TUESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2019 11:41 A.M.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE HOUSE WILL COME

TO ORDER.

IN THE ABSENCE OF CLERGY, LET US PAUSE FOR A MOMENT OF

SILENCE.

(WHEREUPON, A MOMENT OF SILENCE WAS OBSERVED.)

VISITORS ARE INVITED TO JOIN THE MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE

OF ALLEGIANCE.

(WHEREUPON, ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY LED VISITORS AND

MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.)

A QUORUM BEING PRESENT, THE CLERK WILL READ THE

JOURNAL OF MONDAY, JANUARY 28TH.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

DISPENSE WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF MONDAY, JANUARY

28TH AND ASK THAT THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO

ORDERED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THERE ARE

SOME ITEMS BEFORE US TODAY, BUT I DO WANT TO START WITH A QUOTE.

TODAY'S QUOTE IS ONE BY NELSON MANDELA. MOST PEOPLE KNOW THAT

NAME, THEY KNOW OF HIS WORK AND THEY KNOW OF HIS LEGACY. WHAT MR.

MANDELA SAID THAT I THINK WAS SO IMPORTANT TO BE RE-MENTIONED TODAY IS

THAT, "EDUCATION IS THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPON WHICH CAN BE USED TO

CHANGE THE WORLD." I MENTION THAT, MR. SPEAKER, AS WE GO THROUGH

THESE BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, "EDUCATION IS THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPON

WHICH CAN BE USED TO CHANGE THE WORLD."

WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO BRING TO THE

MEMBERS' ATTENTION THE CALENDAR THAT'S ON OUR DESK, THERE ARE SEVERAL

BILLS THAT WE WILL TAKE UP TODAY. IF THERE IS -- IF THERE'S ANY

HOUSEKEEPING, WE SHOULD DO THAT, OF COURSE, FIRST, BUT AFTER THAT, WE

WANT TO TAKE UP OUR GUN VIOLENCE PACKAGE, WHICH I THINK IS A FAIR

OPPORTUNITY TO GET MEMBERS' COMMENTS AND THOUGHTS ON SOMETHING

THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT IN OUR SOCIETY TODAY. WE'D ALSO LIKE TO TAKE

UP A COUPLE OF LOCAL TAX EXTENDER BILLS AS WELL, MR. SPEAKER.

IN ADDITION, THERE IS GOING TO BE A NEED FOR AN

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING OFF THE FLOOR. FOR

MAJORITY MEMBERS, THERE WILL ALSO BE A DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE AT THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

CONCLUSION OF TODAY'S SESSION. AND AS ALWAYS, MR. SPEAKER, SHOULD

THE MINORITY NEED LIKEWISE, WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE THEM ANNOUNCE THAT

ON THEIR OWN.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, IF WE COULD, ARE THERE INTRODUCTIONS?

AFTER THE GENERAL OUTLINE, DO WE HAVE ANY INTRODUCTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: NO INTRODUCTIONS,

MADAM MAJORITY LEADER.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: SO THERE -- WE COULD GO

TO RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE ON PAGE 2?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 61, MS.

LUPARDO. LEGISLATION RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR ANDREW M.

CUOMO TO PROCLAIM JANUARY 2019 AS RADON AWARENESS MONTH IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO. THE RESOLUTION IS

ADOPTED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, IF WE COULD

GO NOW TO PAGE 5, RULES REPORT NO. 17 BY MEMBER HUNTER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A01213, RULES REPORT

NO. 17, HUNTER, TAYLOR, STECK, D'URSO, ORTIZ, GOTTFRIED, BLAKE, PERRY,

WEPRIN, SEAWRIGHT, BICHOTTE, SIMON, BURKE, CRUZ, FRONTUS, GRIFFIN,

JACOBSON, MCMAHON, PICHARDO, REYES, SAYEGH, STERN, BUTTENSCHON.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AN ACT TO AMEND THE PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO ACCESS TO FOREIGN STATE

RECORDS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED, MRS. [SIC] HUNTER. WE ARE ON DEBATE. MEMBERS, PLEASE

HAVE YOUR SEATS.

MS. HUNTER: THANK YOU. THIS BILL IS SIMPLY TO

AFFORD PEOPLE WHO VACATION AND OWN PROPERTY OR OWN RENTAL PROPERTY

IN NEW YORK STATE, FOR THEM TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SAME

BACKGROUND CHECK AS ANYBODY WHO RESIDES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SCHMITT.

MR. SCHMITT: MR. SPEAKER, WOULD THE SPONSOR

YIELD FOR A QUESTION?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. HUNTER, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MS. HUNTER: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. HUNTER YIELDS.

MR. SCHMITT: DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW

MANY LICENSES OR APPLICATION FOR LICENSES THIS WOULD AFFECT?

MS. HUNTER: AT THIS TIME, WE WON'T KNOW THAT.

WE, OBVIOUSLY, DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY COME TO

NEW YORK WHO OWN PROPERTY, WHO RENT PROPERTY, WHO MAYBE THEY

COME TO VACATION WHO ACTUALLY OWN A GUN. THE DEPARTMENT OF

TAXATION MAY BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT RECORD, BUT AT THIS TIME THE

LEGISLATURE DOESN'T KNOW THAT NUMBER.

MR. SCHMITT: AND IF I READ THE BILL CORRECTLY, THIS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WOULD ONLY APPLY IN THAT -- IN THIS CERTAIN INSTANCE, THIS DOES NOT

BROADEN ANY OTHER LANGUAGE REVOLVING [SIC] ANY RESIDENTS, CURRENT

RESIDENTS OF NEW YORK.

MS. HUNTER: CORRECT. THIS IS JUST FOR THOSE FOLKS

WHO ARE OUT-OF-STATE WHO NOW WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SAME

BACKGROUND CHECK AS EVERYONE IF THEY OWN PROPERTY IN NEW YORK

STATE.

MR. SCHMITT: SO, WE ARE, IN ESSENCE -- WE ARE, IN

ESSENCE, MAKING IT FAIR FOR NEW YORK RESIDENTS TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT

SOMEONE ELSE ISN'T GETTING SPECIAL TREATMENT WHO ISN'T A RESIDENT OF

NEW YORK?

MS. HUNTER: CORRECT.

MR. SCHMITT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 60TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THIS IS THE

FIRST VOTE OF TODAY. THERE ARE SEVERAL MORE, SO THAT IF MEMBERS WOULD

COME INTO THE CHAMBERS AND REMAIN HERE UNTIL WE'RE COMPLETED, WE

CAN GET OUR WORK DONE WITH SOME EXPEDIENCE TODAY. I'M SURE FOLKS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HAVE LISTENED TO THE WEATHER, THERE IS ENSUING WEATHER ON THE WAY. IF

POSSIBLE, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF WE CAN GET MEMBERS OUT OF HERE AND

ABLE TO GO HOME PRIOR TO THAT WEATHER GETTING ANY WORSE. SO MEMBERS,

PLEASE, THIS IS THE FIRST VOTE OF THE DAY. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE, REMAIN

IN THE CHAMBERS, WE'LL GET THROUGH WITH OUR WORK RATHER QUICKLY THAT

WAY. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: FIRST SPEAKER -- FIRST

VOTE OF THE DAY, MEMBERS. IF YOU HEAR OUR VOICES, PLEASE COME TO THE

CHAMBER AND VOTE. IF YOU ARE IN YOUR SEATS, VOTE NOW. THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, CAN WE GO

TO CALENDAR -- RULES CALENDAR NO. 21, BILL NO. 2684 BY FAHY, MRS.

[SIC] FAHY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02684, RULES REPORT

NO. 21, FAHY, HEASTIE, LENTOL, PEOPLES-STOKES, SIMOTAS, STECK,

MOSLEY, MCDONALD, GOTTFRIED, ABBATE, ORTIZ, NIOU, ZEBROWSKI,

SOLAGES, BUCHWALD, LUPARDO, THIELE, SIMON, ENGLEBRIGHT, D'URSO,

QUART, GALEF, GLICK, DINOWITZ, COLTON, L. ROSENTHAL, JAFFEE, WEPRIN,

ABINANTI, BRAUNSTEIN, SEAWRIGHT, LAVINE, PERRY, PAULIN, RAMOS,

ARROYO, PICHARDO, VANEL, DE LA ROSA, HYNDMAN, O'DONNELL, TAYLOR,

BLAKE, BICHOTTE, OTIS, BURKE, CRUZ, FRONTUS, GRIFFIN, JACOBSON,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MCMAHON, REYES, SAYEGH, STERN, BUTTENSCHON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO PROHIBITING THE POSSESSION, MANUFACTURE,

TRANSPORT AND DISPOSITION OF RAPID-FIRE MODIFICATION DEVICES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED, MS. FAHY.

WE HAVE SOME FOLKS MOVING AROUND. PLEASE.

MS. FAHY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THIS BILL IS --

IS SOMEWHAT SIMILAR TO THE BILL THAT WE PASSED LAST YEAR IN THIS BODY

AND THAT IS -- AND IT WAS A BILL THAT REALLY RESULTED FROM -- FROM AN

INCIDENT THAT SHOCKED THE CONSCIENCE IN THIS COUNTRY AND THAT IS THE USE

OF A BUMP STOCK DEVICE, OR AN APPARATUS THAT WAS ADDED TO A

SEMIAUTOMATIC GUN THAT, IN EFFECT, TURNED IT INTO A MACHINE GUN. AND I

-- WHAT I'M REFERRING TO IS THE INCIDENT A YEAR-AND-A-HALF AGO IN LAS

VEGAS WHERE THE BUMP STOCK DEVICE WAS ADDED AND LED TO A -- A

MASSACRE WITH A LAS VEGAS SHOOTER, WHO, IN LESS THAN TEN MINUTES WAS

ABLE TO TAKE SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPONS, BUT WITH THE USE OF A BUMP

STOCK, ABLE TO FIRE OFF 1,100 ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION AND KILLED 58

PEOPLE, INJURED OVER 800. AND -- AS WE NOW KNOW IT -- IT REMAINS THE

-- THE SINGLE LARGEST MASS KILLING BY AN INDIVIDUAL IN THIS COUNTRY WITH

GUN VIOLENCE. AND THIS BILL WOULD BAN THE -- THE SALE, THE

MANUFACTURING AND THE POSSESSION OF SUCH A DEVICE IN THIS STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

SPEAKER, WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

FAHY?

MS. FAHY: OF COURSE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. FAHY.

AND FIRST, OF COURSE, I -- I APPRECIATE YOUR HELP AND COOPERATION LAST

YEAR AS WE WRESTLED WITH SOME OF THE LANGUAGE, MUCH OF WHICH WAS --

REFLECTS THOSE DISCUSSIONS. AND AGAIN, I -- I WANT TO COMMEND YOU ON

THAT. AND AS YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR THIS BILL PASSED WITH ONLY ONE

NO-VOTE IN THE ASSEMBLY. BUT I HAD A QUESTION ON THIS BILL BECAUSE THE

LANGUAGE HAS BEEN CHANGED A LITTLE BIT MORE AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE

SURE THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON WHAT THIS LANGUAGE MEANS.

MS. FAHY: CAN I ASK, THOUGH, IT'S -- IT'S A LITTLE HARD

TO HEAR. CAN YOU JUST...

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY. FIRST OF

ALL, WE NEED TO CLOSE THOSE DOORS IN THE BACK AND KEEP THEM CLOSED,

PLEASE. AND THE MEETINGS THAT WE'RE HAVING, PLEASE, IF YOU'RE ON THE

FLOOR OR THE NEAR THE FLOOR, THAT -- THOSE TWO FOLKS IN THE BACK OVER

THERE, WOULD YOU PLEASE GO AWAY FROM THAT AREA? THANK YOU.

HOW'S THAT, MS. FAHY?

MS. FAHY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: GOOD.

MR. GOODELL: NOW, I DO HOPE YOU HEARD ALL THOSE

NICE THINGS I SAID ABOUT YOU EARLIER.

(LAUGHTER)

MS. FAHY: THAT'S WHY I WANTED THE QUIET, TO HEAR IT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AGAIN.

(LAUGHTER)

MR. GOODELL: DID YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT THOSE?

MS. FAHY: SURE.

(LAUGHTER)

IT'S ALL RIGHT.

MR. GOODELL: THIS LANGUAGE HAS ANOTHER PHRASE

AND I JUST WAS HOPING YOU COULD HELP CLARIFY WHAT IT MEANS. IT COVERS,

OF COURSE, BUMP STOCKS, TRIGGER CRANKS, BINARY TRIGGER SYSTEM, BURST

TRIGGER SYSTEMS. ALL THOSE WERE REALLY CONTEMPLATED IN THE BILL LAST

YEAR THAT WE APPROVED. BUT IT GOES ON TO SAY, "AND ANY OTHER DEVICE

THAT'S DESIGNED TO ACCELERATE THE RATE OF FIRE OF A SEMI-AUTOMATIC

WEAPON." AND SO, I WAS HOPING YOU COULD PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF

CLARIFICATION ON THAT. WOULD IT INCLUDE, AS AN EXAMPLE, COMPETITION

TRIGGERS? THESE ARE TRIGGERS THAT DO NOT ACTIVATE MULTIPLE ROUNDS.

THEY'RE NOT BINARY TRIGGERS, BUT THEY ENABLE THE INDIVIDUAL IN

COMPETITION - AS YOU KNOW, SHOOTING IS A -- IS AN OLYMPIC SPORT - SO

COMPETITION TRIGGER HAS LESS PULL AND ENABLES THE INDIVIDUAL TO FIRE

MORE ACCURATELY, BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS THEM TO FIRE A LITTLE BIT QUICKER. IS

THAT INTENDED TO BE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS LEGISLATION?

MS. FAHY: MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS NOT THE

INTENT. THE INTENT HERE IS STILL VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAD LAST YEAR,

IT'S JUST REALLY A FINESSING OF THE LANGUAGE, IF YOU WILL, AND OF COURSE

WE'VE LEARNED A LOT. I -- MOST -- MOST PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY HAD NEVER

EVEN HEARD THE TERM "BUMP STOCK" UNTIL A YEAR-AND-A-HALF AGO WITH --

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AS A RESULT OF THE -- THE MASSACRE IN LAS VEGAS. SO, THIS IS REALLY -- THE

INTENT IS TO -- TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE BANNING THE USE, MANUFACTURE,

TRANSPORT AND -- AND POSSESSION OF THOSE APPARATUSES SUCH AS THE BINARY

AND THE -- THE BURST -- THE BURST TRIGGERS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR SUCH AN

ACCELERATION THAT IT ALMOST IS, IN EFFECT, TURNING THE WEAPON INTO A

MACHINE GUN, NOT -- NOT THE COMPETITIVE TYPE ATTACHMENT THAT YOU'RE

MENTIONING.

MR. GOODELL: AND THAT WOULD LIKEWISE APPLY, FOR

EXAMPLE, TO A ROUTINE MAGAZINE?

MS. FAHY: I'M SORRY?

MR. GOODELL: AND THAT WOULD LIKEWISE APPLY TO A

ROUTINE MAGAZINE, THAT WOULD NOT BE UNDER THE SCOPE OF THIS. SO, IF

YOU HAVE A SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPON WITH A ROUTINE MAGAZINE THAT HAS

SEVEN SHOTS OR SEVEN SHELLS, THAT'S NOT INTENDED TO BE COVERED.

MS. FAHY: CORRECT. THAT IS NOT THE INTENT.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH --

MS. FAHY: THAT IS NOT THE INTENT. YEAH, THE INTENT

IS --

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. FAHY: -- IS STILL THE SAME.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MS. FAHY.

THANK YOU, SPEAKER. ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. GOODELL: I APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR'S

COMMENTS. OF COURSE, WE HAVE OUTLAWED FULLY AUTOMATIC WEAPONS OR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MACHINE GUNS FOR MANY, MANY DECADES. AND AS WE SAW A FEW YEARS

AGO, THERE ARE ATTACHMENTS TO GUNS THAT CAN CONVERT A SEMI-AUTOMATIC

INTO THE EQUIVALENT OF A MACHINE GUN. AS THE SPONSOR EXPLAINED, THIS

LANGUAGE SHOULD BE INTERPRETED IN THAT MANNER, TO BAN MACHINE GUNS OR

ATTACHMENTS THAT CONVERT A SEMI-AUTOMATIC INTO A MACHINE GUN. AND

WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE BILL. THANK YOU VERY

MUCH TO THE SPONSOR. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. FAHY TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. FAHY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. JUST AS A

FURTHER EXPLANATION OF -- OF THIS BILL, WE KNOW THAT AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL

FINALLY THERE -- THERE HAVE BEEN REGULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT OUT TO

TRY TO PREVENT THE USE AND POSSESSION OF BUMP STOCK APPARATUSES THAT,

IN EFFECT, DO TURN SEMI-AUTOMATIC GUNS INTO MACHINE GUN-TYPE DEVICES.

BUT THIS -- THIS BILL WILL GO FURTHER IN CODIFYING WHAT WE KNOW HAS BEEN

A PROBLEM.

AND, QUITE FRANKLY, SINCE THIS HORRIFIC INCIDENT AND

MASSACRE IN LAS VEGAS, WE'VE LEARNED A LOT MORE. THE DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO PUT OUT A -- A STUDY THAT SHOWED THAT JUST

SINCE 2010, OVER 520,000 BUMP STOCK-TYPE APPARATUSES HAVE BEEN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PURCHASED IN THIS COUNTRY. THAT'S A NATIONAL FIGURE. AND, AS WE KNOW,

IT ONLY TOOK ONE DEVICE TO GIVE US THE MOST HORRIFIC MASSACRE IN THIS --

IN THIS COUNTRY'S HISTORY IN TERMS OF ONE INDIVIDUAL CREATING SUCH --

SUCH VIOLENCE, AND THE ABILITY FOR HIM TO FIRE OFF 1,100 ROUNDS AND KILL

58 PEOPLE.

SO, THIS LEGISLATION WILL MAKE SURE WE ARE CODIFYING

THE -- AND OUTLAWING THE MANUFACTURE, THE TRANSPORTATION OR THE

POSSESSION OR SALE OF THESE TYPES OF DEVICES. I COMMEND MY

COLLEAGUES FOR THE STRONG VOTE WE HAD LAST YEAR AND LOOK FORWARD TO IT

AGAIN THIS YEAR. AND THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. SPEAKER, AND MR. GOODELL

FOR THEIR SUPPORT ON THIS MEASURE. AND WITH THAT, I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. FAHY IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. SMULLEN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. SMULLEN: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU. I RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE ON THIS VERY ISSUE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO THE

CONSTITUENTS OF MY DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY SPEAKING TO MEASURES THAT

INFRINGE ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT. AS MANY OF YOU MAY OR MAY NOT

KNOW, I SPENT 24 YEARS IN THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS. I HAVE A LOT

OF EXPERIENCE, AND I FIND THIS TO BE A REASONABLE PROPOSITION TO BE ABLE

TO LIMIT BUMP STOCKS AND THE THINGS THAT WOULD CAUSE WEAPONS TO FIRE

VERY RAPIDLY IN OUR -- IN OUR CIVIL SOCIETY, SORT OF THING. SO, I RISE TO

SAY THAT I FIND IT REASONABLE AND THAT I VOTE YES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR

THIS MEASURE. THANK YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SMULLEN IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. ASHBY TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. ASHBY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE ON THIS -- ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. AND I WAS

CURIOUS NOT TO SEE ANY CARVE-OUTS FOR THE DISABLED POPULATION, WHO MAY

BE NEEDING MODIFICATIONS TO -- TO WEAPONS THAT COULD FALL UNDER THE

CATEGORIZATION OF INCREASING RATE OF FIRE. FOR EXAMPLE, A BITE TRIGGER

MAY -- MAY BE PART OF THIS, AND IT'S A TRIGGER SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW

SOMEONE TO FIRE THE WEAPON THROUGH A BITING SYSTEM THAT'S IN PLACE INTO

THEIR -- INTO THEIR MOUTH. I KNOW THIS, I KNOW THAT MANY PEOPLE MAY

NOT BE AWARE OF THESE TYPES OF SYSTEMS, BUT AS AN OCCUPATIONAL

THERAPIST, AS A MEMBER OF A ROD AND GUN CLUB AND AS A VETERAN, I -- I AM

AWARE OF THESE THINGS. AND I WOULD ASK THAT THE AUTHOR OF THIS

LEGISLATION PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS BECAUSE I FEEL THAT IT COULD BE

EXCLUDING THIS POPULATION AND I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK

YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. ASHBY IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. SCHMITT TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. SCHMITT: MR. SPEAKER, I, AS WELL, WILL BE

VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE, ECHOING MY COLLEAGUE'S COMMENTS CONCERN OF

DISABLED VETERANS AND MEMBERS OF MY COMMUNITY THAT THE DEVICES

THEY UTILIZE TO EXERCISE THEIR SPORTSMAN AND SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

ARE OR COULD BE INTERPRETED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE LANGUAGE, WHETHER IT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BE BITE TRIGGERS, TRIGGERS USED BY FEET TO -- TO SHOOT OR SEVERAL OTHER

DEVICES FOR HANDS THAT ARE IMMOBILIZED THAT ARE INDICATED PICK-TYPE

FUNCTION, BUT ALLOW THOSE WHO ARE DISABLED IN OUR COMMUNITY TO STILL

PARTAKE IN THEIR RIGHTS. THAT'S WHY I'LL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SCHMITT IN THE

NEGATIVE.

