A very small one. The risk of being discovered is much larger than the chance you'll have to use a gun to save your life.Totally valid point. It's a risk.
But not carrying is s risk as well.
A very small one. The risk of being discovered is much larger than the chance you'll have to use a gun to save your life.Totally valid point. It's a risk.
But not carrying is s risk as well.
Very unlikelyA very small one. The risk of being discovered is much larger than the chance you'll have to use a gun to save your life.
Listen to Beaver face now.
She's every bit as painful as FUAC. maybe even more so.
I think she's going to try to have laws changed to put weight and force of law behind "no gun" signs on private property and she's going to expand the restricted/banned places for legal owners to carry.
She's yammering on about preventing people from carrying in public because someone might look at your girlfriend wrong and make you angry and escalate to shooting. Wtf???
Then she rambled on about needing to make NY safe for the anticipated great migration of women fleeing to NY for reproductive freedom. What the actual F?!
That's the justification you are going to use to restrict my rights as a responsible sound minded lawful citizen?!
Go right to hell KH. leave me the hell alone.
Post your own sign on the way in.I will do what I must
A very small one. The risk of being discovered is much larger than the chance you'll have to use a gun to save your life.
All it takes is a suspicion. The police will then pat down for weapons. Then the game is over.Debatable.
It just means I'll be much more less likely to carry larger guns that I can shoot better but have a potential to print for an observant eye, and much more likely to carry my smallest configuration (that I'm less accurate with too thx a lot NY )my single stack flush fit 6rd mag on a Walther PPS. It is basically invisible for my body even under just a relatively snug t-shirt
All it takes is a suspicion. The police will then pat down for weapons. Then the game is over.
Its been long upheld that police can pat down for weapons for their safety. You don't stand a chance here.
Yea you're probably right the 4th amendment is toast too.
Same here. I will be calling to send money for the lawsuit. I can’t wait until they are hit with a racial discrimination lawsuit. Disparaging effect. The subway and the “ opt-in” provisions mean anyone who lives in NYC and has a gun for work can’t travel or eat. How does one know if someone opted in? Im going to carry opted in signs and put them on the business before I walk in-lolGirlfriend says we don't go many places .... Will be staying at home a lot more after this bill passes.
If they give an exemption for security guards then I will just get my security guard license. My buddy just did that (cost him about $500) for no other reason then he wanted it.And there is no retired cop exceptions in the bill according to one source . And nothing to say about security guards
"Become a certified trainer!"The draft of the law says your training certificate must be carried at all times outside the the home and is good for 2 years. This will be Ann ongoing training requirement. They want you to be too busy or get fed up and say the hell with it and let your permit lapse.
When I had my ATF interview that was exactly true. No NICS for a state requirement for ammo. With the ATF changes, who knows, I take nothing for granted now.Hochul said background checks will also be necessary to purchase ammunition for guns that need a permit, such as handguns and semiautomatic rifles.
We had that under safe act . From what I recall they cannot use the NICS check for ammo sales.
Yes, I feel it's worse than the 'Safe Act'. I mean come on... if we need to renew this training every two years and spend 15-20 hours and probably $500-$1000 just to renew it, that's frickin ridiculous. That mixed with barley being able to carry anywhere you go and needing to lock it up when in your own car -- is it even worth all the trouble? And that's just it right there. The horse-faced witch is trying to make us not even bother.Does anyone else think this will end up being worse than safe act?
I used to always think... NY getting a (legal)pistol is a huge burden and pain in the ass but once you actually get it you have more rights than most other states. Even though all legal pistol owners are extensively vetted we are now being treated as we are not trustworthy of our extensive pistol permit licensing scheme to exercise of our God given rights and we are going to be SEVERELY limited on where we can (legally) carry or risk being made examples of and turned into felons.
This impacts our day to day rights more than the safe act did.
There will be so many businesses that either just don't care one way or the other, or are afraid of upsetting the woke mob so they just won't put up "guns welcome here" signs. And lacking of that the default of not posting a sign is guns are banned by force of law.
Im disgusted.
1) Being issued a CCW by a State that then turns around and makes it illegal to carry in 98% of the places in the State is NOT a major victory. This response from Hochul is nothing more than political revenge for her authority being challenged and defeated by SCOTUS.Allow me to comment as someone who is not a native New Yorker, and as someone who has lived and carried in several states, the last one being IL, shortly after they became shall-issue around 2013.
First, there are a lot of doomers here. Like almost all of you. Let me tell you, I get it. You've been getting shafted by NY politicians all your life. But please see this for what it is, a MAJOR victory for us. Yes, they will of course continue to try to screw us. Did you think otherwise? Same thing happened in IL, and in many places where CCW was newly instituted against the wishes of the powers in the state. Let's break it down:
Training requirement: every state that requires a license to carry has a training requirement to my knowledge. And that includes FL and TX, some of the most friendly states. You can argue whether it is right to place a requirement on a constitutionally protected right, but this has been upheld. You will have to take a course. It is what it is. In IL, I had to take 16 hours, in VA it was 8 hours. FL I believe is also 8 hours. Both VA and IL require a shooting qualification. I will say that regardless of the opinions regarding a constitutional right, training in general is one of the better ideas out there. If nothing else, a lot of the coursework is relevant laws and rules of engagement. You all may know them, but I guarantee that most do not. And NY has very strict rules of engagement.
Carry restrictions: again, regardless of your opinions on them, they have been upheld. Including in this very ruling. And obviously there will be many, many of which will be challenged, and many of which will be thrown out based on this very ruling itself. But some will remain. This is true of every state. My best guess will be public transit, major entertainment events, enforceable "no guns" signs. Likely some random ones like public parks, obviously schools, colleges, post offices, hospitals. Possibly financial institutions. Some way of places where alcohol is served, but unlikely all restaurants that serve alcohol. Definitely bars. These are restrictions that already exist in many other states, or federal rules, and they will be easy to uphold.
Possible storage requirements: these already exist in NY. Not sure how they can be made and stricter, short of requiring a cop to inspect your safe. There is no way that should she propose it, it would be upheld.
Background checks to purchase ammo: I believe this has been proposed many years ago in NY. There is a reason why it has never come to pass here or in CA. Not saying it can't happen, but why not do this years ago? It has nothing to do with this ruling. And it is questionable whether it would be upheld.
So let me leave you with this. We just won a major victory. NY has been forced to issue CCW without an arbitrary need. NY will now join the other 20 or so states that have a licensing requirement for carry. It will not be a smooth or simple transition. It never is. But if IL and Chicago where I spent 4 years and carried for 3 of them is any indication, we will be OK. This will grind on for months or more, 2 steps forward, 1 step back. Expect many restrictions and many legal challenges. But we are winning. In the end, there is very little they can do to make it harder and nothing they can do to stop it. And be happy, this is not the last time we will make leftists cry.
The victory is in how the court said these laws must be weighed in court. The sensitive areas and such must be historical. If they weren’t sensitive areas before the ruling was passed , these new areas won’t pass the court test if the judge follows the decision.1) Being issued a CCW by a State that then turns around and makes it illegal to carry in 98% of the places in the State is NOT a major victory. This response from Hochul is nothing more than political revenge for her authority being challenged and defeated by SCOTUS.
2) Your assertion for live fire training being required by any state for a CCW is highly inaccurate .
It’s less than what LEOSA or a security guard license requires.The draft of the law says your training certificate must be carried at all times outside the the home and is good for 2 years. This will be Ann ongoing training requirement. They want you to be too busy or get fed up and say the hell with it and let your permit lapse.
not following you here?It’s less than what LEOSA or a security guard license requires.