Gov. Andrew Cuomo

Uncategorized

Cuomo Capitulates In New York And Signs Gravity Knife Bill

May 31, 2019 by

The third time is obviously the charm. Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) signed AB 5944 which removed the vague term “gravity knife” from the Penal Code. Cuomo had vetoed two previous passed bills which would have changed the law. He signed this bill in the face of both Federal court rulings and the realization that the Supreme Court probably would have changed the law anyway.

From his signing message:

As I review this bill for a third time, the legal landscape has changed. In March of this
year, the United States District Court for the Southern District ofNew York declared the State’s
existing “gravity knife” ban unconstitutional. As argued by many who have advocated for this
change in law, the court reasoned that the existing law could result in arbitrary and
discriminatory enforcement.


While I remain aware of the cautious community voices, I cannot veto a bill passed by
the Legislature to address a decided constitutional infmnity in existing law, as recently affirmed
by a federal court. I remain confident that our law enforcement community will continue to keep
our communities safe by pursuing anyone who uses, or attempts to use, one of these knives in an
unlawful manner.

This is a huge win for Knife Rights who have been fighting in both the courts and in the New York State Assembly and Senate to rectify the injustices caused by the prior knife law. It is also a big loss for New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. who used the Penal Code to charge way too many honest people with violations of the gravity knife ban and who also used it to shake down a number of businesses.

Knife Rights was assisted in this battle by the New York Legal Aid Society whom they recognized in their statement below. Knife Rights is still warning people to be careful carrying a knife in NYC.

Nine years of hard work and effort, including eight years of
costly Federal litigation and the threat of losing big time at the U.S.
Supreme Court (see below), has finally convinced New York Governor
Andrew Cuomo to sign A5944,
repealing the state’s bans on Gravity Knives. Cuomo previously vetoed
two similar bills which Knife Rights Director of Legislative Affairs,
Todd Rathner, also worked on tirelessly in Albany.

Although the
bill leaves the definition of a gravity knife intact, the statutory
repeals make the knives legal, stripping New York City and District
Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. of their ability to continue to abuse the
definition of a gravity knife and continue to arrest and prosecute
people by claiming a common lock blade folding knife or utility knife is
an illegal gravity knife

The repeal is effective immediately.

Knife Rights Chairman Doug Ritter said, “After nine years fighting, it
is a relief to close the book on this extraordinary abuse of authority
by a corrupt system that has terrorized over 70,000 honest, law-abiding
people, disproportionately minorities, for simply carrying a common tool
used daily in their lives. I am thrilled that we and our partners
across the political spectrum in this fight have finally prevailed, but
it is a sad commentary on the state of politics and justice in New York
State, New York City and at the Second Circuit that it took this long
and that tens of thousands of innocent folks had to suffer so much for
so long.”

“This is a big win for Knife Rights, the people of New
York, and for the sponsors who tenaciously fought to get these
injustices stopped. I am very proud to have worked with them on the
ground in Albany as we fought so long to get this done,” said Rathner.
Knife Rights congratulates our longtime legislative allies in this
effort, sponsors Assemblymember Dan Quart and Senator Diane Savino, as
well as Senator Robert Jackson, for gaining unanimous approval of this
bill this time around and for helping to assemble the coalition of
diverse organizations and politicians who urged Cuomo to sign the bill
after two previous vetoes of similar overwhelmingly passed bills.

“No stage hand, no plumber, no maintenance worker, no office worker, no
New Yorker should have to risk their freedom to carry a tool because of
a vaguely worded 1950’s era statute,” said Assemblymember Dan Quart.
“I’m proud to have been a part of this unlikely and diverse coalition
that included public defenders, union members, criminal justice reform
advocates and Knife Rights. Knife Rights’ tenacious 9-year fight in
Federal court against this unjust and unconstitutional enforcement
scheme proved an important element in this struggle.”

We are very thankful for the support of our friends at The Legal Aid Society who have been on the front lines in this fight.