(PAUSE)

THE CLERK WILL WITHDRAW ROLL CALL.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY NOT BE AWARE, WE HAVE

WHAT WE CALL A "CROSS," AND WE WILL NOW SUBSTITUTE THE SENATE BILL.

ON A MOTION BY MS. FAHY, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE

THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED. READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

AND WE SHOULD ALL VOTE AGAIN. ANYONE OUTSIDE THE

CHAMBER, PLEASE COME BACK IN AND VOTE.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. SO, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO RULES REPORT NO. 22, WHICH IS

BILL NO. 2685. MR. SPEAKER, MEMBERS SHOULD NOTE THAT THERE IS AN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AMENDMENT, A HOSTILE AMENDMENT THAT WILL BE ATTEMPTED TO ATTACH TO

THIS ONE. SO, RULES REPORT NO. 22, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02685, RULES REPORT

NO. 22, L. ROSENTHAL, HEASTIE, LENTOL, PEOPLES-STOKES, GOTTFRIED,

ABINANTI, JAFFEE, WEPRIN, CRUZ, FRONTUS, GRIFFIN, JACOBSON, PICHARDO,

REYES, SAYEGH, STECK, STERN, DINOWITZ. AN ACT TO AMEND THE

EXECUTIVE LAW, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING THE MUNICIPAL GUN BUYBACK

PROGRAM; AND TO AMEND THE STATE FINANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

MUNICIPAL GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THERE IS AN

AMENDMENT AT THE DESK BY MR. LAWRENCE TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE

AMENDMENT WHILE THE CHAIR EXAMINES IT.

MR. LAWRENCE: MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SHH. ONE MINUTE,

MR. LAWRENCE, I THINK WE NEED -- RIGHT? PLEASE CLEAR THE HALLS, GET

AWAY FROM THE SPEAKER, FROM THE GENTLEMAN.

GO AHEAD, SIR.

MR. LAWRENCE: I OFFER THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT,

WAIVE ITS READING, MOVE ITS IMMEDIATE ADOPTION AND REQUEST THE

OPPORTUNITY TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: EXPLAIN YOUR

AMENDMENT, SIR.

MR. LAWRENCE: THE BILL-IN-CHIEF ESTABLISHES THE

MUNICIPAL GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM THAT WILL AUTHORIZE AN AGENCY TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PROVIDE MONETARY AWARDS TO INDIVIDUALS SURRENDERING FIREARMS, RIFLES

AND/OR SHOTGUNS. THE STATE POLICE SHALL OVERSEE THE PROGRAM AND THE

SUPERINTENDENT SHALL ESTABLISH NECESSARY RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE

IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF SUCH PROGRAM INCLUDING, BUT NOT

LIMITED TO, THE MANNER IN WHICH AN AGENCY MAY APPLY FOR FUNDING TO

SUPPORT THE PROGRAM, GUIDELINES FOR SAFE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF

FIREARMS AND AMMUNITIONS SURRENDERED TO AN AGENCY UNDER THE

PROGRAM, AND ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS WISHING TO

SURRENDER FIREARMS AND/OR AMMUNITION UNDER THE PROGRAM.

THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ENACT PROVISIONS OF ASSEMBLY

NO. 10896, IN ADDITION TO THE MUNICIPAL GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM

PROVIDED FOR THE BILL-IN-CHIEF; ESTABLISH A POLICE SAFETY EQUIPMENT GRANT

PROGRAM THAT WOULD MAKE AVAILABLE TO APPLICANTS FUNDING FOR POLICE

SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, BULLET-RESISTANT VESTS,

BALLISTIC VEHICLE DOOR PANELS, RIOT SHIELDS, CONDUCTED ENERGY DEVICES

AND AFFORDABLE ELECTRONIC TABLETS.

THE AMENDMENT AND BILL-IN-CHIEF ARE BOTH AIMED AT

ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF SAFETY IN OUR COMMUNITIES. THE BUYBACK

PROGRAM WILL ALLOW PEOPLE TO SURRENDER THEIR UNWANTED FIREARMS AND

AMMUNITION ALLOWING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO DISPOSE PERMANENTLY OF

WEAPONS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE REMAIN IN PRIVATE HANDS, WHILE THE

POLICE SAFETY EQUIPMENT GRANT PROGRAM ALLOWS ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

TO APPLY FOR FUNDING NECESSARY TO INCREASE PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF THE

OFFICERS CHARGED WITH PROTECTING THE GENERAL PUBLIC ACROSS THE STATE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LAWRENCE, WE --

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE CHAIR HAS EXAMINED YOUR AMENDMENT AND FOUND IT NOT GERMANE TO

THE BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE.

MR. LAWRENCE: I WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL THE RULING

OF THE CHAIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YOU MAY CERTAINLY

DO THAT, AND YOU MAY SPEAK ON THE ISSUE OF GERMANENESS.

MR. LAWRENCE: ON THE ISSUE OF WHAT?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YOU MAY -- YOU MAY

MR. LAWRENCE: YES, SIR --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: -- CHALLENGE THE ISSUE

OF GERMANENESS.

MR. LAWRENCE: YES, SIR. THANK YOU. THIS

AMENDMENT COUPLES WELL WITH THE BILL-IN-CHIEF TO PROVIDE SAFETY TO NOT

ONLY THE PUBLIC BY REMOVING UNWANTED GUNS FROM THE POPULOUS, BUT

WILL SERVE TO PROTECT OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM LIKE NEW YORK

POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICERS WENJIAN LIU AND RAFAEL RAMOS, BOTH

KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY IN 2014, WHO WORKED DAY AND NIGHT TO

SAFEGUARD US FROM HARM BY ENSURING THAT THEY HAD THE NECESSARY

FUNDING TO PROCURE ADEQUATE SAFETY DEVICES.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. LAWRENCE APPEALS THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR. THE

QUESTION BEFORE THE HOUSE IS SHALL THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR STAND AS

THE JUDGMENT OF THE HOUSE? VOTING YES VOTES TO SUSTAIN THE RULING OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE CHAIR; VOTING NO VOTES TO OVERRIDE THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR.

THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(PAUSE)

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE RULING OF THE CHAIR IS SUSTAINED.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: AN EXPLANATION IS

REQUESTED, MS. ROSENTHAL.

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY. THIS BILL ESTABLISHES THE

MUNICIPAL GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM BY THE DIVISION OF STATE POLICE FOR

THE VOLUNTARY RETURN OF GUNS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: LADIES AND

GENTLEMEN, WE ARE ON DEBATE. I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THOSE

CONVERSATIONS ARE, BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU WOULD TAKE YOUR

SEATS, ALL THOSE FOLKS IN THE BACK, OR TAKE THEM OUT OF THE CHAMBER.

GIVE YOUR MEMBERS RESPECT. WE'RE STILL NOT LISTENING TO THE CHAIR,

PLEASE. THAT WHOLE GROUP OF MEMBERS AT THE BACK, WOULD YOU PLEASE

PROCEED TO GO TO THE REAR OR OUT OF THE CHAMBER. THERE'S NO EXCEPTIONS

HERE.

(PAUSE)

MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

ROSENTHAL?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL YIELDS.

MR. RA: THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS

ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW THIS WILL BE DONE. FIRST OFF, DOES THIS BILL

INCLUDE AN APPROPRIATION, OR IS IT SUBJECT TO AN APPROPRIATION IN THE

BUDGET?

MS. ROSENTHAL: IT'S SUBJECT TO AN APPROPRIATION

IN THE BUDGET.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND ANY IDEA OF WHAT -- HOW LARGE

THAT APPROPRIATION WOULD, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT

THIS?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YEAH, NOT AT THE MOMENT, BUT

SINCE WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS, HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE A

GOOD SUM.

MR. RA: OKAY. THERE -- IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE

EXECUTIVE BUDGET PROPOSAL REGARDING THIS?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO, THERE IS NOT.

MR. RA: OKAY. IN TERMS OF HOW THE MUNICIPALITIES

WOULD DEAL WITH THIS, ARE THEY REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE, OR IS IT AN OPTION

THAT THEY WOULD COME TO THE STATE AND REQUEST FUNDING TO DO A LOCAL

PROGRAM?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YEAH, IT'S NOT -- IT'S NOT

MANDATORY. IT'S JUST A SET -- A SET OF STANDARDS SO THAT IT CAN BE MORE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE STATE. DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITIES DO IT IN

DIFFERENT WAYS, SO IT'S JUST TO HAVE A UNIFORM STANDARD THROUGHOUT THE

STATE. AND SOMETIMES GROUPS THAT MAYBE SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT ARE

DOING IT, SO THIS WILL HELP MAKE EVERYTHING ABOVE BOARD.

MR. RA: OKAY. WITH -- WITH REGARD TO, YOU KNOW,

YOU SAID -- SO IT'S KIND OF STANDARDIZED, AND I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN

LOCALITIES IN THE STATE WHO HAVE DONE THIS. IN DOING A LITTLE RESEARCH

REGARDING THE TOPIC, YOU KNOW, OTHER STATES, OTHER CITIES HAVE -- HAVE

DONE THESE TYPE OF PROGRAMS AND IT SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THEM HAVE JUST

SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU $200 OR WHATEVER FOR ANYTHING

TURNED IN. OTHER ONES HAVE HAD, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHAT OF A SCHEDULE OF

RANGING, YOU KNOW, IN AMOUNTS OF MONEY FOR THE TYPE OF FIREARM BEING

TURNED IN. DO -- DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STATE WOULD --

WOULD STANDARDIZE THAT? OR WOULD THAT BE UP TO THE LOCALITY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, THE DIVISION OF STATE

POLICE WOULD COME UP WITH ALL THE GUIDELINES, SO IT'S POSSIBLE THEY

MIGHT DO IT THAT WAY. BUT IT'S NOT DICTATED HOW --

MR. RA: OKAY.

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- IT WOULD BE WRITTEN IN THIS

BILL. IT'S JUST A SET -- TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MINIMUM STANDARDS AND TO

ASSURE THESE PROGRAMS WILL ACCOMPLISH THEIR GOALS.

MR. RA: OKAY. AND -- AND LASTLY, IS THERE DATA, YOU

KNOW, TO INDICATE THAT THIS TYPE OF PROGRAM IS -- IS EFFECTIVE AT REDUCING

CRIME AND GUN VIOLENCE?

MS. ROSENTHAL: OH, WELL IT -- I BELIEVE IT'S -- IT'S

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

VERY EFFECTIVE. A LOT OF GUNS THAT WOULD SIT HOME OR WOULD BE OPEN TO

MISUSE WILL -- ARE -- ARE RETURNED. AND I THINK THAT'S -- THAT'S ALWAYS A

GOOD THING. YOU ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT PEOPLE SAYING, OH, I'M GLAD I

COULD GET RID OF THIS GUN, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH IT. SO, I THINK IT

WILL BE A USEFUL TOOL AND NOW WITH STANDARDS, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE WELL

SET UP ACROSS THE STATE.

MR. RA: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THANK YOU.

MR. RA: MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR. RA.

MR. RA: SO, JUST IN REALLY DOING QUICK RESEARCH ON

THIS, THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF RESEARCH OUT THERE THAT HAS -- THAT HAS

LOOKED AT THIS AND THEY'VE -- I'VE READ ONE ARTICLE THAT SAID THEY

BASICALLY STOPPED RESEARCHING THE TOPIC BECAUSE THEY TEND TO GET

EXACTLY THAT. PEOPLE WHO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVE A FIREARM THAT WAS A

SPOUSE'S OR -- OR A RELATIVE'S, AND THEY GO AND THEY TURN IT IN, AND THAT'S

REALLY NOT A WEAPON THAT WE REALLY HAVE ANY FEAR IS GOING TO BE USED IN

-- IN A CRIME.

SO, I THINK THERE ARE SMARTER WAYS TO SPEND THIS

MONEY TO REDUCE, YOU KNOW, GUN VIOLENCE AND TO PROTECT OUR

COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS OFFERED EARLIER TO --

TO TRY TO HELP OUR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PROTECT THEM, THEY'RE --

THEY'RE THE ONES ON THE STREET DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE. BUT THERE WAS --

THERE WAS ONE PARTICULAR THING THAT WAS SOMEWHAT HUMOROUS. THE --

THE CITY OF BALTIMORE RECENTLY DID ONE OF THESE PROGRAMS, AND THEY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACTUALLY HAD AN INDIVIDUAL THAT -- THAT CAME -- WAS TURNING IN A FIREARM

AND ACTUALLY TOLD A REPORTER SHE WAS DOING IT SO THAT SHE COULD TAKE THE

MONEY AND GO BUY A BIGGER GUN.

SO, YOU KNOW, I -- I THINK THERE ARE MANY BILLS WITHIN

THIS PACKAGE TODAY THAT ARE GOING TO BE EFFECTIVE AT REDUCING GUN

VIOLENCE. THIS ONE I -- I REALLY HAVE CONCERNS THAT -- THAT IT'S NOT GOING

TO BE TOO EFFECTIVE. YES, IT MAY PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR

PEOPLE TO TURN IN, YOU KNOW, WEAPONS, THAT, LIKE I SAID, BELONGED TO

SOMEBODY IN THEIR FAMILY OR -- OR MAYBE JUST SOME OLD WEAPON, BUT I --

I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO USE WEAPONS IN A

-- IN A CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ARE GOING TO BE THE ONES TURNING IN -- TURNING IN

THESE WEAPONS. AND I THINK THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY WHEN THESE

PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S -- THAT'S THE

TYPE OF IMPACT THAT THEY HAVE FOUND EITHER. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. SCHMITT.

MR. SCHMITT: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES, I WILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL YIELDS,

SIR.

MR. SCHMITT: WHAT WOULD BE -- WHAT KIND OF

DEVICE WOULD QUALIFY FOR RECEIPT OF PAYMENT IF IT WAS TURNED IN?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, THAT -- THAT IS FOR THE

DIVISION OF STATE POLICE TO -- TO DECIDE.

MR. SCHMITT: THERE HAVE BEEN GUN BUYBACKS IN

OTHER STATES WHERE PEOPLE TURNED IN A BROOM HANDLE WITH A TAPE AROUND

IT, IT SAID "SHOTGUN," AND THEY RECEIVED $100 EVERY TIME THEY DID THAT.

WOULD SOMETHING LIKE THAT QUALIFY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, I WOULD THINK NEW YORK

STATE WOULD BE SMARTER THAN THAT.

MR. SCHMITT: IS IT WRITTEN IN THE LEGISLATION THAT

THEY SHOULD BE SMARTER THAN THAT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I -- I THINK IT'S ABSURD TO GRANT

THAT THE STATUS OF "GUN". SO I THINK WE'RE SMARTER THAN THAT.

MR. SCHMITT: SO, IT -- THERE'S NO SPECIFICS SAYING

IT HAS TO BE FUNCTIONAL, OR IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S NOT FUNCTIONAL, IF IT IS

EVEN ACTUALLY A RIFLE OR NOT OR A FIREARM.

MS. ROSENTHAL: IT HAS TO BE -- IT HAS TO BE A

WEAPON. IT CAN'T JUST BE CALLED A WEAPON, IT ACTUALLY HAS TO BE ONE.

AND I HAVE TRUST THAT THE STATE POLICE WILL ACT ACCORDINGLY WHEN

ESTABLISHING THE STANDARDS.

MR. SCHMITT: OKAY. IN -- IN OTHER STATES THERE

HAVE BEEN SETUPS WHERE THERE'S A GUN BUYBACK ON ONE SIDE, AND THERE IS

A -- A GUN DEALER, AN ILLEGAL GUN DEALER WHO SETS UP ON THE OTHER SIDE OR

ACTUALLY HIS STORE OR HER STORE IS LOCATED IN THE SAME PLAZA. ARE THERE

ANY RESTRICTIONS FOR SOMEONE TO RETURN THEIR OLD NOT VERY VALUABLE

FIREARM, RECEIVE WHATEVER THE FINANCIAL AMOUNT WOULD BE, AND THEN GO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PURCHASE A NEW ONE? IS THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS LIKE THAT WRITTEN INTO THIS

LEGISLATION?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I SEE YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF

THINKING ON THIS. AND THERE IS NO SUCH THING IN HERE, BUT IT'S A GOOD

IDEA FOR A NEW BILL.

MR. SCHMITT: THE -- YOU CITED THAT THERE WAS

SOME EFFECTIVENESS TO THIS. DO YOU HAVE ANY RESEARCH THAT SHOWS THE

EFFECTIVENESS OF IT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, IT'S -- IT'S WELL

KNOWN THAT THESE ARE EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS. PEOPLE HAVE GUNS LYING

AROUND THEIR HOMES THAT THEY MAY NOT INTEND TO USE. AND WE'VE HEARD

SO MANY TRAGIC STORIES ABOUT TODDLERS AND OTHERS PICKING THEM UP AND

SHOOTING THEIR RELATIVE INNOCENTLY, NOT MEANING TO. THE MORE WE CAN

GET GUNS OUT OF THE HOME THAT ARE JUST HANGING AROUND, THE BETTER IT IS

FOR US. SO THAT'S THE GOAL OF THIS.

MR. SCHMITT: WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE UNIVERSITY

OF CINCINNATI AND THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN LAW SCHOOL ARE, YOU

KNOW, INSTITUTES OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT ARE REPUTABLE?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO -- CAN YOU REPEAT THAT?

SORRY.

MR. SCHMITT: THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI AND --

AND THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN LAW SCHOOL, WOULD YOU SAY THOSE ARE

TWO INSTITUTIONS THAT HAVE -- ARE OF REPUTABLE NATURE?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.

WHAT -- WHAT IS THE QUESTION?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. SCHMITT: WELL, BOTH OF THOSE INSTITUTIONS

HAVE DEEMED THROUGH EXTENSIVE RESEARCH THAT GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS

ARE COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE AND HAVE -- MAKE NO CONSEQUENTIAL IMPACT

ON THIS DEBATE IN EITHER REGARD.

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, THAT'S THEIR OPINION.

I HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO TELLING HOW

MUCH DAMAGE A GUN THAT IS TURNED IN MIGHT HAVE -- MIGHT HAVE DONE,

HOW MANY PEOPLE IT MIGHT HAVE INJURED OR KILLED WITH THE PERSON

SHOOTING IT SO, IT'S -- IT'S REALLY A, YOU KNOW, IT'S PRECAUTIONARY, IT'S A

SAFETY MEASURE. AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE CAN ARGUE THAT SOMEONE

TURNS IN A GUN, IT MEANS THEY HAVE ONE LESS GUN ON THEM, AND -- AND

THAT'S -- THAT'S A GOOD THING.

MR. SCHMITT: SO, THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI AND

THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN LAW SCHOOL HAVE ARGUED THAT, BUT YOU

DON'T HAVE AT THIS CURRENT TIME ANY RESEARCH THAT COUNTERACTS THAT OTHER

THAN WHAT YOU'VE STATED ALREADY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I HAVE WHAT I SAID. THERE ARE

PLENTY OF EXPERTS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT WHO BELIEVE IN SUCH PROGRAMS

AND THAT'S WHY THERE ARE QUITE A FEW SUCH PROGRAMS ALREADY OCCURRING

IN THE STATE. SO, THIS -- THE GOAL OF THIS BILL IS TO HAVE UNIFORM

STANDARDS AROUND THE STATE AND THAT WILL HELP THE ONES THAT ARE

CURRENTLY TAKING PLACE AND IT WILL HELP SET MINIMUM STANDARDS, AND A

GOOD WAY TO SET THEM UP ACROSS THE STATE.

MR. SCHMITT: THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. ROSENTHAL: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. DIPIETRO: THANK YOU, MS. ROSENTHAL. LET'S

TRY THIS -- THERE'S A QUESTION. ARE THERE ANY SPECIFICS ON THE FIREARMS;

STOCKS, TRIGGERS, BARREL LENGTHS, CALIBER THAT CAN BE TURNED IN? OR IS IT --

OR DOES IT NOT SAY IT? OR IS IT BLANKET?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THERE -- THERE ARE DEFINITIONS IN

THE PENAL LAW. THIS PARTICULAR BILL WHICH WOULD BE IN THAT -- IN THAT

SECTION, WOULD BE GOVERNED BY THE DEFINITIONS ALREADY IN LAW.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. IS THE DOLLAR AMOUNT SET?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO, IT IS NOT.

