Notebook: Five years after SAFE Act, lawmakers push for bump stock ban

[livingston]

Notebook: Five years after SAFE Act, lawmakers push for bump stock ban
ALBANY — Monday marks the fifth anniversary since the SAFE Act gun control legislation became law.

The question state lawmakers are now pondering is: Is it time for a new gun control measure?
Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie kicked off the session last week by explicitly stating in his opening remarks that his chamber will act on legislation to ban the possession, sale and manufacture of bump-stock devices. Such devices are used to increase the rate of fire of semi-automatic weapons and were used in the Las Vegas mass shooting last year.


Bump stocks are legal to possess in New York, but it is illegal to attach them to a firearm.

"It's a priority of ours, dealing with guns and access to guns and the attempt to not have these mass shootings," he told reporters
More at ..
Notebook: Five years after SAFE Act, lawmakers push for bump stock ban

 

[SomeSoldier]

I love how reactive gov is.

 

[freddy]

Huh? How is a bump stock a machine gun?

Bump stocks are not regulated, and possession and transfer are legal. They become illegal when attached to a semi-automatic weapon, making it a simulated machine gun:

Possession of any semi-automatic weapon modified for the purpose of rapidly firing rounds, without the need for a manual finger pull to discharge each round, is illegal under Penal Law 265.02(2) because such a weapon simulates the function and effect of a machine-gun.

New York Penal Law § 265.02(2) prohibits the possession of a “machine-gun or any other firearm or weapon simulating a machine-gun and which is adaptable for such use.” A machine-gun is defined as any weapon from which “a number of shots or bullets may be rapidly or automatically discharged from a magazine with one continuous pull of the trigger . . .”​

 

[Modean]

Huh? How is a bump stock a machine gun?

Bump stocks are not regulated, and possession and transfer are legal. They become illegal when attached to a semi-automatic weapon, making it a simulated machine gun:

Possession of any semi-automatic weapon modified for the purpose of rapidly firing rounds, without the need for a manual finger pull to discharge each round, is illegal under Penal Law 265.02(2) because such a weapon simulates the function and effect of a machine-gun.

New York Penal Law § 265.02(2) prohibits the possession of a “machine-gun or any other firearm or weapon simulating a machine-gun and which is adaptable for such use.” A machine-gun is defined as any weapon from which “a number of shots or bullets may be rapidly or automatically discharged from a magazine with one continuous pull of the trigger . . .”​

By their own legal definition it's not. But prove it in court in front of an unsympathetic judge.

 

[SmallGameAddict]

By their own legal definition it's not. But prove it in court in front of an unsympathetic judge.

And jury

 

[Modean]

Notebook: Five years after SAFE Act, lawmakers push for bump stock ban
ALBANY — Monday marks the fifth anniversary since the SAFE Act gun control legislation became law.

The question state lawmakers are now pondering is: Is it time for a new gun control measure?
Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie kicked off the session last week by explicitly stating in his opening remarks that his chamber will act on legislation to ban the possession, sale and manufacture of bump-stock devices. Such devices are used to increase the rate of fire of semi-automatic weapons and were used in the Las Vegas mass shooting last year.


Bump stocks are legal to possess in New York, but it is illegal to attach them to a firearm.

"It's a priority of ours, dealing with guns and access to guns and the attempt to not have these mass shootings," he told reporters
More at ..
Notebook: Five years after SAFE Act, lawmakers push for bump stock ban

If they want to ban possession they had best be offering up compensation. MA made that mistake in their ban, and it will end up costing them a pile of money in the end. 5A is pretty clear about confiscating legally purchased items.

 

[SmallGameAddict]

If they want to ban possession they had best be offering up compensation. MA made that mistake in their ban, and it will end up costing them a pile of money in the end. 5A is pretty clear about confiscating legally purchased items.

They never seem to care how much it costs, as long as it's taxpayer's money.

 

[Jmac00]

Bump stocks are legal to possess in New York, but it is illegal to attach them to a firearm

uum what exactly is the point? They're going to ban a device that can't be used anyway. the stupid is so deep in this state it actually hurts.

so go ahead and ban an item that law abiding aren't going to be using anyway, you dumb fucks