At Ruger’s Custom Guns in the Town of Ulster, the confusion that reigned in the aftermath of the laws passage about what would and would not be legal has continued. Co-owner Marie Ruger said that the boost in sales in the wake of the act’s passage has been offset by hours spent fielding questions from gun owners about the law’s requirements. In an effort to close loopholes in earlier assault weapons bans that allowed manufacturers to make the firearms compliant with a few cosmetic changes, the NY SAFE Act included the strictest definition of an assault weapon on the books anywhere. To qualify as an assault weapon, a firearm must have two or more of a laundry list of “military features” including detachable magazines, muzzle brakes, folding stocks or thumbhole grips. New sales of assault rifles are banned; existing ones will need to be registered with the state police by April 15.
Since the law took effect, Ruger said, gun manufacturers have tried to come up with a new class of “New York compliant” versions of popular guns like the AR-15 while individual gun owners have worked to retrofit their firearms in line with the law.
“I’ve spent hundreds of hours answering the same questions over and over and over and it’s not done yet,” said Ruger. “The lawsuits are not complete; it’s probably going to be another few years in the courts.”
Gun owners won a victory last month when a state Supreme Court ruling struck down one of the most unpopular provisions of the law — the seven-round limit on detachable magazines. The judge in the case ruled that allowing the possession of ten-round (the smallest manufactured for most semi-automatic firearms) magazines while threatening arrest of anyone who loaded more than seven was arbitrary and amounted to “virtual entrapment.” Challenges to other elements of the law, including the registration requirement for assault rifles, remain before the courts.
Gun owners protest, politicians backpedal
While the courts hash out the meaning and constitutionality of the law, a backlash has been building among gun owners in Ulster County and statewide. Nationwide, the push for more gun control in wake of mass shootings in Colorado and Connecticut has largely subsided. Federal lawmakers failed to pass a bill requiring universal background checks for gun sales. Nationwide in the year since the Newtown shooting more laws have passed loosening restrictions on guns than ones tightening them. In his State of the State speech earlier this month, Gov. Cuomo limited mention of the NY SAFE Act to a single line in a section about crime-fighting measures and state lawmakers have declined to provide funding for one of the law’s key provisions, an online database to conduct background checks on ammunition sales.
Locally, members of the shooting sports community say that they’ve seen a sharp increase in activism following the act’s passage. In Saugerties last week, dozens of people showed up at the Saugerties Fish and Game Club at noon for a “Shot Heard ’Round New York event” to mark the anniversary of the laws passage.
“The first meeting we had [after the act passed] was standing room only and that never happens,” said Bill Schirmer, a Saugerties town councilman who sits on the Saugerties Fish and Game Club’s board. “People have become much more active in our club and I think a lot of it has to do with the law.”
Assemblyman Kevin Cahill (D-Kingston) described himself as a “reluctant” yes vote on the NY SAFE Act. Cahill said he was uncomfortable with some aspects of the bill, but felt that on balance it was a needed revision of existing state law in response to a new era of mass shootings. As an indication of the emotions around the issue, Cahill said a few longtime friends stopped speaking to him after the vote. A year later, Cahill said, he remains concerned about aspects of the law, in particular their impact on collectors who he called “absolutely the most responsible” of gun owners. But, Cahill said, he believed that loud calls on the right to repeal the act were more political theater than an actual movement. Lawmakers, he said, were unlikely to revisit the law until it had been thoroughly reviewed by the courts — a potentially years-long process.
“I don’t see a great hue and cry to go further,” said Cahill. “I do think that people, for their own political purposes will try to gin up discussion around this just so they can fundraise and show the flag so it can be torn down.”
Assemblyman Pete Lopez (R-Saugerties) was a vocal no vote. Like Cahill, Lopez said that he doesn’t envision the act going on the legislative chopping block anytime soon. But he said he thinks supporters of the bill had badly misjudged both the depth and breadth of anger it would stir among their constituents. One year later, he said, the anger remains red-hot in a movement that straddles traditional political divisions.
“For a lot of people, the right to bear arms is where it begins and ends for them,” said Lopez. “And those people feel like their rights have been diminished.”
