New York (facepalm)...

[98Z5V]

New York done went and out-did California.  Watch the idiot-race take off now...

They banned body armor.  Here's an announcement from AR500 Armor - which is meant to generate NY sales, for sure - but the information is in there.

New_York_Body_Armor_Ban_|_Armored_Republic (ar500armor.com)

New York Bans Body Armor

By AR500 Armor, Jun 8, 2022

For years, politicians have talked about banning body armor. One of them finally went and did it.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed Senate Bill S9407B, banning the sale of body armor to the general public, as well as several other infringements on your God-given rights as free men.

What Does This Mean to You, Our Customer?

After July 5th, 2022, you will no longer be able to legally purchase and we will no longer be able to ship soft body armor to anyone in the state of New York, except (of course) the usual law enforcement exceptions. 

The law “grandfathers” in “body vests” (what NY calls soft body armor) purchased or possessed before the cut-off date.

To our current customers in NY who have ordered (or will be placing them in the next 30 days), we will be prioritizing your orders to ensure you get your order within the timeframe of the law.

 It Won't Work

Anyone thinking banning body armor will do anything to reduce crime is delusional. As has been demonstrated time and again, these laws only affect the law-abiding citizen. 

Criminals have, do, and will continue to ignore laws. Oh…and it’s already illegal to use body armor in the commission of a crime in New York:

Body armor is strictly a DEFENSIVE item and harms no one. Body armor is the most passive form of self-defense available. Its sole purpose is to act as a safety barrier between your body and any bullets fired at an area covered by it. When used within its design envelope, body armor is a life-saving device. Period.

Tyrannical Government

Just how innocuous is it? Did you know it’s perfectly legal (at the time of this publication), to transport body armor on a commercial flight as a carry-on item? The TSA has ruled that body armor is no more of a threat to travelers’ safety than laptops or books. 

If it’s safe enough to take on a plane, why is the state of New York banning it? Why would the state want to take away your ability to defend yourself, your family, and your children? The law is clearly unconstitutional. We have always held that the 2nd Amendment is to prevent the government from infringing on the bearing of arms AND armor. Remember, gun control isn’t about safety, it’s about control.

To that end, it is our intention to sue the State of New York on the grounds the new law violates God-given rights AND the Constitution. 

Remember, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.

We will continue to post updates on any developments. 

What Can You Do?

• If you are a citizen of New York, your best course of action is to flood Gov Kathy Hutchel’s inbox with emails demanding the repeal of the new law. 
• Further, you should support any effort to recall state senators Brian Kavanagh and Timothy M. Kennedy for writing and pushing through this unconstitutional legislation.

You can email her here: https://www.governor.ny.gov/content/governor-contact-form

Call: 1-518-474-8390 | Office hours: 9:00am to 5:00pm

Or contact her by Mail: 

Kathy Hochul

NYS State Capitol Building

Albany, NY 12224

[DNP]

Sooooo….can I still buy steel targets?  Maybe in plate shape?

[Lane]

I wish it was only that law that was passed... And yes; you're still allowed to buy plates and plate carriers. Body armor in NY state is defined as having 7 or more layers of fabric. Neither plates, nor plate carriers qualify as body armor; even after they passed a new law (body armor was already illegal to wear during the commission of a crime). 

There was a package of 10 bills, all signed at the same time; and rammed through the state legislature. I took the time to watch the actual proceedings and it was disturbing to say the least. The whole video is almost 9-1/2 hours long. The relevant parts are during the middle of the Controversial Calendar. I had to scrub around to find them all. 

Below is a link to the Press Release, and relevant bill explanations pasted below that. The two that stuck out to me as the very worst are S.9456/A.10504 An act to amend the penal law, in relation to defining firearm and S.9458/A.10503 Bars Purchase of Semiautomatic Rifles by Anyone Under Age 21 by Requiring a License.

