Jump to content
lexcruiser

New York Supreme Court may issue injunction on recent "SAFE" act..

Recommended Posts

No, its more like go back to the drawing board and try again.

 

That I could see - a deal where they grudgingly admit that "assault weapons" are in common use. So the state sort of turns them into a sort of New York State Class III weapon where the buyers need a tax stamp and so on for X features. Maybe a tax for each "evil" feature. Want a folding stock? Fine. $100 stamp. Want a bayonet lug? Fine. $100 stamp. Want a 30 round magazine? Fine. $100 stamp per magazine. That would have the effect of allowing these weapons, but reducing their availability. And making "post-ban" weapons more popular since you don't have to pay for the stamp. A sort of AWB without being an AWB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion. This doesn't mean crap for NJ. The NY state Supreme Court will till if its constitutionally protected against NY constitution not the US constitution. We all know how well Nj's constitution protects us. Any lawyers care to clarify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That I could see - a deal where they grudgingly admit that "assault weapons" are in common use. So the state sort of turns them into a sort of New York State Class III weapon where the buyers need a tax stamp and so on for X features. Maybe a tax for each "evil" feature. Want a folding stock? Fine. $100 stamp. Want a bayonet lug? Fine. $100 stamp. Want a 30 round magazine? Fine. $100 stamp per magazine. That would have the effect of allowing these weapons, but reducing their availability. And making "post-ban" weapons more popular since you don't have to pay for the stamp. A sort of AWB without being an AWB.

 

The more these tax/insurance plans come up, the more I see it at as denying poor people their rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The more these tax/insurance plans come up, the more I see it at as denying poor people their rights.

 

Wasn't the "Poll Tax" declared unconstituitional?

 

Isn't being forced to pay money (permit fees, background checks etc) to exercise a constitutional right, the exact same thing?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't being forced to pay money (permit fees, background checks etc) to exercise a constitutional right, the exact same thing?

 

No. Because if it saves the life of just one child...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more these tax/insurance plans come up, the more I see it at as denying poor people their rights.

 

Oh it does. I'm not saying that I agree with it, but it's an option that they could use to "discourage" weapons with evil features without actually banning them.

 

I think that we have a bit of a skewed idea toward shooting because pretty much everybody on this board is a frequent shooter. "The poor" in NJ are different than "the poor" in other states. I'd venture to say that if someone "poor" in NJ wants a gun, they are buying one revolver and a box of shells to keep at their Bodega or one Maverick 88 shotgun to keep in their closet and that's it. "The poor" don't buy AR-15's - at least not in NJ.

 

Calling a tax on "evil features" as tax on the poor is almost like saying that a luxury tax on yachts is prejudicial to the poor since it makes yachts less affordable. If a poor person suddenly had $1500 to spend I doubt they would buy an AR-15. They would put it toward bills or clothes for their kids or maybe a well-deserved vacation.

 

IMHO there are 2 types people in NJ who buy AR-type rifles.

#1. The upper middle class enthusiast.

#2. Veterans who want something that is familiar to them.

 

Is a $300 total tax on evil features going to hurt me? No. If I can afford $1,200 for an AR-15, I can afford $1,500

 

The problem comes when we apply flat taxes or insurance or special requirements against initial purchase - sort of like the way NYC requires fees and permits that are often in excess of the cost of the gun. *That* is denying poor people their rights without a doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A ray of hope, but I would not get too excited. The New York Supreme Court is not the highest Court in the State of NY. It is just a trial level court. The highest court in NY is the NY Court of Appeals. This has a long way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...