Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last
Like Tree12Likes

Thread: NYC Letter: Turn in your firearms if you have more than 5 rounds!

  1. #1
    Scavenger

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New England Area
    Posts
    260

    NYC Letter: Turn in your firearms if you have more than 5 rounds!

    Warning TFH Article

    NYPD began sending out notices to firearm owners, if you have a rifle or shotgun that can hold more than 5 rounds, time to turn them in! I just got wind of this story on InfoWars, yes, I'm a Paul Heyman guy, too.

    As I understand it, and thankfully so, the majority on O.com LEOs are against this kind of nonsense.

    My questions are:

    • If you're NYPD, do you really go out there and confiscate a legal firearm owners weapon?
    • How do you educate or how do you enforce a law that is blatantly illegal?
    • LEOs on the NYPD/NY State LEOs are in a pickle, I think, they have to follow orders, or lose their jobs over principle, how do you fight that?


    I said previously, NY LEOs will be in a pickle because it is the folks in Albany and NYC City Council that will rely on LE to carry these orders out. I am very worried, there will be an attempt to carry these orders out and something bad, and big will happen. It will be the catalyst, I think, for more restrictions.

    I have a thesis, we Americans are too nice, and we let legislators walk all over us.

    Notices: http://static.infowars.com/bindnfoco...fiscations.jpg

    Source: http://www.infowars.com/proof-gun-re...-confiscation/

    In the wake of New York’s latest gun control law, the New York Police Department is now sending out notices to registered gun owners demanding that they give up their firearms, clear proof that gun registration leads to outright confiscations.
    The letter being sent out to New York City's gun owners who now possess "illegal" firearms.

    The letter being sent out to New York City’s gun owners who now possess “illegal” firearms. Click to enlarge.

    The notice provides gun owners, who possess firearms now prohibited under New York’s unconstitutional SAFE Act, the “options” to either surrender their firearms to the police, remove them from the city limits or otherwise render them inoperable.

    The NYPD knew exactly who to send the notices to by using a centralized firearms registry which lists the city’s gun owners and what firearms they have in their possession.

    With the gun database already in place, the police merely needed to compile a list of firearm makes and models now banned under the SAFE Act and send the notices to the appropriate owners.

    The SAFE Act, which was passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor on the same day in January, has numerous, draconian provisions including, but not limited to:

    - Outright ban of magazines holding over 10 rounds
    - Restriction on more than seven rounds being loaded into a magazine; the limited exceptions do not include home defense
    - Mandatory background checks for ammunition
    - The creation of a firearms registry for what the state considers “assault weapons”
    - A requirement for firearm permit holders to fill out a form to keep the state from publicly identifying them

    These unconstitutional provisions and the overall law itself have met significant resistance.

    Erie Co., N.Y. Sheriff Timothy B. Howard publicly stated that his department will not enforce the SAFE Act, adding that the law is one of the strongest examples of the government not listening to the people.

    “It’s an unenforceable law and I believe it will ultimately be declared unconstitutional,” he said during a press conference. “Do you want law enforcement people that will say ‘I will do this because I’m told to do this, even if I know it’s wrong?’”

    Earlier this month, Howard won his re-election due to his stance against the gun control law.

    “The SAFE Act was a major issue in this [Erie Co. Sheriff] election,” Carl J. Calabrese, a political consultant, said to the Buffalo News. “A lot of people in Erie County, both Republicans and Democrats, are hunters, gun owners and shooters … These are motivated people who get out and vote.”

    “In a low-turnout election year like this one, it can make a huge difference.”

    Howard told the newspaper that he did what he thought was the right thing to do.

    “People in Western New York feel strongly about the Constitution and Albany’s misreading of it,” he added.

    While the City of New York’s notice proves that gun registration leads to outright confiscations, Howard’s re-election also proves that Americans are beginning to reassert their birth rights as recognized by the Constitution.
    This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.

    . . .that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

    -- Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America

  2. #2
    Woohoo for Tier II !!
    DigitalFrenchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The City That Needs A Nap
    Posts
    1,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclonus View Post
    Warning TFH Article

    NYPD began sending out notices to firearm owners, if you have a rifle or shotgun that can hold more than 5 rounds, time to turn them in! I just got wind of this story on InfoWars, yes, I'm a Paul Heyman guy, too.