Legal Aid Society’s Martin LaFalce said, “Repealing New York’s gravity
knife statute has been a team effort with Legal Aid and Knife Rights
partnering to lead the charge. Governor Cuomo’s signature was clearly
influenced by Knife Rights determined litigation strategy and
partnership with Legal Aid. Together we exposed the wrist flick test as
constitutionally absurd and NYPD’s enforcement of the statute flagrantly
discriminatory.”

We’d also like to credit journalist Jon Campbell whose series of articles starting in 2014 in the Village Voice
publicized these abuses and helped immeasurably to catalyze public
support for a solution. Also credit to VICE News who more recently highlighted this issue and Knife Rights’ efforts to solve it to a broad audience, further arousing opposition to this abuse.

Unfortunately,
this is unlikely to be the end of knife owners being harassed by the
New York Police Department.  READ OUR WARNINGS BELOW on why knife owners
in New York and especially in New York City need to still be careful
about what knife they carry going forward and how they carry it in NYC.


Cuomo’s action on this bill came as briefing was completed in Knife Rights’ appeal of its federal civil rights case on these gravity knife arrests to the Supreme Court of the United States. With a strong case including a 4 to 1 circuit split against the Second Circuit on an important constitutional issue, three strong amicus briefs from across the political spectrum and, just recently, feeble and obfuscatory opposition briefs from NYC and DA, the possibility of Knife Rights’ case being heard increased significantly.

A conference to decide whether to take up this case is currently scheduled for June 13th.
A decision in favor of the plaintiffs against the City and DA Vance in
our case would make it much harder for the Second Circuit to abuse the
issue of vagueness, as they have in our case, to make other cases
opposed by these politicians go away, again, as they have also done
previously. That possibility was so concerning that even DA Vance, who
previously steadfastly opposed any reasonable solution and who is a
close confidant of Gov. Cuomo, reversed his prior opposition to the
Governor signing any bill that would stop his abuse.

As cited in the Governor’s signing statement, it didn’t hurt that in another case recently a Federal Judge in New York issued a very narrow ruling saying that the City’s “wrist
flick” test was, indeed, unconstitutional, although in limited
circumstances that did not substantially impact the ability of the City
and DA to continue the arrests and prosecutions. That case relied
heavily on the briefs in our case. But, despite its serious limitations
and the fact that NYC and Vance were working around it, that decision
provided some public cover for Cuomo and Vance without revealing their
real fear, losing at the Supreme Court in our case. They hope the
signing of this bill will moot our case.

Even better for Vance,
if they don’t lose to us in court, Vance won’t be forced to pay our
million dollar legal bills for eight years of Federal litigation, which
he’d consider doubly painful on top of the embarrassing loss he’s
facing. (This is also painfully illustrative, by the way, as to why we
oppose the Interstate Transport Act (S.542) in the U.S. Senate because
is leaves individuals and other open to similar financial abuse while
providing the appearance of solving a problem that it does not
adequately accomplish.)

NOTE: The repeal also applies to true gravity knives, such as the German Paratrooper Knife that we demonstrated in Federal Court. Please note the WARNING below as to New York City.
In particular, some of these aforementioned true gravity knives have
blades that are 4-inches or longer and would not be legal in NYC.

WARNING! 
New York City Administrative Code still has an Under-4-inch Length
Limit and requires knives be carried COMPLETELY concealed.
Knife Rights recommends that you never carry your knife clipped to your pocket in New York City.
If you plan to carry a folding knife in New York City, we suggest that
if it has a pocket clip, you should remove it so you don’t inadvertently
clip it to your pocket after use. Even when covered by a jacket, simply
moving the jacket aside to get to a wallet has been enough to get folks
stopped. Always ensure your knife is completely concealed at all times,
including not “printing” on the outside of your clothing. In addition,
be extremely circumspect about using a knife for any purpose in a public
setting. Knife Rights suggests that you never carry a knife with a 4-inch or longer blade in NYC.