MR. DIPIETRO: SO, A MUNICIPALITY CAN DO $500 FOR

EACH FIREARM?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, RIGHT NOW, A MUNICIPALITY

CAN DO WHATEVER IT WANTS. THE GOAL OF THIS IS TO UNIFY THE STANDARDS

THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. ARE ANY FIREARMS EXEMPTED?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NO.

MR. DIPIETRO: NO. HOW MANY CAN YOU TURN IN?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, AS I SAID EARLIER, THIS

HAS NOT BEEN WRITTEN YET. ONCE THIS BECOMES LAW, THEN WE WILL KNOW

ALL THE PARAMETERS. BUT THIS IS TO EMPOWER THE STATE POLICE TO WRITE

THESE REGULATIONS, WHICH WILL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE DIFFERENT

CIRCUMSTANCES AROUND THE STATE.

MR. DIPIETRO: IS EVERYTHING THE SAME AMOUNT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: AS I --

MR. DIPIETRO: WILL THERE BE SLIDING SCALES OF ANY

SORT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT WRITTEN IN

THIS BILL. AS I SAID, THIS IS UP TO THOSE WHO ARE WRITING THE STANDARDS.

MR. DIPIETRO: OKAY. THANK YOU, MS. ROSENTHAL.

ON THE BILL, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR.

DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: WE ALREADY HAVE THIS. ANY

MUNICIPALITY CAN PERFORM A GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM. WE CAN DO THIS

ALREADY. I ASK, WHY DO WE NEED THE STATE NOW TO COME IN AND, AGAIN,

BE THE MOTHER HEN OF THIS LEGISLATION? THIS IS WHAT WE DO. WHY DOES

THE STATE HAVE TO TAKE CONTROL? IT IS ALREADY THERE. IF A MUNICIPALITY

WANTS TO DO A GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM, THEY CAN. LAW ENFORCEMENT SAYS

THIS IS A JOKE. GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS DO NOT WORK. THERE IS NO

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OUT THERE IN THE COUNTRY THAT SAYS THESE WORK. ASK

CHICAGO HOW THEIR GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM WORKED A FEW YEARS AGO

WHEN THE WEEK AFTER THE BUYBACK PROGRAM HAD THE RECORD AMOUNT OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HOMICIDES. IT DIDN'T WORK. IT NEVER DOES.

WE'VE GOT THE LOCALS WHO ARE ABLE TO DO THIS. WE

HAVE NO ANSWERS TO WHAT GUNS, HOW MANY, WHO CAN DO IT. WE'RE JUST

LEAVING A BLANKET WHITE SHEET AND SAYING, STATE POLICE COME IN HERE

AND PUT THIS TOGETHER, BECAUSE UP IN THE LEGISLATURE WE DON'T KNOW

WHAT WE'RE DOING, BUT WE WANT YOU TO FIGURE IT OUT FOR US, EVEN THOUGH

THE LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES CAN DO IT ALREADY.

THERE WAS AN INDIVIDUAL IN A GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM

WHO -- I THINK IT WAS AROUND $250, DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT ONE, BUT

BOUGHT A NUMBER OF FIREARMS, OVER A DOZEN BRAND NEW AND BROUGHT

THEM -- FOR LIKE $99, BROUGHT THEM IN, HE GOT $250. HE SCAMMED THE

SYSTEM, AND MANY PEOPLE DO DO THAT. OR YOU -- LIKE A -- AN

ASSEMBLYMAN SAID BEFORE ME, THEY HAVE A BROOMSTICK WITH A KNIFE ON

IT AND THEY GET $200. THIS IS A -- THIS IS A JOKE. IT DOESN'T WORK. IT'S

JUST ANOTHER INFRINGEMENT ON OUR RIGHTS. I HEARD THE SPONSOR SAY THAT,

YOU KNOW, WE HAD THESE ACCIDENTS IN THE HOME AND WE WANT TO TAKE --

WHAT SHE SAID IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LEFT WANTS TO DO: TAKE THE FIREARMS

OUT OF THE HOMES, OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE WHO NEED TO PROTECT

THEIR FAMILIES. AND I UNDERSTAND IT. BUT WHAT IT IS, IS IF YOU'RE NOT FOR

GUN CONTROL, IT'S THAT YOU'RE NOT AGAINST GUNS. AND PEOPLE IN HERE NEED

TO UNDERSTAND THAT. THEY THINK, OH, WE WANT TO WORK -- WE WANT TO GET

RID OF THE FIREARMS, WE WANT TO STOP IT BECAUSE -- BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW

THE CRIMINALS WILL GIVE UP THEIR FIREARMS WHEN WE HAVE THESE GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAMS, THEY ARE SHAKING, AND THEY'RE LIKE, I'VE GOT TO GET

RID OF MY FIREARMS. EVERY TIME WE ENACT A STRICTER LAW, THE CRIMINALS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ARE SHAKING IN THEIR BOOTS, JUST RUNNING OUT OF THIS STATE BECAUSE THEY'RE

SO WORRIED.

BUT IF YOU'RE FOR GUN CONTROL, THEN YOU ARE NOT AGAINST

GUNS BECAUSE THE GUNS WILL BE NEEDED TO DISARM PEOPLE. SO IT'S NOT

THAT YOU'RE ANTI-GUN, YOU'LL NEEDED THE POLICE'S GUNS TO TAKE AWAY OTHER

PEOPLE'S GUNS. SO, YOU'RE VERY PRO-GUN, ACTUALLY, YOU JUST BELIEVE THAT

ONLY THE GOVERNMENT WHICH, OF COURSE, IS SO RELIABLE AND HONEST AND

MORAL AND VIRTUOUS, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE GUNS.

THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS GUN CONTROL, THERE IS ONLY CENTRALIZING GUN

OWNERSHIP IN THE HANDS OF A SMALL POLITICAL ELITE, AND THEY'RE MINIONS.

FOR THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE

AND I'LL ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO SAY NO TO THIS BILL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. FITZPATRICK.

MR. FITZPATRICK: HI, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD THE

SPONSOR KINDLY YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YES.

MR. FITZPATRICK: GREAT. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

HI, LINDA, JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THERE'S NOTHING

IN -- IN LAW PREVENTING ANY COMMUNITY, ANY MUNICIPALITY, COUNTY,

TOWN, VILLAGE FROM ESTABLISHING THEIR OWN GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM

TODAY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NOT.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. FITZPATRICK: NO. OKAY. SO WOULD THIS --

WOULD YOUR LEGISLATION SUPERCEDE ALL OF THESE GUN -- GUN BUYBACK

PROGRAMS AND ESTABLISH STATE RULES THAT EVERYONE MUST FOLLOW FROM THIS

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW --

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- POINT FORWARD, ASSUMING IT'S

SIGNED INTO LAW?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, I THINK THE -- THE --

THE PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERTS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL DECIDE. THE

PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERTS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL DECIDE HOW BEST TO SET

STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENT THIS KIND OF PROGRAM, AND I THINK WE SHOULD

TRUST THEM.

MR. FITZPATRICK: NO, I -- I DON'T DISAGREE WITH

YOU. I'M JUST ASKING, WILL -- WILL THE RULES THAT THESE PEOPLE WILL

PROMULGATE SUPERCEDE ALL --

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW --

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- LOCAL BUYBACK PROGRAMS?

WILL THERE NOW BE -- WHAT I'M ASKING IS, WILL -- WILL THERE NOW BE ONLY

ONE BUYBACK PROGRAM, SO-TO-SPEAK, WITH ONE SET OF RULES THAT ALL

MUNICIPALITIES WILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY --

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, THE--

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- THOSE THAT HAVE THEIR OWN

BUYBACK PROGRAMS TODAY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- THE OFFICE OF THE STATE POLICE

WILL SET STANDARDS AND AS LONG AS THE LOCALITY'S PROGRAM ABIDES BY THOSE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

STANDARDS, THEY CAN PROBABLY TAILOR IT TO THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES.

MR. FITZPATRICK: I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING

YOU, I'M SORRY.

JUST -- I THINK THE NEW -- I DON'T THINK IT'S --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CARRYING?

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- THE NOISE. I JUST THINK THE

MICROPHONES, MR. SPEAKER, ARE JUST NOT SENSITIVE ENOUGH TO -- I'M

HAVING DIFFICULTY HEARING --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO, FIRST, IT IS GOING TO

BE HARD. IF THE FOLKS ARE HAVING PROBLEMS, WE NEED TO BE QUIET SO THEY

CAN HEAR. PLEASE PROJECT INTO THE MIC.

MS. ROSENTHAL: AS LONG AS THE MUNICIPALITY'S

PROGRAM ABIDES BY THE STANDARDS SET BY THE EXPERTS OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT, I BELIEVE THAT SHOULD BE FINE. THEY'RE SETTING MINIMUM

STANDARDS. THEY ARE NOT SAYING, YOU KNOW, WORD-FOR-WORD HOW THE

PROGRAM HAS TO RUN.

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, THAT -- I MEAN, THE

EXPERTS RIGHT NOW ARE RUNNING THOSE PROGRAMS IN EACH MUNICIPALITY,

THE CITY OF NEW YORK --

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, THAT'S NOT TRUE.

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- SUFFOLK AND NASSAU -- BUT LET

ME FINISH. THE -- THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS ARE RUNNING THESE PROGRAMS

NOW. SO, WHAT I'M ASKING IS, IF -- IF YOUR LEGISLATION BECOMES LAW, WILL

-- WILL -- WHO IS GOING TO -- WILL THE LAWS -- I'M SORRY, EXCUSE ME. WILL

THE RULES PROMULGATED BY THE STATE POLICE SUPERCEDE THE RULES THAT ARE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

RUNNING THE -- THE PROGRAMS IN THE CITIES AND COUNTIES OF THE STATE

TODAY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NOW, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDS SET BY THE DIVISION OF STATE POLICE.

MR. FITZPATRICK: SO, YOU -- YOU'RE GOING TO

REQUIRE THAT SUFFOLK COUNTY, NASSAU, CITY OF NEW YORK, ERIE, ET

CETERA, ABIDE BY THESE NEW RULES? ARE YOU SETTING THE REQUIREMENT THAT

ALL OF THE MUNICIPALITIES WILL NOW ABIDE BY THESE NEW RULES?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE WILL BE

ROOM TO TAILOR PROGRAMS TO THE MUNICIPALITIES' NEEDS.

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, IT'S A GUN BUYBACK

PROGRAM, IT'S A -- YOU KNOW --

MS. ROSENTHAL: IT IS AND IT'S ALSO A PROGRAM --

MR. FITZPATRICK: I -- I DON'T SEE THE NEED BEING

DIFFERENT --

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- WHERE -- WHERE THERE WILL BE

FUNDING, HOPEFULLY, SO THAT MUNICIPALITIES CAN ACTUALLY GET SOME MONEY

BACK FOR THEMSELVES, INSTEAD OF THEM LAYING OUT THE CASH, AS THEY'VE

DONE IN THE PAST.

MR. FITZPATRICK: FOR THE -- THE MONEY STILL

COMES FROM THE SAME TAXPAYER, BUT THE -- SO, I'M A LITTLE -- I'M FINDING

THIS A LITTLE CONFUSING, THAT, YOU -- YOU'RE SAYING THE EXPERTS ARE GOING

TO SET THE RULES. RIGHT NOW, THE EXPERTS ALREADY SET THE RULES IN --

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?

MR. FITZPATRICK: I'M SORRY?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. ROSENTHAL: HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, THE SUFFOLK COUNTY

POLICE OR YOU'RE -- YOU'RE --

MS. ROSENTHAL: BUT THERE ARE ALSO PROGRAMS THAT

POP UP ACROSS THE STATE THAT PERHAPS ARE NOT AS CAREFULLY PLANNED OUT AS

THOSE BY THE OFFICES YOU MENTIONED.

MR. FITZPATRICK: YEAH, WELL --

MS. ROSENTHAL: AND THIS WILL HAVE --

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF

THAT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- GUIDELINES FOR SAFE STORAGE AND

DISPOSAL. WE DON'T KNOW THAT THE PROGRAMS THAT POP UP ARE ACTUALLY

SAFELY ADMINISTERED TO THE DEGREE THAT THE DIVISION OF STATE POLICE

WOULD PRESCRIBE.

MR. FITZPATRICK: DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF

THAT?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I HAVE HEARD... OF INCID --

ACCIDENTS, INCIDENTS AND PROGRAMS THAT POP UP THAT ARE WELL MEANING,

BUT PERHAPS NEED TO FOLLOW REGULATIONS BETTER.

MR. FITZPATRICK: AND ARE -- AND ARE THOSE

PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN THE SPECIFIC COUNTIES?

MS. ROSENTHAL: NOT AS FAR AS I KNOW.

MR. FITZPATRICK: OR -- OR TOWNS?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THERE ARE SOME THAT DO NOT

FOLLOW THE BEST GUIDELINES. AND THE GOAL HERE IS TO SET THE SAFEST

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

GUIDELINES FOR THESE KINDS OF PROGRAMS. I'D LIKE TO ALSO SAY THAT AS WE

DEBATE THIS BILL, 45 MINUTES AWAY FROM HERE, A SCHOOL IS ON LOCKDOWN

BECAUSE OF A -- A GUN INCIDENT. SO, IT'S VERY -- IT'S GERMANE THAT WE'RE

TRYING TO GET RID OF GUNS FROM PEOPLE'S HANDS WHEN THEY ARE NOT LAW

ENFORCEMENT AND WHEN THEY DON'T NEED THEM.

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, I THINK THE -- THE POLICE

WILL TELL YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BAD GUYS AREN'T GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN

THIS PROGRAM, SO THAT -- BUT THAT'S -- THAT'S NOT PERTINENT TO THE -- TO THE

DISCUSSION HERE. WHAT'S PERTINENT IS, WILL -- SO, WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME

I THINK IS, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF PROGRAMS THAT ARE

NOT RUNNING WELL. BUT, IN COUNTIES OR MUNICIPALITIES THAT ARE -- THAT DO

HAVE GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS, IT IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT IS RUNNING

THAT PROGRAM, AND THEY, THEREFORE, ARE EXPERTS IN HOW TO TAKE GUNS --

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, THEN, I'M SURE THEY WILL --

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- OR ACCEPT A FIREARM --

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- CONSENT WITH THE STATE POLICE

ON THIS.

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- I'M SORRY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THEN I'M SURE THEY WILL PUT IN

THEIR -- THEIR ADVICE TO THE STATE POLICE AS THEY WRITE THESE REGULATIONS.

THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO FORCE ANYTHING ON A MUNICIPALITY.

MR. FITZPATRICK: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

MS. ROSENTHAL: IT'S A WAY TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO

DO IT THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE, THE SAFEST WAY POSSIBLE WITH GUIDELINES AND

STANDARDS THAT ARE THE SAME THROUGHOUT THE STATE. I DON'T SEE WHAT THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BIG DEAL ABOUT THAT IS.

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, I THINK THE STATE POLICE

WILL PROBABLY CALL UP COUNTIES THAT ARE ALREADY -- THAT ALREADY HAVE GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAMS AND SAY, WELL, HOW ARE YOU DOING IT --

MS. ROSENTHAL: OKAY, THAT --

MR. FITZPATRICK: -- WE'LL USE YOUR BEST

PRACTICES, POTENTIALLY.

MS. ROSENTHAL: AND YOU KNOW WHAT, IN PLACES

THAT HAVE NEVER HELD BUYBACKS --

MR. FITZPATRICK: RIGHT.

MS. ROSENTHAL: -- OR DON'T HAVE AN ESTABLISHED

PROGRAM, WILL BE GUIDED IN THE BEST PRACTICES BECAUSE OF THIS -- THIS

BILL.

MR. FITZPATRICK: I SEE. OKAY. WELL, LINDA,

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THANK YOU.

MR. FITZPATRICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. ON

THE BILL, I JUST --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR.

FITZPATRICK.

MR. FITZPATRICK: I -- I'M WONDERING IF THIS IS

REALLY NECESSARY BECAUSE IF A COUNTY WANTS TO INITIATE A -- A GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAM, THEY CAN CALL UP NEW YORK CITY, THEY CAN CALL UP

THE STATE POLICE NOW, THEY CAN CALL UP ANY OTHER COUNTY THAT HAS A GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAM. I QUESTION THE NECESSITY OF THIS BECAUSE WE'VE --

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WE'VE -- I HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY EXAMPLES OF A GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM

THAT DOESN'T WORK. THEY'RE PRETTY SIMPLE: SOMEBODY BRINGS IN AN

OPERABLE FIREARM, THEY GET $200 BACK. IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE TRANSACTION.

SO, I JUST -- I THINK IF THERE WERE SOME CONCRETE

EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMS THAT THE SPONSOR IS NOT ABLE TO SHARE WITH US, YOU

MIGHT HAVE A POINT. THERE'S -- I DON'T THINK THERE'S A NEED FOR THIS,

QUITE FRANKLY, BECAUSE A MUNICIPALITY CAN ALREADY ESTABLISH ITS OWN GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAM. AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS ALREADY SHARE

INFORMATION AMONG THEMSELVES, ALREADY THEY SHARE INFORMATION WITH

THE STATE POLICE. SO, I THINK -- REALLY, I -- I DON'T THINK A STRONG CASE IS

BEING MADE TODAY BY THE SPONSOR TO CREATE THIS -- TO CREATE THIS

PROGRAM WITH THE STATE POLICE. THE STATE POLICE IS ALREADY AT THE

DISPOSAL OF EVERY POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO ASSIST

WITH THIS. THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. IT'S NOT A DIFFICULT PROGRAM TO

IMPLEMENT.

SO, ON THAT -- ON THAT BASIS, I'M GOING TO OPPOSE THIS

LEGISLATION, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK A STRONG CASE HAS BEEN MADE TO CREATE

THIS PROGRAM THAT ALREADY IS ABLE TO EXIST IN EVERY MUNICIPALITY IN THE

STATE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

ROSENTHAL?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. ROSENTHAL: I'D BE HAPPY TO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. ROSENTHAL YIELDS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MS. ROSENTHAL. I NOTE

ON YOUR BILL ON PAGE 2 STARTING ON LINE 14 THROUGH 16, YOU STATE THAT THE

PROVISIONS OF SUBPARAGRAPH (F) OF PARAGRAPH 1 OF SUBDIVISION (A) OF

SECTION 265.20 THE PENAL LAW SHALL APPLY. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT

THOSE PROVISIONS PROVIDE FOR?

MS. ROSENTHAL: THIS SECTION CONCERNS CERTAIN

PROVISIONS OF IMMUNITY IF YOU ARE PUTTING -- IF YOU ARE SURRENDERING A

FIREARM.

MR. GOODELL: AND SO, WHAT ARE -- WHAT IS THE

NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE IMMUNITY IF YOU'RE VOLUNTARILY BRINGING IN A

FIREARM FOR A MUNICIPAL BUYBACK PROGRAM, WHAT IS THE NATURE AND

EXTENT OF THAT IMMUNITY?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, I'D HAVE TO READ THE EXACT

WORDS OF THE SECTION, BUT IT IS YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ARRESTED FOR

POSSESSION OF THAT FIREARM.

MR. GOODELL: AND AS PART OF THIS PROGRAM, DO THE

POLICE CHECK THE SERIAL NUMBERS AND MAKE A RECORD OF WHO BRINGS IN

WHICH WEAPON?

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT

WOULD BE ESTABLISHED IN -- IN THE PROGRAM. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT HERE

SPECIFICALLY.

MR. GOODELL: AND WOULD YOU ENVISION, THOUGH,

THAT THEY WOULD KEEP TRACK OF WHO BRINGS IN WHICH WEAPON AND WHO'S

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PAID WHAT AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THE GUN?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I MEAN, IT'S NOT -- IT'S NOT

SPECIFIED HERE. I THINK MOSTLY THESE ARE DONE ANONYMOUSLY AND -- AND

THAT'S PART OF THE -- THE GOAL, IS TO GET PEOPLE AND NOT TRAP THEM, BUT JUST

GET THE GUNS BACK.

MR. GOODELL: SO IF YOU ARE IN POSSESSION OF A

GUN THAT YOU KNOW WAS USED IN A VIOLENT CRIME, YOU WOULD BRING IT IN

UNDER THIS MUNICIPAL BUYBACK PROGRAM, YOU'D BE GUARANTEED

ANONYMITY. YOU COULD TURN IN THE GUN AND THEREBY DISPOSE OF THE

WEAPON THAT WAS USED IN THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME WITHOUT ANY

SANCTION?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, I -- I HIGHLY -- HIGHLY

DOUBT THAT A CIRCUMSTANCE LIKE THAT WOULD ARISE. UMM, I'D HAVE TO

CHECK IF -- IF IT HAS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE SOMEONE WOULD PUT THEMSELVES IN

DANGER BY HAVING POSSESSION OF THAT GUN AND TURNING IT IN. I WOULD -- I

WOULD THINK PEOPLE WOULDN'T DO THAT.