    As I understand it, and thankfully so, the majority on O.com LEOs are against this kind of nonsense.

    My questions are:

    • If you're NYPD, do you really go out there and confiscate a legal firearm owners weapon?
    • How do you educate or how do you enforce a law that is blatantly illegal?
    • LEOs on the NYPD/NY State LEOs are in a pickle, I think, they have to follow orders, or lose their jobs over principle, how do you fight that?


    I said previously, NY LEOs will be in a pickle because it is the folks in Albany and NYC City Council that will rely on LE to carry these orders out. I am very worried, there will be an attempt to carry these orders out and something bad, and big will happen. It will be the catalyst, I think, for more restrictions.

    I have a thesis, we Americans are too nice, and we let legislators walk all over us.

    Notices: http://static.infowars.com/bindnfoco...fiscations.jpg

    Source: http://www.infowars.com/proof-gun-re...-confiscation/
    Good question. I'm not sure how our License Division will handle it. It's staffed mainly by civilians, probably a few limited duty guys in there, too. Not sure how they plan on handling compliance.
    beachcop05 likes this.

    __________________

    RIP PO Peter Figoski

    NYPD Scholarship Opportunities

    DigitalFrenchie's Guide to NYPD IMPACT

    A Cop's Point of View

    When I answer a stupid question:

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCTNT View Post
    DF,

    Why do you bother?

  3. #3
    Woohoo for Tier II !!
    DigitalFrenchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The City That Needs A Nap
    Posts
    1,539
    Actually, I'm pretty sure how now that I think of it. The patrol precinct where the firearms are held/holder resides will probably get notified from 1PP to take of care it. Some poor patrol cop will have to do the dirty work as opposed to some paper pusher in HQ. Delightful.

    __________________

    RIP PO Peter Figoski

    NYPD Scholarship Opportunities

    DigitalFrenchie's Guide to NYPD IMPACT

    A Cop's Point of View

    When I answer a stupid question:

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCTNT View Post
    DF,

    Why do you bother?

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    Dingbat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    1,237
    I see alot of firearms randomly getting lost in the near future.
    Krell likes this.
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  5. #5
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    City of New York, County of Kings & Queens
    Posts
    286
    Here are some finals for 61's to residence's, 90Z-90X-90U.
    So Fla Cop likes this.

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    Dinosaur32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Suffolk County, New York
    Posts
    3,520
    Cyclonus.....I doubt the veracity of this alleged confiscation. The section of the NYC Administrative Code quoted, does not pertain to rifles or shotguns. It covers ammunition feeding devices that can hold more than 5 rounds, not the long guns themselves. Also, tubular feeding devices contained within the weapon, as many .22 Cal rifles have, are exempt. The language in the letter is also suspect.

  7. #7
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    2,556
    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalFrenchie View Post
    Actually, I'm pretty sure how now that I think of it. The patrol precinct where the firearms are held/holder resides will probably get notified from 1PP to take of care it. Some poor patrol cop will have to do the dirty work as opposed to some paper pusher in HQ. Delightful.
    Copy and paste this into incident reports: Narrative- "I knocked, no one answered. I left"
    If by chance an honest man like yourself should make enemies, then they would become my enemies.

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,126


    I feel so sorry for you poor peasants trapped up there in NYC.

    I'd mop the bathroom floors at Chuck E Cheese before I'd confiscate an honest US citizen's evil, deadly bolt-action .22 assault gat.
    Last edited by Carbonfiberfoot; 11-28-2013 at 09:56 AM.
    ASTANVET likes this.

  9. #9
    taxi driver
    Max K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    388
    I remember reading about the New York SAFE act (to make it SAFER for criminals) months ago, and how it restricts magazines to 7 rounds (not 5): that was national news.

    Today I read in this post for the first time, something about a restriction to 5 rounds, in the New York City Administrative Code, which apparently conflicts with the SAFE act: http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LA...5+&TARGET=VIEW

    How does that work when you have a law that says one thing, and an administrative code that contradicts it?

