NY's Vindictive Plans for carry - special session next week to respond to SCOTUS's ruling. (Merged)

[Cavalry]

While on duty.

Yes, that is assumed, But its not written that way. Laws do not work on assumptions, they work on what is written. They specifically called out LEOSA, LEO and security (subsection g) "in the course of their duties" but not active military

I guess when you ram a shit bill through in a matter of hours with no legislative debate, time to review and no time to let the public see what you want to pass shit like this happens.

 

[Glock_USA]

Yes, that is assumed, But its not written that way. Laws do not work on assumptions, they work on what is written. They specifically called out LEOSA, LEO and security (subsection g) "in the course of their duties" but not active military

I guess when you ram a shit bill through in a matter of hours with no legislative debate, time to review and no time to let the public see what you want to pass shit like this happens.

It bypassed "codes" which is where it would go and the committee would take a look and try to find things wrong with the bill. Different scenarios and so on and so forth. Well it went there but they weren't given any time to read it. It was rushed through in an emergency manor. This is what was explained by one of the members of the "codes" committee that was on a radio program last week. He also explained how some of this needs to go back to SCOTUS for clearer defining. It was very interesting to hear someone on the inside talk about. I really learned a lot about the sham process.

 

[Defilade]

 

[subsonic]

Or you would just buy a pistol and keep it in a locker at the training facility. Who knows. There are ways to do it. Or maybe the trainers would have a handful of guns to teach with that would stay with them. You dont necessarily have to train on the exact gun you want to buy.

Whole point is you can't buy a pistol until you at least have a restricted permit already, which means going through the entire application and approval process.

 

[Tisto]

I have a lot of guns, I have a lot of ammo cans.

None of my guns are in ammo cans (except an airsoft pistol and accessories).

I have a can full of screws, another full of pennies. They are great for *anything* that a plastic box isn't heavy duty enough for.

So claiming that an ammo can is "probable cause" of a gun is an absolute fail.

If that's what your "experience and training" lead to, then "experience and training" is obviously insufficient to establish real probable cause.

You should have to have actual statistics to cite in court to prove probable cause.

"My extensively trained gut told me so" should not cut it.

That's exactly why I brought up the ammo can.

I used to own a vending company. After sorting and rolling all the change from my machines, the rolled coins were put in 50 caliber ammo cans because they were strong enough to hold them where cardboard or plastic would not be. I can tell you that you can put $ 1540 worth of rolled quarters in an ammo can and that it will weigh 86 pounds. I can tell you the same statistics for dimes and nickels too. If you like, I can tell you what each roll weighs. That's neither here nor there. The point is I would regularly have 5 - 8 ammo cans in my vehicle.

The fact that someone has an ammo can in their vehicle can not possibly be an indicator that they are in posession of a gun or ammo. Does it mean that I smoke crack if I have a small butane torch ? No. What about havinga gallon of acetone ? Does that mean I'm making bombs ? Any cop using that logic to push for a warrant needs better training. Any judge issuing a warrant for those simple items should be disrobed if not disbarred.

Since the contents of ANY closed container in ANY vehicle can not be assumed, there can be NO circumstances that should cause a cop to seek a search warrant simply because of that container. No cop can use his SUPER COP INSTINCT POWER to say there is anything nefarious happening simply because he observed a closed container and the vehicle operator refused to allow a search. That is the very definition of FISHING.

I'm going out to a music store today and buying a bunch of guitar cases. I'm going to put all my illegal shit in them when I travel, since the probability is that "greater than 51%" of the time those cases will contain a guitar and not illegal shit. Of course, no-one has ever done any study to determine that, but whatever. They don't need statistics. Their gut instinct is enough.

Bullshit.

I have absolutely refused a roadside search simply because the cop had absolutely no reasonable suspicion and no probable cause to search. He just WANTED to search. NO FUCKING WAY. GET A DAMN WARRANT BASED ON ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF A CRIME, NOT JUST A FEELING.

 

[Truebeliever]

On what grounds ? A green box. That's nothing. It means nothing. If you're using a green box as "reasonable suspicion" then you are the problem. To me, it says you are indeed fishing.

Half the people I know have an ammo can in their vehicle. Most use them for emergency kits.