NOTE:
While there is nothing in the Administrative Code compelling or
allowing seizure of the knife in question, invariably the knife will be
taken by the officer and chances of it being returned are very low. In
cases where it has been returned is has taken months of effort and often
use of an attorney. Knife Rights  recommends that you never carry a
valuable knife in NYC or one you would not want to lose.  Knife Rights
strongly suggests that you not resist the officer seizing your knife as
that can lead to more serious legal complications.

For more information on New York City’s Administrative Code with regards to knives: https://kniferights.org/legislative-update/new-york-city-administrative-code-knives/
For more information on what to do when stopped or arrested: https://kniferights.org/if-arrested/
WARNING: Assisted-Opening Knives may be considered illegal Switchblade Knives in New York State.

On June 10, 2018, the highest court in New York State upheld the conviction of an individual in possession of an assisted-opening (spring-assisted) folding knife that
he used in his work under the theory that it was an illegal switchblade
knife under New York law. Essentially, this decision redefined what a
switchblade is under New York State law to include assisted opening
(spring-assisted) knives. This decision applies to the entire state, not
just New York City.  The New York Police Department and DA Vance have
since been prosecuting those caught with assisted-opening knives as
having illegal switchblades. Knife Rights recommends that you do not carry an assisted-opening knife in New York. 

Uncategorized

ACLU Finally Stepping Up In NY And California

August 27, 2018 by

The state branches of the American Civil Liberties Union in New York and California appear to be stepping up to oppose measures aimed at the gun culture.

First, in California. The ACLU is joining with groups like the Firearms Policy Coalition to oppose AB 1968 which mandates a lifetime ban on firearm ownership by anyone who has been involuntarily admitted to a mental health facility more than once in one year.

In a letter to Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) who is the author of the bill, they said:

“This bill stigmatizes people with a history of mental health issues, and perpetuates the harmful and false stereotype that such people are inherently violent and dangerous.”

As AWR Hawkins notes in an article in Breitbart, the bill’s approach is essentially the same as that was used to deny Social Security recipients that needed help managing their monies. That is, it didn’t differentiate between non-violent and violent behavior and lumped them all together.

Duke University psychiatrist and behavior health professor Jeffrey Swanson had an op-ed in the Washington Post at the time criticizing this lumping together. He said then, ““the vast majority of mentally ill individuals pose no threat to themselves nor to others. Yet the ban stigmatized a broad swath of the mentally ill by treating them as a threat.

Now on to New York where the ACLU filed an amicus brief supporting the NRA in their lawsuit against Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY). To me, this is the more important of the two because the ACLU’s defense of the NRA rightly points out the danger of using the administrative state against any organization that is out of favor at the time with a politician.

Reason.com describes the efforts of the Cuomo administration to deny the NRA the ability to obtain banking and insurance coverages.

A timeline prepared by the NRA suggests the intimidation campaign began last fall. The anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety met with New York officials in September 2017; a month later the Department of Financial Services began an investigation that started with a company called Lockton, which administered the NRA-branded personal liability insurance program known as Carry Guard. Despite a 20-year relationship, Lockton responded by abruptly ditching the NRA as a customer in February; so did Chubb and Lloyd’s.

Emboldened by this initial success, Maria Vullo, head of the state’s Department of Financial Services, sent a pair of ominous letters to all banks, financial institutions, and insurers licensed to do business in New York. Vullo warned companies to sever ties with pro-Second Amendment groups that “promote guns and lead to senseless violence” and instead heed “the voices of the passionate, courageous, and articulate young people” calling for more restrictions on firearms. All companies receiving the letter, she advised, should “review any relationships they have with the NRA or similar gun promotion organizations, and to take prompt actions to managing these risks and promote public health and safety.”

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo underlined the regulatory threat in a tweet the next day: “The NRA is an extremist organization. I urge companies in New York State to revisit any ties they have to the NRA and consider their reputations, and responsibility to the public.'”

As a result of those not-very-veiled threats, the NRA says, multiple banks withdrew bids to provide basic depository services. The NRA is also worried about being able to continue producing its NRA TV channel, with hosts including Dana Loesch and Cam Edwards, unless it can obtain normal media liability insurance.

