How NYC is using its Weapons Registration database

[BrianFromWA]

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/06/new-york-city-confiscating-rifles-and-shotguns/#ixzz2n6kf6rCh

he New York City Police Department (NYPD) is sending out letters telling gun owners to turn over their rifles and shotguns — or else face the consequences.

New York City’s ban on rifles and shotguns that hold more than five rounds is now being enforced, according to a letter the NYPD is sending out to targeted city gun owners.

“It appears you are in possession of a rifle and/or Shotgun (listed below) that has an ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than five (5) rounds of ammunition. Rifles and shotguns capable of holding more than five (5) rounds of ammunition are unlawful to possess in New York City, as per NYC Administrative Code 10-306 (b).”

“You have the following options,” the letter explains.

“1. Immediately surrender your Rifle and/or Shotgun to your local police precinct, and notify this office of the invoice number. The firearm may be sold or permanently removed from the City of New York thereafter.

2. Permanently remove your Rifle and/or Shotgun from New York City and provide the following…Disposition Report/Registration Certificate…Notarized statement of permanent removal…Utility bill or other proof of residency regarding the address where the firearm will be stored outside the City of New York.

3. You may call to discuss the matter if you believe your firearm is in compliance…”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/06/new-york-city-confiscating-rifles-and-shotguns/#ixzz2n7NmMOcH

Similarly, from the Washington Times.

 

[Natebishop3]

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/06/new-york-city-confiscating-rifles-and-shotguns/#ixzz2n6kf6rCh



Similarly, from the Washington Times.

Then I'm sure the police wouldn't mind getting rid of their firearms that hold more than five rounds, right?

 

[DaLincolnJones]

hmmm was this the same crowd that claimed that they did not want to take away your guns, just halt the sale of new ones?

 

[Nikolokolus]

You can't have a proper authoritarian police state until a government takes care of this "problem."

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

so... they're... enforcing the law? or?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

They should just make the retailers only sell 5 bullets at a time.

Problem solved.

 

[such sweet thunder]

I get a kick out of the uproar over registration databases. I know why it matters to gun manufacturers: it makes it easy to institute mandatory insurance which would make guns more expensive. I mean, this story isn't about a registration database; it's about the law in NYC. It's just being spun to be about a registration database.

 

[MARIS61]

I get a kick out of the uproar over registration databases. I know why it matters to gun manufacturers: it makes it easy to institute mandatory insurance which would make guns more expensive. I mean, this story isn't about a registration database; it's about the law in NYC. It's just being spun to be about a registration database.

Read it again.

As many times as necessary.

 

[HailBlazers]

Then I'm sure the police wouldn't mind getting rid of their firearms that hold more than five rounds, right?

haha, look at these guys, no way they have any themselves...

 

[Eastoff]

so... they're... enforcing the law? or?

That's what I read as well.

 

[oldguy]

Can we see a show of hands of the posters that like to say, "You are just paranoid, nobody wants to take your guns."?

Go Blazers

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

I mean HOW DARE THEY try to enforce the law that's already in place. Tyranny.

 

[Denny Crane]

I mean HOW DARE THEY try to enforce the law that's already in place. Tyranny.

Is it ok to pass really bad or even unconstitutional laws and enforce those?

You seem to be suggesting its fine.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

Is it ok to pass really bad or even unconstitutional laws and enforce those?

You seem to be suggesting its fine.

All I'm suggesting is that people should complain about the law. The enforcement of the law is just those folks doing their jobs.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

All I'm suggesting is that people should complain about the law. The enforcement of the law is just those folks doing their jobs.

and people like you who call out others for not agreeing with being lied to are the real danger

 

[Denny Crane]

All I'm suggesting is that people should complain about the law. The enforcement of the law is just those folks doing their jobs.

The law seems unconstitutional. However, to address your post...

They don't enforce numerous laws. Like jaywalking.

Why? Because it's up to the cops to promulgate the law.

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

 

[Masbee]

All I'm suggesting is that people should complain about the law. The enforcement of the law is just those folks doing their jobs.

