Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

Goodell Calls Bill ‘Rush Job’

Assemblyman Says State Bill Will Do Little To Curb Gun Violence; Young Agrees

January 18, 2013

State Assemblyman Andy Goodell isn’t pleased with Tuesday’s gun-control bill signed into law by Gov. Andrew Cuomo....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jan-18-13 1:12 AM

Goodell and Young both have my vote for another term!

20 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 1:31 AM

then these lawmakers have no choice but to send a bill called safe act 2 banning cars and steak knives from every residence and business in ny and any other item with a sharp point,its for obviously the right thing to do for the overall safety of new yorkers it has to be done,its the right thing to do

14 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 5:46 AM

Me too Yankee!

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 6:34 AM

Goodell finally says something days after the bill is passed. He had to wait to see which way the wind blew. Way to lead Andy!

2 Agrees | 20 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 8:44 AM

The reasons Goodell gave for not using the adequate review legislation are NOT the same as the reasons the Governor used! Another republican lying to make themselves look good.

3 Agrees | 19 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 9:34 AM

I diddo yankee and carlaw!!! I can't go against any politician that is in favor of standing up for our Constitutional rights as citizens of the U.S.A.

14 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 9:36 AM

Lilrud, I second what mrinbetween said. Goodell asked some very tough questions and is sticking up for the citizens of this state.

16 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 9:49 AM

A defenseless society will be ruled by tyrants, see pattern already with this wacko job governor,first legalize gay marriage, working on legal casino's throughout the state, his will (far from from a republic/democratic valued land)is that of a dictator. hold on for what's next with this millionaire rich boy living on daddies money and name.

11 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 10:37 AM

Great point Seadog - it doesn't exempt LEOs.

My question is - Why should it exempt LEOs? What good reason do they have for carrying 10 rounds?

Oh, safety? Then why can't law abiding citizens carry 10 as well?

12 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 1:56 PM

Lone, thanks for the info on UK but you left out the final step where they even outlaw plastic knives and everyone is forced to use sporks. Everyone, that is, except politicians and those willing to pay a special tax for a permit to use a plastic knife.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 2:00 PM

The State Police were fielding so many inquiries about the law that they posted it on their website so people could read it for themselves, but by this morning it was down. Why? Because there is was much seemingly conflicting and ambiguous language in it that reading it raised more questions than it answered?! I'm pretty good at reading legal "mumbo-jumbo" but I ended up with a headache & cross-eyed! Gun dealers calling the SP are politely being told that the organziation just doesn't know what to make of it at this point. Inquiries to the federal NISC check people about getting the now required clearance for every time that you buy a box of 22's or a 5 pack of deer slugs ends up with an unanswered run around. Also there's the question of who pays for the dealer's time in obtaining that federal clearance. Is that $2 box of 22's now going to have $15 service fee tacked on by the dealer? If so I'll buy a bunch at one time, but that'll bring in an inquiry as why I need so

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 2:12 PM

kcw007 continued: to why I need so much ammo! YIKES! One thing that's absolutely certain about this law is that is has ensnared huge numbers of people who never had any reason to believe that they had anything to do with the matter of assault weapons! For example the grandfather who takes his grandson out back to shoot up tin guns with his 22 rifle. IT'll NEVER occur to him that he can't any longer load that eight, ninth or ten round into the clip in his trusty Ruger 1022! The next thing he'll know will be that some cop will be putting him in cuffs!

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 3:30 PM

Sorry, don't watch tv. Thought it would have been in this paper. Not sure if I'm that moron you're talking about but riddle me this: how does this law affect you? Do you think it stops you from defending yourself? You still have your pistols and rifles and shotguns. What is the definition of "well regulated militia"?

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 3:49 PM

so you could walk up to a leo today and ask him how many rounds he has in his weapon including the ar 15 in the trunk and if he exceeds 7 in either of them you could do a citizens arrest on him for each weapon that he is in violation of,ea is a misdemeanor after 40 or 50 of those today that would get there attention

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 3:52 PM

Thankfully not so loneriderr1, for whatever reason tube feeds are specifically exempted from the nonsense! So your grandson can load up the tube with all fifteen rounds! As a matter fact, if the gun will digest "shorts" he may be able to get 30 rounds in there, all legally! However if you take a Ruger 1022 out, you can only put seven rounds into that highly dangerous ten round magazine!

9 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 4:03 PM

Lilrud, " a well regulated militia" refers to the body public as whole being proficient or effective("a proficient or effective militia"). Reading the 2008 SCOTUS decision District of Columbia v Heller (currently the defining ruling on Second Amendment issues) would answer many questions on the matter.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 4:47 PM

So you agree with the Supreme Court's decision when it helps you but hate it when it doesn't like in the ACA? I thought the right followed the the Constitution? Make up you're minds. Either way, no one is banning guns. Registration should be required for all firearms.Reasonable limits should be set on the types of weapons available to the public.

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 5:41 PM

Again, does the Constitution say you can have anything you want. All rights have limits. Free speech has limits. Why shouldn't guns. Why do you only read read half of what the 2nd Amendment says. Off topic, but I heard Martin Luther King's "I have a dream speech" the other day. Being his holiday, it should be a must hear by everyone.

2 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 6:09 PM

The bit about the "well regulatd" would lead me to think so.

0 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 6:41 PM

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The Supreme Court decision also includes restrictions. Such as registration requirements, tes of weapons allowed and who may possess a weapon. How does this affect the average gun owner? This complaining of yours sounds like a bully who can't get his way.

3 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 7:02 PM

You can still keep and bear arms. In your 4:15 post you said there many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession consistent with the 2nd Amendment. Why is this one different?

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 8:02 PM

Not true assault rifles? What are you saying Scalia made up that definition too! It's a civilian variant of the military m-16. What else was it made for except killing people. Anyone listen to MLK's speech yet?

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 9:06 PM

Typical ******* loser. Can't be open to ideas. Stuck in the '70s. Have fun with your guns.

3 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-18-13 10:29 PM

You don't become the next Democratic presidential candidate by waiting for state lawmakers to adequately review a bill before its passage... you make headlines, first and foremost.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-19-13 9:14 AM

When the state starts confiscation it will make the hunt for Bucky Philips and the fight with the Indians look like a picnic. There are likely to be many Waco instances throughout the State.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 30 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web