David Cole, the ACLU Legal Director, explained in a blog post why they filed their amicus brief even though they still cling to a collective right view of the Second Amendment.

In the ACLU’s view, targeting a nonprofit advocacy group and seeking to deny it financial services because it promotes a lawful activity (the use of guns) violates the First Amendment. Because we believe the governor’s actions, as alleged, threaten the First Amendment rights of all advocacy organizations, the ACLU on Friday filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the NRA’s right to have its day in court.

His blog post points out that while it may be the NRA that is targeted today, it could be a liberal group that is being targeted tomorrow for “disapproved speech” and that violates the First Amendment.

The amicus brief opposes NY’s motion to dismiss the NRA’s case. Their argument centers on two major points. First, that the court must consider all circumstances to determine whether or not Cuomo and company threatened adverse actions against the NRA’s banks and insurers. In essence, it urges the court to look beyond the “wink-wink, nudge-nudge” wording of the press releases and guidance letters and look to the substance of what was being communicated. That is, if you do business with the NRA we will consider it a reputational risk and make it hard for you to do any business in New York State.

The second argument in the amicus brief is that Cuomo and the other defendants misstated the requirements for a First Amendment claim. The ACLU says the requirements to make a First Amendment claim are rather straightforward and the NRA met the standard. However, the defendants (Cuomo and company) have tried to add some “non-existent requirements on to the test.” The brief then takes these apart one after another and finds they have no merit. They conclude that the NRA’s lawsuit should not be dismissed and that the case should go forward.

While I don’t agree with the ACLU on a lot of things and certainly not their incorrect interpretation of the Second Amendment, I do applaud their efforts in both California and New York State. It isn the latter case where I think they’ve really stepped up in their protection of constitutional rights.

Uncategorized

Knife Law Reform In New York Must Wait Another Year

January 1, 2017 by

Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) ignored the overwhelming support in both houses of the New York Assembly for reform of New York’s gravity knife law and vetoed the bill today. The bill had the support of groups such as the NAACP and the ACLU who normally would not support a pro-2A bill. In this case, they saw the harm that the existing law caused for the average New Yorker.

I guess I could make a joke about Cuomo getting confused on what he was supposed to do after indulging in one too many of girlfriend Sandra Lee’s cocktails but what he did was give the average New Yorker the finger.

Knife Rights has the full story below.

Cuomo Sides with NYC Pols – Gives Finger to the People 




Waiting until the last possible moment, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has vetoed Knife Rights’ Gravity Knife and Switchblade Reform Bill,
effectively giving the finger to New York’s legislature that
overwhelmingly passed the bill and the large coalition of organizations,
many part of his own constituency, which supported the bill. Despite
the thousands who called and emailed the Governor to sign the bill, and
thanks very much for those who did so, he sided with the disingenuous
arguments made by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, NYPD Commissioner
James O’Neill and District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr., virtually the only
ones who opposed the bill. In vetoing this bill he has potentially
doomed thousands more to arrest and prosecution for carrying common
pocket knives that won’t get someone arrested virtually anywhere except
in New York City.

Despite Cuomo’s avowed commitment to criminal justice reform in New York, this veto clearly shows the lie to that claim.
Next year’s session of the New York Legislature is almost
upon us and we’ll be back again working to fix the state’s Gravity Knife
law to prevent these arrests and prosecutions. This bill passed with
such large majorities in both houses of the legislature that an override
of a veto is theoretically possible.

Meanwhile, our five-year-old Federal civil rights lawsuit over the constitutionality of New York City’s “wrist flick” test awaits a decision which could settle the issue for certain.

Uncategorized

Cuomo Spokesman: “No Remington Jobs Are Leaving NY”

February 17, 2014 by 4 Comments

Rich Azzopardi, who some describe as “Ewok-like”, has been the spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) since 2012. Yesterday he went on Twitter to try and deflect from some of the attention the Remington expansion in Alabama is getting.

In the strictest sense of the word, New York may not be losing any jobs – for now. In the short-term, it will take some time before Huntsville is up and running. However, as the production lines begin to come online in Huntsville and the cost per unit of production starts to decrease compared to Ilion, just how long do you realistically think Remington Outdoor Company will wait before shifting production lines south?

