A-2413, police take temp custody of firearms, on agenda

[gunpoliticsny]

A-2413, Requires police officers to take temporary custody of firearms for not less than one hundred twenty hours when responding to reports of family violence, is on the Codes Committee agenda for Tuesday the 23rd @ 11:00am. Companion S-2102.

 

[Deplorable Me]

No such thing as "temporary" when it comes to persons employed by the government.

 

[VietnamEraVet]

What a pile of crap. When I had to surrender my handguns due to a insanely ridiculous accusation, my permit was reinstated within one day of my court hearing in NY Supreme Court. Yet it still took me about 6 months to get them back.

 

[ManualF150]

What a pile of crap. When I had to surrender my handguns due to a insanely ridiculous accusation, my permit was reinstated within one day of my court hearing in NY Supreme Court. Yet it still took me about 6 months to get them back.

Surprised you even got them back...

I wouldn't doubt that if you had this happen again now, you'd never see your collection ever again.

 

[turbobike]

Oh....lookie what we have here...AR-15 without being neutered...Cuff-em-n-stuff-em...

 

[VietnamEraVet]

Surprised you even got them back...

I wouldn't doubt that if you had this happen again now, you'd never see your collection ever again.

My "collection" (whatever it may be), now lives in the freedom of South Carolina.

 

[Acer-m14]

LEO FORGOT there OATH AND CAN'T READ THE 2A ..

Serve and Protect .. just not your RIGHTS

 

[togmaster]

To serve (donuts) and protect (their pension).

 

[Saltwater60]

Tipping point is near.

 

[Truebeliever]

Stop blaming the police on this one. It’s all on the law makers.

This law is so badly written that if a police officer responded to family dispute at a concert where the armed security guards broke up the fight , they would be required to take the guard’s guns if he is open carrying.

And good luck getting a written disposition if no arrest was made, and one is not considered the victim.

And it requires that they take away the weapon that may have been bought to protect one’s self from an assailant. So if a woman has a gun to protect herself from someone who is clearly a threat ( orders of protection against him/ prior convictions) they would be required to take her gun too.

 

[ManualF150]

Stop blaming the police on this one. It’s all on the law makers.

This law is so badly written that if a police officer responded to family dispute at a concert where the armed security guards broke up the fight , they would be required to take the guard’s guns if he is open carrying.

And good luck getting a written disposition if no arrest was made, and one is not considered the victim.

And it requires that they take away the weapon that may have been bought to protect one’s self from an assailant. So if a woman has a gun to protect herself from someone who is clearly a threat ( orders of protection against him/ prior convictions) they would be required to take her gun too.

That sounds about right.

I see it in light of where someone knows you have guns, wants to attack you, but first red flags you, then the cops take the guns, then the attacker attacks you.

 

[Truebeliever]

The legal challenge should be easy enough on part of the law.

 

[prambo]

To serve (donuts) and protect (their pension).

They haven't even figured out yet that the governments they work for have already spent their pensions on hookers and blow or hiring drag queens to pervert their kids while they're handling a volatile domestic call.

Sorry, everyone has to earn respect...that doesn't appear to be in play anymore - now it's "respect the fear", or else.

 

[Truebeliever]

They haven't even figured out yet that the governments they work for have already spent their pensions on hookers and blow or hiring drag queens to pervert their kids while they're handling a volatile domestic call.

Sorry, everyone has to earn respect...that doesn't appear to be in play anymore - now it's "respect the fear", or else.

Earn the respect ? How does that individual cop “earn” that respect with you when you haven’t met before ? He has earned it numerous times daily without ever having met you . To paraphrase Dick Winters respect the rank [position], if not the man.
The police officers are not making this law or even proposing it. It is the civilian leadership that is imposing it on the police.
And you would have no idea if that individual officer “overlooked” such laws in the past or even 5 seconds before meeting you.
Put the blame where it belongs.

 

[Defilade]

Earn the respect ? How does that individual cop “earn” that respect with you when you haven’t met before ? He has earned it numerous times daily without ever having met you . To paraphrase Dick Winters respect the rank [position], if not the man.
The police officers are not making this law or even proposing it. It is the civilian leadership that is imposing it on the police.
And you would have no idea if that individual officer “overlooked” such laws in the past or even 5 seconds before meeting you.
Put the blame where it belongs.

Yeah. Load em in the cattle cars because the "law" states it. Got it!

 

[Truebeliever]

Yeah. Load em in the cattle cars because the "law" states it. Got it!

You should really take a second look at your rhetoric. It’s very familiar to what people used to shout baby killers at soldiers at airports during Vietnam. Soliders shouldnt join the military because there is a chance that they might have collateral damage that might cause the death of an innocent by your standards.
By your standards Oskar Schindler should have closed his factory in protest and those Jewish workers would not have survived . But your virtue signaling would have been done .
How many pure SAFE act arrests( not an additional charge or already illegal before SAFE) were made, statewide? You could probably count them on one hand. You don’t think about how easy they could be made ? Just think about it if YOU wanted to catch people at it. Not hard right? Meaning — the normally legal people that is compared to real criminals. Think about it.
Put the blame where it belongs . You are already blaming police for a law that hasn’t even been passed yet. Put the blame on the lawmakers who vote for this stuff .

