That is the equivalent of what Federal District Court Judge William M. Skretny ruled in regards to New York States ridiculously named SAFE Act.
In his opinion Judge Skretny ruled that the provision of a 7 bullet maximum for magazines was unconstitutional. Outside of any 1911 owners that pretty much would have outlawed all semi automatic pistols.
Now, sure this is a victory of the 2nd Amendment…a victory borne through resounding defeats.
Skretny also ruled that everything else in the SAFE Act is constitutional.
These provisions include:
-The “Assault Weapons Ban”. Not only limited to rifles but any firearm that has ONE miiltary feature, be it a telescoping or folding stock or a pistol grip on a long gun. How exactly these features make a weapon any more dangerous is beyond me but the bed wetting gun controllers who know nothing about firearms apparently equate black guns to violence and ignorantly demand they be banned.
Case in point – Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D) from New York introduced an assault weapons ban and didn’t even know what she was banning. Watch her try and sidestep answering the question about barrel shrouds until forced to answer
The shoulder thing that goes up? What the hell is she talking about?
Or then there is Rep Diana DeGette who in two congresses has introduced legislation to limit magazine sizes. Yet, her only knowledge of guns must come from movies where you never see anyone actually reloading a magazine on their down time. How else does she explain this gem:
“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
She is saying that magazines have one uses and when the bullets are fired you through the magazine away…like in the movies.
–Firearm Registration. What other reason is there for this BUT to lay the foundation for confiscation of guns? Criminals who will use these guns will simply scratch off the serial number and nutjobs who want to go on killing sprees end up dead anyways so what does a firearm registration do save inconvenience the law abiding and make them complicit in their own disarmament?
– There still is a magazine ban. Yes, the 7 round magazine limit has been struck down but the 10 round magazine limit remains in effect as too does the 5 round limit for shotguns.
Not exactly the resounding victory some in the 2nd Amendment community was thinking it was.
When things like this come out I like to juxtapose it with other rights for the non gun people who may not understand what these restrictions really mean to the law abiding.
So, if the SAFE Act was the SPEECH Act and dealt with New Yorkers freedom of speech it would enact the following provisions:
– You may freely speak about something but only with a limited amount of words or time.
– The topics you can speak of are also limited by the state. If the state objects to your topic you will be arrested.
– The number of metaphors, analogies, allegories or other “assault rhetoric” will be prohibited
– Before speaking you will come into the office of the state’s authority and fill out paperwork to ensure that you are privileged to speak at all.
– You may not speak any radical ideas that someone else may find uncomfortable.
That’s basically what the SAFE Act looks like when applied to another right. To follow the above comparison, all Judge Skretny did was allow people to use monosyllabic words instead of just grunting and pointing like cavemen. Not really much of a reinstatement of our right.
A reminder New Yorkers, this November you have a chance to toss Cuomo out on his keister and disassemble this SAFE Act before it can take root. Be grateful they haven’t yet applied the SAFE Act to voting or you might not have that opportunity.
Anyone interested in reading Skretny’s full decision it can be found here: SAFE Act decision
Send this to friend