The Ilion, New York plant will become for Remington what the East Alton, Illinois plant has become for Winchester: an aging albatross of a building with a highly unionized workforce in a state whose politics is dominated by the gun prohibitionists. While you may leave some production there because of specialty machines and craftsmen, the bulk of it is eventually going to shift to the newer plant.

Uncategorized

The Fine Hand Of Bloomberg And Bill Drafting

March 26, 2013 by 9 Comments

The New York Post reported yesterday that sources within Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration are blaming the Brady Campaign and Bloomberg’s people for all the problems with the new NY SAFE Act. That is, of course, beyond the fact that the bill was rammed through both houses of the New York State legislature with very no discussion.

A Cuomo administration source is flatly denying the governor’s claim that his new anti-gun SAFE Act was carefully drafted, saying the governor himself wasn’t even aware of some provisions when it was hastily enacted into law.

“The governor thought the limit on the size of [gun] magazines would only apply to assault-style rifles, not to handguns,’’ said the source.

“That’s why there’s the big problem now with handguns, among other things in the statute.’’

The legal sale of virtually all semiautomatic handguns will soon be impossible because Cuomo’s law limits the size of bullet-holding magazines to seven shots, virtually none of which are manufactured for sale.

“Much of what’s in the law was drafted by people connected to Mayor Bloomberg and the Brady Center, not by the governor’s staff,” the source said. “That’s why there are so many problems with it.’’

As Michael Bane has reported many times, the new gun control bills in Colorado were drafted by Bloomberg and his people and have definitions that are peculiar to New York law and not Colorado law. This especially relates to the definition of transfer of a firearm.

Meanwhile back in February, in Minnesota, Rep. Alice Hausman, the prime sponsor and ostensible author of HF 241 – the Minnesota “assault weapons” (sic) ban – left the hearings on her own bill and let Heather Martens, a lobbyist from the gun control group Protect Minnesota, explain the bill. Hausman told a reporter later that she really didn’t understand her own bill. That bill also had a different definition of “transfer” as well.

As used in this section, “transfer” means a sale, gift, loan,
assignment, or other delivery to another, whether or not for consideration, of an assault
weapon.

When the BATFE speaks of transfer of a firearm, they mean the transfer of ownership or title. Under normal commercial law, a sales transaction or transfer of title requires an offer, an acceptance of that offer, and the offering of consideration. Consideration is the cash or other remuneration paid for the item. Without those three actions, the transaction or transfer is void and didn’t occur. Notice that the Minnesota law explicitly removes the third element from their definition of transfer.

I’m sure a close examination of any of the other gun control bills involving semi-automatic firearms, magazines, and background checks that have been introduced in many state legislatures would show these same similarities. What Michael Bloomberg and his billions can’t achieve on a national level might be achieved on the state level if we aren’t on guard. As Michael Bane said to Tom Gresham on Sunday during his interview on Gun Talk, they were blindsided in Colorado.

UPDATE: It seems like Mayor Bloomberg isn’t pleased with the reports that Cuomo is blaming the drafting of NY SAFE on him.

Asked about that criticism today, Bloomberg erupted in anger.

“What did we do, put a gun to their head, if you pardon the pun, and force them to write legislation?” he said, during a press conference in Brooklyn about helping the unemployed get jobs. “Is that the allegation? That we were up there with automatic weapons with expanded capacity magazines forcing them to write a bill?”

“That’s the kind of journalism that I find troublesome,” he continued. “You’ve got a source that isn’t willing to put their name on the bill and the reporting of it wasn’t in the context of, is that credible? But they were forced by guns, or a knife at their throat, to take our ideas. If they took our ideas, I’m flattered. I hope they did. And I don’t know whether they did or didn’t, and I don’t know whether they got it accurate or not.”

In a latter statement from one of Bloomberg’s press spokesman, they said they wanted micro-stamping in NY SAFE but never said anything about magazines. Hmmm.