 

[Cooolone]

How arbitrary... 120? Why not 97, or 117¿. 238hrs...

What a joke!

But sorry, NO! Let's see that warrant!

 

[C3D]

Red Flag laws have been found unconstitutional twice already in NY. I doubt this will stand to challenge.

 

[prambo]

NewYorkistan needs....

 

[spat]

Stop blaming the police on this one. It’s all on the law makers.

This law is so badly written that if a police officer responded to family dispute at a concert where the armed security guards broke up the fight , they would be required to take the guard’s guns if he is open carrying.

And good luck getting a written disposition if no arrest was made, and one is not considered the victim.

And it requires that they take away the weapon that may have been bought to protect one’s self from an assailant. So if a woman has a gun to protect herself from someone who is clearly a threat ( orders of protection against him/ prior convictions) they would be required to take her gun too.

"Just following orders" never absolves you for violating someone's rights.

Most of the worst atrocities in history have been carried out by people who were "just enforcing the law".

So, you can tell yourself whatever you need to, but that still doesn't make it right.

If you don't already have a red line for stuff you won't enforce, then you would turn on the gas in the showers if that was what "the law" said.

 

[Defilade]

You should really take a second look at your rhetoric. It’s very familiar to what people used to shout baby killers at soldiers at airports during Vietnam. Soliders shouldnt join the military because there is a chance that they might have collateral damage that might cause the death of an innocent by your standards.
By your standards Oskar Schindler should have closed his factory in protest and those Jewish workers would not have survived . But your virtue signaling would have been done .
How many pure SAFE act arrests( not an additional charge or already illegal before SAFE) were made, statewide? You could probably count them on one hand. You don’t think about how easy they could be made ? Just think about it if YOU wanted to catch people at it. Not hard right? Meaning — the normally legal people that is compared to real criminals. Think about it.
Put the blame where it belongs . You are already blaming police for a law that hasn’t even been passed yet. Put the blame on the lawmakers who vote for this stuff .

Lol. As the Cop is exempt and can purchase standard capacity mags. Screw that! If the cop doesn't see the fault with that he must have mental issues. And no the lawmaker does not get a pass either.

 

[prambo]

"Just following orders" never absolves you for violating someone's rights.

Most of the worst atrocities in history have been carried out by people who were "just enforcing the law".

So, you can tell yourself whatever you need to, but that still doesn't make it right.

If you don't already have a red line for stuff you won't enforce, then you would turn on the gas in the showers if that was what "the law" said.

Maybe he should read this...just a "police reserve battalion", who ended up as Einsatzgruppen - not a career path anyone with morals or integrity follows, or anyone who wishes for a long life span.

 

[Truebeliever]

"Just following orders" never absolves you for violating someone's rights.

Most of the worst atrocities in history have been carried out by people who were "just enforcing the law".

So, you can tell yourself whatever you need to, but that still doesn't make it right.

If you don't already have a red line for stuff you won't enforce, then you would turn on the gas in the showers if that was what "the law" said.

How about this. Instead of bad mouthing police , wait and bad mouth the individual officer who does something. You are badmouthing people who haven’t done what you claim.

And yes, innocent people are knowingly arrested all the time . Yep. I said it. If you have two cross-complainants , each claiming self-defense at a scene. Both want to press charges and both claim to be the victim and the other the criminal. What do you do if you have no immediate means of ascertaining who is telling the truth? Both get arrested and let the detectives, the DA and the courts figure it out is the answer. I’m sure some would say, let them both go but you know very criminal would claim to the innocent party.
Unlike what they might say on TV, if you are put in handcuffs, and taken away to the station house against you will, even for questioning , it’s an arrest.

 

[Criticalt]

Unfortunately, the term "family violence" is interpreted by NYS.
Remember, not using "preferred pronouns" is considered violence in NYS.
Not calling your son a girl at their demand, is violence.
There are a LOT of absurd things NYS considers violence.

 

[Truebeliever]

Unfortunately, the term "family violence" is interpreted by NYS.
Remember, not using "preferred pronouns" is considered violence in NYS.
Not calling your son a girl at their demand, is violence.
There are a LOT of absurd things NYS considers violence.

Not under the law yet

 

[Criticalt]

Not under the law yet

YET
But there are a lot of things police and prosecutors try.
Even if the charge is eventually dropped, the DA can cause issues.
And like others have mentioned, once the cops get your firearms, it can be difficult getting them back.
I know a guy, not a friend, just know him, who was arrested by NYSP for DUI when he had his concealed firearm on him. After a second breath test and a blood draw, it was found he was not under the influence. But, its been over a year and he has not got his firearm back from the NYSP. The police themselves say he SHOULD get it back but it has not been "released" yet.
I believe its because he was drinking while carrying and the powers that be are dragging their feet. Again, the lieutenant of the NYSP location that has the firearm says he doesnt see an issue with having it back.
This guy has NOT had his carry permit revoked or suspended.
He is 50 years old and a well known local business owner with no criminal history.
My point is, a progressive cop COULD take action "to be safe", then the gun owner could have issues getting their guns back.