MR. GOODELL: WELL, LET'S TAKE ANOTHER MORE

COMMON SITUATION. PERHAPS A PERSON HAS A GUN THAT THEY'RE NOT LEGALLY

AUTHORIZED TO OWN. OR MAYBE IT WAS A GUN THAT WAS IN AN ESTATE, FOR

EXAMPLE, AND YOU DIDN'T REALIZE IT. NOW, YOU HAVE THIS GUN, YOU'RE NOT

A LICENSED PISTOL HOLDER; WOULD THIS SECTION ALLOW YOU TO BRING THAT GUN

IN AND TURN IT IN?

MS. ROSENTHAL: I WOULD THINK SO, YEAH.

MR. GOODELL: AND WOULD THEY KEEP TRACK OF ALL

THE ILLEGAL GUNS THAT ARE COMING IN --

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. ROSENTHAL: WELL, I'M SURE THEY --

MR. GOODELL: -- AND WHO'S BRINGING IN?

MS. ROSENTHAL: YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THEY KEEP

TRACK OF -- OF THE GUNS, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S TIED TO THE PERSON WHO

BROUGHT IT IN. I MEAN, IT'S -- IT'S A -- YOU DON'T -- YOU DON'T GIVE YOUR

SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER AND YOUR INFORMATION WHEN YOU TURN IN THE

GUN. IT'S AN ANONYMOUS PROGRAM.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS.

ROSENTHAL.

ON THE BILL, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL.

MR. GOODELL: SO, AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE

MENTIONED, THIS BILL IS -- THERE'S NO NEED FOR THE BILL BECAUSE

MUNICIPALITIES CAN ALREADY DO IT. AS THE SPONSOR ACKNOWLEDGED,

THERE'S NO FUNDS. AS ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES POINTED OUT, THERE ARE

NUMEROUS STUDIES THAT SHOW IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE

STANDARDS ARE, SO THERE'S NO STANDARDS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING,

AND THERE'S A CONCERN THAT THE STANDARDS MAY BE LESS STRINGENT THAN THE

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS', OR MORE STRINGENT AND, EITHER WAY, IT'S A

ONE-SIZE-FIT-ALL APPROACH.

AND WE'VE NOW BEEN TOLD THAT A PERSON CAN BRING IN A

GUN ANONYMOUSLY WITHOUT ANY TRACKING OF WHO BRINGS IT IN, WHICH

MEANS IF YOU'RE A CRIMINAL, YOU CAN GET RID OF A GUN THAT WAS USED IN A

CRIME. WHAT BETTER WAY THAN TO TURN IT INTO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT

RATHER THAN THROW IT IN THE BOTTOM OF A CREEK OR IN A POND, RIGHT? HOW

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

-- HOW IRONIC IS THAT?

SO, WE HAVE A BILL THAT HAS NO NEED, NO FUNDS, NO

EFFECTIVENESS, NO STANDARDS AND PROVIDES A WAY FOR CRIMINALS TO GET RID

OF GUNS. MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE BEST WAY FOR US TO GO IN THIS

ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER. AND, AGAIN, THANK

YOU TO MY COLLEAGUE FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BLAKE.

MR. BLAKE: ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. BLAKE: JAHEEM HUNTER WAS A FIVE-YEAR-OLD

AND IS A FIVE-YEAR-OLD, AND NOW SIX-YEAR-OLD YOUNG MAN IN OUR DISTRICT,

WHO, ON HIS BIRTHDAY WHILE WALKING OUTSIDE OF HIS HOUSE, WAS STRUCK

BY A STRAY BULLET, HAD TO FIGHT FOR HIS LIFE, FORTUNATELY OVERCAME THE

ODDS AND IS STILL WITH US TODAY. LLOYD MORGAN, AT THE TIME, WAS A

FOUR-YEAR-OLD YOUNG BOY IN ONE OF THE PROJECTS WITHIN OUR DISTRICT,

PLAYING BASKETBALL, STRUCK BY A BULLET.

THE REASON WHY -- AND I FIRST AND FOREMOST THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. THE RATIONALE BEING ARTICULATED ON

THE OTHER SIDE IS THAT WE DOESN'T NEED THIS BECAUSE YOU CAN DO THIS IN

OTHER PLACES IS FAULTY FOR SO MANY REASONS. NUMBER ONE, YOU HAVE TO

CREATE STATEWIDE STANDARDS TO GIVE US A CHANCE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S

OCCURRING ACROSS THE STATE. PRESUMING THAT JUST BECAUSE ONE

MUNICIPALITY IS DOING IN ANOTHER WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING

DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE IN ANY ASPECT. NUMBER TWO, THE EXACT

REASON WHY WE NEED TO HAVE THESE KINDS OF STANDARDS IS THE EXACT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

REASON WHY WE DID THE EMPIRE STATE POVERTY REDUCTION INITIATIVE, OR

THE MY BROTHER'S KEEPER PROGRAM, OR FOR RAISE THE AGE, BECAUSE WE

CONSISTENTLY SAW ACROSS THE BOARD WHEN IT CAME TO CHALLENGES

HAPPENING, THERE WAS NOT A STATEWIDE PREMISE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE -- THE YOUNG

MAN WITHIN OUR DISTRICT WHO WENT FROM OUR DISTRICT UP TO SCHENECTADY,

AND THEN THEY REALIZED --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL, WHY DO

YOU RISE?

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPEAKER BE WILLING TO YIELD?

MR. BLAKE: RESPECTFULLY, I WILL NOT, MR. GOODELL.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BLAKE DOES NOT

YIELD.

MR. BLAKE: WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF

THIS, IT'S BECAUSE YOU CAN GO FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER AND LITERALLY

LOSE YOUR LIFE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND SET STANDARDS

ACROSS THE STATE. AND SO FOR THIS EXACT PURPOSE AND REASON, THAT'S WHY

YOU NEED THIS LEGISLATION.

LASTLY, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THAT THERE'S NO

EFFECTIVENESS AND THERE'S NO RATIONALE AROUND THIS, AND THERE'S NO DATA,

AGAIN, THAT IS JUST FACTUALLY INACCURATE. YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING

IN BOSTON, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN BALTIMORE,

THERE'S CLEARLY A DEMONSTRATION THAT AT SCALE, IT DOES WORK. SO, AT THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

END OF THE DAY WE SHOULD BE HERE TO SAVE LIVES, AND THIS WILL DO THIS.

THIS WILL HELP PEOPLE. IT WILL CREATE THE STANDARDS, IT'LL MAKE IT MUCH

MORE EFFECTIVE ACROSS OUR STATE. AND WHEN WE THINK ABOUT WHY WE'RE

HERE, THAT IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.

SO, I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE SPONSOR, I'M GRATEFUL FOR THIS

LEGISLATION, AND ABSOLUTELY WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. RYAN.

MR. RYAN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANTED TO --

ON THE BILL. I WANTED TO ADDRESS THE -- JUST THE ISSUE OF -- OF THE

RATIONALE OF THIS LEGISLATION. SO, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT

DATA. HERE IS ONE PIECE OF DATA THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IRREFUTABLE. THERE'S A

CORRELATION BETWEEN GUN OWNERSHIP AND GUN INJURY OR GUN DEATH. IF

YOU OWN A GUN, YOU HAVE A HIGHER CHANCE OF BEING SHOT BY A GUN.

OFTEN THE WOUNDS ARE SELF-INFLICTED. WE HAVE BIG PROBLEMS WITH

SUICIDE BY GUN OWNERSHIP IN NEW YORK, IN AMERICA.

SO, ONE OF THE RATIONALES BEHIND GUN BUYBACK

PROGRAMS IS WE WANT TO GET THE GUNS OUT OF THE PEOPLE'S CLOSETS. YOU

KNOW, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE GUNS BECAUSE THEIR GRANDFATHER HAD A

GUN, AND THAT GUN WENT FROM SOMEONE'S CLOSET TO SOMEONE ELSE. THIS

GETS THE GUNS OUT OF THE CLOSETS, UNUSED GUNS.

SO WE'VE HAD A SERIES OF GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS IN THE

CITY OF BUFFALO, AND A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BRINGING GUNS IN ARE

GRANDMOTHERS. GRANDMOTHERS WHO HAVE HAD GUNS SITTING IN THEIR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

CLOSETS FOR A GENERATION. NOW, OF COURSE, THE GRANDMOTHER'S NOT GOING

OUT HUNTING, I'M TALKING MOSTLY LONG GUNS HERE, SO IT GIVES AN

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE SAFE DISPOSAL OF GUNS. THROUGHOUT THE '50S AND THE

'60S AND THE '70S, AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS MANUFACTURED HUNDREDS OF

THOUSANDS OF -- OF LOW-GRADE HUNTING SHOTGUNS AND RIFLES. IF YOU TAKE

THESE GUNS TO A SHOP AND SAY, YOU KNOW, CAN I SELL THIS TO YOU? THEY'RE

GOING TO SAY, NO, I REALLY DON'T WANT THAT. YOU KNOW, THINK OF A FORD

ESCORT. EVERYONE THINKS OF THESE GUNS IN CLOSETS AS SOME VALUABLE

COMMODITY. BUT MOST OF THE GUNS HANGING AROUND PEOPLE'S CLOSETS ARE

THE EQUIVALENT OF A FORD ESCORT, THEY'RE -- THEY'RE WORTH NOTHING, THERE'S

NO COLLECTING VALUE. SO, WHEN YOU TRY TO TAKE THEM BACK TO A GUN

SHOP, THEY DON'T WANT THEM, AND THEN THE GUN GOES BACK INTO THE CLOSET.

THE PERSON'S NOT -- WASN'T THE ORIGINAL GUN OWNER, THEY DON'T KNOW

ABOUT GUN STORAGE, THEY DON'T KNOW ABOUT GUN SAFETY, THEN THAT IS THE

GUN THAT ENDS UP, SOMEONE'S GRANDSON COMES OVER AND INADVERTENTLY

SHOOTS A NEIGHBOR KID.

SO, GUN BUYBACKS HELP DRAG DOWN ACCIDENTAL

SHOOTINGS, THEY HELP REDUCE SUICIDES BECAUSE IT BREAKS THE CORRELATION

THAT WE KNOW THAT IS IF YOU OWN A GUN, YOU ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE SHOT

BY A GUN. SO, GETTING THOSE GUNS, THOSE UNUSED GUNS OUT OF PEOPLE'S

CLOSETS INTO SAFE DISPOSAL SITES IS A TREMENDOUS RATIONALE BEHIND GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAMS. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE NATIONAL ADVOCATES ON THIS

ISSUE, THEY HAVE THE -- THE BEST PRACTICES FOR GUN BUYBACKS. SO, I'M

HOPING THAT THE STATE POLICE INTERACTS WITH THOSE GROUPS TO COME UP

WITH THE BEST PROGRAMS. THE PROGRAMS IN BUFFALO HAVE CHANGED OVER

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE YEARS. THEY -- YOU KNOW, THEY DIFFERENTIATED BETWEEN DIFFERENT

TYPES OF GUNS, BUT IT TOOK THEM A FEW TIMES TO GET THERE. SO, IF THERE'S A

BEST PRACTICES ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE, THEY CAN BE IMPLEMENTED IN

COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

SO, I APPLAUD THE SPONSOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL

FORWARD. THERE'S A LOT OF RATIONALE BEHIND THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,

MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

(PAUSE)

READ THE LAST SECTION.

WE'LL RESCIND THAT.

ON A MOTION BY MS. ROSENTHAL, THE SENATE BILL IS

BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED. READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 180TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. SAYEGH TO EXPLAIN VOTE.

MR. SAYEGH: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH

FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. TODAY IS A HISTORIC DAY FOR THE PEOPLE OF NEW

YORK STATE. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE SPEAKER, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK FORMER

ASSEMBLYWOMAN, SENATOR SHELLEY MAYER, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK ALL THE

SUPPORTERS THAT RECOGNIZE THE URGENCY OF PUTTING A STOP TO GUN

VIOLENCE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BEING FROM THE 90TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT, WHICH IS IN

THE CITY OF YONKERS, WE IN THE CITY OF YONKERS HAD A VERY, VERY TRAGIC

LOSS NEARLY TWO YEARS AGO. A YOUNG MAN WHO WAS DRAFTED BY THE

OAKLAND A'S, SIX FOOT EIGHT - YOU WOULD BE PROUD OF THIS YOUNG MAN,

MICHAEL NOLAN - WHO WAS SHOT AND KILLED WITH AN ILLEGAL GUN. AND

WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF HIS FAMILY THAT ARE HERE TODAY, JIMMY NOLAN, HIS

MOTHER, DONNA, HIS BROTHERS, THEY WANTED IN THE CITY OF YONKERS TO

RECOGNIZE THE URGENCY OF PUTTING A STOP TO ILLEGAL GUNS. AND WITH THEIR

EFFORTS AND THE EFFORTS OF SENATOR SHELLEY MAYER AND MANY OTHERS, WE

IN THE CITY OF YONKERS ESTABLISHED A GUN BACK -- BUYBACK PROGRAM THAT

IN OUR CONSULTATIONS WITH THE POLICE COMMISSIONER AND THE CITY

ADMINISTRATION SHOWS AND PROVES THAT THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN NOT ONLY

WORTHY, BUT THE PROGRAM HAS DECREASED CRIME IN THE CITY OF YONKERS.

WE HAVE TWO WAYS OF LOOKING AT IT. FROM MY END, I

LOOK AT THE MEMORY OF A YOUNG MAN WHO DEDICATED HIS LIFE TO

SCHOLASTIC SPORTS AND WHO HAD A PROMISING FUTURE AND CAREER,

ESPECIALLY AS A PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL PITCHER, AND HE LOST HIS LIFE DUE TO

ILLEGAL GUNS. AND TODAY IS HISTORIC BECAUSE WE LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OTHER FIELDS -- AS AN EDUCATOR, IF I HAVE A SCHOOL

PRINCIPAL OR A SCHOOL THAT DOES A GREAT JOB IN ONE SCHOOL, THERE'S NO

REASON TO KEEP THAT BEST PRACTICE AWAY FROM OTHER SCHOOLS TO ASSURE

THAT ALL CHILDREN GET THAT SAME BENEFIT.

TODAY, YES, MANY OF US SAY, WELL, IF CERTAIN

MUNICIPALITIES HAVE IT, LET IT BE, AND WHY SHOULD WE HAVE IT ACROSS THE

STATE? AND I SAY, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THE REST OF THE STATE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THAT THERE'S AN EXCELLENT MODEL, AND MUCH OF THIS PROGRAM AND THIS

PROPOSAL IS MODELED ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF YONKERS PROGRAM THAT WE

FEEL IS EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL AND BENEFICIAL. SO, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES

TO RECOGNIZE HOW WE NEED TO STICK TOGETHER TO STOP CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, TO

SAVE LIVES, AND MAKE SURE THAT BEST PRACTICES, YES, IN KEEPING GUNS OUT

OF OUR STREETS AND OUT OF OUR HOMES WHEN NECESSARY ARE APPLICABLE

ACROSS THE STATE. SO, MR. SPEAKER, I WILL VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SAYEGH IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. DIPIETRO.

MR. DIPIETRO: THANK YOU, SIR. TO EXPLAIN MY

VOTE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE,

SIR.

MR. DIPIETRO: YEAH, WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT

PEOPLE GETTING SHOT AND WE'RE -- AS -- THOSE ARE TRAGIC INCIDENCES, BUT A

GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM DOES NOT STOP ANYONE FROM GETTING SHOT. THAT'S

A MISNOMER. THERE'S NO -- NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. AS A MATTER OF FACT,

GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN PROVEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN TO BE

INEFFECTIVE AT STOPPING VIOLENCE AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. AND ESPECIALLY

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, AND SOMEONE JUST MENTIONED ILLEGAL GUNS, THIS BILL

-- THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ILLEGAL GUNS. IF YOU WANT ILLEGAL

GUNS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHECK THEM AT THE GUN BUYBACK, AND

UNDER THIS BILL, THERE IS GOING TO BE, SUPPOSEDLY, NO LOOKBACK ON THE

GUN OR THE PERSON PUTTING THE GUN INTO THE BUYBACK PROGRAM. SO, THAT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

JUST FLIES IN THE FACE OF ADVERSITY, IT FLIES IN THE FACE OF COMMON SENSE.

WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT? YOU WOULD WANT EVERY GUN CHECKED IF IT'S

BROUGHT INTO THE BUYBACK. AND THIS DOESN'T DO IT.

WE'VE SEEN THAT THERE'S -- THERE -- THERE IS NO -- THERE'S

NO MAP TO WHERE THIS IS GOING TO GO. THERE'S -- WE'VE ALREADY -- WE

ALREADY DO IT ALL OVER THE STATE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW WE'RE SAYING

THAT MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR YEARS, THAT IF YOUR

MUNICIPALITY DOESN'T DO IT, WHAT DO YOU DO? YOU GO TO THE

MUNICIPALITY THAT DOES. I'D GO TO THE CITY OF BUFFALO FROM MY LITTLE

HOMETOWN AND THEY WOULD ASK HOW YOU DO IT, AND YOU WOULD FIND OUT

HOW TO DO IT, AND HOW THEY BEST DO IT. BUT THIS IS SAY -- THIS BILL SAYS

THAT NO ONE KNOWS HOW TO DO IT EVER. WE NEED THE STATE TO REALLY MAKE

THIS THING WORK. AND IT JUST DOESN'T WORK.

AND AS WE'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE ON THIS FLOOR, IT'S

ABOUT TAKING GUNS OUT OF THE HOMES, I'VE HEARD IT MANY TIMES IN THIS

DEBATE, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. THIS IS ABOUT GUN CONFISCATION,

ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DO NOT LIKE THE SECOND AMENDMENT, WHO DO NOT LIKE

FIREARMS, AND ARE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO PUSH FURTHER

RESTRICTIONS ON GUNS AND ON FIREARMS TO TAKE THEM OUT OF LEGAL,

LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS. THAT IS WHY I VOTE NO. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. RICHARDSON.

MS. RICHARDSON: MR. SPEAKER, I RISE IN SUPPORT

OF THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHERE WE WILL ESTABLISH A MUNICIPAL GUN

BUYBACK PROGRAM, AND AS WELL AS ESTABLISHING A FUND. UNFORTUNATELY,

SOMETIMES IN THIS CHAMBER WE ARE PRIVY TO FEARMONGERING, AND THAT IS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

NOT WHAT THIS BILL'S INTENT IS.

IN THE COUNTY OF KINGS, I WANT TO COMMEND OUR

DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ERIC GONZALEZ, AS WELL THE LATE GREAT KEN

THOMPSON, FOR HAVING A GUN BUY PROG -- EXCUSE ME, A GUN BUYBACK

PROGRAM IN OUR COUNTY, WHERE OFTEN AT TIMES IN ONE -- IN ONE SESSION,

THEY'RE ABLE TO RECOVER OVER 50, 60, 70 FIREARMS AND PROVIDING PUBLIC

SAFETY TO OUR RESIDENTS IN THE COUNTY. AND WITH DOING THIS, THE DISTRICT

ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS BEEN USING THEIR OWN PERSONAL BUDGET TO DO THIS

PROGRAM. SO THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION WILL FURTHER AID IN THAT. AND I

WANT TO JUST, AGAIN, COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

WITH THAT, I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. PICHARDO.

MR. PICHARDO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

JUST VERY QUICKLY, A FEW MONTHS AGO, AFTER A LOT OF

PESTERING, I WANT TO THANK THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BRONX COUNTY,

DARCEL CLARK, IN PARTNERING WITH MY OFFICE AND PARTICIPATING AND

SPONSORING A GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM. AND WE WERE ABLE TO HOLD TWO

EVENTS, ONE IN MY DISTRICT AND ONE JUST OUTSIDE OF MY DISTRICT, AND IN

THAT INSTANCE, WE WERE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO TAKE OFF THE STREETS ABOUT 30

GUNS. ROUGHLY, 30, 31 GUNS.