Jacob at GunpoliticsNY.com has more on this along with some analysis. Sebastian discusses this buck-passing and the reliance on polling by some politicians in a post this afternoon. I suggest reading both.

Uncategorized

Cuomo: Guns For Hollywood But Not New York Citizens

February 28, 2013 by 1 Comment

Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) is asking for “technical amendments” to the NY SAFE law that he rammed through the New York Assembly and Senate earlier this year. These technical amendments would allow film makers to use firearms for film and TV productions that are denied to ordinary New Yorkers.

“We spend a lot of money in the state bringing movie production here, post-production here, so obviously we would want to facilitate that,” said Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who wants to expand the film and TV tax credit.

He said movies and TV may use fake guns that wouldn’t be subject to the new law but the industry wants “certainty.” The revised law would allow them to use real weapons without real ammunition.

“There’s no reason not to make a change like that to give an industry comfort, especially when it’s an industry we want to do business in the state,” the governor said.

There is a Yiddish word for what Gov. Cuomo wants to do. That word is chutzpah.

Uncategorized

What’s Banned In New York

January 29, 2013 by 4 Comments

The office of Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) has provided a graphic summary of what rifle features are now banned under NYSafe. That is the draconian law pushed through so quickly that even law enforcement if prohibited from having more than 7 rounds in their magazines. NY(un)Safe stands for Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act.

As you look through the pages of the graphic you need to ask yourself how the absence of a bayonet lug or a muzzle break will make the people of New York State any safer. The obvious answer is that it won’t.

NY State – Banned Rifle Features by

Uncategorized

CCRKBA Blasts NY Governor Cuomo’s Proposal For Closing Prisons And More Gun Control

September 21, 2011 by 2 Comments

In a speech given at the kickoff breakfast for the African-American Day Parade in New York City’s Harlem, Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) called for shutting down some prisons in order to save money. He also called for more Federal gun control.

Cuomo also pushed for stricter gun control laws from the federal government.

“It has been decades where we have been fighting Washington for sensible laws controlling guns and we need those laws passed and we need them passed now. We’re losing too many people out in the streets,” he said.

Lest it be forgotten, when he was Bill Clinton’s Secretary for Housing and Urban Development, Cuomo was responsible for pushing extortion-like lawsuits against gun manufacturers and for signing the infamous agreement with Smith and Wesson that allowed the government to mandate many so-called safety features. That agreement was signed only after the government essentially said “sign or we’ll sue you out of business.” It was later repudiated by the new owners of Smith and Wesson.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has responded to Cuomo’s new call for gun control with a blistering response.

BELLEVUE, WA – New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s call for more gun control laws while advocating the closure of prisons in a Sunday speech proves he is “drinking too much of Michael Bloomberg’s Kool-Aid,” the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

Gov. Cuomo made his comments during a Harlem breakfast prior to the African-American Day parade, according to the New York Daily News. He reportedly said closing some prisons would release more funding for local programs.

“If Andrew Cuomo thinks keeping thugs out of prison, so he can pump the money into some community program while pushing for further disarmament of potential crime victims makes sense,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “he’s been breathing too much of the same air as the mayor of New York City. The other day, Bloomberg was babbling about riots in the streets if the government doesn’t ‘do something’ about creating jobs. It now appears Andrew Cuomo wants to keep hoodlums working, in the neighborhoods, in the convenience stores, on the streets; anywhere they can rob and steal from honest citizens.”

Gov. Cuomo also complained that we could send a person to Harvard University for the same amount it costs to incarcerate them.

“Well,” Gottlieb said, “that certainly makes sense. Let’s just move thugs to college campuses. Maybe the governor thinks criminals will climb the ladder of success by robbing a more affluent class of victims.

“Andrew Cuomo and Michael Bloomberg apparently live in the same fantasy world,” Gottlieb said. “They want to throw government money around, either to invent make-work jobs that accomplish nothing, or to pad some social program at the expense of much-needed jail space, while working overtime to disarm law-abiding citizens. They’re not in the State of New York; they’re in a state of confusion.”