Best of the Region Shining Stars

Confusion sets in for gun dealers after NY Safe Act is enacted

2013-01-19T00:00:00Z 2013-10-28T12:22:59Z Confusion sets in for gun dealers after NY Safe Act is enactedBy JON ALEXANDER — Glens Falls Post-Star

Some area gun dealers continued to sell high-capacity magazines banned by the NY Safe Act days after Tuesday’s hasty passage of the sweeping gun control legislation, as confusion reigned about when they actually had to pull the clips from their shelves.

And the state took steps Friday night to clear up the widespread befuddlement.

The state Senate passed the controversial crackdown on high-capacity guns late Monday night, only hours after most lawmakers were first handed the lengthy bill, and the Assembly followed suit Tuesday because Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s “message of necessity” waved the traditional three-day vetting period.

The haste at which the bill plowed through Albany meant most of the required state oversight wasn’t in place even though the law technically was.

And local gun dealers, for three days following the law’s enactment, couldn’t get answers from Albany about when they had to pull the banned magazines from their shelves, all while patrons flooded their stores looking to skirt the restrictions.

“I want to comply, but nobody is telling me anything,” said Chris Nemec, who operates Nemec’s Sport Shop in Warrensburg, one of several gun dealers overrun with customers seeking supposedly illegal magazines.

Nemec’s repeated calls Thursday to State Police and Cuomo’s office in pursuit of some guidance were fruitless, he said.

“Until we hear something, we’re business as usual,” Nemec said Thursday. “Everybody is freaking out and buying 10-round mags,” he said.

Patrons were buying armfuls of supposedly illegal 10-round magazines from shops throughout the region more than 48 hours after much of the law went into effect.

The NY Safe Act limits any magazine’s capacity sold in New York to seven rounds, but when the magazine regulations take effect remained a mystery to dealers and local officials.

Gun owners and dealers looked to area police for clarity, but county sheriff’s offices were equally out of the loop.

“We’ve had no guidance,” Washington County Sheriff Jeff Murphy said Friday. “People are calling us and we just refer them to State Police.”

Cuomo has said legislation was fast-tracked to avoid a run on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

The New York State Sheriff’s Association struggled to respond to statewide queries from member police agencies. The association was expected Friday to release a guidance sheet to local police, said Warren County Sheriff Bud York.

“This was done so quickly, we haven’t had time to digest it,” York said.

State Police posted a lengthy list Thursday on the Internet of firearms that could no longer be sold under the expanded state assault weapons ban. The state launched Friday evening in an effort to answer the flood of questions by dealers and gun owners. The seven-round magazine limit takes effect April 15, according to the new website.

Cuomo’s use of the message of necessity to fast-track the sweeping ban raised the ire of pro-gun Republican lawmakers, who said it was employed to skirt public scrutiny. Several newspaper editorial boards also criticized Cuomo for the move, arguing it intentionally avoided transparency. The Post-Star editorial board went so far this week as to label the fast-track maneuver an “abuse of power” and argued Cuomo increasingly relies on the message of necessity as “standard operating procedure” to ram through controversial bills before the public can react.

Cuomo blasted The Post-Star editorial later Thursday on New York Post Capitol reporter Fred Dicker’s radio show, “Live from the State Capitol,” on Talk 1300.

“If you look at the number of messages of necessity, I’ve done less than Spitzer, Pataki, Paterson; I’ve done less,” Cuomo said. “So to say it’s becoming standard operating procedure is wrong. I don’t mind a passionate debate. But when people change the facts, I do mind.”

Cuomo’s predecessors often used the message of necessity on budget bills.

Copyright 2015 Glens Falls Post-Star. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(17) Comments

  1. hdekhtereva
    Report Abuse
    hdekhtereva - January 20, 2013 6:22 pm
    OK, better Bob. I think most would deal with initial gun ownership training, at least I would not mind it so much. Though, cost would be another barrier to the common man who wants to own a gun, and that's an imperfection. If cost was low enough it could be acceptable.

    Hunters already have to complete the "Hunter Safety Training Course" are you saying the course needs to be looked at and redesigned? Because Bob, after all, a Boob is a Boob, no matter what class he took last month, and accidents will happen.

    Self defense classes are and should remain up to the individual owner. The point is the freedom. If a person tries to defend him/herself and is unsuccessful then they die, but at least they had a chance. I would rather be unskilled at self defense with a pistol, than be unskilled at self defense with my hands or a lamp or whatever I could grab because my freedom was stripped away. I want the freedom to choose for myself my emergency course of action plan should anything happen.
  2. hdekhtereva
    Report Abuse
    hdekhtereva - January 20, 2013 5:14 pm
    why is it that a good number of the Pro-2nd A people have intelligent, insightful, and complex arguments that force thought and challange us to critically think, like the one above, and the anti-gun people have a majority of arguments like the one below, and they got their law? How? Is this just in our area? Do they have better arguments elswhere? Are the 2nd A people really the minority? I'm not being facetious. How did this happen?
  3. hdekhtereva
    Report Abuse
    hdekhtereva - January 20, 2013 4:20 pm
    Also some will have the skills, some may not Bob. But the point is they have the opportunity, sucessful or not, they have a chance. They have the freedom to decide if they will even own a gun or not. Who are we to decide what freedoms an entire peoples should have based on skill? With that logic we could say a majority of America is lower middle class & lower class = they are unskilled with $, so the Gov. should control how much $ everyone gets, how often we get it, and on what we spend it. Sound good Bob? It is your logic at work.
  4. hdekhtereva
    Report Abuse
    hdekhtereva - January 20, 2013 4:09 pm
    C'omon Bob, is that really yor argument for weakening the 2nd A? I can see the headlines now. . "Tougher Gun Laws Because 4 Accidents Happened Yesterday".