The changes to definition of "firearm" now would outlaw muzzle loading rifles, flare guns, and even power nailers that use RAMSET and the like (since licenses will not be issued for anything in the new firearm category). Furthermore, State Senator Luis Sepúlveda who sponsored the bill said, "I am honored Governor Kathy Hochul has signed into law my bill S9456, which changes the definition of firearms to include "Ghost Guns". Ghost Guns are, unequivocally, a big component of the increasing gun violence that is plaguing our communities.." This bill never had anything to do with Ghost Guns... We already have other laws that cover both unfinished and unserialized frames and receivers. He doesn't even understand what the intent of the bill was; and that is even more clear during the debates on the bill.

Requiring a license to purchase semi-automatics applies to everyone; it's not simply raising the age. It also requires the full process of the existing pistol permitting requirements. In short; time consuming and expensive process. That also means future semi-automatic rifle purchases will also become "may issue" in the state of NY. If the current pistol permitting timeline applies; those licenses may take more than a year to obtain depending on which county a resident applies from. 

https://www.nysenate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/brian-kavanagh/governor-hochul-signs-landmark-legislative-package-strengthen

Raising the Age to Purchase Semiautomatic Rifles  

Legislation S.9458/A.10503 requires individuals to obtain a license prior to purchasing a semiautomatic rifle. Under preexisting New York State law, individuals must be 21 years or older to acquire a gun license.  

Banning Body Armor  

Legislation S.9407-B/A.10497 makes it illegal to purchase and sell body vests for anyone who is not engaged in an eligible profession. Eligible professions include law enforcement officers and other professions, which will be designated by the Department of State in consultation with other agencies. It also requires that all body vest sales are completed in-person.  

Strengthening the Red Flag Law 

Legislation S.9113-A/A.10502 expands who may file an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) petition to include health care practitioners who have examined an individual within the last six months.  

It amends the firearm licensing statute to ensure that mental health practitioners' reports on potentially harmful individuals are considered closely when determining whether to issue a firearm license.  

It also requires police and district attorneys to file ERPO petitions when they have acquired credible information that an individual is likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm—either to themselves or others.  

It requires State Police and the Municipal Police Training Council to create and disseminate policies and procedures to identify when an ERPO petition may be warranted.  

Microstamping  

Legislation S.4116-A/A.7926-A requires the Division of Criminal Justice Services to certify or decline to certify that microstamping-enabled pistols are technologically viable and if certified as viable, to establish programs and processes for the implementation of such technology; and establishes the crime of the unlawful sale of a non-microstamping-enabled firearm.  

Microstamping is an innovative ammunition-marking technique that marks bullets and cartridge cases with a unique fingerprint each time a firearm is discharged. This allows investigators to link bullets and casings recovered at crime scenes to a specific gun and potentially other crimes. 

Closing Loopholes  

Legislation S.9456/A.10504 expands the definition of a "firearm" to include any weapon not defined in the Penal Law that is designed or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by action of an explosive.  This is intended to capture firearms that have been modified to be shot from an arm brace, which are evading our current definitions of firearms and rifles. 

Legislation S.9229-A/A.10428-A eliminates the grandfathering of large capacity ammunition feeding devices that were lawfully possessed prior to the enactment of the Safe Act or manufactured prior to 1994. 

Legislation S.89-B/A.6716-A creates the crimes of making a threat of mass harm and aggravated making a threat of mass harm. 

Enhancing Information Sharing  

Legislation S.4970-A/A.1023-A requires enhanced reporting by law enforcement to the state and federal gun databases. Agencies must report seized or recovered guns to the criminal gun clearinghouse; participate in the ATF's collective data sharing program; and enter the make, model, caliber, and serial number of the gun into the national crime information center.  

The law also requires gun dealers to enact uniform security and reporting standards. It prohibits those under 18 and not accompanied by a parent from entering certain locations of a gun dealer's premises and requires training for all employees on conducting firearm, rifle, and shotgun transfers, including identification of and response to illegal purchases. It also requires State Police to conduct inspections of gun dealers every three years. 