NOW, HERE'S THE THING. THE -- THE STATISTICS HAVE BEEN

SHOWN TO PROVE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE GUN CRIMES THAT ARE COMMITTED

WITHIN THE STATES ARE PURCHASED WITH FIREARMS THAT ARE PURCHASED

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OUTSIDE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. THERE WAS A STUDY IN 2011 THAT

ABOUT 355 GUNS WERE PURCHASED IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA AND MADE THEIR

WAY UP HERE THROUGH THE I-95, AND OUR COUNTIES AND OUR COMMUNITIES

WERE SATURATED WITH FIREARMS THAT PEOPLE DID NOT WANT AND WERE USED

IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME. WHAT THESE GUN BUYBACK PROGRAMS

CREATE IS AN AVENUE FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO FIND THESE FIREARMS IN THEIR

HOME, TO GET RID OF THEM AND TO GET SOMETHING OUT OF IT.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT I CAN SAY, PEOPLE CAN --

CAN POINT TO THE FACT THAT MAYBE GUN BUYBACKS DON'T STOP GUNS BEING

USED IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME, BUT WHAT IT DOES DO, IS THAT GUN THAT

IS TAKEN OFF THE STREETS WILL NEVER BE USED IN THE COMMISSION OF A

CRIME. SO, THEREFORE, ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE,

PARTICULARLY IN MY DISTRICT, I WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT. AND THIS -- THIS

EVENT WAS SUCCESSFUL, AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN ABLE TO REPLICATE THIS

ACROSS THE STATE. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO THANK

THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. TAYLOR.

MR. TAYLOR: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU. I RISE TO

ALSO SHARE MY REASON FOR VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THIS BILL. IN THE

COMMUNITY IN WHICH I SERVE, IN ONE PARTICULAR ORDER THERE WERE 30

HOMICIDES -- I'M SORRY, FOUR HOMICIDES IN A 30-DAY PERIOD. AND THAT

HAPPENED BECAUSE FOLKS HAD ACCESS TO GUNS. AND THESE ARE YOUNG

PEOPLE. AND IN OUR COMMUNITY, I THINK CY VANCE AND A FEW OTHERS,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

CLERGY, THAT HAVE GOTTEN TOGETHER AND ACTUALLY HAD BUYBACKS. SO, IT'S

NOT NECESSARILY AN AFFRONT TO THE FIRST -- SECOND AMENDMENT, BUT IT'S

HOW DO YOU TAKE GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS OF YOUNG PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT

RESPONSIBLE, THAT THERE IS A HISTORY OF GUNS COMING ACROSS BORDERS

WHERE THEY'RE ABLE TO ACCESS THEM EASILY, AND THEN THEY TURN OUT IN THE

COMMISSION OF CRIMES.

SO, I STAND TO SUPPORT MY COLLEAGUE ON THIS PIECE OF

LEGISLATION. AND, AGAIN, THE IDEA IS TO TAKE THE GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS OF

PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT INFORMED AND NOT GOING TO USE THEM FOR THE RIGHT

PURPOSE. BUT ALSO, I THINK IT'S A HOLISTIC APPROACH. IT'S NOT JUST WE WANT

TO TAKE A GUN OUT OF SOMEONE'S HAND - I HEAR THE NOISE AROUND ME, I'M

SORRY, SO I SHOUT A LITTLE BIT LOUDER - BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY IT'S NOT

JUST WE WANT TO MOVE GUNS, BUT WE WANT TO TALK COMMUNITY, WE WANT

TO TALK RELATIONS AND EVERYBODY IS BUYING IN, SO THAT IT'S A HOLISTIC

APPROACH. SO, YOU EDUCATE PEOPLE ON WHY IT'S NOT GOOD, YOU EDUCATE

PEOPLE ON WHY GUNS ARE NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE AS A

YOUNG PERSON. AND WHEN YOU ARE MINISTERING TO FAMILIES THAT HAVE

LOST THEIR LOVED ONES IN THE STREETS, THE LAST THING THEY WANT TO HEAR

ABOUT IS, WE NEED TO LEAVE THE GUNS THERE. NO, WE NEED TO DO

EVERYTHING WE CAN IN OUR COMMUNITIES, SUCH AS HARLEM, THE HEIGHTS,

THE SOUTH BRONX AND PLACES LIKE THAT, IN BROOKLYN, IN THE CITY, TO TAKE

THESE GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO GET

THEM.

SO, IT'S REAL, IT'S NOT THAT WE WANT TO TAKE SOMETHING

FROM SOMEONE, BUT COLLECTIVELY, IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK COMMUNITY AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THERE ARE 20 MILLION OF US IN THIS STATE, WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT

DIFFERENT THINGS HAPPEN IN DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES AND THE COMMUNITY I

COME FROM. I STAND IN THE AFFIRM WITH MY COLLEAGUE FOR INTRODUCING

THIS LEGISLATION THAT WE DON'T GET -- WE GET THEM OFF THE STREETS. THANK

YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. FAHY.

MS. FAHY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I, TOO, RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. AND I WANT TO START BY COMMENDING THE SPONSOR OF

THIS LEGISLATION. THIS REALLY IS ABOUT PREVENTION, ALONG WITH THE SERIES

OF BILLS THAT ARE BEING OFFERED TODAY. SO MUCH OF THIS IS ABOUT

PREVENTION, AND WE KNOW THAT PREVENTION WORKS. ONE OF THE -- WHAT I

THINK IS MOST -- ONE OF THE MOST COMPELLING STATISTICS IN TRACKING GUN

VIOLENCE AND GUN SAFETY IN THIS COUNTRY IS THE FACT THAT WE KNOW THAT

STATES THAT HAVE THE TOUGHEST GUN LAWS, GUN SAFETY LAWS ON THE BOOKS,

ARE ALSO THE SAME STATES THAT HAVE THE LOWEST RATES OF GUN VIOLENCE. SO,

THERE IS A DIRECT INVERSE CORRELATION. NEW YORK HAPPENS TO HAVE THE

THIRD LOWEST GUN -- THIRD LOWEST RATE OF GUN VIOLENCE IN THIS COUNTRY,

AND THAT IS NOT AN ACCIDENT. HOWEVER, WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY

IN TERMS OF THE -- THE GUN BUYBACK, IS ABOUT PREVENTING ACCIDENTS AND

OTHER PROBLEMS.

ONE OF THE OTHER MORE ALARMING PIECES THAT I THINK IS

-- IS HELPED BY THIS LEGISLATION IS THAT THE FACT THAT WE KNOW THAT WHEN

WE TAKE GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS OF DOMESTIC ABUSERS, WE ARE PROTECTING

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS BECAUSE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS ARE

STATISTICALLY FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY TO END UP DEAD IF THE ABUSER HAS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACCESS TO A GUN. SO, THE SAFER AND THE MORE GUNS WE GET OFF THE STREETS,

THE SAFER WE ARE IN, I THINK, IN OUR HOMES AND ON THOSE STREETS,

PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO CRIMES OF PASSION, PARTICULARLY WITH

PREVENTION. I THINK THAT THIS IS-- THIS IS ANOTHER STEP IN THE RIGHT

DIRECTION. HERE IN ALBANY THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF BUYBACK

PROGRAMS AND THEY'VE TAKEN HUNDREDS OF GUNS OFF THE STREETS, AND I

KNOW THAT THAT IS MAKING OUR STREETS SAFER. WITH THAT, I AGAIN

COMMEND THE SPONSORS AND VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MS. ROSENTHAL.

MS. ROSENTHAL: TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO

READ SOMETHING FROM THE FULTON COUNTY --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ONE MINUTE, MS.

ROSENTHAL. WE HAVE AN AWFUL LOT OF ACTIVITY AROUND THE SPEAKERS, I

DON'T KNOW WHY.

(PAUSE)

PROCEED.

MS. ROSENTHAL: THANK YOU. I WANT TO READ FROM

THE FULTON COUNTY AREA NEWS, THAT'S ABOUT 45 MINUTES AWAY FROM HERE,

A JOHNSTOWN POLICE OFFICER STANDS INSIDE A JOHNSTOWN HIGH SCHOOL

CLASSROOM WITH A RIFLE AS SEEN LATE THIS AFTERNOON. THE SCHOOL WAS PUT

INTO LOCKDOWN FOLLOWING A THREAT. PLANS FOR EVACUATION WERE TALKED

ABOUT LATE THIS MORNING. MANY STUDENTS HAD BEEN EVACUATED TO THE

WARREN STREET SCHOOL WHERE THEY WERE DIVIDED INTO THE GYM BY GRADE.

MORE AND MORE KIDS HAVE HAD TO UNDERGO THE TRAUMA

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OF WATCHING THEIR FRIENDS AND CLASSMATES BE SHOT TO DEATH, THEIR

TEACHERS, THEIR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS SHOT TO DEATH BY GUNS, BY PEOPLE

WITH GUNS WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS. THIS BILL IS ABOUT

ESTABLISHING A MUNICIPAL GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM THAT IS VOLUNTARY. WE

HOPE PEOPLE WHO HAVE GUNS WILL BE ENTICED BY A CASH REWARD. I DON'T

SEE HOW ANYONE COULD OPPOSE A BILL SETTING UP STANDARDS FOR A PROGRAM

THAT ATTEMPTS TO GET GUNS OFF THE STREETS WHERE THEY DO NOT BELONG. AND

I THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR SUPPORT.

AND I'D LIKE TO SAY THIS IS DEDICATED TO THE NOLAN'S,

MICHAEL NOLAN; JAMES NOLAN, WHOSE SON TRAGICALLY DIED SOME YEARS

AGO. YONKERS HAS A WONDERFUL PROGRAM, AND I'M SURE THE STATE POLICE

WILL CONSULT WITH THEM ON BEST PRACTICES. SO, I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

(APPLAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: SO, IF WE COULD MOVE TO

RULES REPORT NO. 18, THIS IS SPONSORED BY MEMBER GRIFFIN.

AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE YOU TO PLEASE CALL THE EN CON

COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM, PLEASE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION, SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A01715-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 18, GRIFFIN, D'URSO, HEASTIE, LENTOL, PEOPLES-STOKES,

GOTTFRIED, CRUZ, FRONTUS, JACOBSON, PICHARDO, REYES, STECK. AN ACT TO

AMEND THE PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO LIMITING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

ABILITY TO AUTHORIZE THE POSSESSION OF A WEAPON ON SCHOOL GROUNDS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MS.

GRIFFIN, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED.

AN EXPLANATION IS --

(PAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: -- APOLOGY FOR THE DELAY

IN ASKING YOU TO RECOGNIZE AND PROVIDE THE CORDIALITIES OF OUR FLOOR TO

THE FAMILY OF MICHAEL NOLAN, WHO WAS SHOT AND KILLED IN YONKERS IN

2017 [SIC]. HIS FAMILY IS WITH US TODAY TO SUPPORT GUN REFORM

LEGISLATION. HIS BROTHER, JAMES NOLAN, JR., HIS PARENTS, JAMES AND

DONNA NOLAN, AND WE REALLY WANT TO THANK THEM FOR THEIR EXPANDED

WORK, THEIR ADVOCACY AND THEIR EFFORTS THAT THEY PUT INTO THE

OPPORTUNITIES TO ADVANCE GUN REFORM IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU COULD GREET THEM AND OFFER

THEM THE CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR, I'D APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU VERY

MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY. ON BEHALF

OF MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES, THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WELCOME YOU HERE, THE NOLAN FAMILY, TO THE NEW YORK STATE

ASSEMBLY, THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE. WE EXTEND TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE

FLOOR, OUR GRATITUDE FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING TO ENSURE THAT OTHERS

DO NOT SUFFER FROM THE TRAGEDIES THAT YOU HAVE. GOD BLESS YOU ALL.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.

(APPLAUSE)

MS. GRIFFIN FOR AN EXPLANATION.

MS. GRIFFIN: OKAY? THIS BILL PROHIBITS TEACHERS IN

K-12 SCHOOLS FROM CARRYING FIREARMS TO PROTECT THEIR STUDENTS. SCHOOL

RESOURCE OFFICERS, POLICE OFFICERS, PEACE OFFICERS OR SECURITY GUARDS THAT

ARE PRIMARILY EMPLOYED BY THE SCHOOL AND HAVE BEEN ISSUED A SPECIAL

ARMED GUARD REGISTRATION CARD WILL BE AUTHORIZED TO CARRY FIREARMS. NO

WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION WILL BE GIVEN TO A TEACHER, ADMINISTRATOR OR ANY

OTHER PERSON EMPLOYED BY THE SCHOOL. CARRYING AN UNAUTHORIZED

WEAPON IS A CLASS E FELONY. TEACHERS HAVE BEEN TRAINED TO TEACH,

WHICH IS ALREADY A MONUMENTAL TASK, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY

SHOULD BE DOING. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT ARMING TEACHERS WILL MAKE

SCHOOLS SAFER AND, IN FACT, I -- I BEG TO DIFFER AND SAY THEY WILL EXACTLY

DO THE OPPOSITE, THEY WILL MAKE OUR SCHOOLS MUCH MORE DANGEROUS.

THIS BILL IS STRONGLY SUPPORTED BY NYSUT, WHICH IS

THE LARGEST TEACHERS UNION IN NEW YORK STATE. AND ALSO, UFT ALSO

STRONGLY SUPPORTS THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

GRIFFIN?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. GRIFFIN.

AS YOU KNOW, MANY OF OUR SCHOOLS ARE IN RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS. I HAVE

17 SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN MY DISTRICT, OF WHICH ONLY TWO ARE IN A

MUNICIPALITY. AND FOR MANY OF OUR RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS, THEY DON'T

HAVE AN ARMED RESOURCE OFFICER IN EACH SCHOOL, ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE,

HIGH SCHOOL. THEY'RE LUCKY IF THEY HAVE ONE AT ALL; THEY WORK UNDER THE

TAX CAP, WHICH KEEPS THEIR BUDGETS VERY TIGHT. AND THE CLOSEST STATE

POLICE OR SHERIFF'S PATROL MIGHT BE A 15 OR 20 MINUTE DRIVE, ASSUMING

THE WEATHER IS GOOD. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE SHOWS UP AT THE

SCHOOL AND STARTS SHOOTING, WHAT HAPPENS DURING THAT 15 TO 20 MINUTES

BEFORE --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL, WOULD

YOU PAUSE FOR A MINUTE?

MR. GOODELL: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: LADIES AND

GENTLEMEN, WE ARE ON DEBATE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON UNDER THE

EAVES, BUT I NEED PEOPLE TO BE QUIET, OR WE'RE GOING TO CLEAR THE HOUSE

OF EVERYBODY BUT MEMBERS.

PROCEED.

MR. GOODELL: SO, MY QUESTION IS, SOMEONE

COMES INTO THE SCHOOL HEAVILY ARMED, STARTS SHOOTING TEACHERS AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

STUDENTS, THE CLOSEST POLICE OFFICER IS 15 TO 20 MINUTES AWAY, WHAT IS

THE SCHOOL SUPPOSED TO DO DURING THAT 15 OR 20 MINUTES? ISN'T IT

NOTHING MORE THAN AN UNRESTRICTED OPEN SHOOTING GALLERY KILLING OUR

INNOCENT CHILDREN AND TEACHERS?

MS. GRIFFIN: WELL, IN -- IN RURAL DISTRICTS,

ADJUSTMENTS MAY HAVE TO BE MADE. IN -- I KNOW -- I DON'T LIVE IN A

RURAL DISTRICT, BUT OUR POLICE, OUR VILLAGE POLICE, OUR NASSAU COUNTY

POLICE AND SUFFOLK COUNTY, THEY HAVE MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO PROPERLY

MAKE SURE THE SCHOOLS ARE SAFE. SO, IN RURAL DISTRICTS, STATE POLICE,

WHOEVER ARE THE -- WHATEVER POLICE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, WILL

HAVE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS SO THEY CAN HELP KEEP OUR SCHOOLS SAFE.

MR. GOODELL: WELL, I -- I APPRECIATE THAT

SENTIMENT, AND I CERTAINLY WOULD URGE ALL OF OUR LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES

AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE WHATEVER ADJUSTMENTS ARE NECESSARY.

KEEPING IN MIND, MY RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS 1,000 SQUARE MILES.

HOW MANY ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICERS DOES THIS BILL FUND?

MS. GRIFFIN: THIS BILL ISN'T FUNDING POLICE OFFICERS.

WHAT THIS BILL IS DOING IS STATING THAT WE ARE KEEPING OUR SCHOOLS SAFE

BECAUSE WE DON'T BELIEVE IN NEW YORK STATE THAT OUR SCHOOLS WILL BE

SAFE IF WE LET ANY TEACHER JUST BRING A GUN TO SCHOOL WITH THEM. WE

BELIEVE THAT TEACHERS SHOULD BE TEACHING AND --

MR. GOODELL: WELL, LET -- JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR.

THIS BILL DOESN'T TALK ABOUT SAFETY, IT TALKS ABOUT KEEPING OUR SCHOOLS

UNARMED, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT THE BILL ACTUALLY SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO KEEP

ALL OF OUR RURAL SCHOOLS UNARMED.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. GRIFFIN: NO, THAT ISN'T TRUE.

MR. GOODELL: OH, DOES THIS SCHOOL -- DOES THIS

ALLOW, THEN, FOR HIGHLY-TRAINED SCHOOL PERSONNEL, OTHER THAN AN OFFICER,

A HIGHLY TRAINED SCHOOL PERSONNEL, TO CARRY A GUN IN THE SCHOOL WITH THE

WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE SCHOOL BOARD?

MS. GRIFFIN: IN -- IN THIS BILL, LIKE I HAVE SAID

BEFORE, SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS, POLICE OFFICERS, PEACE OFFICERS AND

SECURITY GUARDS, SO --

MR. GOODELL: BUT NOT A HIGHLY-TRAINED TEACHER.

FOR EXAMPLE, A TEACHER IN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS, OUR RURAL SCHOOL

DISTRICTS, WE HAVE -- ACTUALLY, IT'S AN ORGANIZED SPORT SIMILAR TO THE

OLYMPIC SHOOTING SPORT, RIFLE SPORT, SO WE HAVE TEACHERS THAT ARE HIGHLY

TRAINED. THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED EVEN IF THEY WANTED TO, THEY

WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO CARRY A GUN, CORRECT, UNDER THIS BILL?

MS. GRIFFIN: THAT IS CORRECT. ALTHOUGH, THEY ARE

ALSO WELCOME TO GET THE REGISTRATION CARD, AND IF THEY WANT TO -- IF

THEY'RE NOT TEACHING, THEY -- SAY IF THEY WANT TO BE AT THE SCHOOL AT

NIGHT AT A FOOTBALL GAME AND THEY'RE WORKING AS A -- IN A SECURITY ROLE,

AT THAT POINT THEY CAN. BUT WHILE THEY'RE TEACHING, THEY CANNOT BE --

THEY CAN'T HAVE A FIREARM.

MR. GOODELL: BUT YOUR BILL DOES NOT ALLOW

VOLUNTEERS, EVEN THOSE WHO ARE HIGHLY TRAINED AND QUALIFIED, YOU CAN'T

EVEN BE A VOLUNTEER POLICE OFFICER, OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICER, RIGHT?

BECAUSE THIS REQUIRES THAT THE INDIVIDUAL BE "PRIMARILY EMPLOYED". SO

YOU CAN HAVE THE POLICE CHIEF, YOU CAN HAVE THE COUNTY SHERIFF, YOU

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

CAN HAVE THE MOST SKILLED POLICE OFFICER IN YOUR DISTRICT, THEY CANNOT

VOLUNTEER TO BE THERE TO PROVIDE SECURITY AT A SCHOOL BASKETBALL GAME

OR SPORTING EVENT OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF EVENT, RIGHT? BECAUSE THIS BILL

REQUIRES THAT THEY HAVE TO BE "PRIMARILY EMPLOYED."

MS. GRIFFIN: RIGHT. WHAT -- WHAT I WOULD SAY IS,

IF -- IF PEOPLE ARE A GUN OWNER AND THEY'RE HIGHLY SKILLED AND HIGHLY

TRAINED AND THEY'RE A POLICE OFFICER, AND THEY WANT TO ALSO WORK AT A

SCHOOL TO BE A PEACE OFFICER AND A SECURITY GUARD, THEY CAN DO THAT AND

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT CAN HIRE THEM TO DO SO.

MR. GOODELL: BUT THIS --

MS. GRIFFIN: WHAT --

MR. GOODELL: BUT THIS BILL WOULD MAKE IT ILLEGAL

FOR THEM TO VOLUNTEER, CORRECT?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES.

MR. GOODELL: OKAY.

MS. GRIFFIN: WE'RE LOOKING FOR LOCAL -- LOCAL POLICE

TO REALLY HANDLE THE SAFETY AT SCHOOLS BECAUSE --

MR. GOODELL: AND YOU UNDERSTAND, I HAVE

MULTIPLE TOWNSHIPS IN MY COUNTY THAT HAVE NO LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT

AT ALL; DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES, I DO.

MR. GOODELL: AND THERE'S NO POLICE BARRACKS AT

ALL, NO STATE POLICE BARRACKS, NO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT SUBSTATION. BUT

WE WON'T LET ANYONE WHO IS HIGHLY TRAINED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED WHO

WANTS TO VOLUNTEER TO PROTECT THE SCHOOL, THAT'S NOT ALLOWED UNDER THIS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BILL.