    If that is truly the depth of your insight I wont bother arguing with you as I do like a little bit of a challenge. (skilled carpenters cut fingers, legs, and feet with circular saws pretty often - so what, accidents happen. Shwew! that was hard!

    I think you are preaching to the chior about gun skills and self defence and such.

    Also, the scope of this debate goes way farther than gun ownership or scared people wanting to feel safe. It is about the freedom of the citizens of this country Bob, it is about the foundation on which your and my country was built upon.
  5. Bob1234
    Report Abuse
    Bob1234 - January 20, 2013 2:49 pm

    Just because I'm pointing out that some gun owners are incompetent boobs doesn't mean I'm anti-gun. But I do think the 'self-defense' argument for owning a weapon is overblown.

    Guns are lethal weapons and should be given the respect they deserve: Owners need substantial training and practice just to learn how to use them without shooting themselves in the foot or maiming bystanders. Hunters need even more training and practice (just look at the recent hunting incidents around here). And as to self-defense -- that's yet another, significantly higher, level of skill. A level that most gun owners simply don't have.
  6. Bob1234
    Report Abuse
    Bob1234 - January 20, 2013 1:40 pm
    My point: If experienced gun owners at gun shows fail at the simple task of handling guns safely, resulting in shooting friends, themselves, or innocent bystanders, what makes anyone think they have the skills to defend themselves against armed attack? Will they say to an intruder, "Hold on while I pull out my handgun and shoot myself and accidentally wing you while I'm at it?"

    Make no mistake: Processing a weapon is not sufficient for self-defense. It's a skill that requires a great deal of training, practice, commitment, and then more practice. How many gun owners have spent the time and effort to do this?

    And the gun owners at these gun shows being first-time buyers? No. One was a gun dealer, and another was bringing his shotgun into the show.
  7. The Bleeb
    Report Abuse
    The Bleeb - January 20, 2013 10:38 am
    There WAS NO nation to defend until after the Constitution was adopted. Our framers fought against THEIR OWN government of England. The resulting individual states becamesovereign nations, and they all decided that they ought to retain the ability to not only defend themselves collectively, but get rid of what the Constitution created if it abused its authority.
    On September 9, 1789, a member of the Senate proposed adding "for the common defense" onto the draft of the Second Amendment. It would have read:
    "A well regulated militia being the security of a free State, the right of the people to bear arms for the common defense, shall not be infringed."
    The proposed change was voted down because it represented a collective / common / mutual defense, and would not secure an individual right.!

    Oh, there were semi-autos with 20-round capacities in that day.The framers were well-educated inventors and historians, and knew more than you

    C'mon, this is simple stuff of well-documented history
  8. The Bleeb
    Report Abuse
    The Bleeb - January 20, 2013 10:20 am
    Bob1234, those are accidents, and it wasn't even a good try. According to the CDC 2007 injury and mortality report, compared to firearms accidents, one is:
    • Five times more likely to burn to death
    • Five times more likely to drown
    • 17 times more likely to be poisoned
    • 17 times more likely to fall
    • And 68 times more likely to die in an automobile accident

    Perhaps you should properly weigh isolated incidents against the aggregate, but that would entail some critical thought. Don't hurt yourself.
  9. hdekhtereva
    Report Abuse
    hdekhtereva - January 19, 2013 11:46 pm
    Polittle QB,
    As for your voting pledge, glad you are the minority QB.

    As for your musket talk here is an interesting bunch of facts for you from another poster. . .

    " you are wrong. The volley gun was first used during the Hundred Years' War Edward III,s army in 1339. The Continental Congress was offered the Belton Flintlock repeating flintlock design, invented in Philadelphia at some time prior to 1777. It fired up to 16 shots in 16 sec. The founders were aware of 20-shot Girandoni .46 cal. rifles (the AR15 is .223 cal), in service with the Austrian army in 1780. It fired 20 shots quickly. Lewis and Clark later took them on their expedition. The breech-loading John Cookson rifle was made in Boston, and could fire 9 shots as quickly as a wrist twist. The Puckle repeating gun was invented in 1718, and had an 11-round revolving cylinder".

    Wonderful tidbit of info quoted from "The Bleeb" in another thread here.
  10. hdekhtereva
    Report Abuse
    hdekhtereva - January 19, 2013 11:32 pm
    Ummm so what is your point?

    Because guns are for self protection they should not be at gun shows?