  10. #10
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberfoot View Post


    I feel so sorry for you poor peasants trapped up there in NYC.

    I'd mop the bathroom floors at Chuck E Cheese before I'd confiscate an honest US citizen's evil, deadly bolt-action .22 assault gat.
    Not to be a smart-***....but where did you get that from? I ask because the letterhead looks suspect......as that's the address to the Queens Borough Hall.

    Does NYPD even work out of there....?

    One would think anything like this would be coming from 1PP....
    Last edited by Bearcat357; 11-28-2013 at 11:57 AM.

  11. #11
    It's Complicated
    Iowa #1603's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    15,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Max K View Post
    How does that work when you have a law that says one thing, and an administrative code that contradicts it?
    There are lots of city ordinances that are HARSHER than the state law it is based on.

    Just like there are many state codes that are harsher than a federal law that is is based on.

    I guess the best way to say it is you can't EXCEED the base law.

    In other words a 5 round (NYC) magazine would meet the requirements of the (NYS )SAFE act since it doesn't exceed 7 rounds
    "Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon - no matter how good you are, the pigeon will still crap all over the board and strut around like it won anyway."



    I don't know it all, I know a little about a lot and a lot about a little---slamdunc


    I have discussed religion and politics over morning coffee with men who have killed people, you don't scare me.

  12. #12
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    Not to be a smart-***....but where did you get that from? I ask because the letterhead looks suspect......as that's the address to the Queens Borough Hall.

    Does NYPD even work out of there....?

    One would think anything like this would be coming from 1PP....
    I certainly can't verify its authenticity.

    I came across the image on Reddit, where there were a few discussions going on about it:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comment...pliance_order/

    http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/c...st_in_ny_city/

  13. #13
    Woohoo for Tier II !!
    DigitalFrenchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The City That Needs A Nap
    Posts
    1,539
    1) That letterhead does look suspect, as does the wording as someone already mentioned. There's also no NYC seal.

    2) The Rifle & Shotgun Section of the license division does in fact work out of that address in Queens...so that's actually accurate.

    3) A simple phone call will sort all this out. Tomorrow, obviously.

    __________________

    RIP PO Peter Figoski

    NYPD Scholarship Opportunities

    DigitalFrenchie's Guide to NYPD IMPACT

    A Cop's Point of View

    When I answer a stupid question:

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCTNT View Post
    DF,

    Why do you bother?

  14. #14
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberfoot View Post
    I certainly can't verify its authenticity.

    I came across the image on Reddit, where there were a few discussions going on about it:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comment...pliance_order/

    http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/c...st_in_ny_city/


    From looking at the reddit stuff.....someone posted it on there a couple of times but no one is saying where it came from....from at least what I can tell......

    Letterhead is very suspect as if you do a simple Google search, you can see huge differences in it and the real stuff....

    And here appears to be the correct letter....with letterhead and a 1PP address...and a May 2013 date....not Nov 2013.

    http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloa...2013_05_v9.pdf
    Last edited by Bearcat357; 11-28-2013 at 01:20 PM.

  15. #15
    taxi driver
    Max K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    388
    Quote Originally Posted by Iowa #1603 View Post
    There are lots of city ordinances that are HARSHER than the state law it is based on.

    Just like there are many state codes that are harsher than a federal law that is is based on.

    I guess the best way to say it is you can't EXCEED the base law.

    In other words a 5 round (NYC) magazine would meet the requirements of the (NYS )SAFE act since it doesn't exceed 7 rounds
    Thank you, I didn't realize at first that the big news story about the 7-round limitation (almost a year ago) was about the state law of New York, whereas the topic of the current post (5-round limitation) is about a municipal law. So let me see if I understand this:

    Let's say, as a theoretical example, that the state of New York enacts a law that requires a minimum speed, on all freeways in the state, of 45 MPH. But then the city of New York wants to enact a law that only requires a 35 MPH minimum speed on any freeway within the city limits: such a law would not be permissible, because such a lower minimum speed would be LESS RESTRICTIVE than the existing, higher minimum speed, required by state law. Is that correct?
    Last edited by Max K; 11-28-2013 at 03:08 PM.