MS. GRIFFIN: THERE IS AN EXEMPTION IN THIS BILL IN

LAW -- I'M SORRY, I MISSPOKE. THERE IS EXEMPTION IN THE PENAL LAW THAT

ALLOWS A VOLUNTEER. SO, A POLICE OFFICER COULD VOLUNTEER IF HE LIVES IN

THIS RURAL DISTRICT AND IS CONCERNED ABOUT KEEPING THE SCHOOL SAFE.

MR. GOODELL: AND, BY THE WAY, I ABSOLUTELY

AGREE WITH YOU, THE CURRENT LAW NOT ONLY ALLOWS THOSE VOLUNTEERS, BUT

THE CURRENT LAW ALLOWS THE SCHOOL BOARD TO AUTHORIZE IN WRITING THOSE

VOLUNTEERS; THAT'S THE CURRENT LAW, CORRECT?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES. AND IN THIS CASE, JUST LIKE

THERE'S A LOT OF CASES THAT NEW YORK STATE WANTS TO MAKE THE ENTIRE

STATE SAFER, JUST LIKE WE DO, WE HAVE SCHOOLS, HAVE TO GET VACCINATIONS.

WE DO CERTAIN THINGS. WE DO BACKGROUND CHECKS ON EMPLOYEES NOW

AT SCHOOLS. SO, THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T DO, NEW YORK STATE HAS COME UP

WITH MANY LAWS TO MAKE THE ENTIRE STATE SAFER, WHICH MAKES OUR

SCHOOLS SAFER.

MR. GOODELL: BUT AS I POINTED OUT, THE CURRENT

LAW ALLOWS THE SCHOOL BOARD TO AUTHORIZE THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO BE

VOLUNTEERS, AND THE PENAL LAW ALLOWS THAT. BUT THIS LAW AMENDS THE

CURRENT LAW BY MAKING IT A CLASS E FELONY, AND ELIMINATING THE ABILITY

OF A SCHOOL BOARD TO EVEN AUTHORIZE THEM. THAT'S MY CONCERN. WE

NOW TAKE WHAT IS IN THE CURRENT LAW AND WE MAKE IT A CLASS E FELONY.

MS. GRIFFIN: OKAY. THIS -- THERE IS A SEPARATE

PROVISION, 265.20, WHICH ALLOWS LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE ON SCHOOL

GROUNDS --

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. GOODELL: LAW ENFORCEMENT --

MS. GRIFFIN: -- AND THERE'S AN EXEMPTION.

MR. GOODELL: -- YES, OF COURSE. CONTINUING, IF I

MAY. OTHER THAN REQUIRING THAT ALL OF OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS BE UNARMED,

DOES THIS BILL DO ANYTHING TO IMPROVE SAFETY AT THE SCHOOL? DOES IT, FOR

EXAMPLE, PROVIDE FUNDING OR GUIDANCE ON HOW TO IMPROVE THE SECURITY

OF THE SCHOOL BUILDING ITSELF?

MS. GRIFFIN: THIS BILL IS FOCUSED ON PREVENTING --

PROHIBITING TEACHERS AND -- EDUCATORS, PRINCIPALS AND SO FORTH FROM

HIRING -- FROM HAVING FIREARMS TO PROTECT CHILDREN. THERE ARE CERTAINLY

OTHER MEASURES THAT ARE TAKEN IN OTHER BILLS AND TO ADDRESS OTHER ISSUES.

BUT THIS BILL IS FOCUSED ON THE FACT THAT THERE ARE MANY CASES ACROSS THE

COUNTRY WHERE SKILLED TEACHERS -- THERE WAS A CASE IN CALIFORNIA WHERE

A SKILLED TEACHER, FELT HE WAS VERY SKILLED, SO SKILLED THAT HE COULD HAVE

A FIREARM IN HIS HAND, SO SKILLED THAT IT COULD BE LOADED, AND SO SKILLED

THAT THAT GUN WENT ACROSS THE ROOM AND HIT SOMEONE. SO, THAT'S A REAL

REASON WHY I BELIEVE, AND MANY OTHERS BELIEVE, THAT IT IS A REAL

APPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO MAKE THIS A SAFETY ISSUE IN OUR SCHOOLS.

MR. GOODELL: SO, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND

YOU CORRECTLY. THE ONLY PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO ENSURE THAT THESE

SCHOOL PERSONNEL ARE UNARMED. THIS BILL DOES NOT DEAL WITH ANY OTHER

SAFETY FEATURES OR FACTORS THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO CONSIDER,

SUCH AS INCREASED MENTAL HEALTH BACKGROUND, ADDITIONAL FUNDING,

ADDITIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING, ANTI-BULLYING PROGRAMS, STRENGTHENING

THE SCHOOL, HARDENING THE SCHOOL ITSELF, NONE OF THAT'S -- NONE OF THOSE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OTHER SAFETY PROVISIONS ARE IN THIS, THIS BILL JUST TALKS ABOUT ENSURING

THAT OUR SCHOOL PERSONNEL ARE UNARMED, CORRECT?

MS. GRIFFIN: THE FOCUS OF THIS BILL IS -- IS

ALLEVIATING TEACHERS FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EVER BEING CHARGED WITH

HAVING TO PROTECT THEIR STUDENTS WITH GUNS. BECAUSE WHILE SOME MIGHT

THINK THAT THAT CAN PROTECT STUDENTS, THERE ARE -- A CASE IN POINT IS LINDA

AND MICHAEL SCHULMAN, WHO ARE UP HERE BECAUSE THEIR SON, SCOTT

BEIGEL, WHO WAS A TEACHER IN PARKLAND, HE HAD SECONDS TO DECIDE TO

WHETHER -- HOW HE COULD PROTECT HIS CLASS OF STUDENTS, OR COULD HE -- IF

HE HAD THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE GUN, SHOULD HE RUN TO HIS DESK AND GET A

GUN, ALL THE WHILE THERE WAS A HUNTER READY TO MURDER HOW MANY --

HOW EVER MANY PEOPLE HE COULD WITH AN AR-15.

MR. GOODELL: RIGHT.

MS. GRIFFIN: SO, WHAT THAT MAN DID, WHAT HE DID IS

HE SAVED THE LIVES OF -- OF A BUNCH OF STUDENTS THAT WERE IN THE HALLWAY

AND HE GOT THEM INTO A ROOM AND HE GOT THEM SAFE. AND IN THE END,

THIS MAN WAS MURDERED. SO, IT -- THAT IS A PERFECT CASE IN POINT. HAD

HE HAD A GUN, SOME MIGHT SAY, OH, HE COULD HAVE PUT A STOP TO IT.

WELL, HAD HE HAD A GUN, HE MIGHT HAVE ACCIDENTLY SHOT OTHER STUDENTS.

HE MIGHT HAVE ACCIDENTLY SHOT OTHER TEACHERS. BECAUSE THIS HAPPENS --

IT WAS BEDLAM WHEN THIS HAPPENED. AND IN A MATTER OF SECONDS, 17

PEOPLE WERE MURDERED. AND THERE WAS NO TIME FOR A TEACHER TO GO TO

HIS DESK DRAWER, WHICH WAS LOCKED, FIND THE KEY, GET A GUN, AND A

HANDGUN WAS NOT GOING TO STOP THE PARKLAND SHOOTER.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU FOR YOUR GUIDANCE ON

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THAT AND YOUR COMMENTS.

ON THE BILL, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: ON THE BILL, MR.

GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: MY COLLEAGUE BROUGHT UP THE

PARKLAND SITUATION. SO, LET'S TAKE A LOOK. THE MOST SERIOUS GUN

VIOLENCE SITUATIONS WE'VE HAD IN RECENT YEARS IN OUR COUNTRY, RIGHT?

LET'S START WITH COLUMBINE. HOW DID COLUMBINE END? WHEN DID IT

END? WHAT STOPPED THE MASSACRE AT COLUMBINE? WELL, THE ANSWER IS,

THE INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS SHOOTING EVERYONE, THE ASSAILANT, DID NOT STOP

KILLING PEOPLE UNTIL THE POLICE SHOWED UP AND THERE WAS AN EXCHANGE

OF GUNFIRE, AND THEN HE COMMITTED SUICIDE. SO, IT WAS THE POLICE WITH

GUNS THAT STOPPED THE KILLING.

WHAT ABOUT SANDY HOOK? WHAT HAPPENED THERE?

THERE WERE OVER 20 KIDS MASSACRED IN THE MINUTES IT TOOK FOR THE

POLICE TO SHOW UP. IT WASN'T UNTIL THE POLICE SHOWED UP WITH A GUN THAT

HE TOOK HIS LIFE IN A SUICIDE. WHAT HAPPENED IN PARKLAND? SEVENTEEN

KIDS WERE KILLED. AND WHAT DID THE ASSAILANT DO? BY THE WAY, THAT WAS

17 KIDS, IT WAS IN SIX MINUTES, HE KILLED 17 KIDS. THE SHOOTING DIDN'T

STOP UNTIL PEOPLE SHOWED UP WITH OTHER GUNS, AT WHICH POINT THE

ASSAILANT ESCAPED.

WHAT ABOUT ORLANDO? THE PULSE SITUATION. THREE

HOURS OF A SHOOTING GALLERY, OVER 50 PEOPLE KILLED. THAT ENDED ONLY

AFTER PEOPLE WITH GUNS STOPPED THE ASSAILANT. WHAT ABOUT THE VEGAS

SHOOTING? FIFTY-EIGHT PEOPLE KILLED. THAT WENT ON FOR TEN MINUTES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

TEN MINUTES, 58 PEOPLE KILLED. HOW DID IT END? IT END -- ENDED WHEN

THE POLICE FOUND OUT WHICH ROOM THE GUY WAS AT AND HE COMMITTED

SUICIDE. WHAT ABOUT THE CHURCH IN TEXAS, THAT MASSACRE? WHEN DID

THAT MASSACRE END? WHEN A GUY ACROSS THE STREET GRABBED HIS RIFLE OUT

OF HIS PICKUP TRUCK AND STARTED SHOOTING AT THE SHOOTER. THAT'S ONLY

WHEN IT ENDED.

SO, WHAT KIND OF TIME ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? SIX

MINUTES IN PARKLAND. TEN MINUTES ON THE VEGAS SHOOTING. ONLY A FEW

MINUTES IN SANDY HOOK. SO WHAT HAPPENS? WHAT'S THIS BILL SAY? THIS

BILL REMOVES THE AUTHORITY OF A SCHOOL BOARD, YOU KNOW THOSE MEMBERS

THAT WERE ELECTED SPECIFICALLY TO REPRESENT THE VOTERS IN THAT DISTRICT, IT

TAKES THE AUTHORITY AWAY FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD TO AUTHORIZE HIGHLY

TRAINED PEOPLE TO BE -- TO DEFEND THE SCHOOL. IT REMOVES THEIR

AUTHORITY. AND AS A MATTER OF LAW SAYS THE SCHOOL MUST BE AN UNARMED

SHOOTING GALLERY.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: MR. BLAKE, WHY

DO YOU RISE?

MR. BLAKE: I JUST HAVE A QUESTION OF MR. GOODELL.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: MR. GOODELL, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. GOODELL: AS SOON AS I'M DONE.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: AS SOON AS HE'S

FINISHES. HE DOESN'T YIELD YET.

MR. GOODELL: SO IT RENDERS OUR SCHOOL AS AN

UNARMED SHOOTING GALLERY UNTIL SOMEONE SHOWS UP. AND IN MY RURAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

DISTRICT, THAT COULD BE 15 OR 20 MINUTES. AND FOR 15 TO 20 MINUTES THIS

BILL SAYS NO ONE ON THAT SCHOOL, UNLESS THEY'RE A HIRED EMPLOYEE, CAN

STOP THE SHOOTER. I KNOW YOU SHARE MY PASSION FOR PROTECTING OUR KIDS.

I KNOW YOU SHARE MY PASSION FOR MAKING SURE WE MINIMIZE THE LOSS OF

INNOCENT LIFE, BUT MAKING IT ILLEGAL FOR A RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICT TO DEFEND

ITSELF IS NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO GO.

I WILL NOW YIELD TO MR. BLAKE'S QUESTION.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: FOR 22 SECONDS.

GO.

MR. BLAKE: MR. GOODELL, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.

DID YOU SAY THAT THERE WAS NO ONE THAT WAS ARMED AT PARKLAND THAT

THEN LEFT THE SCENE?

MR. GOODELL: NO. I'M SAYING THE SHOOTER DIDN'T

STOP UNTIL THE POLICE ARRIVED.

MR. BLAKE: THAT WASN'T MY QUESTION. I JUST WANT

TO BE CLEAR.

MR. GOODELL: NO, YOU ASKED ME WHAT I MEANT OR

WHAT I SAID. THE SHOOTING DIDN'T STOP UNTIL THE POLICE ARRIVED.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: MR. GOODELL,

YOUR TIME IS UP.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, MR. BLAKE. THANK

YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: IF YOU WANT TO,

YOU CAN FOR A SECOND TIME. THANK YOU.

MR. REILLY.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: DO YOU YIELD?

MR. REILLY: I YIELD.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: THE SPONSOR

YIELDS.

MR. REILLY: SO, I HAVE A -- WHEN YOU DRAFTED THIS

BILL WHEN WE -- WE STARTED -- WHEN YOU STARTED TO ANALYZE IT, DID WE

HAVE A NUMBER OF HOW MANY WRITTEN LETTERS BY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS?

ON RECORD, HOW MANY GRANTED PERMISSION IN NEW YORK STATE TO HAVE A

FIREARM OTHER THAN THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER? DO WE -- DO WE HAVE

THAT DATA?

MS. GRIFFIN: CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I --

MR. REILLY: THE QUESTION IS HOW MANY ACTUAL

LETTERS WERE WRITTEN BY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS GIVING PERMISSION TO

SOMEONE WHO LEGALLY POSSESSES A FIREARM TO CARRY IT ON SCHOOL

GROUNDS?

MS. GRIFFIN: I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

MR. REILLY: AS A RETIRED LIEUTENANT FROM THE

POLICE DEPARTMENT IN NEW YORK CITY, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT

SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FIRST STEP BEFORE WE LOOK TO LEGISLATE AND PUT A

MANDATE ON A SCHOOL DISTRICT, RESTRICTING WHO THEY CAN ALLOW. BECAUSE

IF THERE'S NO NEED FOR IT, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE ACTUAL LETTER BEING WRITTEN,

THEN THERE'S NO REASON TO LEGISLATE IT, IN MY OPINION. NOW I ALSO,

TALKING ABOUT HOW MR. GOODELL SPOKE ABOUT THE RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BECAUSE IN NEW YORK CITY, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THE MAYOR AND THE

CHANCELLOR ARE NEVER EVER GOING TO GIVE PERMISSION TO SOMEONE TO

CARRY A FIREARM, ALL RIGHT, IN A SCHOOL BUILDING, OTHER THAN THE NYPD.

AND I FULLY SUPPORT THAT. THE ISSUE BECOMES - WHAT MR. GOODELL SAID -

WHEN WE HAVE A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER IN A RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, THAT

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, IF HE GETS HURT, HE'S OUT LINE OF DUTY FOR A WEEK,

THAT SMALL DEPARTMENT PROBABLY CAN'T REPLACE THEM FOR THAT WEEK.

SO, YOU HAVE A GUY LIKE ME THAT MAY LIVE IN THE

SCHOOL DISTRICT. MY KIDS MAY ATTEND THERE. I'M A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER.

I CAN'T CARRY MY GUN ON SCHOOL GROUNDS BECAUSE I AM A RETIRED

MEMBER, I'M NO LONGER ACTIVE. BUT IF I CAN VOLUNTEER MY TIME FOR THAT

WEEK, NOT EMPLOYED AS A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, CURRENTLY THE SCHOOL

ADMINISTRATOR CAN SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR

COVERING FOR THIS WEEK. I'M GOING TO WRITE THE LETTER AND ALLOW YOU TO

DO IT. THIS WILL TAKE THAT AWAY AND WE WILL NOW, AS MR. GOODELL

POINTED OUT, WE WILL LEAVE THAT SCHOOL WITHOUT A SCHOOL RESOURCE

OFFICER. NOW THAT'S A BIG -- AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT ABOUT NOT

HAVING TEACHERS. I AGREE. I AGREE. THIS, IN MY OPINION, THE LEGISLATION

IS TOO BROAD WHERE IT WILL PREVENT SOMEONE LIKE ME WHO'S RETIRED AND

WANTED TO VOLUNTEER MY TIME BECAUSE THAT SCHOOL RESOURCE -- RESOURCE

OFFICER GOT HURT IN THE LINE OF DUTY AND IS NO LONGER ABLE TO PROTECT OUR

SCHOOL. DO YOU -- DO YOU THINK THAT THIS GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND

TEACHERS CARRYING?

MS. GRIFFIN: I DON'T, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A BIG

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN TALK ABOUT THERE'S THESE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HIGHLY-SKILLED TEACHERS, BUT THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A TEACHER

THAT'S HIGHLY SKILLED AT THE -- AT THE -- AT THE SHOOTING RANGE TO A POLICE

OFFICER THAT IS TRAINED TO BE -- TO BE A TARGETED SHOOTER, TO PUT DOWN A

TARGETED SHOOTER. AND I BELIEVE EVEN IN RURAL DISTRICTS THERE ARE RETIRED

POLICE OFFICERS THAT COULD GET THE LICENSE AND THAT COULD BE MADE

AVAILABLE TO THEM AND THEY COULD BE ON A LIST OF PEOPLE THAT WHEN

NEEDED, THEY COULD BE HIRED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

SO, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS TOO BROAD. I THINK NEW YORK

STATE, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO KEEP OUR STATE AS SAFE AS IT CAN BE. AS

WAS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, IT'S THE STATES THAT HAVE THE STRONGEST GUN

LAWS SEEM TO HAVE THE LEAST SHOOTING MASSACRES. SO, I'M ALL FOR

ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO IN OUR SCHOOLS TO MAKE THEM SAFER AND I

BELIEVE THIS BILL DOES JUST THAT.

MR. REILLY: BUT THE INTENT IS REALLY TO STOP

TEACHERS FROM BEING ARMED, CORRECT?

MS. GRIFFIN: IT'S TO -- IT'S TO STOP TEACHERS FROM

BEING ARMED AND ALSO HAVE SPECIFIC PERSONNEL AVAILABLE, AS MENTIONED:

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS, POLICE OFFICERS, PEACE OFFICERS, SECURITY

GUARDS. THIS BILL ONLY APPLIES TO EMPLOYEES OF THE SCHOOL. SO, THIS BILL

TAKES OUT -- IS JUST APPLYING TO TEACHERS AND ADMINISTRATORS IN THE

SCHOOL.

MR. REILLY: IT DOESN'T. IT ACTUALLY IS ANYBODY -- IN

MY OPINION, IN READING THE BILL, IT'S ANYBODY THAT HAS A LICENSED FIREARM

CANNOT -- CANNOT GET WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR

TO ACT AS A TEMPORARY FILL-IN. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT STATES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. GRIFFIN: NO. THIS BILL DOES NOT SAY THIS. THIS

BILL IS JUST DIRECTED AT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE SCHOOL.

MR. REILLY: NO. IT SAYS -- JUST THE TITLE ALONE SAYS,

"THE ABILITY TO AUTHORIZE THE POSSESSION OF WEAPON ON SCHOOL

GROUNDS." SO, THAT MEANS ME AS A RETIRED MEMBER OF THE POLICE

DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE UNDER NEW YORK STATE LAW, I AM NO LONGER A

POLICE OFFICER; I AM A PERMIT HOLDER WITH NEW YORK CITY. SO, I NO

LONGER CAN HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR TO

FILL IN, BECAUSE I'M NOT TECHNICALLY AN EMPLOYEE. THIS IS WHAT THIS BILL

DOES.

ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO: IS -- IS THAT A

QUESTION, SIR?

MR. REILLY: DO YOU AGREE?

MS. GRIFFIN: NO, I DON'T.

MR. REILLY: OKAY.

MS. GRIFFIN: SO, IF YOU -- I'M READING THE BILL RIGHT

NOW: "SHALL ISSUE SUCH WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION TO ANY TEACHER, SCHOOL

ADMINISTRATOR OR OTHER PERSON EMPLOYED AT THE SCHOOL WHO IS NOT

PRIMARILY EMPLOYED AS A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, POLICE OFFICER, PEACE

OFFICER OR SECURITY GUARD WHO HAS BEEN ISSUED A SPECIAL ARMED GUARD

REGISTRATION CARD, AS DEFINED IN 89(F) OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW."