Improving Response and Reporting of Hateful and Threatening Social Media Content  

Legislation S.4511-A/A.7865-A requires social media networks in New York to provide a clear and concise policy regarding how they would respond to incidents of hateful conduct on their platform and maintain easily accessible mechanisms for reporting hateful conduct on those platforms 

Legislation S.9465/A.10501 creates a new Task Force on Social Media and Violent Extremism. Housed in the Office of the Attorney General, the Task Force will study and investigate the role of social media companies in promoting and facilitating violent extremism and domestic terrorism online. 

This robust set of new laws, designed to provide immediate enhanced protections and developed and approved in partnership with Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Speaker Carl Heastie, builds on two Executive Orders issued in the immediate wake of the Buffalo shooting.  

[Lane]

 

Apparently they "found out" about the loopholes already; and are hoping/planning to ban all types of body armor in the future (plates and plate carriers).

If the current law bans "7 layers of fabric"; am I in jeopardy if I wear layers of winter clothing? Or seven T-shirts?

[98Z5V]

I laughed at what those fuktards passed.  I really did.  They didn't even know what they were talking about, when they shoved that through - they were clueless.  Now, they're realizing how bad the fucked up what they did - and they're scrambling to "fix" their bullshiit.

I hope it fails.  Miserably.  They dream of turning the police and the actual military on the public - certain sectors of "public."  Well, fuk - the 2A is in their way.  If the .gov can have hard plates and soft armor, well then...   so can the civil population.  Notice, I wrote "civil population."  The whackjobs need to go - they always have needed to go.  Lock 'em up. 

Applying your new laws and restrictions on the Civil Population will not stop crime.  It won't.  That's the very specific definition of "criminal."  In a nutshell.

Now, In New York - we'll see illegally trafficked guns, and illegally trafficked body armor.  Criminals don't give a fuk if it's illegal...

They'll still get it, if they think they need it.  And they'll do it.  Whaddaya gonna do, get a weak Soros prosecutor upcharge them?  Fuk no.  Won't happen.  Released in 30 days.

[BrianK]

I had to laugh too. Illegal to wear body armor in the commission of a crime... Isn't it illegal to commit a crime in the first place? I bet the dirtbag also has a firearm, maybe that's illegal too? I also have to comment that NYS politicians (more dirtbags) now can't wear body armor when doing their work since what they are doing is a crime.

Jackasses. More laws against the law abiding folks that will do NOTHING(!) to stop or even give a pause to crime. Jackasses.

[Lane]

To be frank; I would certainly be laughing if this were another state. Unfortunately; it's just an embarrassment to live in the same state as some of these bill sponsors. I went to a few gun stores today, and overheard some of a phone conversations about "our future" here in NY. The employees were instructed not to give legal advice on the phone; but clearly things like muzzleloading rifles being banned, and how future licensing is going to work were popular concerns. I've also NEVER seen these stores so flush with guns.... Almost every rack was full; overflowing even. There were dozens of guns laying on the counters, and parts of the shop even blocked of with more stacks of new-in-box items. Demand is through the roof (not surprising). It's almost like the Dems want to sell more guns?? Even plate carriers were hanging up for sale which is unusual for these shops....

I had a conversation about this with one of the old timers that hunts on the mountain here. This man is in his 80s now (though he doesn't look like it). Despite being a member of a rod and gun club, and rather politically aware; he had absolutely no idea that the definition of a firearm in NY was changing. There was almost no local reporting on the majority of the bills that just passed. A lot like the SAFE Act; this got rammed through the legislature without much warning. 

Took the time to scrub through the NY state senate hearings (the nearly 9-1/2 hour session) and mark off the starting times for the most jarring discussions. While they are the same video, when you click play; each one starts at a different bill as annotated. In short; the public displays of ignorance from bill sponsors and supporters was off the charts. It's just so "strange" how representative from downstate (NYC area) are so uninformed, and yet act confident and steadfast in layering on the stupidity. I was impressed with a few of the Senators from western NY for grilling sponsors about real issues; but even confronted directly about problems, there was absolutely zero appetite to delay passage of the bills to fix said issues.

For those that don't want to watch much legislative nonsense; I left one of my favorite bits as the first video location (part of the semi-automatic licensing discussion)

Senator Thomas asking, "What is a 22"?

