If you pass a law that is hard to enforce and probably unconstitutional, why would Democrats think anyone would enforce it? non-paywalled version at Yahoo)
Another Challenge to New York’s Gun Law: Sheriffs Who Won’t Enforce It
Robert Milby, Wayne County’s new sheriff, has been in law enforcement most of his adult life, earning praise and promotions for conscientious service. But recently, Milby has attracted attention for a different approach to the law: ignoring it.
Milby is among at least a half-dozen sheriffs in upstate New York who have said they have no intention of aggressively enforcing gun regulations that state lawmakers passed last summer, forbidding concealed weapons in so-called sensitive areas — a long list of public spaces including, but not limited to, government buildings and religious centers, health facilities and homeless shelters, schools and subways, stadiums and state parks, and, of course, Times Square.
“It’s basically everywhere,” said Milby, in a recent interview in his office in Wayne County, east of Rochester. “If anyone thinks we’re going to go out and take a proactive stance against this, that’s not going to happen.”
Everyone, including myself, said that it would be everywhere. Remember, it’s not just those places Milby mentioned
The big one is that private businesses must post their intent to allow CCW holders to enter while carrying. Because most won’t bother, mostly because most won’t know the rule. In most states private companies must post if you may not carry in the business. So, this NY law will mean concealed carry will be banned in most businesses across the entire state. Those few who are truly paying attention will post a “sure, go ahead and carry” sign, if they are gun rights supporters. Most won’t have any idea. Which means that CCW holders, who tend to be law abiding, won’t carry often because they cannot bring it anywhere. In a city like Albany they can at least lock it in a car. In NYC, they won’t usually have that ability, so, it will stay at home.
If not posted, it’s banned.
On Thursday, a U.S. District Court judge blocked large portions of the law, dealing a major blow to lawmakers in Albany who had sought to blaze a trail for other states after the Supreme Court in June struck down a century-old New York law that had strictly limited the carrying of weapons in public. Between the court challenge and the hostility of many law enforcement officers, New York’s ambitious effort could be teetering.
It was simply an attempt at a big blanket ban after the Supreme Court struck down New York’s “special need” law. If NY chooses to appeal the newest block, it will probably end up at the Supreme Court, and NY will be smacked down yet again.
The judge, Glenn T. Suddaby, agreed to a three-day delay of his order to allow an emergency appeal to a higher federal court. But even before Suddaby ruled, a collection of sheriffs from upstate New York were already saying they would make no special effort to enforce the law, citing lack of personnel, an overbroad scope and possible infringements on the Second Amendment.
Nationwide, conservative sheriffs have been at the front line of an aggressive pushback on liberal policies — often framing themselves as “constitutional sheriffs,” or as self-declared arbiters of any law’s constitutionality. Sheriffs in other states have also been part of efforts to prove a fallacious conspiracy theory that former President Donald Trump won the 2020 election.
Of course there needed to be a mention of Trump in a NY Times piece, because Trump Derangement Syndrome.
“I have to enforce it because I swore to uphold the laws, but I can use as much discretion as I want,” said Richard C. Giardino, the Republican sheriff in Fulton County, northwest of Albany. “If someone intentionally flouts the law, then they’re going to be handled one way. But if someone was unaware that the rules have changed, then we’re not going to charge someone with a felony because they went into their barbershop with their carry concealed.”
Such criticism has been heard from Greene County, in the Hudson Valley, to Erie County, home to Buffalo, the state’s second-largest city, as well as from groups like the New York State Sheriffs’ Association, which called the new law a “thoughtless, reactionary action” that aims to “restrain and punish law-abiding citizens.”
How many people even know that quiet part of the law, that it’s illegal unless a business or home (yes, private domiciles) states that concealed carry is allowed?
And as for who was to blame, Milby said the opinions in Wayne County were crystal clear long before Thursday’s decision.
“There’s a very strong sentiment in this county that the governor has just thumbed her nose at the Supreme Court, in what’s being touted as an unconstitutional conniption fit,” he said. “She’s absolutely overstepped.”
The law is a blatant attempt to circumvent the SCOTUS ruling, and all it does is harm law abiding citizens looking to protect themselves. It does nothing to stop criminals. As the NY Daily News wrote “Add it all up, and assuming these requirements survive inevitable court challenges, it’s going to remain fairly difficult to arm oneself legally in New York.”
County Prosecutors, like rural Sheriffs, can use their discretion when picking and choosing which laws to enforce.
Does Teach agree with that?
Dear Elwood:
The sheriffs can not decide which laws to enforce.
And can you quote which law says that county prosecutors can pick and choose which laws to enforce? They can decide not to take a case to the Grand Jury based on a lack of evidence, but not just ignore a plain violation.
The left love them some discretion in law enforcement! They love George Soros-sponsored prosecutors reducing or dismissing criminal charges against criminals when they’re caught, and they love the governments of ‘sanctuary cities’ refusing to allow any assets to be used to enforce immigration laws, and they love cops and prosecutors not enforcing marijuana and other anti-drug laws.
Sadly, you are very mistaken. There may not be a specific law, but prosecutors can, and do, routinely dismiss charges they do not wish to prosecute.