Yep. Now ask how many “ emergency “ kits have been seized? Not many. None that I know of. How many ammo boxes have been seized ? Quite a few with ammo or contraband in them. Why? It’s totality of the circumstances that makes a difference. It might be something as simple as opening the box. It could be a whole host of other factors that by themselves aren’t illegal.
Yes, a locked 50 cal ammo box can rise to that level. You just call it a green box but the original description is a 50 cal ammo box, see the difference.
If I go into a house and I see certain types of scales, white residue on them—I’m not supposed to think drugs? It could be just someone cooking a recipe with flour correct?
If I saw used duct tape, and a bloodstain in the truck of the car, it could be the owner just cut their hand right?
No need for further investigation? The police would be just fishing for no reason right?.
You asked a question about a 50 cal ammo box.? I gave you the answer. Note the difference in your later description and the original description. It makes a difference.

 

[spat]

Yep. Now ask how many “ emergency “ kits have been seized? Not many. None that I know of. How many ammo boxes have been seized ? Quite a few with ammo or contraband in them. Why? It’s totality of the circumstances that makes a difference. It might be something as simple as opening the box. It could be a whole host of other factors that by themselves aren’t illegal.
Yes, a locked 50 cal ammo box can rise to that level. You just call it a green box but the original description is a 50 cal ammo box, see the difference.
If I go into a house and I see certain types of scales, white residue on them—I’m not supposed to think drugs? It could be just someone cooking a recipe with flour correct?
If I saw used duct tape, and a bloodstain in the truck of the car, it could be the owner just cut their hand right?
No need for further investigation? The police would be just fishing for no reason right?.
You asked a question about a 50 cal ammo box.? I gave you the answer. Note the difference in your later description and the original description. It makes a difference.

Not talking about seized.

Obviously when you search the can and it's full of coins you don't seize it (unless they're quarters, then maybe you run a drug dog by it then get something new for the break room).

How many were *searched* illegally? What % of them contained the item it was suggested they contain ?

If you search for a gun and find drugs, you can't count that toward your 50% you need for "probable".

How many owners were intimidated into "consenting" to a search ?

 

[Truebeliever]

That's exactly why I brought up the ammo can.

I used to own a vending company. After sorting and rolling all the change from my machines, the rolled coins were put in 50 caliber ammo cans because they were strong enough to hold them where cardboard or plastic would not be. I can tell you that you can put $ 1540 worth of rolled quarters in an ammo can and that it will weigh 86 pounds. I can tell you the same statistics for dimes and nickels too. If you like, I can tell you what each roll weighs. That's neither here nor there. The point is I would regularly have 5 - 8 ammo cans in my vehicle.

The fact that someone has an ammo can in their vehicle can not possibly be an indicator that they are in posession of a gun or ammo. Does it mean that I smoke crack if I have a small butane torch ? No. What about havinga gallon of acetone ? Does that mean I'm making bombs ? Any cop using that logic to push for a warrant needs better training. Any judge issuing a warrant for those simple items should be disrobed if not disbarred.

Since the contents of ANY closed container in ANY vehicle can not be assumed, there can be NO circumstances that should cause a cop to seek a search warrant simply because of that container. No cop can use his SUPER COP INSTINCT POWER to say there is anything nefarious happening simply because he observed a closed container and the vehicle operator refused to allow a search. That is the very definition of FISHING.

I'm going out to a music store today and buying a bunch of guitar cases. I'm going to put all my illegal shit in them when I travel, since the probability is that "greater than 51%" of the time those cases will contain a guitar and not illegal shit. Of course, no-one has ever done any study to determine that, but whatever. They don't need statistics. Their gut instinct is enough.

Bullshit.

I have absolutely refused a roadside search simply because the cop had absolutely no reasonable suspicion and no probable cause to search. He just WANTED to search. NO FUCKING WAY. GET A DAMN WARRANT BASED ON ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF A CRIME, NOT JUST A FEELING.

You are wrong with your assessment. Just because you have retasked a product for a legal purpose doesn’t mean its not commonly done for illegal purposes. It’s the totality of the circumstances and the crime suspected. Right now, is carrying ammo illegal? For most people no. A gun, in a locked container? Maybe.
If I ran the driver’s name and he can’t be in possession of a gun period, yes that green ammo box is probable cause for a search

Not talking about seized.

Obviously when you search the can and it's full of coins you don't seize it (unless they're quarters, then maybe you run a drug dog by it then get something new for the break room).

How many were *searched* illegally? What % of them contained the item it was suggested they contain ?

If you search for a gun and find drugs, you can't count that toward your 50% you need for "probable".

How many owners were intimidated into "consenting" to a search ?

