Post by: pianoman9701 on May 31, 2019, 07:48:15 AM
https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2019/05/burglar-shot-by-homeowner-had-hit-the-house-before-da-says-shooter-was-a-hoarder.html
Post by: Dan-o on May 31, 2019, 08:11:24 AM
Post by: Westside88 on May 31, 2019, 09:01:40 AM
The fact that it was a 38 that was inherited seem like good circumstances to challenge the constitutionality of these laws
Post by: jackelope on May 31, 2019, 09:40:03 AM
A homeowner in Deerfield, NY killed 2 burglars with a .38 wheel gun he inherited from his father who had legally purchased it. One of the burglars had stolen from his home a few weeks prior and returned with his aunt - sounds like a lovely family. Now, the DA has charged the homeowner with illegally owning a handgun because he never registered is as required under the NY Safe Act. This is where WA is headed.
https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2019/05/burglar-shot-by-homeowner-had-hit-the-house-before-da-says-shooter-was-a-hoarder.html
Not to be a stick in the mud here, but NY has required pistol permits and registration of handguns since 1911 and the Sullivan Act. So Safe Act aside, if the handgun wasn't registered to the guy who owned it/shot the guy, it would have been illegal long before 2013.
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 31, 2019, 10:12:34 AM
A homeowner in Deerfield, NY killed 2 burglars with a .38 wheel gun he inherited from his father who had legally purchased it. One of the burglars had stolen from his home a few weeks prior and returned with his aunt - sounds like a lovely family. Now, the DA has charged the homeowner with illegally owning a handgun because he never registered is as required under the NY Safe Act. This is where WA is headed.
https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2019/05/burglar-shot-by-homeowner-had-hit-the-house-before-da-says-shooter-was-a-hoarder.html
Not to be a stick in the mud here, but NY has required pistol permits and registration of handguns since 1911 and the Sullivan Act. So Safe Act aside, if the handgun wasn't registered to the guy who owned it/shot the guy, it would have been illegal long before 2013.
According to the article, his father registered when purchased. The Sullivan Act, named after one of Tammany Hall's most corrupt politicians, doesn't contain a mandatory penalty or sentencing. Many charges related to this law have been dropped at the discretion of the judge. In addition, the act was originally passed to target the Italian population of NYC, a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment. There are two different charges associated with the Sullivan Act: 1. is not registering, which is a misdemeanor. 2. is carrying a non-registered gun in public, a felony. The man who shot these two POSs in his house was not charged under the Sullivan Act, but the Safe Act, or the charge would've been a misdemeanor because he wasn't carrying an unregistered gun in public. He's charged with a felony.
Regardless of all of this, the fact that he's being charged with anything because he defended himself in his home is wrong. I hope the gun lobbies get on this and take it all the way up to the big house in DC.
Post by: jackelope on May 31, 2019, 10:15:34 AM
A homeowner in Deerfield, NY killed 2 burglars with a .38 wheel gun he inherited from his father who had legally purchased it. One of the burglars had stolen from his home a few weeks prior and returned with his aunt - sounds like a lovely family. Now, the DA has charged the homeowner with illegally owning a handgun because he never registered is as required under the NY Safe Act. This is where WA is headed.
https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2019/05/burglar-shot-by-homeowner-had-hit-the-house-before-da-says-shooter-was-a-hoarder.html
Not to be a stick in the mud here, but NY has required pistol permits and registration of handguns since 1911 and the Sullivan Act. So Safe Act aside, if the handgun wasn't registered to the guy who owned it/shot the guy, it would have been illegal long before 2013.
According to the article, his father registered when purchased. The Sullivan Act, named after one of Tammany Hall's most corrupt politicians, doesn't contain a mandatory penalty or sentencing. Many charges related to this law have been dropped at the discretion of the judge. In addition, the act was originally passed to target the Italian population of NYC, a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment. There are two different charges associated with the Sullivan Act: 1. is not registering, which is a misdemeanor. 2. is carrying a non-registered gun in public, a felony. The man who shot these two POSs in his house was not charged under the Sullivan Act, but the Safe Act, or the charge would've been a misdemeanor because he wasn't carrying an unregistered gun in public. He's charged with a felony.
Regardless of all of this, the fact that he's being charged with anything because he defended himself in his home is wrong. I hope the gun lobbies get on this and take it all the way up to the big house in DC.
All I meant was there wasn't anything legal about him owning the gun per NY law. Whether they charged him correctly is a valid topic, but either way it was illegal for him to own that gun with it not being registered to him in NY state. That's not new.
Post by: KFhunter on May 31, 2019, 10:56:36 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 31, 2019, 11:24:25 AM
A homeowner in Deerfield, NY killed 2 burglars with a .38 wheel gun he inherited from his father who had legally purchased it. One of the burglars had stolen from his home a few weeks prior and returned with his aunt - sounds like a lovely family. Now, the DA has charged the homeowner with illegally owning a handgun because he never registered is as required under the NY Safe Act. This is where WA is headed.
https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2019/05/burglar-shot-by-homeowner-had-hit-the-house-before-da-says-shooter-was-a-hoarder.html
Not to be a stick in the mud here, but NY has required pistol permits and registration of handguns since 1911 and the Sullivan Act. So Safe Act aside, if the handgun wasn't registered to the guy who owned it/shot the guy, it would have been illegal long before 2013.
According to the article, his father registered when purchased. The Sullivan Act, named after one of Tammany Hall's most corrupt politicians, doesn't contain a mandatory penalty or sentencing. Many charges related to this law have been dropped at the discretion of the judge. In addition, the act was originally passed to target the Italian population of NYC, a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment. There are two different charges associated with the Sullivan Act: 1. is not registering, which is a misdemeanor. 2. is carrying a non-registered gun in public, a felony. The man who shot these two POSs in his house was not charged under the Sullivan Act, but the Safe Act, or the charge would've been a misdemeanor because he wasn't carrying an unregistered gun in public. He's charged with a felony.
Regardless of all of this, the fact that he's being charged with anything because he defended himself in his home is wrong. I hope the gun lobbies get on this and take it all the way up to the big house in DC.
All I meant was there wasn't anything legal about him owning the gun per NY law. Whether they charged him correctly is a valid topic, but either way it was illegal for him to own that gun with it not being registered to him in NY state. That's not new.
I understand your point. He broke the law. It's just that if all were laid bare, NY would likely have more than a million felons in the state who've been model citizens and never broken another law.
Post by: bhawley76 on May 31, 2019, 12:03:25 PM
Post by: jackelope on May 31, 2019, 12:08:13 PM
I would love to be on that jury.
I bet it gets thrown out.
Post by: optic2 on May 31, 2019, 03:52:56 PM
Post by: Special T on July 06, 2019, 11:13:31 AM
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk