SAFE Act prohibited rifles

ecosystem3

ecosystem3

.40 S&W
Messages
130
Reaction score
439
Location
Escaped from NY
A while ago I had looked on the NY Safe Act website to determine what is considered an assault weapon. They had a handy little workflow where you answer questions and they determine for you if a rifle is or is not considered an assault weapon. I looked at the same website today. The workflow is gone and it's been replaced by a pdf listing the the assault weapons by manufacturer.

When did they change the law to outlaw rifles based on manufacturers versus features? (yes, that's sarcasm)
 
Edwardteach72

Edwardteach72

.475 A&M Magnum
U.S. Military
Messages
14,883
Reaction score
15,065
Location
New York
ecosystem3 said:
A while ago I had looked on the NY Safe Act website to determine what is considered an assault weapon. They had a handy little workflow where you answer questions and they determine for you if a rifle is or is not considered an assault weapon. I looked at the same website today. The workflow is gone and it's been replaced by a pdf listing the the assault weapons by manufacturer.

When did they change the law to outlaw rifles based on manufacturers versus features? (yes, that's sarcasm)
Click to expand...

They always had that
 
Uninformed and Compliant

Uninformed and Compliant

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,894
Reaction score
48,258
Location
CNY
The entire list of SAFE Act prohibited rifles can be found here:

In a per curiam decision, the Supreme Court vacated the ruling of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.[7] Citing District of Columbia v. Heller[8] and McDonald v. City of Chicago,[9] the Court began its opinion by stating that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" and that "the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States".[6] The Court then identified three reasons why the Massachusetts court's opinion contradicted prior rulings by the United States Supreme Court.[1] First, the Massachusetts court said that stun guns could be banned because they "were not in common use at the time of the Second Amendment’s enactment", but the Supreme Court noted that this contradicted Heller's conclusion that Second Amendment protects "arms ... that were not in existence at the time of the founding”.[10] Second, the Massachusetts court said that stun guns were "dangerous per se at common law and unusual" because they were "a thoroughly modern invention", but the Supreme Court held that this was also inconsistent with Heller.[11] Third, the Massachusetts court said that stun guns could be banned because they were not "readily adaptable to use in the military", but the Supreme Court held that Heller rejected the argument that "only those weapons useful in warfare" were protected by the Second Amendment.[12]


Should you find yourself in possession of a SAFE Act prohibited rifle, please reconcile the issue by filing a complaint of the following:
18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law (fed)
and
New York Consolidated Laws, Penal Law - PEN § 135.60 | FindLaw (nys)
 
V

Vantrepes

.45 acp
Messages
309
Reaction score
373
Location
Upsate
Robin

Robin

.475 A&M Magnum
Messages
18,677
Reaction score
39,801
Location
Livingston County
thegatman said:
Does an assault rifle that is under water in New York State qualify for the SAFE act.
Click to expand...
Funny you should mention that, I did that "is it legal" thing the state set up and all the guns not lost in that boating accident are legal!!! Pretty cool!
Robin
 
meketrefe

meketrefe

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
12,807
Reaction score
16,327
Location
Dexter, ME
Nothings is prohibited or illegal with exception of the obvious illegal activitoes of gangs and cartels and thugs. There is SAFE BS compliance or not. In History might be a temporary thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top