Federal judge dismisses challenge to New York's pistol permit law

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Madmallard, Jan 12, 2018.

  1. Madmallard

    Madmallard .44 mag

    781
    589
    128
    In Edward Garrett's eyes, the time, energy and money it took for him to get a pistol permit, were reasons enough to challenge the state law.

    The former chairman of the Erie County Libertarian Party got his answer this week: the 106-year old law stands.

    A federal judge dismissed the Libertarians' legal challenge and pointed to the pistol permit's role in ensuring that "only law-abiding, responsible citizens" are allowed to own guns.

    "Moreover, the laws promote public safety and prevent gun violence," Chief U.S. District Judge Frank P. Geraci Jr. wrote in his decision.

    In Edward Garrett's eyes, the time, energy and money it took for him to get a pistol permit, were reasons enough to challenge the state law.

    The former chairman of the Erie County Libertarian Party got his answer this week: the 106-year old law stands.

    A federal judge dismissed the Libertarians' legal challenge and pointed to the pistol permit's role in ensuring that "only law-abiding, responsible citizens" are allowed to own guns.

    "Moreover, the laws promote public safety and prevent gun violence," Chief U.S. District Judge Frank P. Geraci Jr. wrote in his decision.

    The court decision came on the same day Erie County lawmakers urged Gov. Cuomo to extend the deadline for pistol permit recertifications.

    Under New York's SAFE Act, pistol permit holders who received their permit before Jan. 15, 2013, must re-certify with the State Police by Jan. 31 or face a loss of their permit and possibly firearm, as well.

    In the court case, Geraci rejected the Libertarians' argument that the pistol permit law is constitutionally vague because of its reliance on determining a license applicant's "good moral character."

    He also rejected the party's claim that the law is too expensive, too time-consuming and an unnecessary invasion of an individual's privacy.

    “This decision is a victory for sensible gun laws and New York’s fundamental responsibility to protect our communities," Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman said in a statement Friday. "Common sense guidelines that ensure guns don’t fall into the wrong hands are critical to our public safety. We’re glad the court agreed.”

    The law, known to some as the Sullivan Act, named after the Tammany Hall politician who sponsored it, requires licenses for state residents who possess firearms small enough to be concealed.

    "We're not surprised by the decision and we're obviously going to appeal," said James Ostrowski, a lawyer for the local Libertarian party.

    When the suit was first filed, gun control advocates suggested it was a waste of time. New Yorkers Against Gun Violence described the lawsuit as nothing but a "rehashing of old and tired arguments that have been long settled by the courts.”

    The group also claimed the lawsuit was filled with legal and historical errors and, even more important, failed to recognize that the courts have repeatedly given elected officials and judges the authority to act in the interests of public safety.

    Unlike previous legal challenges, Ostrowski thinks this lawsuit can make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.


    The court decision came on the same day Erie County lawmakers urged Gov. Cuomo to extend the deadline for pistol permit recertifications.

    Under New York's SAFE Act, pistol permit holders who received their permit before Jan. 15, 2013, must re-certify with the State Police by Jan. 31 or face a loss of their permit and possibly firearm, as well.

    The suit, filed in July of 2015, points to the time and cost involved in applying for a permit – critics claim it can take up to a year – to suggest that the law is overly burdensome and therefore a violation of the Second Amendment.

    The plaintiffs also take issue with the various local governments charged with issuing permits and claim the decision-making on who gets them and who doesn’t can vary greatly from county to county.

    "There's a right to bear arms but it's only a privilege in New York State," Ostrowski said Thursday.

    If the suit is appealed, it would go forward as politicians debate the need for an extension in the Jan. 31 deadline for pistol permit re-certifications.

    Federal judge dismisses challenge to New York's pistol permit law
     
    Burzum and CaseHardened like this.
  2. MothMan

    MothMan 6.5 Creedmoor

    1,726
    1,611
    148
  3. togmaster

    togmaster .338 Win Mag

    5,900
    5,346
    178
    The courts in this state are infested with a liberal mentality.
     
  4. Bigfoot

    Bigfoot .223 Rem

    1,348
    2,565
    148
    Federal Judge said: "the pistol permit's role in ensuring that ( "only law-abiding, responsible citizens" ) are allowed to own guns."

    Well IMO, considering the history of the Sullivan act and how it came about I am calling the sentence above BULLSHIT

    The father of New York gun control was a Democratic NYC politician Tim Sullivan.
    He was a state senator and Tammany Hall crook, a criminal overseer of the gangs of New York during 1911

    Just like Cuomo's NY - "SAFE" - Act is BULLSHIT also... It certainly didn't make millions of ( "only law-abiding, responsible citizens" ) any safer. It did the total opposite actually.

    So this ( "only law-abiding, responsible citizens" ) stuff is total BULLSHIT in my opinion.


    I can't wait for the time I can finally move out of this shithole...
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018
  5. Catskillkid

    Catskillkid .308 Win

    4,103
    5,305
    178
    Glad to see somebody challenged it (I didn't know anyone was) but this is no unexpected. We'll see what happens on appeal but unless this goes to SCOTUS to get relief nothing will change. And SCOTUS taking it up is iffy if best.
     
    1911guy, Burzum and VietnamEraVet like this.
  6. ArmedCorgi

    ArmedCorgi .338 Win Mag

    5,349
    6,224
    178
    Can you appeal a dismissal?
     
