Lets have a discussion about the passage of the safe act.

[beevul]

Another DUer reminded me of something with this statement:

Many duly enacted laws are not legit and the NY Safe Act is questionable considering the lack of debate and the fact it was passed in the dead of night to keep the constituents from registering their dissatisfaction. (thanks for the reminder, NU)

I tend to agree with both the general characterization of laws, and that characterization of the safe act, entirely.

Seeing the above quote, reminded of of another discussion I saw in another group:

Pennsylvania Court Rejects Law That Aided NRA Gun Lawsuits | ABC News

"A State Appellate Court struck down a law making it easier for organizations like the NRA to challenge local firearm ordinances in court."

The comment in that post was quite blistering, and I will highlight the methodology that its author trounces on, so that there is no confusion as to the methodology being objected to in that comment:

The ruling is broader than that and heavily criticizes the total lack of transparency and public input in passing a law contrary to procedure mandated by the State Constitution. Which is a "rule in the dark" method preferred by the cowardly lackeys of ALEC and the NRA who will do the bidding of their paymasters even if it means screwing over the very public that elected them, meanwhile stomping on the constitution and the Open Meetings laws intended to allow public debate before most laws are changed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12629177

It seems that "rule in the dark" method the poster refers to, was employed in NY to pass the 'safe act' and only we pro-gun folks were aware of it. I think we might want to let the folks in the other group know so they can righteously object to the passage of the safe act.

I think this bears some discussion in an OPEN forum.

[Shamash]

1. Interestingly

Many of the contemporary news accounts of the law used the phrase "dead of night" to describe its passage. I suppose it might be that the GCRA folks were on vacation and missed it, just like they seem to on vacation now and missing your post. Otherwise I'm sure they'd be demanding that this sort of chicanery can lead to nothing but bad laws.

Change in violent crime rate, NY state, from 2012 to 2013 (year before NY SAFE Act): -6.1%
Change in violent crime rate, NY state, from 2013 to 2014 (year after NY SAFE Act): -2.2%
Change in violent crime rate, NY state, from 1/1/2014 to 4/30/2014 compared to 1/1/2015 to 4/30/2015: +9.9%

Percentage of violent crimes that were firearm-related, NY state, 2012 (year before NY SAFE Act): 8.5%
Percentage of violent crimes that were firearm-related, NY state, 2013 (year after NY SAFE Act): 10%
Percentage of violent crimes that were firearm-related, NY state, 2014 (2 years after NY SAFE Act): 10%

Figures taken from "Crime, Arrest and Firearm Activity Report(Data Reported through April 30, 2015)", published by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services.

Would anyone from the gun control side care to opine on what their reaction would be if these figures had been the result of relaxing gun laws?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. NY Safe Act or yogurt: Which was debated longer on state Senate floor?

NY Safe Act or yogurt: Which was debated longer on state Senate floor?

SYRACUSE, N.Y. -- The New York State Senate on Tuesday approved yogurt as the official state snack.

Hold your applause. The New York State Assembly must also approve the legislation, and Gov. Andrew Cuomo must sign it into law, before yogurt makers and eaters can truly celebrate.

But the fun, lively and appetizing debate on yogurt brought about an interesting question: Did the state's senators spend more time on Tuesday debating the calorie counts, lactose tolerance and inclusiveness of snacks than they did discussing the NY Safe Act back in January 2013?

The answer is yes. The yogurt debate and vote took about 44 minutes. The Safe Act? Just less than 30 minutes.


http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/05/ny_safe_act_or_yogurt_which_got_more_debate_time_in_state_senate.html

Emphasis added.

[Lurks Often]

3. Connecticut pulled a similar stunt

After the public hearing, which was overwhelmingly attended by the pro-gun side (about 95% were pro-gun), did not go the way the gun control advocates wanted, the Governor and the leadership (both sides) of the legislature rammed through the bill under the "Emergency Certification" clause despite the fact that no actual imminent emergency existed.

The "E-Cert" bypassed all committees and any public hearings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_General_Assembly#Committee_system

It's pretty sad that the gun control extremists have to use procedural tricks to get their bills passed.

[hack89]

4. The last thing controllers want is lengthy and open debate.

it has a tendency to dissipate the emotion as people realize it is a complex issue with no simple solutions.