SAFE Act exemption awaits Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s approval

6

A bill to exempt retired law enforcement officials from a portion of the state’s new gun laws is headed for Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s desk after the Senate approved the measure early Friday despite disagreement among the chamber’s Republicans.

If signed into law, retired police officers, peace officers and certain federal law enforcement agents wouldn’t be subject to New York’s ban on high-capacity magazines. Under state law, all magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are prohibited, though they can only be loaded with seven rounds away from a gun range or competition.

The Senate passed the bill around 2 a.m., which drew significant criticism from nearly half of the Senate GOP, which shares control of the chamber with the four-member Independent Democratic Conference. The measure passed by a 49-14 vote and was sponsored by Sen. Martin Golden, a Brooklyn Republican who is a retired member of the NYPD.

Sen. Greg Ball, R-Patterson, Putnam County, said the bill was put to a vote in the wee hours of the morning to prevent public attention. He said the changes to the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act — which widened the state’s assault weapons ban and implemented tougher penalties on illegal gun owners — have split Senate Republicans, a divide he blamed on Cuomo, the main supporter of the new gun-control measures.

“I’m glad Senator Golden can protect his family,” Ball said during the Senate debate. “How about the victim of domestic violence in her home, who now doesn’t have a home exemption?”

Golden said criticism of the time of the vote was unfounded because the bill was first introduced weeks ago. The Assembly passed the measure in May.

Cuomo hasn’t signaled whether he will support the bill.

The SAFE Act was shepherded through the Legislature in January by Cuomo after high-profile shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and in Webster, Monroe County. The new law has hurt Cuomo’s standing among gun owners — particularly those upstate — and led to lawsuits challenging it constitutionality.

Share.

About Author

6 Comments

  1. What about retired military? There are quite a few retired vets who popped off more rounds and have had more extensive training than certain LEO’s!

  2. Hey Scott, what about every person who is a law abiding citizen? Who cares if you’re former military former law enforcement or former mall security.. American citizens are guaranteed the right to bare arms. The type of weapon you use to defend yourself should not be limited because weapons of police and military can be used against you.. Whose to say that the weapons of the police will not end up in the hands of people who wish to do harm?

  3. Limiting the number of rounds in a magazine is stupid and totally ineffective. First, only those of us who a law abiding in the first place will adhere to the law. Secondly, I can drop an magazine, put in a new one and have the eighth (11th, or nth) round on the way in less then 2 seconds.

  4. John M Peluso on

    I feel that any one who served in law inforcement. Or was honorbly Discharge from the armed force should be able to own an asault weapon.I would also like to know
    who came up with parts that discribe an asault weapon.
    It only shows me that they don’t know much about weapons to start with.