How dense can you be about this?


There are literally THOUSANDS of laws on the books.


The vast, vast majority of laws are selectively enforced or not enforced at all.


That this law is being so AGRESSIVELY enforced is, in fact, a very valid issue.


Try a thought experiment. Add to the US Constitution an amendment that guarantees the right to consume marijuana. Have a state legalize marijuana, allow it to be produced and sold, taxed and regulated of course. As part of the law, sellers must maintain a log of all purchasers. That state then later redefines "consume" marijuana to eliminate its use to get "high". There is debate about the Constitutionality of this new law, but no matter, IF the Supremes decide to hear a case about that law it won't be for years. As part of the enforcement that state uses the purchaser logs to send police to every single past purchaser in the state for "interviews". Those that don't have convicing stories are required to give up their stash. Those who are labled as only wanting to get "high" that refuse to give up their stash, or caught in the future with marijuana are arrested and charged wiht a crime.

What say you? Would that be ok?

 

[DaLincolnJones]

The law seems unconstitutional. However, to address your post...

They don't enforce numerous laws. Like jaywalking.

Why? Because it's up to the cops to promulgate the law.

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

you make a valid point , Denny. There are many laws that are on the books that the police refuse to enforce.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

weed doesnt kill people, twinkies kill people

 

[3RA1N1AC]

people shot for jaywalking

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

and people like you who call out others for not agreeing with being lied to are the real danger

yes people like me are the "real danger" lol

wait, who's being lied to?

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

How dense can you be about this?


There are literally THOUSANDS of laws on the books.


The vast, vast majority of laws are selectively enforced or not enforced at all.


That this law is being so AGRESSIVELY enforced is, in fact, a very valid issue.


Try a thought experiment. Add to the US Constitution an amendment that guarantees the right to consume marijuana. Have a state legalize marijuana, allow it to be produced and sold, taxed and regulated of course. As part of the law, sellers must maintain a log of all purchasers. That state then later redefines "consume" marijuana to eliminate its use to get "high". There is debate about the Constitutionality of this new law, but no matter, IF the Supremes decide to hear a case about that law it won't be for years. As part of the enforcement that state uses the purchaser logs to send police to every single past purchaser in the state for "interviews". Those that don't have convicing stories are required to give up their stash. Those who are labled as only wanting to get "high" that refuse to give up their stash, or caught in the future with marijuana are arrested and charged wiht a crime.

What say you? Would that be ok?

Sorry, I'm TOO dense to follow your WELL REASONED "thought experiment" right NOW.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

The law seems unconstitutional.

I don't know that it does. It further restricts the type of weapon someone can own. To me, that isn't infringing on the right to bear arms... unless you think we should be able to have nukes and tanks. Which you might. Which is okay. Whatever.

 

[Masbee]

Sorry, I'm TOO dense to follow your WELL REASONED "thought experiment" right NOW.

Not only are you dense (self proclaimed), but your avatar is annoying. There.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

Not only are you dense (self proclaimed), but your avatar is annoying. There.

well that's a relief, I was afraid you'd just call me a dumbass

 

[MARIS61]

All I'm suggesting is that people should complain about the law. The enforcement of the law is just those folks doing their jobs.

People ARE complaining about the law. The one unconstitutionally requiring gun registration. Registration passed by proponents who claimed it would never be used as a tool to confiscate guns.

 

[MARIS61]

Interesting that they only listed 3 options for response. Real Americans will no doubt exercise option 4.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

People ARE complaining about the law. The one unconstitutionally requiring gun registration. Registration passed by proponents who claimed it would never be used as a tool to confiscate guns.

Can explain to me how the registration of guns is unconstitutional?

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Can explain to me how the registration of guns is unconstitutional?

when it leads to confiscation that is the problem, Hoo

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

when it leads to confiscation that is the problem, Hoo

but the act of registering the guns themselves within a database doesn't directly lead to confiscation. It has a different intended purpose. So is the registration itself unconstitutional?