S9456: Definition of firearm

S9458: License for semi-automatic rifles

S4116A: Microstamping

S9407B: Body Armor

This last video is regarding NYSRPA v. Bruen. Hochul plans to have a response within HOURS of the supreme court decision about New York residents potentially gaining the ability to obtain and carry pistols without the current arbitrary may issue licensing scheme. She is already on record saying she has no problem passing unconstitutional laws, simply to let them get fought out in court at a later date. If only there were some kind of system in place to punish lawmakers and elected officials who purposely author and sign bills they know to be unconstitutional. There's simply no accountability; and that's not just a NY state thing. 

 

[jtallen83]

8 hours ago, Lane said:

If only there were some kind of system in place to punish lawmakers and elected officials who purposely author and sign bills they know to be unconstitutional. There's simply no accountability;

It's almost like you are saying our votes don't count for anything in this democracy of ours?

They told us what they are doing, many still think it's fiction.

Edited June 18, 2022 by jtallen83

[Lane]

On 6/18/2022 at 8:04 AM, jtallen83 said:

It's almost like you are saying our votes don't count for anything in this democracy of ours?

In some places votes can and do count. Not around these parts though. 

Some kind of accountability outside of those other systems seems useful for that reason. Getting a case up to the federal supreme court might take years; or simply be rejected when it arrives. The internal affairs of states are even more absurd than at the federal level; with almost no checks and balances when one party rules. NY is notoriously corrupt historically; modern history appears no different. The federal level isn't too much better off with a supreme court that continues to opine on party lines for the most part (seems to me that federal and state powers are relatively well separated in the law; but not so much in court opinions). 

Hard to believe one could ask for; and actually find an impartial judge these days. 

Not sure what to expect with NYSRPA v. Bruen though. I have an expectation regarding the supreme court; but in NYS wants to counter that immediately. Within hours is the language broadcast publicly. Then it's easily possible there's another 5 years or more before the courts even attempt to reconcile those state issues again. And presumably; in a very narrow ruling since that's what the supreme court likes to do.

A little "oopsie" in legislation is set to make it a felony to posses a muzzle loading rifle in NY State; a mere 10 days from now. No recourse in sight. Need to ship them out of state to remain a law abiding citizen? Or turn them in? I'd rather destroy them; but that's neither here nor there.... A felony is no laughing matter. 

[jtallen83]

4 hours ago, Lane said:

NY is notoriously corrupt historically; modern history appears no different. The federal level isn't too much better off with a supreme court that continues to opine on party lines for the most part

Which is why they provide us some of our favorite politicians, they see it as good cover, a clinton would never be found guilty there, even better cover than they had in Arkansas. By the 80's my family had been driven out of the state just because of corruption. My Uncle was a Nassau county cop, he had very clear lines not to cross and it wasn't the law that concerned him, with my step-Father being a cop here in small town Iowa the differences were obvious to me. Why is it so hard for people to see that where criminals have the most power in government is where the strictest gun laws exist and people live in the most violent environments, it's almost like the criminals are the real problem.........

[Lane]

We got a win with NYSRPA v. Bruen at least. 

Very interested to see what NYS does to counter it; and how long the new process will take to get a pistol permit. I personally just signed up for a safety class, and plan to apply for a pistol permit the moment new guidelines are implemented (whenever that is; certainly could be a while).

[Armed Eye Doc]

It's nice to hear that the SCOTUS has restored some of you rights.

[98Z5V]

7 hours ago, Lane said:

We got a win with NYSRPA v. Bruen at least. 

Very interested to see what NYS does to counter it;

NYS can't do shiit about that decision, but abide by it.  The only other choices they have now are:  Stay Mad, or Get Over It. 

It's gonna take the same amount of "political will" that would be required to make a new Constitutional Amendment, to change the Supreme Court decision today.

6 hours ago, Armed Eye Doc said:

It's nice to hear that the SCOTUS has restored some of you rights.

Today's decision affects the entire country, brother.  All 335 million of us, and all 50 States. 

