a legal grievance.
Click to expand...

Thats what the Article 78 referred to in the scannned letter refers to....

That proceeding replaced the old common law writ of Mandamus iirc btw

WildbutmaybeidontrecallcorrectlyAlaska
 
Were it not so sad and such a blatant infringement of personal property rights that would be falling-out-of-the-chair funny. What is next? Engineers that have too many slide-rules? TV show hosts that own too many motorcycles? Judges that own too many gavels? Is SCOPE also going to get in on this? Address for bux contribution highly requested.
 
Alfieri

I am a 26 year police veteran. Also going though a divorce. My wife told my friend she was going to make an allegation against me so I voluntarily turned in all my firearms before she did this.
I was arrested and the charges were later dismissed as there was no PC. The ADA said so. I have no other criminal cases pending and have an impeccable record.
Yet, Judge Alfieri denied my permit back. I hired a lawyer to help me fight the divorce and the permit issue.
I cannot believe this judge is allowed to rule from the bench.
There are no laws prohibiting the number of guns you own. So long as after 15 they are in a safe. You have to take a photo of the safe and submit it with the request.
Something must be done to this Judge by the NRA.
Are you an NRA member?
Does anyone have any thoughts to how we can address this Judge??
AJ
 
wow this is insane.....

I'd love to see NYC and NY states laws challenged by the NRA, or by the attorneys that represented Dick Heller..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top