NY Pols Plan To Require Firearms Seizures At Domestic Calls
Police in New York State may soon be required to seize any visible firearms when they attend a domestic dispute call, if some of the state’s politicians have their way.
Gun laws @ TFB:
A temporary seizure
Our first indication of this proposed change comes from Spectrum News, who was informed of the planned update to the laws by state Senator Pete Harckham.
The proposed law is also being put forward by Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, says the state government website. Under the new law, if the police attend an active domestic incident call and observe firearms, they will be required to seize them, holding them for up to five days while working out a plan to protect the individuals involved in the incident, or laying the legal groundwork for long-term confiscation of the firearm or firearms. Under the law, police would not be required to seize firearms they can’t see, unless that firearm was on someone’s person while they were being arrested in connection with a domestic.
The law would not require police to have a court order or a search warrant to seize the firearms temporarily.
Tom King, president of New York State’s Rifle & Pistol Association, was extremely skeptical of the law proposed by Senator Harckham. King told Spectrum News the state’s existing red-flag laws also only provide for short-term, temporary seizures, but gun owners are finding their property tied up long-term by the legal system. See more of King’s response in Spectrum’s article here.
A legal standard
Senator Harckham says this policy will save lives by protecting those at risk in domestic disputes. Assemblywoman Paulin echoes that thought. Harckham also says some police departments already have a policy of temporarily seizing firearms when they attend a domestic dispute, but others don’t. He believes New York State needs a law that standardizes the practice across all jurisdictions. Other lawmakers are also on board, and believe recent Supreme Court decisions will back them up. A similar bill was actually up for vote in New York’s last state legislature session, but the politicos were waiting on that Supreme Court decision before deciding to move forward with their law.
Professional hoser with fudd-ish leanings.
More by Zac K
Comments
Join the conversation
Blatantly unconstitutional fantasy-based nonsense bills truly are the bucket of brainworms that unites both parties in this idiotic artificial duopoly.
So....couple gets in an argument, as couples tend to do, nosy neighbors call the cops, couple loses their guns. Despite there being zero threat to anyone, because the whole thing was all "your mom drinks too much wine and always ruins everything, so let's not do Christmas at your parent's house this year", or "I told you to take the garbage out twice and you still haven't" or "you forgot our anniversary" or whatever other nonsense that couples fight about that can lead to yelling but doesn't lead to violence among reasonable adults.
I've gotten in arguments with my lady over all sorts of nonsense, mostly me being rude to people (who generally deserved it). Thank God I no longer live in an NYC apartment with paper thin walls.
Last NYC apartment with paper thin walls I lived in, the neighbors were a mother and son. They'd scream and howl at each other ALL THE TIME in Spanish, and I could hear (but not understand, because I don't speak Spanish) every single word of it. But the relationship didn't seem even remotely abusive, just loud and obnoxious. I doubt they owned guns, this being Queens, but if they did, they didn't deserve to lose them because I found their behavior obnoxious.