People, especially NYS lawmakers and elected officials, think they can do something about this - they can't.  It's done.  Over.  They THINK they'll find an end-around - unpossible.  Unless, like I said, Constitutional Amendment. Won't happen. 

An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose. The amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.

In today's political climate, and probably forever into the future, we'll never see another Constitutional Amendment - no way in hell we'll ever get that many people in this country to agree on a single thing.  Ever.  What happened today was pretty historic, for both Pro-2A and Anti-2A sides of the fence.  It laid down the law... 

There's 7 or 8 blue States that are gonna be changing their Concealed Carry Laws pretty damn quick - as soon as the State lawsuits come up.  Bet that will be happening pretty damn fast, too...  

[Lane]

1 hour ago, 98Z5V said:

NYS can't do shiit about that decision, but abide by it.  The only other choices they have now are:  Stay Mad, or Get Over It. 

Still reading the full text of the court opinion; didn't want to skip a single word. It sure is juicy. 

Since before the decision was released; the powers that be have been planning behind the scenes ways to counter a loss in the Supreme Court. Sounds like they are planning to bring the state legislature back for an extraordinary session in July to drop even more gun legislation on us (like amending the failed body armor sales ban, but also whatever they can do the change the pistol permitting laws).

“This decision isn’t just reckless, it’s reprehensible,” Hochul said. “It’s not what New Yorkers want. And we should have the right of determination of what we want to do in terms of our gun laws in our state.” ~~~~~ https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/23/new-york-hochul-supreme-court-gun-00041715

Don't have too many details yet; but what I did read there was a short list of ways to make it more arduous, time consuming, and expensive to obtain a pistol permit in NY (as if it wasn't already bad enough). 

Going have to have to disagree with Hochul here too; this IS what some New Yorker's want.... After exploding crime rates following the pandemic and bail reform; who else is here to protect state residents and their families? 

[98Z5V]

20 minutes ago, Lane said:

Don't have too many details yet; but what I did read there was a short list of ways to make it more arduous, time consuming, and expensive to obtain a pistol permit in NY (as if it wasn't already bad enough). 

They can try all they want - the specific Supreme Court decision was directly against NYS, though it impacts the entire country.  They (NYS) can try anything they want, enact anything they want pertaining to this, and all it'll take is one court case - it will end quickly, with the Supreme Court decision ending the lawsuit.  In record time.

Today was a very major victory, for everyone in this country. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by 98Z5V

[dpete]

As I understand it the court struck down the "may issue" language of the law and it requiring demonstrating a special need for a carry permit.  All that will be needed is an application for a permit and then jump through whatever hoops the gov't says are proper for getting that permit.  The gov't "shall issue" permits to qualifying applicants.  Its the qualifications and the details that the gov't can play with now, and where court cases can evolve from.

I'm just thankful I'm here in WI.  Submit proof of a qualifiying training course with the application fee and boom you have a permit as long as you aren't a prohibited person.  In my case it was the certificate of completion of the Hunter's Safety course I took when I was 13, which is now 50 years ago.

[DNP]

There will be plenty of law suits related to the new hoops they will try to create. This will fall in line with the already planned expensive insurance requirements, background investigations (to include former spouses or significant others), full family mental health evaluations…the list of insanity will go on. It will be challenged, but like everything else, it will be held to those standards until it makes its way to the Supreme Court in 10 years. 

[Lane]

Went to a pistol safety class that is accepted by the county that I live in. The class itself is just a basic introduction to the laws, basic pistol safety, a visual tour of how to clear common jams, and some explanation about stance. There's really not much to it since you legally can't touch a pistol in the state of NY without first having a license (though some counties make you pay for a pistol in full BEFORE applying for a license; making the dealer hold it until the license is issued or denied). That too was a topic of discussion; "why in the world does NY issue pistol license to people who are likely to have zero experience with a pistol (unless they had experience from out of state, military, or illegally)?".

