New York gun law is likely unconstitutional

[jerp]

It's very likely that in their haste to "do something" they passed a law that will turn out to be unconstitutional. Even though the New York law is not an outright ban of 9mm and .40-caliber handguns, it does make most of them inoperable, and thus would seem to fly in the face of the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in Heller v. District of Columbia. In that decision the Court noted that “handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid.” Even more to the point, the Court also held that restrictions short of complete bans could also fail constitutional muster. At the time, the DC law said that "firearms in the home must be rendered and kept inoperable at all times,”. The court said that law “makes it impossible for citizens to use them for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.” (The holding in Heller was also applied to the states in McDonald v. City of Chicago.)

So, since there is no such thing as a 7 round mag for the large majority of 9mm and 40 cals, (except maybe for some compacts?) they just become expensive paper weights, so a law making them inoperable is unconstitutional according the the Supreme Court.

[RR 314]

Jerp,

Admittedly I have not read the New York law--and will not. :-). This being stated, I did read and understand (perhaps inaccurately) from ancillary sources that you can have a magazine with a capacity greater than seven but you cannot load more than seven in it. I may be wrong but this is what I have gathered from others.

[tvc184]

According to an article on MSN, in their rush to get the bill passed into law, they forgot to exempt even on duty police officers. That means in March, they all become felons unless they find some low capacity magazines for all the cops including 42,000+ in NYC that carry Glocks.

And the article says high capacity magazines, not simply loading only 8.

[jerp]

RR314 - I tried to look it up and I'm now confused. In a couple places I read that the law prohibits possession of mags that hold more than 7 rounds. Somewhere else I read that the law prohibits possession of mags that hold more than 10. That would mean you could have a 10 round mag but legally only put 7 in it? How ridiculous it that, even from a practicality/enforcement standpoint? So I can have a 10 round mag with 7 bullets in it but not a 12 round mag with 3 bullets in it? Sheesh.... Methinks they did not think this through very well. (understatement of the year?)

[tvc184]

And this from Fox News.....

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's office is working on amendments to clarify the newly passed gun-control law, following complaints that it did not explicitly exempt police officers from a ban on high-capacity magazines.

The state law bans magazines over seven rounds -- police officers typically use magazines that hold twice as many bullets. Critics of the law claimed the alleged oversight was a product of the haste with which the package was passed through the legislature.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2IMvHF1hV


According to them, a "magazine" with over 7 rounds of capacity is a crime.

[tvc184]

And I stand corrected, it is a misdemeanor to possess a magazine with more than 7 rounds, not a felony.

[RR 314]

RR314 - I tried to look it up and I'm now confused. In a couple places I read that the law prohibits possession of mags that hold more than 7 rounds. Somewhere else I read that the law prohibits possession of mags that hold more than 10. That would mean you could have a 10 round mag but legally only put 7 in it? How ridiculous it that, even from a practicality/enforcement standpoint? So I can have a 10 round mag with 7 bullets in it but not a 12 round mag with 3 bullets in it? Sheesh.... Methinks they did not think this through very well. (understatement of the year?)

I am as confused as you are. However, I am much more apathetic and haven't tried to look up the proper answer by reading the actual language of the legislation. I am not going to NY anytime soon and other than laughing at their ineptness I am unwilling to dig deeper. :-)

[tvc184]

I just read the new law and it calls high capacity magazines a "large capacity ammunition feeding device". Got to love that stuff. Of course by caling it a "device" they added stripper clips (notice the correct usage of "clip").

The confusion in the new law appears to be the next part of the definition that says you can possess a 10 round magazine if it is not readily convertible to a higher capacity AND it was "obtained" prior to the new law going into effect in March. But the currently owned 10 round magazines can only be loaded to 7 rounds and any new magazines "obtained" (not manufactured) after the law goes into effect is a crime.

So possession of a 10 round magazine will be grandfathered but the possession of those previously manufactured but not possessed will not be.

I can see some undercover stings where the cops try to sell a 10 round magazine after the date of the new law and will bust the person that accepts it, even though it was legal when manufactured.

[CEO]

So you can have a 10 rounder but only load 7. Such a joke but exactly the kind of "do something" solution you'd expect.

[tvc184]

So you can have a 10 rounder but only load 7. Such a joke but exactly the kind of "do something" solution you'd expect.

From I read in the actual bill, yes. That is assuming that you came into possession of the magazine before the date of the new law.

The old federal assault weapon ban from 1994 grandfathered any magazines that were manufactured before the new law went into effect but the new mags had to say LEO/Military Only on them. Under this new NY law, there will be no such grandfathering on mags already made but only those possessed.

Of course you can get them because who will know... unless they start running stings which you can almost be on.

[jerp]

The law is very confusing and convoluted to be sure, but the good new is, as soon as it goes into effect, gun murders will cease in NY state!

[tvc184]

I read it and at least the magazine part isn't confusing... it is just stupid. The confusing part is when the media gets to spitting out their opinions which don't come from reading the entire law but reading other people's opinions (who didn't read the law) and put it out as fact.

[iamntxhunter]

I read it and at least the magazine part isn't confusing... it is just stupid. The confusing part is when the media gets to spitting out their opinions which don't come from reading the entire law but reading other people's opinions (who didn't read the law) and put it out as fact.

Yep the Media is known for this type of half ace reporting. They are supposed to be our first line of defense by alerting the public to abuse of power and circumvention of the laws. Makes me sick.

[tvc184]

Yep the Media is known for this type of half ace reporting. They are supposed to be our first line of defense by alerting the public to abuse of power and circumvention of the laws. Makes me sick.

I used to say that the First Amendment was the most important because informed people can't be kept down. That is why the communist countries and dictatorships have a ruthless control over the media.

The problem in this country at this time is when the media becomes a co-conspirator with the government.