It’s based on the totality of the circumstances. Not just the presence of one thing. The officer doesn’t have to be looking for drugs but a firearm or ammo If he can articulate the crime and why to a judge, he can get a warrant. It’s the totality of the circumstances. Not just based on one thing.

 

[Tisto]

So if I paint the ammo can red, blue, black, orange purple, or cover it with glitter then it's all good ? No. Your suppositions are just that. Suppositions.

I have an Ohaus triple beam scale. The very scale that YOU associate with drugs. I used it to double check each roll of nickels, dimes, and quarters. There is an average weight for each, and above or below that weight by a certain amount means that the count is wrong. Since I no longer own the vending company, I use the scale for reloading. Not to measure powder, obviously, but I regularly weigh bullets or brass to get a close aproximation of quantity. The scale in and of itself means nothing. I just hope you don't come over after I set a powdered donut on it because your super cop instincts will tell you I'm committing a crime.

 

[spat]

You are wrong with your assessment. Just because you have retasked a product for a legal purpose doesn’t mean its not commonly done for illegal purposes. It’s the totality of the circumstances and the crime suspected. Right now, is carrying ammo illegal? For most people no. A gun, in a locked container? Maybe.
If I ran the driver’s name and he can’t be in possession of a gun period, yes that green ammo box is probable cause for a search

It’s based on the totality of the circumstances. Not just the presence of one thing. The officer doesn’t have to be looking for drugs but a firearm or ammo If he can articulate the crime and why to a judge, he can get a warrant. It’s the totality of the circumstances. Not just based on one thing.

Your contention is that the presence of an ammo can is probable cause to search it for a gun.

It *isn't* *probable* cause of an illegal gun unless you find *a illegal gun* half the time you do that.

Just finding something illegal is not enough.

If you find something else illegal on occasion, you can pursue that, but if you aren't finding illegal guns better than 50% of the time you search for them, then your probable cause isn't probable.

Probable cause for "something illegal" is a fishing expedition, and we're better off with criminals running around than we are with cops who want to do an end run around the 4th ammendment.

 

[Tisto]

I notice he didn't respond to my guitar cases.

 

[Truebeliever]

So if I paint the ammo can red, blue, black, orange purple, or cover it with glitter then it's all good ? No. Your suppositions are just that. Suppositions.

I have an Ohaus triple beam scale. The very scale that YOU associate with drugs. I used it to double check each roll of nickels, dimes, and quarters. There is an average weight for each, and above or below that weight by a certain amount means that the count is wrong. Since I no longer own the vending company, I use the scale for reloading. Not to measure powder, obviously, but I regularly weigh bullets or brass to get a close aproximation of quantity. The scale in and of itself means nothing. I just hope you don't come over after I set a powdered donut on it because your super cop instincts will tell you I'm committing a crime.

Again, Totality of the circumstances. You are getting angry because I am explaining search and seizure. Criminals retask legal items to do illegal things.
If a cop pulls over an RV in the dessert and it has a high school chemistry kit in the back— he isn’t supposed to think meth lab?
You guys are missing the “ totality of the circumstances “ and the part where I said the driver can’t have a gun after a name check—- ie a prohibited person. What else can’t a prohibited person have? Ammunition. Yet, a 50 cal box is in his car? Use some common sense.
Scales with white powder. Again, totality of the circumstances.
You guys don’t want to hear the truth, people won’t tell it to you

 

[Tisto]

No, what we don't want to hear is some bullshit made up percentages and bogus reasons given for a search.

 

[Tisto]

Drug smughlers put drugs inside spare tires all the time. So is it not "probable" that the spare tire in the back of my pickup truck contains drugs if I'm crossing the Mexican border ? Bullshit.

 

[Truebeliever]

No, what we don't want to hear is some bullshit made up percentages and bogus reasons given for a search.

Go read the original circumstances. Green 50 cal box. And I said yes if the name check comes back saying he can’t have a gun.
Then people argued that a 50 cal box wasn’t enough for probable cause for search warrant.
The percentage is is it more probable than not, there is something the driver can’t legally possess. More probable than not is 51% likely to be something he can’t have in that box.

 

[Tisto]

Who's ass are these statistics being pulled out of ?