Obviously the upcoming changes to the law were a part of the discussion; though very little is known about what will happen next. One thing that stood out to me; is that as of today, nothing has changed for the most part. The vast majority of NY counties have decided to wait on lower courts to address the Supreme Court ruling. More interesting still in my mind; NY maintains the being "of good moral character" requirement, as well as "concerning whom no good cause exists for the denial of the license" which to my mind are the exact same type of totally arbitrary and undefined requirements to obtain a pistol permit that NYSRPA v. Bruen struck down when invalidating the requirement of showing proper-cause above and beyond ordinary citizens to carry concealed. Only; these other parameters apply to the state issuing a permit in the first place, and not regarding concealed carry for self defense once one already has said permit.

Essentially; NY appears to wish to remain may issue on the grounds that these other requirements are a necessity to obtain a pistol permit? Sure, they aren't denying for self defense because of the proper-cause not being established; they are denying the whole permit to buy or own a pistol in the first place instead. My assumption is that it will need to be fought in court separately in the future. 

I will still be pursuing this process to see how it works out for me. But there remains a number of things not addressed by the Supreme Court, that NY appears to be flaunting to deny any applicant the pistol permit in the first place. Of what value would a "good moral character" clause be in a shall issue permitting scheme? The guidance from Albany County appears to state they "think" they are allowed to remain "may issue" outside of the specific rejections under proper-cause that the Supreme Court struck down.

Obviously it's still a bit early since the 2nd circuit hasn't changed anything yet; but that's what I'm seeing in terms of language and guidance by the counties so far. 

Here's a little quote from the Albany county sheriff; and this is well known to be the truth (they certainly will be calling your ex wife and asking her option; luckily I don't have one): During that time (it takes to process the application), law enforcement will go through nearly everything in a person’s history: from a credit check to speaking with friends and family. “We send investigators out. We do neighborhood checks. We take a few photos and put it in the background check. We talk to former spouses, former girlfriends, current girlfriends, current spouses, whatever the case may be.” 

[DNP]

“We dig until we can find a good reason to say no.  It turns out one of your kindergarten classmates from 50 years ago recalls you making threats over some finger paints…we’re going to have to deny your application.”

[98Z5V]

22 minutes ago, Lane said:

Here's a little quote from the Albany county sheriff; and this is well known to be the truth (they certainly will be calling your ex wife and asking her option; luckily I don't have one): During that time (it takes to process the application), law enforcement will go through nearly everything in a person’s history: from a credit check to speaking with friends and family. “We send investigators out. We do neighborhood checks. We take a few photos and put it in the background check. We talk to former spouses, former girlfriends, current girlfriends, current spouses, whatever the case may be.” 

This is what you have to go through to get a .gov TS Clearance. 

[Lane]

I had been looking for this to better qualify my last post; but couldn't remember where I saw it (I've had a huge number of browser tabs open trying to get all the of the components to fully apply for a pistol permit now that I have the training class completed). It was on a ny.gov site actually. Here is the text (from the horses mouth) posted inline, with some emphasis that is my own. Link below the text in case you want to verify it, or see how it evolves later on (click on the Frequency Asked Questions section).

What was the United States Supreme Court’s ruling about New York State’s “concealed carry” law?

• On June 23, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling struck down a more than 100 year old law that required an individual to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to be able to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm.
• According to the ruling, New York State’s existing law has been deemed unconstitutional because it gives too much discretion to the State and its licensing officers in determining “proper cause.”

So, is New York’s law overturned? Can I carry a concealed weapon without a permit?

• Nothing in the Supreme Court decision allows anyone to immediately legally carry a concealed firearm in New York State without obtaining the currently-required permits or licenses.  
• This also means you cannot legally carry a concealed firearm outside of your home in New York State if you only have a license to possess a gun in your home. 

What does this ruling mean for license or permit application processes?

• As of June 23, the application process to obtain a license or permit to carry a firearm in New York State is unchanged.
• Though it is ultimately State law that dictates how firearm licenses are issued, the State has designated the application processes to counties (or in some cases, cities).
• Those who want to change their permit status to get an “unrestricted conceal carry” permit must file an application with their designated local licensing authority.
• For example, in New York City, this would be the NYPD.