  7. Catskillkid

    Catskillkid .308 Win

    4,103
    5,305
    178
    Maybe I misread the article. I thought it said the plaintiff was going to appeal. Not being a lawyer or legal scholar I don't know the answer to that question to be honest. I would think you could probably appeal any ruling you want but I could be wrong.
     
  8. Defilade

    Defilade 6.5 Creedmoor

    2,178
    2,194
    148


    You said SHITHOLE! :ROFL:
     
    Burzum and Bigfoot like this.
  9. Willjr75

    Willjr75 .450/400 Nitro Ex U.S. Military

    11,575
    9,760
    178
    @nortatoga , a court ruled so it's all good right?
     
  10. Jmac00

    Jmac00 .308 Win

    3,388
    5,397
    178
    If you own a gun, you're not welcome here. On top of that, we don't give a shit about your ability to protect yourself or your family, this is a crime-friendly state. We protect the criminal
    element. Taxpayers are here to supply the UNethical government with much-needed funds for the Welfare class. if you don't like it, MOVE
     
    Jezman, 1911guy, Burzum and 1 other person like this.
  11. nortatoga

    nortatoga 6.5 Creedmoor Yearly Shot Winner Monthly Shot Winner

    2,402
    3,122
    148
    Until it goes to the next level of Courts, That's the way it works!!
     
    Burzum likes this.
  12. MikeyCNY

    MikeyCNY .223 Rem Monthly Shot Winner

    1,227
    1,414
    148
    This is my shocked face.

    :fuac:
     
    1911guy likes this.
  13. Willjr75

    Willjr75 .450/400 Nitro Ex U.S. Military

    11,575
    9,760
    178
    So you condone their corruption because that's just the way it is right? You just have to accept it because you have no choice and you shouldn't question it or say that it's wrong like I do.

    When someone else says that rights were violated, you can gleefully point to this judge's corrupt, biased decision and say that you are right to win an argument that you know in your heart is wrong.

    You can even put it in your signature too.
     
    Defilade, spat and GOYABEAN like this.
  14. Bigfoot

    Bigfoot .223 Rem

    1,348
    2,565
    148
    I call it as I see it LOL ...
    Well to be fair, NYS wouldn't be that bad IMO if it wasn't for the overwhelming political influence from NYC.

    Well that and watching my vehicles rot away from all of the corrosion.
     
    Burzum and Jmac00 like this.
  15. GOYABEAN

    GOYABEAN .450/400 Nitro Ex

    10,755
    12,080
    178
  16. Acer-m14

    Acer-m14 .338 Win Mag

    6,094
    4,674
    178
    so the next shooting from someone without a PP the judge is getting arrested too .. seams fair for not keeping that gun out of his/her hand without a PP ..
     
  17. minderasr

    minderasr .44 mag

    974
    1,046
    128
    Same here. Five years, and counting the seconds.
     
    fartgamer likes this.
  18. MFC_9

    MFC_9 9mm

    99
    67
    18
  19. Steal2B

    Steal2B 6.5 Creedmoor

    1,779
    2,957
    148
    Another flaming Obama appointee.
    20180131_183338.jpg
     
  20. VietnamEraVet

    VietnamEraVet 6.5 Creedmoor U.S. Military

    1,994
    3,080
    148
    That is an interesting read. It details very clearly the problems we face here in New Yorkistan as firearm owners regarding our permits. Having had my own brush with ex-parte accusations from people bent on taking my permit away permanently, and that resulted in my own permit being suspended (until I went to Court and the judge immediately reinstated it) a few years ago, I think I can safely say that I think this suit is exactly on target.

    Unfortunately, I think it will very likely get ignored by SCOTUS.

    I have known Jim Ostrowski personally for going on 30 years, and I like him. He is definitely trying on behalf of gun owners. I wish him and his client all the best. I just think we are up against it here though...
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2018
    MFC_9 and Fezzik like this.
  21. Cooolone

    Cooolone 6.5 Creedmoor

    1,881
    2,145
    148
    I'm sure... Back in the day, that magistrates ruled that only colonist of good moral character and in the interest of public safety, that only loyalist to the "Crown" be able to posses and bear arms! Only those who possessed a permit, issued by the Crown itself, could own firearms and the distribution of powder was tightly controlled.

    Guess we've come full circle huh?
     
    Criticalt and Doc8404 like this.
  22. Jmac00

    Jmac00 .308 Win

    3,388
    5,397
    178
    Im going to move to the deep woods, let these moronic lib's tear themselves apart. When the state goes bankrupt, I'll be off the grid. screw this dump
     
  23. libertysnake

    libertysnake 6.5 Creedmoor

    1,864
    2,282
    148
    All we did was trade one king for many in the long run. If we stay apathetic and let the government abuse us they'll keep getting away with it too.
     
    Cooolone, Criticalt and Steal2B like this.
  24. Criticalt

    Criticalt .308 Win

    4,512
    6,827
    188
    "......ensuring that "only law-abiding, responsible citizens" are allowed to own guns."

    Which is what NICS background checks do.

    Incompetent moron.
     
    Cooolone and Steal2B like this.
  25. Bozo

    Bozo .40 S&W

    155
    218
    63
    Obama appointee...well there's a shock...
     
    Cooolone likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page