    Or is it that because guns are for self protection, there should never be an accident with all of the first time buyers out there?
  11. billybobskiff
    Report Abuse
    billybobskiff - January 19, 2013 10:37 pm
    You found 3 examples of people who failed to make sure the weapon was not loaded. Now go find the thousands of examples of murders by criminals who don't care about your laws. In the week following Newtown 60 ppl were shot in gun free Chicago. On a brighter note the same week in TX a man walked into a diner and shot his girlfriend then proceeded to head to a theatre for more carnage only to be shot and killed by an off duty sheriffs deputy. You see the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy or in this case woman with a gun. Remember when seconds count the police are minutes away.
  12. greyghost
    Report Abuse
    greyghost - January 19, 2013 10:06 pm
    Politico you are naive and ignorant. The Second Amendment was included because the framers knew first hand what happens when the governed have no means to not only defend themselves against a tyrannical government but also to dissuade one from forming. Part of the strength of this republic over the 200 plus year history has been this capability. If your argument for abandonment of the second Amendment is that we haven't seen a tyrannical government or anything close since it was written, then I would answer that it is precisely due to the rights granted by that very amendment.
    If you really think that you are any safer now that we have a few more laws regarding gun control to add to the six hundred or so already on the books then I'm afraid you are mistaken. Criminals will continue to have illegal guns and the mentally and/or morally deranged will still find a way to kill more people than you would ever think possible. Until this country has an honest discussion about what leads people to commit such horrific acts, we will never be able to get close to preventing them from happening. It is patently absurd to think that the violence portrayed on film, television and video games has contributed any less to these horrific incidents than any kind of firearm and it is equally absurd to ignore the pathetically ineffective and incapable mental health system in this country. To be clear, I am not against laws that would prevent the mentally ill or unbalanced from getting firearms and do not object to having to have my permit reviewed every few years. These are substantive steps which would go a long way towards preventing another tragedy but limiting the number of bullets or capacity of a magazine or the style of the firearm will do nothing but make hoplophobes feel better.
  13. billybobskiff
    Report Abuse
    billybobskiff - January 19, 2013 8:47 pm
    How do you suppose this shameful disaster of a law is going to stop any gun crime. You do realize that those who want to commit these acts will stop at nothing to do so right? Do you know the largest school massacre in the history of this country did not see one single shot fired? The problem with people like you politico is you don't think logically you act on emotions.
  14. Bob1234
    Report Abuse
    Bob1234 - January 19, 2013 8:47 pm
    Guns. They’re for self-protection. Right?

    As reported by the Associated Press today:

    “Accidental shootings at gun shows in North Carolina, Indiana and Ohio left five people injured Saturday.

    – At the Dixie Gun and Knife Show in Raleigh, a 12-gauge shotgun discharged as its owner unzipped its case for a law enforcement officer to check at a security entrance, injuring three people, state Agriculture Department spokesman Brian Long said.

    – In Indianapolis, police said a 54-year-old man was injured when he accidentally shot himself while leaving a gun show.

    – And in Ohio, a gun dealer in Medina was checking out a semi-automatic handgun he had bought Saturday when he accidentally pulled the trigger, injuring his friend, police said. The gun’s magazine had been removed from the firearm, but one round remained in the chamber, police said."
  15. politicoQB
    Report Abuse
    politicoQB - January 19, 2013 5:41 pm
    I will certainly remember Cuomo's bold brave move, and will elect him again.
    And myself and lots of others hope there are lots more trampling of your supposed God-given 2nd Amendment. You know what that meant? It meant that the framers wanted to protect the right of people to pick up their muskets and defend the nation.
    If they knew of 30-round clips and child massacres, I assure you - they would have worded that Amendment much differently.
  16. 5756917
    Report Abuse
    5756917 - January 19, 2013 8:57 am
    I agree, the ramrodding of this bill without proper vetting is now starting to cause problems. One of them is for law enforcement. The other is making law abiding citizens criminals. Good job Cuomo. Everyone needs to remember this stomp on our 2nd amendment rights come election time.
  17. politicoQB
    Report Abuse
    politicoQB - January 19, 2013 1:09 am
    Doesn't take much.


1) Comments must be contained to the topic of the articles only. Comments that stray from the direct subject of the article will be deleted.

2) Readers are free to comment on and debate other readers' comments, but comments must specifically address the issue(s) raised. Comments containing personal insults directed toward another reader in any form will be deleted.

3) Comments must be civil in tone, and there will be no name calling of any kind. Uncivil or inappropriate comments will be deleted, as will any comment containing profanities.

4) Comments critical of crime or accident victims will be deleted.

5) Comments that are potentially libelous, including those that contain accusations not supported by facts, will be deleted.

Commenters who abuse these policies will have their e-mail registrations revoked.


View the full commenting policy.

Thank you, and we hope you enjoy interacting with us and the community.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

Call to volunteer organizations

Do you run a volunteer organization in our area? We're looking to add listings to our online database of volunteer organizations. Please submit details to us using this form.

Search Homes for Sale

Search Classifieds