 

[spat]

How about this. Instead of bad mouthing police , wait and bad mouth the individual officer who does something. You are badmouthing people who haven’t done what you claim.

And yes, innocent people are knowingly arrested all the time . Yep. I said it. If you have two cross-complainants , each claiming self-defense at a scene. Both want to press charges and both claim to be the victim and the other the criminal. What do you do if you have no immediate means of ascertaining who is telling the truth? Both get arrested and let the detectives, the DA and the courts figure it out is the answer. I’m sure some would say, let them both go but you know very criminal would claim to the innocent party.
Unlike what they might say on TV, if you are put in handcuffs, and taken away to the station house against you will, even for questioning , it’s an arrest.

This isn't about an error of fact.

Nobody reasonable will expect cops on scene to be able to correctly determine the facts of a situation when you have parties giving you conflicting versions of events.

This isn't about a few corrupt cops either.

This is about arresting people for things that are morally wrong to arrest them for. This is about arresting people who *shouldn't* be arrested based on facts that are not in question at the time, just because some corrupt legislature tells you too.

You, *yourself* were just supporting the arrest of these people. You just said "blame the legislature for passing the laws, not us for supporting them". No, I am going to blame *everyone* involved in unethical law enforcement, from the guy who drafted the law all the way to the guy who locks the cell door behind them.

If a group of criminals work in concert to commit a crime, you don't give the get away driver a pass because he wasn't actually in the bank. By the same logic, *every person* who is working in concert to enforce an immoral law is responsible.

 

[Truebeliever]

YET
But there are a lot of things police and prosecutors try.
Even if the charge is eventually dropped, the DA can cause issues.
And like others have mentioned, once the cops get your firearms, it can be difficult getting them back.
I know a guy, not a friend, just know him, who was arrested by NYSP for DUI when he had his concealed firearm on him. After a second breath test and a blood draw, it was found he was not under the influence. But, its been over a year and he has not got his firearm back from the NYSP. The police themselves say he SHOULD get it back but it has not been "released" yet.
I believe its because he was drinking while carrying and the powers that be are dragging their feet. Again, the lieutenant of the NYSP location that has the firearm says he doesnt see an issue with having it back.
This guy has NOT had his carry permit revoked or suspended.
He is 50 years old and a well known local business owner with no criminal history.
My point is, a progressive cop COULD take action "to be safe", then the gun owner could have issues getting their guns back.

That’s a completely different case and circumstances. He was arrested but I have no idea why they need a release from the DA’s office unless there is something you don’t know about. With the second draw, it came in under the influence, correct? The DA might still might decide to prosecute claiming he was drunk when driving and enough time had past for him to pass by the time the second draw was done.
But I still don’t understand why it was vouchered the way it was. It should have been vouchered as investigatory evidence for the guys who run the permits, or safekeeping. It sounds like it was vouchered as arrest evidence connected to the DWI. That might be why he is having an issue getting it back. Once it was arrest evidence— the DA has to sign off on it. And the DA is why would I return arrest evidence if I might decide to press charges later— not knowing it is not really related to their case.

 

[Truebeliever]

This isn't about an error of fact.

Nobody reasonable will expect cops on scene to be able to correctly determine the facts of a situation when you have parties giving you conflicting versions of events.

This isn't about a few corrupt cops either.

This is about arresting people for things that are morally wrong to arrest them for. This is about arresting people who *shouldn't* be arrested based on facts that are not in question at the time, just because some corrupt legislature tells you too.

You, *yourself* were just supporting the arrest of these people. You just said "blame the legislature for passing the laws, not us for supporting them". No, I am going to blame *everyone* involved in unethical law enforcement, from the guy who drafted the law all the way to the guy who locks the cell door behind them.

If a group of criminals work in concert to commit a crime, you don't give the get away driver a pass because he wasn't actually in the bank. By the same logic, *every person* who is working in concert to enforce an immoral law is responsible.

Go look at quote again

"blame the legislature for passing the laws, not us for supporting them".
I don’t I think I had that “supporting them “ in my statement at all.
Now, you make a Nazi reference, comparing a cop who works with a guy to the criminal who is the get-away driver and to the guys who drove the trains .

So that other cop should do what in your mind ? Virtue signal and quit? Who’s left.

Now, a different cop makes an arrest you don’t agree with. And a cop of the same rank helps the process the arrest and has no decision making ability to stop the arrest. You would want that other cop there who could speed up the process to get that person in and out as fast as possible with as little headaches. I say this from experience from when a cop’s family member or another cop themselves are arrested on nonsense. Your Nazi and criminal comparisons not only don’t fit the circumstances but are just insulting.

 

[GOPerfect]

I got to get a few more ducks in my row, once I do I will be able to leave this profession. I have been in this line of work we're going on 17 years, I cannot wait to get out of it. I'm long for the day when the uniform never gets placed back on.