MR. REILLY: WHAT YOU JUST READ ACTUALLY IS THE

EXACT THING THAT I'M STATING. I'M THE RETIREE, VOLUNTEERING FOR A WEEK.

I'M NOT EMPLOYED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. I DON'T HAVE AN ARMED GUARD

LICENSE. THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR CANNOT GIVE ME PERMISSION TO FILL IN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

FOR THAT WEEK THAT THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER IS OUT LINE OF DUTY. DO

YOU AGREE THAT THAT'S -- BECAUSE IT SAYS "OTHER PERSON." YOU JUST READ IT.

MS. GRIFFIN: SO, YEAH. AND PRIOR TO WHAT I JUST

READ, IT SAYS "WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF SUCH EDUCATIONAL

INSTITUTION," OTHER PERSON EMPLOYED.

MR. REILLY: I KNOW, BUT AREN'T WE -- ISN'T THIS BILL

BANNING THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR FROM GIVING THAT PERMISSION?

MS. GRIFFIN: THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR IS -- HAS THE

CHARGE OVER THE EMPLOYEES IN THE SCHOOL.

MR. REILLY: YES, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THIS

-- THIS LEGISLATION IS TELLING THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR THAT THEY'RE NO

LONGER ALLOWED TO GIVE ME PERMISSION, WRITING A LETTER SAYING THAT I CAN

POSSES A FIREARM TO VOLUNTEER.

MS. GRIFFIN: YEAH. SO, IN THIS BILL, THEY'RE NOT

ALLOWED TO GIVE AUTHORIZATION TO EMPLOYEES OF THE SCHOOL, MEANING

TEACHERS, OTHER ADMINISTRATORS, COACHES, WHOEVER IT MAY BE.

MR. REILLY: PTA MEMBERS? PTA MEMBERS?

MS. GRIFFIN: IF THEY'RE NOT EMPLOYED BY THE

SCHOOL.

MR. REILLY: OKAY.

MS. GRIFFIN: SO, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S ONLY TALKING

ABOUT WHAT THEY CAN DO FOR EMPLOYEES IN A SCHOOL. THEY CAN, ALL

DISTRICTS WILL BE ABLE TO HIRE PEOPLE WITH THE APPROPRIATE LICENSE TO BE

AT THEIR SCHOOL. THOSE PEOPLE ARE TRAINED AND ARE EXPERIENCED AND

THEY'RE NOT WEARING TWO HATS. IT'S VERY HARD TO HAVE A TEACHER WEAR TWO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HATS. SO, THIS BILL IS CONFINED TO THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ARE NOT

HIRING THEIR TEACHERS AND PEOPLE IN THEIR SCHOOL, THE EDUCATORS, TO BE

ARMED -- ARMED WITH GUNS TO PROTECT THEIR STUDENTS.

MR. REILLY: YOU JUST MENTIONED SOMETHING THAT

THEY CAN'T WEAR TWO HATS. A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER BY DEFINITION

WEARS TWO HATS. THEY ARE A TEACHER AND THEY ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT.

THAT IS BY DEFINITION WHAT A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER IS. SO, DO YOU --

DO YOU THINK IT'S INCAPABLE OF SOMEONE TO ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO HAVE A

DUAL ROLE IN A SCHOOL?

MS. GRIFFIN: WHAT I AM SAYING IS ANYONE, A PERSON

WHO IS AUTHORIZED AND HAS THE APPROPRIATE LICENSE CAN COME IN WITH THE

AUTHORIZATION. THEY CAN VOLUNTEER OR THEY CAN BE PAID BY A DISTRICT.

SO, A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER WHO'S EMPLOYED TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN

CAN DO JUST THAT.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. SO, JUST GOING

BACK TO MY FIRST QUESTION. SINCE WE DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF ACTUAL

LETTERS THAT WERE WRITTEN FOR OUR 600 SCHOOL DISTRICTS, HOW MANY

SCHOOLS -- HOW MANY ADMINISTRATORS ACTUALLY GAVE PERMISSION FOR

SOMEONE OTHER THAN AN EMPLOYEE TO CARRY A FIREARM ON SCHOOL GROUNDS,

WE DON'T HAVE THAT DATA, RIGHT?

MS. GRIFFIN: NO, AS I SAID, I DO NOT PERSONALLY

HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

MR. REILLY: WOULD YOU -- WOULD YOU THINK IT

WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO ACTUALLY SEE HOW MANY -- HOW THIS IN -- IN REAL

LIFE, IN REAL TIME, HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND HOW

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MANY HAVE ALREADY GIVEN THAT PERMISSION. DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE

A GOOD IDEA?

MS. GRIFFIN: NO, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY

BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IN THE CLIMATE THAT WE LIVE IN WHERE THERE ARE

SHOOTINGS WEEKLY, I THINK WHAT IS MOST IMPORTANT IS TO KEEP OUR

SCHOOLS SAFE AND IF YOU HAVE BEEN TO MANY GUN -- GUN RALLIES FOR SAFE

GUN LEGISLATION, NOT ONLY ARE STUDENTS SO SCARED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED

IN PARKLAND OR SOME OF THESE ARE PLACES, BUT THEY ARE FRIGHTENED ABOUT

IT HAPPENING AT THEIR SCHOOL. AND THEY ARE FRIGHTENED ABOUT THEIR

TEACHER HAVING A GUN IN THEIR DRAWER. SO, WITH THE CLIMATE THAT WE LIVE

IN AND WITH TALKS OF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT POSSIBLY ALLOWING STATES

ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO HAVE FIREARMS, WITH BETSY DEVOS STATING THAT

MONEY, FEDERAL MONEY THAT'S EARMARKED FOR EDUCATION COULD BE THEN

GIVEN TO SCHOOLS FOR FIREARM OR TO TRAIN THEIR TEACHERS, I THINK IT'S VERY

IMPORTANT AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME TO HAVE THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE I THINK

IT'S ESSENTIAL.

MR. REILLY: ALL RIGHT. BUT SINCE WE'RE NOT DEALING

WITH HYPOTHETICALS, RIGHT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T CONTROL WHAT

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S GOING TO DO. WE CAN CONTROL WHAT WE CAN DO

FOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN NEW YORK STATE, I BELIEVE. AND, FOR ME, WE

ARE LIMITING OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS WHO MAY BE CHALLENGED WITH HAVING

FUNDING FOR A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER. AND THIS BILL WILL STOP THEM

FROM BEING ABLE TO ALLOW A RETIREE VOLUNTEER HIS TIME. THAT WOULD

PROTECT THE SCHOOL. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS WILL DO.

MS. GRIFFIN: NO. I MEAN, AS I STATED BEFORE,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SOMEONE LIKE YOU WHO IS RETIRED, A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER AND HAS THE

APPROPRIATE LICENSE FROM THE DEC, HE CAN APPLY TO BE A VOLUNTEER

SECURITY GUARD AT THE SCHOOL.

MR. REILLY: NOT IF -- I WILL TELL YOU NOW, IF THE

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER GETS HURT THIS WEEK AND CANNOT COME TO WORK

TOMORROW AND SOMEONE LIKE ME WHO IS A RETIREE TODAY, RIGHT NOW

BEFORE THIS IS PASSED, THE PRINCIPAL CAN WRITE A LETTER AND SAY, HEY,

MIKE, DO ME A FAVOR. FILL IN TOMORROW? YOU GOT IT. I'LL HELP OUT. THIS

WILL PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.

MS. GRIFFIN: THIS BILL WILL ALLOW FOR THAT. A

SCHOOL DISTRICT COULD HAVE A LIST OF RETIREES THAT ARE WILLING TO COME IN

AND BE A SECURITY OFFICER AND ALSO WITH -- AS LONG AS THEY HAVE THAT

LICENSE.

MR. REILLY: NEGATIVE. NEGATIVE. I'M SORRY, THAT'S

NOT -- THAT'S NOT ACCURATE BECAUSE FOR YOU --

MS. GRIFFIN: IF YOU CAN JUST LET ME SAY ONE THING.

MR. REILLY: I'M SORRY.

MS. GRIFFIN: IT'S OKAY. WHAT I DIDN'T MAKE CLEAR IS

THE -- YOU, IF YOU ARE THE RETIRED POLICE OFFICER WHO WANTS TO VOLUNTEER,

YOU CAN COME INTO THE SCHOOL AND VOLUNTEER. AND ONLY THE EMPLOYEES

OF THE SCHOOL NEED TO HAVE THAT -- THAT LICENSE. IF AN EMPLOYEE OF THE

SCHOOL, THEY CANNOT COME -- THEY CANNOT HAVE THAT POSITION UNLESS THEY

HAVE THE LICENSE.

MR. REILLY: ACTUALLY, I CAN'T BECAUSE AFTER THE

SAFE ACT WAS PASSED, IF I STEP ON SCHOOL GROUNDS WITH MY FIREARM I'M

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

A FELON, BECAUSE I'M A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER AND I'M NOT ACTIVE. SO, I'M

-- I'M BEING HONEST WITH YOU, BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT-- WHAT IT

BECAME.

MS. GRIFFIN: IF YOU HAD WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION TO BE

THERE AND YOU WERE RETIRED AND YOU WERE ON THE LIST OF VOLUNTEERS THAT

-- THAT IS WILLING TO COME IN AND ACT AS A SECURITY GUARD AT THAT SCHOOL,

YOU WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO. SO, WE'RE NOT LIMITING DISTRICTS FROM BEING

ABLE TO DO THAT.

MR. REILLY: BUT ISN'T THIS TAKING AWAY THE WRITTEN

PERMISSION? I MEAN, YOU READ IT BEFORE, IT SAYS, "AND OTHERS."

MS. GRIFFIN: THIS IS TAKING AWAY -- SCHOOLS STILL

HAVE, THEY CAN STILL HAVE A WRITTEN PERMISSION. THEY JUST CAN'T HAVE

THAT FOR EMPLOYEES. SO, EMPLOYEES CANNOT BE DESIGNATED FOR -- FOR THIS

POSITION.

MR. REILLY: SO AS A CEC MEMBER WHEN I WAS THE

SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT IN NEW YORK CITY, WHICH IS THE OLD SCHOOL

BOARDS, I WAS AN ELECTED VOLUNTEER. UNDER NEW YORK CITY RULES, I WAS

TECHNICALLY A PART-TIME EMPLOYEE, ALL RIGHT. SO, WOULD THAT MEAN AS --

WHAT'S THE DEFINITION THAT YOU ARE USING IN THIS BILL AS "EMPLOYEE."

MS. GRIFFIN: I WOULD JUST SAY IT WAS IF HE IS PAID

BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEN HE WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN EMPLOYEE --

MR. REILLY: EXACTLY.

MS. GRIFFIN: -- WHETHER PART-TIME OR NOT.

MR. REILLY: EXACTLY. BUT IF I'M -- IF I'M A

VOLUNTEER, I'M NOT GETTING PAID SO THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR CANNOT GIVE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ME PERMISSION THEN; IS THAT CORRECT?

MS. GRIFFIN: REPEAT THAT, PLEASE.

MR. REILLY: SO IF I'M A VOLUNTEER, I'M NOT GETTING

PAID. UNDER THAT DEFINITION THAT YOU JUST GAVE, I'M NOT AN EMPLOYEE.

SO, THEREFORE, THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR CANNOT GIVE ME WRITTEN

PERMISSION; IS THAT CORRECT?

MS. GRIFFIN: IF YOU ARE NOT EMPLOYED BY THE

SCHOOL -- SO, YOU ASKED SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS, SO IT'S A LITTLE

CONFUSING. IF YOU'RE NOT EMPLOYED BY THE SCHOOL. SO, IF YOU'RE NOT A

PART-TIME EMPLOYEE OR YOU'RE NOT ANY AFFILIATION WITH THE SCHOOL AND

YOU WERE VOLUNTEERING, YOU CAN HAVE THAT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. REILLY, YOUR TIME

HAS EXPIRED ON THIS 15, AND --

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING ME THE

TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY.

MR. WALCZYK.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I

WONDER IF THE SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GRIFFIN CONTINUES

TO YIELD.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU. I'M LOOKING FOR A

DEFINITION, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, MA'AM, FOR "NOT PRIMARILY EMPLOYED."

IT'S USED AND I THINK IT'S KIND OF A POINT OF CONTENTION IN THIS BILL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

CURRENTLY. WHAT DOES "NOT PRIMARILY EMPLOYED" MEAN?

MS. GRIFFIN: IN A SCHOOL DISTRICT -- THE INTENT OF

THIS BILL IS IN A SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE EDUCATORS, ADMINISTRATORS, THE STAFF

THAT WORKS IN THE SCHOOL, THEY ARE ALL PRIMARILY EMPLOYED BY THE SCHOOL

AS A TEACHER OR EDUCATOR OR IN SOME OTHER CAPACITY, THEY'RE WORKING AT

THE SCHOOL.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU. AND THROUGH YOU, MR.

SPEAKER, IF THE SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES.

MR. WALCZYK: IF -- IF I UNDERSTAND THIS PROPERLY,

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS, PEACE OFFICERS, POSSIBLY VILLAGE POLICE

OFFICERS, MANY OF THEM ARE WORKING IN A PART-TIME CAPACITY. THEY HAVE

OTHER FULL-TIME JOBS WHERE THEY ARE NOT PRIMARILY EMPLOYED EITHER BY

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR IN THAT ROLE IN THEIR PEACE OFFICER, POLICE OFFICER,

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER STATUS, WOULD THEY, AS YOU READ IT OR AS YOU'VE

WRITTEN THIS BILL, WOULD THEY BE PROHIBITED FROM ACTING AS A SCHOOL

RESOURCE OFFICER ON BEHALF OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT

GAVE THEM AUTHORIZATION?

MS. GRIFFIN: SO, IF THEY ARE POLICE OFFICERS UNDER

THAT 265.20, THAT ALLOWS LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE ON SCHOOL GROUND.

THEY HAVE AN EXEMPTION. THEY CAN BE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS.

MR. WALCZYK: LET ME JUST, AND I KNOW YOU READ

THIS EARLIER, BUT AS I READ THE BILL, IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME, "PROVIDED,

HOWEVER, NO SCHOOL AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION 10 OF SECTION 1125 OF

THE EDUCATION LAW SHALL ISSUE SUCH WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION TO ANY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

TEACHER, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR", OR HERE'S THE KEY PIECE, "OR OTHER

PERSON EMPLOYED AT THE SCHOOL WHO IS NOT PRIMARILY EMPLOYED AS A

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, POLICE OFFICER, PEACE OFFICER OR SECURITY GUARD

WHO HAS BEEN ISSUED A SPECIAL ARMED GUARD REGISTRATION CARD."

SO AS I READ THAT, WHAT I'M SEEING IS THAT IF THEY ARE

NOT PRIMARILY, AND YOU EVEN GIVE A PORTION TO A THIRD-PARTY OPTION

WHICH IS NICE, BECAUSE THOSE ARE IN -- IN THE FRONT YARD OF AMERICA, THE

RURAL AREA WHICH I REPRESENT, MANY OF THESE THIRD PARTIES WOULD BE

MUNICIPALITIES OR PRIVATE SECURITY COMPANIES THAT SCHOOL DISTRICTS COULD

SAVE MONEY AND STILL HAVE THAT OPTION FOR A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER.

BUT AS I READ YOUR BILL -- AND WOULD YOU READ YOUR BILL TO PROHIBIT THOSE

OPPORTUNITIES FOR A VILLAGE POLICE OFFICER TO STEP INTO THAT ROLE AS A

SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER.

MS. GRIFFIN: YEAH. SO, IT SEEMS THAT -- I'VE SAID

THIS BEFORE AND IT SEEMS THAT THIS APPLIES TO THESE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE

BEEN ASKED IN DIFFERENT WAYS, THAT 265.20 ALLOWS LAW ENFORCEMENT TO

BE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS. THEY GET AN EXEMPTION FROM WHAT'S STATED IN

THIS BILL. SO, IN ANY OF THESE RURAL AREAS, THERE IS THAT OPTION.

MR. WALCZYK: SO YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT LAW

ENFORCEMENT, EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT PRIMARILY EMPLOYED AS LAW

ENFORCEMENT, COULD BE AUTHORIZED TO BE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS IN THAT

CAPACITY; IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING?

MS. GRIFFIN: IF THEY'RE LAW ENFORCEMENT, THEY DON'T

NEED THE AUTHORIZATION. YOU KNOW, THEY CAN BE ON -- THEY CAN BE HIRED

TO BE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS. THEY COULD VOLUNTEER, THEY COULD BE ASKED TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS IF THEY HAVE VOLUNTEERED FOR THAT ROLE.

MR. WALCZYK: SO IN A -- IN A VOLUNTEER CAPACITY,

EVEN IF THEY -- EVEN IF THEY AREN'T CURRENTLY EMPLOYED AS A -- FOR A

THIRD-PARTY OR AS A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, IF THEY HAVE THOSE

CREDENTIALS AS A RETIREE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COULD STILL AUTHORIZE -- IT'S

YOUR UNDERSTANDING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COULD STILL AUTHORIZE THEM TO BE

ON SCHOOL GROUNDS IN THAT CAPACITY?

MS. GRIFFIN: YES.

MR. WALCZYK: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. SALKA.

MR. SALKA: ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. SALKA: THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HAD THE HONOR

TO SPEAK TO MY PEERS IN THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS AND

IT'S -- IT'S -- IT'S TRULY AN HONOR AND I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT BEING HERE. I

WANT TO RELAY MY UNDERSTANDING FOR THE PASSION THAT THE SPONSOR HAS

FOR THIS BILL. THERE'S NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROTECTING OUR

CHILDREN; IT'S OUR MOST VALUABLE ASSET. AND IT'S A TRAGEDY WHEN ANY LIFE

IS LOST DUE TO GUN VIOLENCE. IT'S A TRAGEDY WHEN ANY PARENT LOSES A

CHILD. I KNOW THAT EXPERIENCE NOT FROM GUN VIOLENCE, BUT IT'S JUST A -- A

PARENT'S WORSE NIGHTMARE AND WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO

MAKE SURE THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN.

BEFORE I RAN FOR THE ASSEMBLY, I WAS A SCHOOL BOARD

MEMBER AND A SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT OF A SMALL LITTLE RURAL SCHOOL IN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SOUTHERN MADISON COUNTY, BROOKFIELD CENTRAL. AND WE HAVE ABOUT

230 YOUNG PEOPLE IN THAT DISTRICT AND WE, AS SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS

WHO LIVE IN THAT DISTRICT, ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT OUR

CHILDREN ARE EDUCATED WELL, AND FIRST AND FOREMOST, ARE PROTECTED. NOW

BROOKFIELD'S IN A SOUTHERN PART OF MADISON COUNTY. THE OLD JOKE IS,

YOU KNOW, WHERE THE HECK IS BROOKFIELD? BECAUSE WE'RE SO FAR FROM

EVERYWHERE. ROUTE 20 IS PROBABLY 20 OR 25 MINUTES AWAY. ROUTE 8,

WHICH IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, IS VERY FAR AWAY, ROUTE 12. SO, WE ARE

FAR LOGISTICALLY FROM ANY SOURCE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PROTECTION.

WE'RE 35 MINUTES FROM THE LOCAL STATE TROOPER BARRACKS. WE'RE AT

LEAST A HALF-HOUR OR MORE FROM THE LOCAL SHERIFFS AND THEIR ABILITY TO

PROTECT US.

SO, IF SOMETHING DOES, IN FACT, OCCUR IN OUR -- IN OUR

SMALL TOWN, ESSENTIALLY WE -- WE HAVE NO PROTECTION. AND TO BE ABLE TO

ELIMINATE ANY POSSIBILITY FOR THOSE PEOPLE IN OUR SCHOOL THAT KNOW THEIR

CHILDREN, LOVE THEIR CHILDREN AND MANY OF THOSE TEACHERS, AS A MATTER OF

FACT, AND STAFF, YOU KNOW, I'VE HUNTED WITH AND ARE VERY WELL AWARE OF

HOW TO HANDLE A GUN SAFELY. AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE

SAYING THAT YOU, WHO HAVE SHOWN RESPONSIBILITY TIME AND TIME AGAIN TO

BE ABLE TO HAVE A FIREARM, YOU OBVIOUSLY TRULY LOVE THE CHILDREN OF OUR

COMMUNITY AND OF OUR SCHOOL, BUT WE'RE TELLING THEM NO, YOU CAN'T

PROTECT THOSE CHILDREN.