  16. #16
    It's Complicated
    Iowa #1603's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    15,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Max K View Post
    Let's say, as a theoretical example, that the state of New York enacts a law that requires a minimum speed, on all freeways in the state, of 45 MPH. Then the city of New York enacts a law that only requires a 35 MPH minimum speed on any freeway within the city limits: such a law would not be permissible, because such a lower minimum speed would be LESS RESTRICTIVE than a higher minimum speed. Is that correct?
    YES that would not be allowable. ...................the 35 mph would be breaking NYS law of a minimum of 45.

    They could however make the minimum 50mph and still be ok since their minimum would be above the state minimum.
    "Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon - no matter how good you are, the pigeon will still crap all over the board and strut around like it won anyway."



    I don't know it all, I know a little about a lot and a lot about a little---slamdunc


    I have discussed religion and politics over morning coffee with men who have killed people, you don't scare me.

  17. #17
    Forum Member
    Dinosaur32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Suffolk County, New York
    Posts
    3,520
    You're mixing apples and oranges. The seven round magazine limit is for handguns and is also the the law under the NYC admin Code. The 5 round limitation on magazines id in the code for LONG GUNS. Once again the section quoted DOES NOT PROHIBIT LONG GUNS. Please read the code, it is available online. This most likely is a bogus letter.

  18. #18
    taxi driver
    Max K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    388
    Quote Originally Posted by Dinosaur32 View Post
    You're mixing apples and oranges. The seven round magazine limit is for handguns and is also the the law under the NYC admin Code. The 5 round limitation on magazines id in the code for LONG GUNS. Once again the section quoted DOES NOT PROHIBIT LONG GUNS. Please read the code, it is available online. This most likely is a bogus letter.
    Okay, apparently, there are multiple ways of misunderstanding the topic under discussion:
    1. You may be unaware that gun laws in New York are more complex than in other states.
    2. You can confuse state law and municipal code.
    3. You can confuse a 10-round magazine limit with a 7-round magazine limit, and with a 5-round magazine limit.
    4. You can confuse a handgun magazine limit with a long gun magazine limit.
    5. You can confuse magazine limits for centerfire rounds with magazine limits for .22 rounds (for example, .22 tubular magazines are exempt from limits)
    6. You may be unaware that there are different restrictions depending on where you are with your weapon (at home, hunting, at the range, or elsewhere).
    7. You can mix various elements of misunderstanding together and get things doubly wrong. Or triply wrong. I think it would take at least several days of all-day study to learn the New York state guns laws and municipal codes for major cities in New York.
    Last edited by Max K; 11-29-2013 at 03:30 AM.

  19. #19
    It's Complicated
    Iowa #1603's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    15,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Max K View Post
    Okay, apparently, there are multiple ways of misunderstanding the topic under discussion:
    1. You may be unaware that gun laws in New York are more complex than in other states.
    2. You can confuse state law and municipal code.
    3. You can confuse a 10-round magazine limit with a 7-round magazine limit, and with a 5-round magazine limit.
    4. You can confuse a handgun magazine limit with a long gun magazine limit.
    5. You can confuse magazine limits for centerfire rounds with magazine limits for .22 rounds (for example, .22 tubular magazines are exempt from limits)
    6. You may be unaware that there are different restrictions depending on where you are with your weapon (at home, hunting, at the range, or elsewhere).
    7. You can mix various elements of misunderstanding together and get things doubly wrong. Or triply wrong. I think it would take at least several days of all-day study to learn the New York state guns laws and municipal codes for major cities in New York.
    Max................I think you are an adult and know how to read and understand that there are higher powers to almost everyone .

    Read what Dinosaur read...................he works there and knows what he is talking about.


    The post I quoted above is just plain stupid...........you are smarter than that drivel
    "Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon - no matter how good you are, the pigeon will still crap all over the board and strut around like it won anyway."



    I don't know it all, I know a little about a lot and a lot about a little---slamdunc


    I have discussed religion and politics over morning coffee with men who have killed people, you don't scare me.

  20. #20
    taxi driver
    Max K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    388
    Quote Originally Posted by Iowa #1603 View Post
    you are smarter than that drivel
    New York state (and NYC) gun laws are more complex than I thought. Given that, I like to assemble the confusing stuff in front of me (as I did), so I can use that as a new "starting point".

