first test Of NY's new gun ban/gun confiscation as we know it!!!!!

[KFhunter]

http://www.abanow.org/wordpress/wp-content/files_flutter/13595562602013jan30_gunviolence_t.pdf

http://www.abanow.org/2013/01/aba-urges-congress-take-action-to-curb-gun-violence/



The lawyers are not in his court, they'll take his money yes, but this is where their loyalties are.

[300UltraMagShooter]

[quote link=topic=117229.msg1544088#msg1544088 date=1359626679].

The case of Nathan Haddad should boil the blood of any good American. A twelve-year veteran of the Army, with four deployments, is a decorated combat veteran and now, probably, a felon. His crime: possession of five empty 30-round clips for an AR-15. The clips were stowed in the trunk of his car at the time of a traffic stop.
 
This is why, even though one is a law-abiding citizen, never talk to police officers and never give them permission to search your vehicle without a warrant describing in detail the area to be searched and the things to be seized. As Haddad found out, assuming that he did give permission to search his vehicle, thinking himself to be innocent of any crimes, now faces up to 35 years in prison, 7 years for each clip.
Original news story Jan 7
[/quote]

Wait!  I thought "if you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about." 

All he had to do was be fully cooperative and everything would be hunky dory?   

[JimmyHoffa]

Makes you wonder what will happen to people that are out of the area, but reside and keep their guns in NY.  (Military deployment, business travel, schools, etc.)  They comeback and try to settle all the other stuff first and get caught with items.  Such a BS law.  I read that in the haste to write/pass it, they neglected to except police.  So they ended up having to amend it later so the cops wouldn't all have to turn in their stuff.

[KFhunter]

someone had to be the test case, and I almost wonder if this wasn't setup to be that.

I digress.

In order for this law to be challenged someone had to violate it or have standing to challenge it, and be willing to fight it all the way.  I see this person has a lot of help, and donation sites are all over which helps lend credence to my initial thoughts.  The average schmuck would plea out or take a public defender and we'd never hear about it.  But this has gone national, the big media isn't playing it up too much because they are in the tank with gun control (including FOX).

IMO - this is a test case done on purpose, and I think he'll win.

[Bob33]

I thought they had 1 year to sell them out of state. 

Ditto. Thougbt there was a 1 yr window

The window is from 10 to 7. Magazines with more than 10 rounds capacity have been illegal since 1994.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

"The state of New York's version of the law is very similar to the Federal version, but New York's version does not have a sunset provision. According to the laws of the State of New York, a magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds manufactured after September 14, 1994 cannot be legally possessed by anyone other than a law enforcement officer."

[jackelope]

30 round mags have been legal in NY till the new ban. Now they have a year to get rid of them and can only put 7 rounds in a 10 round mag....but 2 months ago they could own 30 rounders. At least that's what my AR owning friends and family tell me. They all own them and some are on their way here as we speak for safe keeping.

[csaaphill]

ya that was what i read on it.
ya think he may have let himself be set up to help us get this crap repealed.

[lokidog]

Hope he wins, it's going to be an uphill battle.

[jackelope]

ya that was what i read on it.
ya think he may have let himself be set up to help us get this crap repealed.

But he hasn't broken any laws yet. A year from now, maybe...but not yet.

[Bob33]

30 round mags have been legal in NY till the new ban. Now they have a year to get rid of them and can only put 7 rounds in a 10 round mag....but 2 months ago they could own 30 rounders. At least that's what my AR owning friends and family tell me. They all own them and some are on their way here as we speak for safe keeping.

Everything I've read indicates that in 1994 NY banned any magazine over 10 rounds that was manufactured after that date.

[csaaphill]

30 round mags have been legal in NY till the new ban. Now they have a year to get rid of them and can only put 7 rounds in a 10 round mag....but 2 months ago they could own 30 rounders. At least that's what my AR owning friends and family tell me. They all own them and some are on their way here as we speak for safe keeping.

Everything I've read indicates that in 1994 NY banned any magazine over 10 rounds that was manufactured after that date.

that's what ive been reading too. that NY already had some kind of Magazine ban since 1994 and that is where he's being held on not the new law they just passed. I've also read that his were purchased prior to this 1994 ban so all charges should be droped.
I've also been reading that Coumo has giving the police the right to confiscate any gun or Pistol if not registered or cpl not reuped.'
shtf soon I think. I think too all recources are about to come to and end so what we all fear may just have to come to pass.

[Bob33]

I believe the case will come down to when the magazines were manufactured. Interesting that Snopes just picked this up today:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/haddad.asp

[jackelope]

30 round mags have been legal in NY till the new ban. Now they have a year to get rid of them and can only put 7 rounds in a 10 round mag....but 2 months ago they could own 30 rounders. At least that's what my AR owning friends and family tell me. They all own them and some are on their way here as we speak for safe keeping.

Everything I've read indicates that in 1994 NY banned any magazine over 10 rounds that was manufactured after that date.

I left while the '94 ban was still in effect so I don't know for sure. I do know for a fact that lots of guys I know back there that have AR's are/were using 30 round mags...maybe they don't know the law and havent gotten in trouble. Reading around online now that you've mentioned it...thats the way it looks to me too.
 
The fact of the matter then is that this arrest has nothing to do with the new ban and is just coincidence with the timing of it. Sounds like this guy could have been arrested for the same thing 6 months ago.
Am I wrong...??

[Bob33]

"The fact of the matter then is that this arrest has nothing to do with the new ban and is just coincidence with the timing of it. Sounds like this guy could have been arrested for the same thing 6 months ago. Am I wrong...??"

That is how I see it based on what has been reported so far.

[JLS]

someone had to be the test case, and I almost wonder if this wasn't setup to be that.

I digress.

In order for this law to be challenged someone had to violate it or have standing to challenge it, and be willing to fight it all the way.  I see this person has a lot of help, and donation sites are all over which helps lend credence to my initial thoughts.  The average schmuck would plea out or take a public defender and we'd never hear about it.  But this has gone national, the big media isn't playing it up too much because they are in the tank with gun control (including FOX).

IMO - this is a test case done on purpose, and I think he'll win.

You could very well be right here.  Hence, the permission to search and the five mags uncovered?   

I hope it works out for him if that's the case.