January 25th, 2013

Gun Owners Refuse To Register Under New York Law


This article was written by Alex Newman and originally published at The New American

After Democrats in New York rammed a sweeping assault on the right to keep and bear arms through the legislature that failed to exempt police officers from the draconian restrictions, gun owners and even some lawmakers are planning what has been dubbed potentially the largest act of civil disobedience in state history. According to news reports, gun rights activists are urging everyone to defy far-left Governor Andrew Cuomo’s new registration mandate while daring authorities to “come and take it.”

Analysts say the legislation, passed in a frenzy last week in the wake of the Newtown shooting, represents the most brazen infringement on the right to keep and bear arms anywhere in the nation. Among other points, the so-called SAFE Act seeks to limit magazines to just seven bullets, require virtually all of the estimated one million semi-automatic rifles in the state to be registered with authorities, mandate reporting of patients who express indications that they may have thoughts about hurting themselves or others by doctors, and more.

Aside from being unconstitutional, experts on gun violence also point out that the draconian schemes are a bad idea: Studies have repeatedly shown that more guns lead to less crime, and the phenomenon is obvious across America — just compare Chicago or D.C. to Alaska or Wyoming. The mandated reporting requirements for doctors, meanwhile, have come under fire from across the political spectrum. Whether it will even be possible to enforce the bill, however, remains to be seen.

Preparations are already being made for mass resistance. “I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said President Brian Olesen with American Shooters Supply, among the biggest gun dealers in the state, in an interview with the New York Post.

Even government officials admit that forcing New Yorkers to register their guns will be a tough sell, and they are apparently aware that massive non-compliance will be the order of the day. “Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that,’’ a source in the Cuomo administration told the Post, adding that officials expect “widespread violations” of the new statute.

Threats of imprisoning gun owners for up to a year and confiscating their weapons are already being issued by governor’s office, headed by a rabid anti-Second Amendment extremist who suggested before the bill passed that “confiscation” of all semi-automatic rifles was being considered. If tens or even hundreds of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens refuse to comply, however, analysts say New York would either have to start raising taxes and building a lot more prisons, or give up on the scheme that experts say will do nothing to reduce violence and that lawmakers say is aimed at eventual confiscation.



Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath

Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!

 Read More Posts

Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.

15 Responses to “Gun Owners Refuse To Register Under New York Law”

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

  1. 1
    Mr.B Says:

    “A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” -Edward R. Murrow

  2. 2
    Mr.B Says:

    Law Enforcement Oath of Honor:
    On My Honor, I Solemnly Swear that,
    I will never betray my Badge, my Integrity, my Character, or the Public Trust.
    I will always have the Courage to hold myself and others, accountable for our actions.
    I will always Uphold the United States Constitution and defend it from all enemies foreign and domestic; and I will bear true faith and allegiance to same.
    I will Serve with Honor, Dignity, and Respect, the Community and Agency I serve.
    So help me God.

  3. 3
    Lee Says:

    Taking our country back at the local level.


    Five minutes of truth:


  4. 4
    csaaphill Says:

    Good to see it Molon Labe New Yorkers stand be proud never falter.

  5. 5
    Chancellor Says:

    So my question is Do we stand United as a Group Oath Keepers and fight this here and now?
    Or is the line to be drawn in another state, Mississippi river?….Rocky Mtns? Because it is happening NOW. April 14 is just an Arbitrary day wrote down on a calender.
    “Threats of imprisoning gun owners for up to a year and confiscating their weapons are already being issued by governor’s office, headed by a rabid anti-Second Amendment extremist who suggested before the bill passed that “confiscation” of all semi-automatic rifles was being considered.”

    How far do they stomp on the rights of Americans before we stand up to them? Seeing Americans coming from everywhere across the Country to stand and be heard in the state capital. To join in on class action law suits. To in anyway possible …[phrase deleted by Elias Alias, editor]
    In todays news you have anti-gun people protesting in Washington….Do you not think for one minute NY isn’t being used as a testbed for the rest of you. I will stand and even lose all I own but I will not back down. Sorry for being blunt but this is the front lines kids!

  6. 6
    Sammy Jar Says:

    If New York can show effective resistance to this blatantly unconstitutional law, so can every single other state in the union.