Teach typed: Bummer: New York State Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce Highly Restrictive NY Gun Law
Will the Sheriff allow a NY citizen to carry their Glock 19 9mM (with 15 round magazine + and few extras) into an elementary school? According to Teach, it’s likely unConstitutional to harass a citizen carrying.
Dear Elwood:
“Will the Sheriff allow a NY citizen to carry their Glock 19 9mM (with 15 round magazine + and few extras) into an elementary school? According to Teach, it’s likely unConstitutional to harass a citizen carrying.”
The SC has ruled that a law enforcement officer can take action when he has reasonable belief that a crime has been or is in process of being committed.
Try again.
The very much not Catholic Mr Dowd asked:
If you had actually read the article that our distinguished host linked, you’d know that these sheriffs stated that they’d absolutely go after any situation in which they had information that such an armed person was heading into a school.
The sheriffs with which the Times spoke said that they would act on real information, including information from citizen complaints and notifications in the case of a clear and present danger.
The part Mr Teach left out, but I included in my article on the same subject, is that even the Times noted, in its article subtitle, the difference between the urban liberals and the “way people live outside big cities”.
I’ve given you the statistics before: In 2020, there were 1,009 murders in the Keystone State, 499, or 49.45%, of which occurred in Philadelphia. According to the 2020 Census, Pennsylvania’s population was 13,002,700 while Philadelphia’s alone was 1,603,797, just 12.33% of Pennsylvania’s totals.
Here’s how the actual numbers work out: there were 510 homicides among 11,398,903 Pennsylvanians not living in Philadelphia, for a homicide rate of 4.474 per 100,000 population, while there were 499 murders among 1,603,797 Philadelphians, which works out to a homicide rate of 31.114 per 100,000. If the gun laws are the problem, why aren’t the homicide rates for Philly and the rest of the Commonwealth fairly similar?
It got worse last year: with 562 homicides in Philly, out of 1027 total for Pennsylvania, 54.72% of all homicides in the Keystone State occurred in Philadelphia. Allegheny County, where Pittsburgh is located, was second, with 123 killings, 11.98% of the state’s total, but only 9.52% of Pennsylvania’s population.
The other 65 counties, with 78.11% of the state’s total population, had 33.30% of total murders.
Gun control laws are set by the state legislature, and localities are prohibited from enacting their own gun control laws if they are stricter than what the state requires. Philly Mayor Jim Kenney and District Attorney Larry Krasner blame the Republicans controlling the legislature for not allowing the city to enact its own, stricter gun control laws, but Philly isn’t an island. If you’re driving in on Ridge Pike or the Schuylkill Expressway or I-95 or Route 611 (Broad Street), the only way you’ll know that you’re in Philadelphia and not Norristown or Plymouth Meeting or Hatboro is if you notice the sign on the road telling you that you have. The bad guys can get their piece across the line in Montgomery County, and then drive — in their carjacked SUV — back into the city.
The very Catholic Mr Dana typed: If you had actually read the article that our distinguished host linked, you’d know that these sheriffs stated that they’d absolutely go after any situation in which they had information that such an armed person was heading into a school.
I did read the NYT article but missed that part. My apologies. Can Mr Dana point me to the exact verbiage they used? Thanks.
If someone tries entering our home with even a legal pistol they will be asked to 1) turn it over to me for safekeeping or 2) leave and lock their gun in their car or 3) just leave.
We appreciate Mr Dana’s efforts confirming that some areas of large cities like Philadelphia are dangerous, especially for young Black men!!
There he goes again with the narcissism.
Bravo, Rimjob.
So brave for such a little man.
Teach
Hunter Biden might be indicted for lying on his gun application about previous drug use. Do you think that previous drug use should disqualify from gun ownership ?
Yes because it’s illegal and I think lying should too.
Of course, the younger Mr Biden was never tried and convicted on any drug issues, so there’s that.
[…] Also see: William Teach, Bummer: New York State Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce Highly Restrictive NY Gun Law […]
Carol Ann do you think everyone who has ever used an illegal drug should also be indicted for lying in their gun application? The 2nd Amendment says no infringement. If you disagree and say that felons should not be allowed guns than you only support the 2nd Amendment for some classes nof people not for all
I do only support the 2nd Amendment for some classes of people not for all. I don’t believe violent criminals should be allowed to own guns, do you? I do not believe people under 16 should own guns, do you? I do not believe people with mental illness should own guns, do you? I believe lying on the federal application should disqualify you from owning a gun, don’t you? That’s what Hunter did so should Hunter be carrying a gun?
Hunter has shown himself to be a reckless person with his whoring, money laundering, collusion with enemies and probable treason with Red Chinese whores, and the long term use of illegal drugs. Do you think he should be given a gun permit?
Carol Ann do you think everyone who has ever used an illegal drug should also be indicted for lying in their gun application?
What does “ever used an illegal drug” have to do with it? The question is if Hunter lied which is the point. Not if he used drugs. That’s a separate issue which he has not nor ever will be convicted of due to the corruption of our legal system by people like you. But the only people who should be indicted for lying in their gun application are people like Hunter who actually lied on their gun application. Don’t you?