What happens next?

• The U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the State of New York will be able to continue to require licenses for concealed firearms, so long as the license requirements clearly lay out who can carry, where they can (and cannot) carry, and the types of firearms residents might have access to.  The State can also restrict the carrying of firearms in sensitive locations and otherwise restrict the manner of carrying firearms.

 What actions is New York State taking in response to this ruling?

• It is Governor Hochul’s top priority to ensure that New Yorkers are safe and kept out of danger.
• Governor Hochul’s Administration is working closely with the State legislature, county and local leaders, as well as legal experts, to ensure that the State enacts laws and create rules that conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision while also ensuring that the ability to access or use firearms is restricted and carefully regulated.

How does New York State’s firearm licensing system currently work? What is likely to change?  

•  A firearm license is a State-regulated license, and nothing in the Bruen ruling suggests that the State does not have the authority to issue licenses or determine licensing requirements.
• In New York State, licenses are often issued by county licensing entities. It is possible that this process could change moving forward.
• Currently, an applicant must decide what type of license they would like to apply for.
• The most common types of firearm licenses are: (a) Carry concealed (b) Possess on Premises and (c) Possess/Carry During Employment. There is a possibility that these categories might change as a result of the Bruen ruling.
• At this time, the cost to obtain different licenses varies by county (or in some cases, city), as does the time it takes to obtain a license. At this time, the average processing time for license applications is six (6) months.
• Prior to June 23, 2022, in order to be eligible to have a firearms license, an individual in New York State must have demonstrated that they are:
  • A New York State resident;
  • at least 21 years old;
  • have no prior felony or serious offense convictions;
  • be of “good moral character,”; and
  • have a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm.

• As of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling, only the proper cause requirement to conceal carry is no longer applicable and ordinary citizens are deemed to have a self-defense basis for applying for a concealed carry permit. 

https://www.ny.gov/services/how-obtain-firearms-license

Edited June 26, 2022 by Lane
extra carriage return; formatting looked stupid.

[Lane]

1 hour ago, 98Z5V said:

2 hours ago, Lane said:

We take a few photos and put it in the background check. 

This is what you have to go through to get a .gov TS Clearance. 

This is one bit that really surprised me.... What in the world are they going to be taking pictures of? Am I to expect to find police, sheriffs, or private investigators crawling around in the woods near my house? Do to need to do extra checks when I go outside to do ordinary target shooting at home since there might be humans trespassing on the land? This is a very curious admission by a county sheriff.

I suppose I could see that being "useful" in some way if one lived in a city. But that kind of behavior absolutely doesn't fly in a secluded location. 

Should I expect that my vehicle will be followed regularly? Singled out for reasons during that 6 month window of application processing? Also; that 6 months "average" is absolutely not realistic in very many circumstances. During, and post-COVID; that time is known to have extended well over a year for many licensing agencies/processes. Some surpassed the two year mark even. That's a lot of tip-toeing around; and wondering who's in the deep woods around here...

Here is the rest of that "statement" by the Albany County Sheriff; Craig Apple. And one more tid-bit from the same.

https://www.news10.com/news/what-changes-are-coming-to-new-yorks-concealed-carry/

“You have to have great integrity. You are a good character. You’re certainly not a criminal or if you were it was some stupid thing you did 15 years ago. Many times judges won’t look past 10,” explains Sheriff Apple about some of the qualifications, “so again, the judge could look at those qualities and look at your character and say, ‘I would have given you this and restricted it but now I don’t think I’m gonna.” 

Edited June 26, 2022 by Lane

[Lane]

I was going to let this one slide; but the Twitter comment section is just too juicy.

And fret not; if you obtain a license, you can possess air guns in NYC (though, I'm not sure they actually issue those licenses).

Without a rifled barrel; is that actually an air rifle? Under that same logic; aren't Nerf guns also illegal? And probably squirt guns too?

[dpete]

Maybe so.  But you are our resident NY expert. Most of the rest of us are just glad we live in free states.😄

[DNP]

Free states like California….where I can still have air rifles.