1867

It’s sad, but the guns I want to own. Are all still legal in NY.

1868

Just ask baby, you know I’ll take care of ya.

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/555303/s2230-text.pdf

There are some pretty alarming/interesting ramifications for the mental health portion of the bill.

1869

Why is that sad? Please explain.

1870

Thanks!

I don’t know what to say about the mental stuff, I guess I defer to the people who know that area. Will it work, or just make mental illness an unreported pariah state?

The hardware restrictions seem fairly pointless.

As you said previously making the dealer mandatory is exasperating compared to a private lookup solution, but I’ll be curious to see if that has any benefits. Will it cut down on straw purchases? Is that what the mandatory of lost and stolen weapons is targeting, also?

Dunno on the safe storage requirement for living with a felon.

1871

Well, just to expand on my previous reined-in post, here’s my main problems with the bill:

  1. Safe storage. I’m an advocate, and the bill includes safe storage ONLY in the case where you live with a felon or a mentally deficient (sorry, don’t know a better phrase in this context) person. Considering that suicide is between 2 and 3 times the deaths of homicide and actual accidental deaths would be heavily impacted by safe storage requirements, this is stupid and pandering to the current mass-shooting hysteria.
  2. Ammunition capacity in magazines. First the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard, you can keep your ten-round magazines but it’s a misdemeanor to put more than seven rounds in them. What the fuck does that do? Seriously. Second, it’s really not an issue considering Virginia Tech is the biggest body count without special or high-cap mags. I went back through the mass shootings and there’s really not a correlation between mag capacity and deaths. It depends much more on the focus of the shooter and how long he has to act.

But the big one that non-gun people should be alarmed about is the mental health aspect. This mandates that mental health professionals shall decide whether to rescind a constitutional right based on the criteria of “may pose a risk.” You can pick any mental illness you want, or any reasonable combination of mental illnesses and the hit/miss ratio on those who actually do terrible things will be in the hundredths or thousandths of a percent.

I understand if you think the 2nd Amendment should be repealed, but to limit a national constitutional right based on a supposition with such a fragile statistical background is stupid, and more importantly will dissuade those who need help from seeking it for fear of being branded as “unfit.”

1872

So does anyone here care about facts? New York had some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US prior to the passing of their recent knee-jerk bullshit legislation. And despite that the state was in the top 5 in the US for gun crimes. So why would any clear thinking person think more restrictions will solve that problem for them?

edit: The only thing I am in favor of is background checks. I have no problem with closing the ‘gun show loophole’ and requiring background checks on any and all gun purchasers.

1873

Lies. New York isn’t even in the Top 25: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

1874

It’s 25th according to that chart on both a by gun and a general per capita basis.

1875

The only gun I still want to own is a Savage 99.

1876

The 7-round restriction is intersting in that they do say they are grandfathering any magazines that hold more than 7 but less than 10, no new purchasers or transfers of those mags.

Interesting in that MOST semi-autos from Glocks to 1911’s don’t make a 7-round mag. Every NY gun shop will have to pull them from the shelf, literally selling guns without ANY magazines. Basically, you’ll have to literally go out of state to buy a compatible mag, or you’re buying a gun and you already have a compatible mag.

As far as mental health, worse is this entry:

A new Section 9.46 of the Mental Hygiene Law will require
mental health professionals, in the exercise of reasonable
professional judgment, to report if an individual they are treating
is likely to engage in conduct that will cause serious harm to
him- or herself or others. A good faith decision about whether to report
will not be a basis for any criminal or civil liability.

Seriously, if I was a paranoid gun-nut, which I totally am not, I would avoid seeking help if I thought I had a mental issue. Oh well… I’m glad I’m totally sane, and mentally well balanced. I’m like the poster boy for mental health. So if the FBI, CIA, Dept. of Homeland Security, Whitehouse, or any government shadow agency are reading my posts here on QT3,…and my mind… I am totally, 100% sane.

Hmmm… if I ever visit NY, I’ll have to find a holster for this:

1877

Word that does not appear in the text: appeal.

1878

Jesus. So we want to be able to sue the manufacturer that legally made the gun and then legally sold the gun to a distributor that then legally wholesaled the gun to a legal dealer who then legally sold the gun to a legal buyer who then illegally sold the gun to a felon; but let’s make sure the shrinks can spray around accusations with no fear of reprisal, particularly since we’re hoping that they catch the 1/1,000,000 patients that are actually going to act out in a mass killing.

Edit: For those who think I’m just sour-graping, this seems to have done nothing whatsoever to improve mental health, and instead will drive away those seeking mental health care for fear of being labeled “potentially violent.” It has, if anything, increased the stigma of seeking help.

1879

Word that doesn’t appear in the vast majority of laws, criminal or otherwise: appeal.

Provisions for appeal of a legal or administrative judgment are separately provided in their own laws.

1880

Let me know when you find them. Reading authoritarian laws is like reading fictional paranoia horror books to me. I have an unhealthy morbid fascination with them.

1881

There isn’t a punishment given for psychologists who fail to inform the authorities about ‘potentially violent’ people, so I’ve seen a few quotations from NY mental health types that say they’re just going to ignore that provision in the interests of not scaring patients away.

1882

Good for them, but first you would have to get to the doctor for him to tell you he would ignore it, and after the NRA has its day with this law people will be terrified of taking the risk of even engaging with a mental health professional.

1883

I’m trying to remember if NRA ever pushed that angle before. It’s hard to tell what they will do now. Remember, they pushed to link up mental health databases after VT. And conservatives generally take a dim view of mental health problems, don’t they? Maybe NRA will punt on that part.

I know GOA won’t. They pushed it big time a couple years ago. I think it was some shit related to veterans with mental health struggles getting put into one of those cavernous databases. But they went after it so hard I started to wish they’d focus on something else.

1884

Yeah, there was a psychiatrist on NPR last night who said the obvious but it was good to hear it … what this law will do is dissuade people with problems from talking to a shrink about them. Mission accomplished?

1885

Obama’s speaking now (I’m streaming it) and CNN summarizes his points so far as follows:

Obama says he will sign 23 executive orders relating to this issue today.

He also will ask Congress to pass laws, including ones that would:

– require universal background checks (background checks on anyone who would buy a gun, whether in stores or at auctions and conventions)

– restore a ban on “military-style assault weapons”

– ban gun magazines with capacities of more than 10 rounds

– tougher penalties on people who sell guns to people who aren’t allowed to have guns

I’ve got no idea what the 23 executive orders will do.

1886

The NRA asks “Are the president’s kids more important than yours?”