  7. 7
    Sammy Jar Says:

    I think it will take those Patriots in New York to show some resistance before gaining any substantial support from other patriots across our nation. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, but many see New York as a lost cause and need to see some evidence of an effective homegrown patriot movement before they will change that view.

  8. 8
    mike smith Says:

    Amen Chancelor, I was wondering the same thing myself, are we going to let our brother in N.Y. go down like we did with California? How far do we let it go? Are we just flapping our jaws or do we really mean it? I for one am getting tired of just sitting on my hands I do not want a war, WHO DOES? But how far is too far?

  9. 9
    Cal Says:

    Governor Cuomo took a legally binding oath, breaking it means that he can be impeached, and prosecuted for criminal and civil offenses. It also means, since KEEPING the Oath is a REQUIREMENT of the office, that he can be immediately replaced.

    Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order that further defines the law for purposes of enforcement.

    5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office.

    5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law,

    5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”.

    18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) REMOVAL FROM OFFICE and; (2) confinement or a fine. (caps are mine)

    The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311.

    Executive Order 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “THE ALTERATION … OF THE FROM OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES BY UNCONSTITUTIONAL MEANS.” (CAPS ARE MINE)

    Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

    Article VI, Clause 2 of the US Constitution: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

    The Constitution of the United States of America IS the Supreme Law of this land, NOT those who serve within the federal government.

    The first law statute of the United States of America, enacted in the first session of the First Congress on 1 June 1789, was Statute 1, Chapter 1: an act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths, which established the oath required by civil and military officials to support the Constitution.

    The wording of the Presidential Oath was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 8.

    ‘Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”’

    The Framers placed the presidential Oath of Office after the beginning clauses setting forth the organization of the executive department, and before the ending clauses that specify the contours of the President’s assigned power. The President takes the oath after he assumes the office but before he executes it. The location and phrasing of the Oath of Office Clause strongly suggest that it is not empowering, but that it is limiting – the clause limits how the President’s “executive power” is to be exercised.

    The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4.

    They are bound by their Oath to support the US Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure – political remedy for a political offense; civil and criminal charges.

    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

    Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge.

    Solemn: “Legally binding, Common legal phrase indicating that an agreement has been consciously made, and certain actions are now either required or prohibited. The other requirement for an agreement or contract to be considered legally binding is consideration – both parties must knowingly understand what they are agreeing to”
    Bound: “Being under legal or moral obligation; to constitute the boundary or limit of; to set a limit to; confine”

    Legally Binding: Common legal phrase. Lawful action, such as an agreement consciously agreed to by two or more entities, establishing lawful accountability. An illegal action, such as forcing, tricking, or coercing a person into an agreement, is not legally binding. Both parties knowingly understand what they are agreeing to is the other requirement to legally establish an agreement or contract.

    Consideration: “Consideration in a contract is a bargained for exchange of acts or forbearance of an act.”

    Require, Requirement, Required: Mandated under a law or by an authoritative entity. “To claim or ask for by right and authority; That which is required; a thing demanded or obligatory; something demanded or imposed as an obligation.”

    Contract: “An agreement between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law.”

    The Framers placed the requirement for “Oaths of Office” in the Constitution. These Oaths are to function as “checks” on the powers of the federal government and protect us from usurpations.
    Each Branch of the federal government has “the check of the Oath” on the other two branches. The States, whose officials also take the Oath of Office, have the same check on all three branches of the federal government. And “We the People”, the “original fountain of all legitimate authority” (Federalist 22), have the Right to overrule violations of the Constitution by elected and appointed officials.

    This one I not yet VERIFIED:
    Title 18 United States Code Section 926 (Federal law Gun Control Act of 1968) makes it a FEDERAL FELONY for ANYONE to require a gun registration list of ANY kind if at any time said list in any way can or will be used as a gun confiscation list.

  10. 10
    Karl Kirshbaum Says:

    Concerned Citizens across the United States are watching NY very closely, many are preparing to transfer that concern to help protect those against Gov’t terrorists infringing against their Constitutional Rights. In 1917 the Bolsheviks somehow convinced the Russian Citizens to register their arms, and for their compliance received a bullet in back of their ears, along with the slaughter of over 100 million of their fellow dis-armed citizens. Registration leads to Confiscation which eventually leads to mass-executions. Lets not allow history to repeat itself on our land, on our watch. No more Waco’s!

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148