    When Dinosaur32 said: "Please read the code, it is available online." Was he talking about the NYC administrative code? I did read that one, here:

    http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LA...5+&TARGET=VIEW

    I also searched for the text of the "New York SAFE Act", on the assumption that it was easy to find, and all together in one place, but what I found was that the SAFE Act seems to consist mostly of many different amendments to existing law, and not all in one place.

    If somebody asks: "can I own such-and-such a weapon in the state of New York?", it appears necessary to go through a list of qualifying questions first: where in New York (NYC or not), where in New York (your home, or at the range, or on the street etc), what kind of weapon, what kind of magazine (type and capacity), even what kind of ammunition: I merely listed some of those necessary questions, and stated that it is complicated. So how is that drivel? Is there some kind of short-cut that I missed, where you don't have to go through all those questions first?

  21. #21
    Woohoo for Tier II !!
    DigitalFrenchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The City That Needs A Nap
    Posts
    1,539
    Well, this is settled.

    I called our good colleagues at the Rifle & Shotgun Section. They are well aware of the sh*tstorm this caused all over the web.

    This letter was sent to ONE person...for reasons involving his specific permit. He then changed it a bit to make it look like something it wasn't, and posted it online.

    Done and done.
    Last edited by DigitalFrenchie; 11-29-2013 at 10:41 AM.

    __________________

    RIP PO Peter Figoski

    NYPD Scholarship Opportunities

    DigitalFrenchie's Guide to NYPD IMPACT

    A Cop's Point of View

    When I answer a stupid question:

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCTNT View Post
    DF,

    Why do you bother?

  22. #22
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,126
    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalFrenchie View Post
    Well, this is settled.

    I called our good colleagues at the Rifle & Shotgun Section. They are well aware of the sh*tstorm this caused all over the web.

    This letter was sent to ONE person...for reasons involving his specific permit. He then changed it a bit to make it look like something it wasn't, and posted it online.

    Done and done.
    Thanks for the legwork.

  23. #23
    Forum Member
    Dinosaur32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Suffolk County, New York
    Posts
    3,520
    Max K.......The Safe Act is actually a compendium of amendments to a number of New York State laws that affect the possession of weapons. The central law is the New York State Penal Law. Section 265 seals with possession and Section 400 deals with licensing. While somewhat complicated, NY's weapons laws are not that difficult to understand.
    Max K likes this.

  24. #24
    Scavenger

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New England Area
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalFrenchie View Post
    Well, this is settled.

    I called our good colleagues at the Rifle & Shotgun Section. They are well aware of the sh*tstorm this caused all over the web.

    This letter was sent to ONE person...for reasons involving his specific permit. He then changed it a bit to make it look like something it wasn't, and posted it online.

    Done and done.
    You frakkin' kidding me? I feel like a posterior of a donkey. What did he change; how much of that letter was changed?

    I forgot who said it but some one said it initially that the letter was suspect.
    This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.

    . . .that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

    -- Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America

  25. #25
    Woohoo for Tier II !!
    DigitalFrenchie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The City That Needs A Nap
    Posts
    1,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclonus View Post
    You frakkin' kidding me? I feel like a posterior of a donkey. What did he change; how much of that letter was changed?

    I forgot who said it but some one said it initially that the letter was suspect.
    Not sure what was altered or what the goal of the original letter was, but it's clear this isn't some "disarming" movement by NYC. My guess is there was an issue with his permit, or perhaps a particular firearm, or maybe ran afoul of some other policy/regulation.

    When any of that information is taken out, I could see how it could look like a blanket letter sent to everyone. The poor admin person knew what I was talking about practically before I mentioned it. Apparently, all sorts of people have been calling to "rant" about it since this was posted. Ah, the internet.

    __________________

    RIP PO Peter Figoski

    NYPD Scholarship Opportunities

    DigitalFrenchie's Guide to NYPD IMPACT

    A Cop's Point of View

    When I answer a stupid question:

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCTNT View Post
    DF,

    Why do you bother?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Click here to log in or register