 

[Truebeliever]

To all who jumped down my throat, see how totality of the circumstances matter.
The original post said a 50 cal ammo box . I said if the name check came back that the driver couldn’t have a gun, it was enough for a search warrant .
Many didn’t bother to read that part. They just jumped in with half the story and argued that the ammo box wouldn’t be enough or how because they use ammo boxes for other things, I would be wrong Totality of the circumstances matter.
Again, if the driver can’t have a gun ( a name check shows this) and there is a 50 cal ammo box in his car— yes, it’s enough for a search warrant. Generally Prohibited people can’t have ammo either.

Anybody still want to disagree or start saying , it’s a BS search etc etc?

 

[Truebeliever]

Who's ass are these statistics being pulled out of ?

What does more probable than not mean? Slightly more chance it’s true, right?

 

[Tisto]

We read it, what we're saying is that an ammo can posessed by a prohibited person is not in and of itself evidence of any crime, and not probable cause for a search.

 

[Truebeliever]

Drug smughlers put drugs inside spare tires all the time. So is it not "probable" that the spare tire in the back of my pickup truck contains drugs if I'm crossing the Mexican border ? Bullshit.

Totality of the circumstances again. Go to a border crossing. Does the border patrol have stations where they take the tires off without any cause? Yep.

 

[Tisto]

Totality of the circumstances again. Go to a border crossing. Does the border patrol have stations where they take the tires off without any cause? Yep.

That must mean the 51% of the spare tires coming across the border have drugs in them. 51% or more ! No.

 

[Truebeliever]

We read it, what we're saying is that an ammo can posessed by a prohibited person is not in and of itself evidence of any crime, and not probable cause for a search.

You are incorrect. Generally prohibited people can not possess ammunition and it is a crime .

 

[Tisto]

You are incorrect. Generally prohibited people can not possess ammunition and it is a crime .

Posession of the ammo box is NOT. Unless your super cop instinct is coupled with super cop x-ray vision and super cop chemical analysis, all you have is supposition.

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

What's nuts is that before last Friday no license holder would have any need to have the above conversation. What's good is that this new law does not only affect as narrow a constituency as the safe act did. And there were workarounds for that.

This affects hundreds of thousands, if not millions of gun owners across the state. Both handguns and long guns, tacticool types and fudds.

Good in that there was an article in a typical leftist rag that actually discussed how everyone who lives within the boundaries of the Adirondack Park is enraged, and confused. Good in that I have spoken to county and state politicians who are not only being bombarded with inquiries, but who are literally disarmed themselves, and feel utterly betrayed by the system.

The law requires multiple technologies that do not exist, and requires law abiding citizens to become contortionists (disarming and placing a gun in a car safe) physical movements that must be done safely hundreds or thousands of times per day all over the state, and all out of sight of the public.

It goes against common sense, any sense of decency, the trends of recent history, the wishes of millions of New Yorkers, and most of all, a recent ruling of the Supreme Court addressing that very topic.

 

[Truebeliever]

Posession of the ammo box is NOT. Unless your super cop instinct is coupled with super cop x-ray vision and super cop chemical analysis, all you have is supposition.

Let’s see. A person who can’t legally possess a gun. Can’t posesss ammo and there is a 50 cal ammo box there. And it’s wrong to get a search warrant for the box?

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

Let’s see. A person who can’t legally possess a gun. Can’t posesss ammo and there is a 50 cal ammo box there. And it’s wrong to get a search warrant for the box?

So see if Anvil Cases makes something shaped like a musical instrument.

 

[Truebeliever]

So see if Anvil Cases makes something shaped like a musical instrument.

Since I don’t know what Anvil cases are, I can’t answer that directly .
But change the circumstances to a locked guitar case. Then the circumstances changes. It’s more likely to be a guitar than not. No probable cause.

 

[Glock_USA]

One thing I found interesting that I was talking to my buddy about is that the law is worded that you're guilty of possession in a sensitive place if you knew or should have known that you are in such place.

Well how would I or should I reasonably know such thing is a sensitive place if I've been carrying there for the last 30 years and it has never been sensitive before?

Something to think about.

 

[camper4lyfe]

One thing I found interesting that I was talking to my buddy about is that the law is worded that you're guilty of possession in a sensitive place if you knew or should have known that you are in such place.

Well how would I or should I reasonably know such thing is a sensitive place if I've been carrying there for the last 30 years and it has never been sensitive before?

Something to think about.

Ignorance of the law is not a very solid defense.

 

[camper4lyfe]

Whole point is you can't buy a pistol until you at least have a restricted permit already, which means going through the entire application and approval process.

Exactly. You can't get a permit without the training, but you can't get the training without the permit.