NOW, AS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER, WE ALWAYS USED TO

ROLL OUR EYES WHEN ANOTHER MANDATE CAME DOWN FROM THE STATE. IT

WOULD EITHER COST US MONEY OR TOOK SOME KIND OF CONTROL AWAY FROM US

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ON A LOCAL LEVEL. THIS ESSENTIALLY DOES THAT. THESE MEN AND WOMEN

WHO SERVE ON THESE SCHOOL BOARDS KNOW THEIR AREAS, KNOW THEIR

DISTRICTS, KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE. A LOT OF TIMES LIVE RIGHT NEXT

DOOR TO THEM OR EVEN HAVE CHILDREN, AS I DID, IN THAT DISTRICT. AND TO BE

ABLE OR TO HAVE TO TAKE THAT PROTECTION AWAY FROM THEM TO BE ABLE TO

LOOK OUT OVER THEIR COMMUNITY TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE SAFE AND THEIR

CHILDREN ARE SAFE I THINK IS -- IS -- IS JUST DOING A DISSERVICE.

NOW, THERE'S 35 TOWNS IN MY DISTRICT AND MANY, MANY

OF THEM ARE RURAL. MANY OF THEM FIT THE SAME BILL AS MY SCHOOL DISTRICT,

QUITE A WAYS AWAY FROM ANY KIND OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PROTECTION. AND

ALSO, GIVEN THE FACT THAT MOST OF THESE SCHOOLS HAVE A TIGHT BUDGET; AS A

MATTER OF FACT, MY SCHOOL DISTRICT, BROOKFIELD CENTRAL, WAS CUT IN THIS

YEAR'S BUDGET. THAT GIVES US EVEN LESS MONEY TO WORK WITH AND LESS

MONEY TO DO WHAT OUR FIRST AND FOREMOST TASK IS, IS TO EDUCATE OUR

CHILDREN AS WELL AS WE CAN. SO, THEY MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY HAVE THOSE

FUNDS TO HIRE A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER. NOW IN MADISON COUNTY,

WHICH IS MY HOME COUNTY, THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DID PUT

MONEY FORWARD THIS YEAR THAT WOULD PAY FOR 50 PERCENT OF THE SCHOOL

RESOURCE COST FOR SCHOOLS. AND SOME SCHOOLS HAVE COME FORWARD AND

HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THAT, BUT THERE ARE OTHER SCHOOLS WHO JUST

SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY.

SO, NOT BEING ABLE TO HIRE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, NOT

BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE WHAT ARE VERY COMPETENT TEACHERS AND/OR STAFF TO

BE ABLE TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, AGAIN, I FEEL IS LEAVING THEM SITTING

DUCKS. THESE ARE GUN-FREE ZONES. THESE ARE AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE AN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OPPORTUNITY WHEN THEY NEED IT TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT THEIR CHILDREN AND

I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS TODAY. AND, AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE PASSION

THAT EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS IN THIS ROOM FOR THEIR CHILDREN, AS I DO, AND

I THINK THAT IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO TRULY PROTECT OUR CHILDREN IN RURAL

DISTRICTS, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO GIVE OUR LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS AND OUR

LOCAL ADMINISTRATORS AT LEAST THE CHOICE. THEY'VE PROVEN THEIR

RESPONSIBILITY IN BEING ABLE TO DO THEIR JOBS. I THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE

ABLE TO LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AND BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION ON A LOCAL

LEVEL ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN. BUT,

AGAIN, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR -- FOR YOUR SPONSORSHIP AND I APPRECIATE

YOUR PASSION.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. BLAKE TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BLAKE: THANK YOU TO THE SPONSORS ON THE BILL.

THIS -- TO EXPLAIN THE VOTE IN PARTICULAR, WHEN THINKING ABOUT THE

IMPORTANCE OF THIS, IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER, AS IT RELATES TO

PARKLAND, WHICH WE HAD THE HONOR OF HAVING SEVERAL OF THE STUDENTS

COME UP TO OUR DISTRICT RECENTLY, THAT THE ARMED SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER

THERE ACTUALLY LEFT THE GROUNDS. SO, THE NOTION THAT'S BEING CONVEYED IN

THE OPPOSITE OF HAVING TO HAVE MORE ARMED INDIVIDUALS AROUND WOULD

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

LEAD TO SHOOTING STOPPING, WHICH WAS ALSO CONVEYED BY SEVERAL

PERSONS, IS NOT ONLY INFLAMMATORY, BUT IT'S UNACCEPTABLE.

AND SO, TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE STOOD UP

REPEATEDLY TO SAY THAT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, WHETHER IT BE MOMS DEMAND

ACTION, WHETHER IT BE SAVE OUR STREETS, WHETHER IT BE LIFE CAM, YOU

KNOW, ALL THE DIFFERENT GROUPS. THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE NEED THIS KIND

OF LEGISLATION BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT IS ABOUT GETTING MORE CONTAINMENT SO

YOU HAVE LESS GUNS NEAR THESE SCHOOLS RATHER THAN THE OTHERWISE THAT'S

HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.

SO, DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION, BUT IT WAS

IMPORTANT TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT, THAT JUST ARMING SCHOOL RESOURCE

OFFICERS WHO DO NOT HAVE THE TRAINING TO ACTUALLY GO WITHIN FACILITIES,

THEY'RE ACTUALLY TRAINED TO STAY OUTSIDE THE GROUNDS, IS NOT HOW YOU

ADDRESS THE PROBLEM ON GUN VIOLENCE. THIS BILL WILL ACTUALLY DO THAT. I

PROUDLY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BLAKE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. GLICK.

MS. GLICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY

VOTE. I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION BECAUSE OF THE

PREVALENCE OF SCHOOL SHOOTINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE ARMING EVERYONE

WHO IS IN THE SCHOOL. TEACHERS -- AND THERE ARE SOME STATES WHERE

THERE ARE SOME TEACHERS WHO HAVE EMBRACED THAT OPPORTUNITY. BUT I DO

THINK THAT THE FEWER GUNS, PARTICULARLY IN THE HANDS OF THOSE WHO ARE

NOT TRAINED AND TRAINED FOR A LONG TIME TO USE THEM IN AN EMERGENCY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SITUATION. AFTER VIRGINIA TECH, THERE WAS A STUDY DONE AND IT WAS

DETERMINED THAT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT POLICE OFFICERS USE TWO HANDS

IS BECAUSE THE ADRENALINE THAT HAPPENS IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION

RESULTS IN FLOODING YOUR MUSCLES, LARGE AND SMALL, WITH ADRENALINE.

AND YOUR LARGE MUSCLES USE THEM TO RUN AND IS A GOOD THING, BUT WHAT

HAPPENS IS THAT YOUR CAPACITY TO HOLD YOUR HANDS STEADY IN YOUR

SMALLER MUSCLES IS ACTUALLY IMPEDED.

AND SO, HAVING A SLIGHTLY TRAINED PERSON WITH A GUN IN

A CROWDED CLASSROOM IS LIKELY TO RESULT IN MORE CARNAGE, NOT LESS. AND

I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AS I THANK THE

SPONSOR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GRIFFIN.

MS. GRIFFIN: YES. I JUST WANTED TO THANK ALL THE

SUPPORTERS OF THE BILL AND ALL OF THE SPONSORS OF THE BILL. I THINK THIS IS

A REALLY IMPORTANT BILL BECAUSE I THINK IT DOES WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN

NEW YORK STATE. SOMETIMES NEW YORK STATE HAS TO SPEAK TO THE

SCHOOL DISTRICTS, AND THERE ARE MANY TIMES AND IN MANY CASES WE FEEL

THAT AN OVERALL RULE FOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN NEW YORK STATE CAN

MAKE STUDENTS SAFER, AND THIS HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES. THERE USED TO

BE A TIME THAT YOU WERE ALLOWED TO SMOKE IN SCHOOLS. NEW YORK STATE

DECIDED YOU WEREN'T ALLOWED TO DO THAT. THERE IS BACKGROUND CHECKS,

THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS WE DO IN NEW YORK STATE TO MAKE OUR

SCHOOLS SAFER, AND TODAY, THIS IS JUST ONE MORE THING THAT MADE OUR

SCHOOLS SAFER AND I FEEL LIKE THIS BILL, FOR ME, IS IN HONOR OF SCOTT

BEIGEL, BECAUSE HE WAS A TEACHER AND HE DID EVERYTHING HE COULD AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HE DIED SAVING HIS STUDENTS. AND WE COULDN'T ASK MORE OF ANY TEACHER,

BUT I DO COMMEND HIS PARENTS, LINDA AND MICHAEL SCHULMAN. BECAUSE

OF THEM, THEY HAVE GONE OUT, EVER SINCE THEIR SON WAS MURDERED, THEY

HAVE GONE OUT AND SPOKEN ALL OVER THE COUNTRY ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT

THIS IS. AND TO ME, IF YOU ARE A -- IF YOU'RE A SKILLED GUN -- A SKILLED --

SKILLED WITH GUNS AND YOU'RE A TEACHER, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CAN

PROTECT YOUR CLASS, BECAUSE YOU MIGHT -- YOU DON'T HAVE THAT

EMERGENCY TRAINING, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO ALL OF A SUDDEN ACT AS A -- AS A

POLICE OFFICER COULD ACT.

AND SO I FEEL LIKE THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS WE CAN DO

TO MAKE OUR SCHOOLS SAFER, BUT THIS BILL -- AND THIS BILL DOES JUST THAT. IT

MAKES OUR SCHOOLS SAFER, IT DECREASES THE STRESS AND FEAR FROM OUR

TEACHERS AND OUR STUDENTS AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE SPONSORED THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'M GOING TO BE

SUPPORTING THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND I THANK THE SPONSOR, BUT -- BUT I

THINK THERE WERE A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT POINTS THAT WERE RAISED TODAY.

AND SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND, YOU KNOW, WE -- LAST

YEAR, WE DID A PACKAGE OF BILLS AND THERE WAS A PACKAGE OF BILLS DONE

DOWN THE HALL AND THEY KIND OF NEVER CAME TOGETHER. OBVIOUSLY, A

NUMBER OF THESE ARE NOW GOING TO BE SIGNED INTO LAW.

BUT WE DO STILL NEED TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT

PROVIDING RESOURCES TO OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS SO THAT THOSE LOCAL SCHOOL

BOARDS AND THEIR SUPERINTENDENTS AND ADMINISTRATORS CAN FIND SOLUTIONS

THAT WORK FOR THEIR, NOT JUST THEIR DISTRICTS, BUT THEIR INDIVIDUAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BUILDINGS. SO, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, RESOURCES FOR PHYSICAL SECURITY

IMPROVEMENTS, BECAUSE ONE BUILDING MAY NEED SOMETHING ANOTHER

BUILDING DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS,

AND AS WELL AS FUNDING FOR SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS, WHICH SOME AREAS

HAVE THEM AND OTHERS DON'T.

AND, AGAIN, I THINK PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THOSE

LOCAL DISTRICTS TO DECIDE WHAT IS GOING TO WORK BEST FOR SECURING THEIR

BUILDINGS IS WHAT WE -- WHAT WE OUGHT TO BE DOING. SO, I HOPE THAT WE

ALL KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS AND

HOPEFULLY LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO PROVIDE THOSE RESOURCES TO OUR LOCAL

DISTRICTS SO THAT THEY CAN DO THEIR BEST TO KEEP OUR STUDENTS SAFE. THANK

YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. SAYEGH.

MR. SAYEGH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER,

JUST ON THE BILL. I WANTED TO INDICATE THAT AS A TRUSTEE OF A BOARD OF

EDUCATION, WHEN MANY SCHOOL DISTRICTS ACROSS THE NATION, WHEN

IMPACTED BY TRAGEDIES AND SHOOTINGS AT SCHOOLS, IT WAS SAID THAT THE

MAIN RESPONSE THAT WE HEARD WAS ARM EVERYBODY AND GIVE GUNS TO

TEACHERS, AND THIS IS TOTALLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT NEEDED TO HAPPEN.

WHAT HAPPENED IN CASES THAT I WAS PERSONALLY

INVOLVED AS A TRUSTEE OF A LARGE SCHOOL DISTRICT, IS WE TOOK THOSE

CONCERNS AND REACHED OUT AND DEMANDED THAT THE POLICE, LOCAL LAW

ENFORCEMENT AND THE EDUCATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS AND SUPERINTENDENTS

MET TOGETHER AND THEY ESTABLISHED GREATER SAFETY INITIATIVES. FOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

EXAMPLE, TO MAKE SURE THAT SCHOOLS HAD SAFETY CAMERAS AND THAT

HALLWAYS AND ALL PARTS OF THE BUILDINGS WERE WELL-LIGHTED AND TO MAKE

SURE THAT THERE WAS A SPECIAL SECURITY SYSTEM WHENEVER, GOD FORBID,

THERE WAS A SERIOUS CRIME IN A SCHOOL, LAW ENFORCEMENT WAS EASILY

MADE AWARE THROUGH THESE TECHNOLOGICAL SYSTEMS THAT ARE NOW IN

PLACE, AND IT CAUSES A MUCH SAFER SITUATION TO HAVE EXPERIENCED AND --

AND -- AND -- AND INCREDIBLE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS AT SCHOOL

FACILITIES.

THIS INITIATIVE GETS THE GUNS OUT OF HANDS THAT MAY NOT

HAVE THE EXPERIENCE AND MAY, AT THE END OF THE DAY, CAUSE MORE

DANGERS. SO, IT REALLY FORCES LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EDUCATORS TO SIT ON

THE TABLE TOGETHER AND THERE'S WELL-KNOWN PROCEDURES THAT'S NOT

REINVENTING THE WHEEL THAT THEY CAN INITIATE AND SUPPORT TO PROMOTE

SAFETY WITHOUT HAVING GUNS THAT ARE THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL BUILDING THAT

I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WANT. THIS IS WHY I SUPPORTED THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SAYEGH IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. ABINANTI.

MR. ABINANTI: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TO

SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION. I COMMEND THE SPONSOR.

I'D LIKE TO ADD A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS TO THIS

CONVERSATION. FIRST OF ALL, LET'S CLARIFY THAT THIS LEGISLATION LEAVES WITH

THE SCHOOL BOARDS THE POWER TO DESIGNATE WHO THEY WANT TO PROTECT THE

STUDENTS. ALL IT DOES IS SAY THAT YOU CANNOT INCLUDE IN THAT DESIGNATION

TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS AND OTHERS WHO HAVE ANOTHER PRIMARY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH IS TO TEACH AND TO ADMINISTER THE SCHOOL. AND I

SUGGEST THAT THERE ARE GOOD REASONS, GOOD POLICY REASONS FOR MAKING

THIS DISTINCTION. THOSE WHO ARE ASSIGNED THE RESPONSIBILITY OF

PROTECTING THE STUDENTS SHOULD BE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRAINED IN THAT ART OF

PROTECTING THE SCHOOL, NOT JUST SOMEONE WHO MAY BE SKILLED WITH A

GUN. IT'S BEEN SAID BEFORE, WE SHOULD REPEAT IT, IT IS A SPECIAL SKILL TO BE

ABLE TO RESPOND TO A SHOOTER ON A CAMPUS.

SECONDLY, I THINK THIS LEGISLATION MAKES IT CLEAR TO

SCHOOL BOARDS, DON'T EVER BE TEMPTED TO CONSIDER AS ONE OF THE FACTORS

IN HIRING A TEACHER OR AN ADMINISTRATOR THEIR SKILL WITH A GUN. THAT'S

NOT WHY YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE HIRING THEM. YOU'RE HIRING THEM FOR

OTHER REASONS. WE'RE MAKING IT VERY CLEAR AS A POLICY, THAT SHOULD NOT

BE A CONSIDERATION IN HIRING A SCHOOL EMPLOYEE. AND, LASTLY, I WANT TO

SUGGEST THAT WHEN AN EMPLOYEE HAS ANOTHER FUNCTION, TO RUN A

CLASSROOM, TO BE AN ADMINISTRATOR, THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY PAYING

ATTENTION TO WHERE THEIR WEAPON IS OR WHO THEY'RE WITH. THEY MIGHT BE

WITH A BUNCH OF STUDENTS WHO ARE IN A LOCKER ROOM SOMEWHERE AND

THEY'RE DISTRACTED. AND THAT MAKES A GUN AVAILABLE TO SOMEONE ELSE

WHO MIGHT MISUSE IT. ON THE OTHER HAND, A RESOURCE OFFICER OR A POLICE

OFFICER IS TRAINED TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE WEAPON AND TO FOCUS ON

PROTECTING THE STUDENTS.

SO, THEREFORE, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD BILL. I URGE PEOPLE

TO VOTE FOR IT AND I WILL VOTE FOR IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU. TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ALL OF US HERE WERE ELECTED AS ASSEMBLYMEMBERS, AND I APPRECIATE THE

DEBATES THAT I HAVE HEARD BOTH FOR AND AGAINST THE WISDOM OF THIS BILL,

AND FOR AND AGAINST THE WISDOM OF ALLOWING SCHOOL PERSONNEL TO BE

ARMED. BUT THERE ARE ANOTHER GROUP OF ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO ARE

ELECTED SPECIFICALLY TO RUN OUR LOCAL SCHOOLS, AND THAT'S THE SCHOOL

BOARD. THE CURRENT LAW ALLOWS THE SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE

ELECTED TO REPRESENT THEIR DISTRICT, IT ALLOWS THEM TO MAKE THE DECISION

WHETHER OR NOT EMPLOYEES OF THE SCHOOL SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CARRY

GUNS OR NOT, AND THEY ARE IN THE BEST SITUATION TO EVALUATE WHETHER THE

RESPONSE FROM THE LOCAL POLICE IS ADEQUATE OR NOT OR WHAT ALL THE

ALTERNATIVES ARE. WE ARE NOT A SUPER SCHOOL BOARD AND IT'S

INAPPROPRIATE FOR US TO ASSUME THAT ROLE. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALLACE.

MS. WALLACE: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE IN

SUPPORT OF THIS BILL BECAUSE LIKE SO MANY IN THIS CHAMBER, I THINK WE

ALL AGREE THAT IT'S REALLY NOT A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE TEACHERS WHO ARE

PRIMARILY RESPONSIBLE FOR TEACHING CHILDREN, GIVING THEM THE ADDED

RESPONSIBILITY OF ALSO WORRYING ABOUT PROTECTING THEM WITH A WEAPON.

BUT I DO RISE TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD THAT IT IS MY

UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS BILL WILL NOT APPLY TO SPORTSMAN'S CLUBS THAT USE

NRA PRECISION AIR RIFLES. I KNOW THAT I HAVE SCHOOLS IN MY DISTRICT

WHERE STUDENTS DO ENGAGE IN THOSE CLUBS AND I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT MY

UNDERSTANDING UNDER THE BILL IS THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO APPLY TO THOSE IN

ANY WAY AND WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, I VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.

THANK YOU.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

AND I BELIEVE THIS IS YOUR FIRST BILL.

(APPLAUSE)

CONGRATULATIONS, MS. GRIFFIN. IT NEVER GETS BETTER THAN

THIS.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. WE ARE MOVING ALONG. WE COULD GO A LITTLE FASTER, BUT WE'RE

PLODDING ALONG. BUT I WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO INTERRUPT THE

PROCEEDINGS FOR A MOMENT TO INTRODUCE SOME REALLY GREAT PEOPLE THAT I

HAD TO OPPORTUNITY TO MEET EARLIER TODAY. LINDA BEIGEL AND HER

HUSBAND, SCHULMAN. LINDA IS THE MOTHER OF SCOTT BEIGEL, WHO WAS

KILLED IN A SHOOTING THAT TOOK PLACE ON FEBRUARY THE 14TH, 2018 AT

MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL IN PARKLAND, FLORIDA. THE

SCHULMAN'S ARE NEIGHBORS OF OUR OWN COLLEAGUE, MR. STERN, AND SCOTT

WAS A GREAT TEACHER THAT EVERYONE LOVED AT MSD SCHOOL. HE WAS BOTH

AN ATHLETE, A COACH AND HIS COMMUNITY REALLY, REALLY ADMIRED HIM. HE

ACTUALLY DIED PROTECTING HIS STUDENTS DURING THE VALENTINE'S DAY

MASSACRE THAT TOOK THE LIVES OF 16 PEOPLE. HIS PARENTS ARE HERE WITH

US. THEY HONOR HIS LEGACY, MR. SPEAKER, AND SO DO WE, SO IF YOU COULD

GIVE THEM THE CORDIALITIES OF THE FLOOR, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY. ON BEHALF

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OF MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES, THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE

WELCOME YOU HERE TO THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY. WE EXTEND TO

YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR AND OUR GRATITUDE AND PRAYERS THAT YOU

WILL CONTINUE TO BE STRONG IN THE FACE OF THE HORRORS THAT YOU HAVE

FACED, AND CONTINUE TO WORK FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR SOCIETY. THANK

YOU SO VERY MUCH. CONGRATULATIONS.

(APPLAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, IF WE CAN

NOW CALL RULES REPORT NO. 24, 26 -- BILL NO. 2689 BY MS. SIMON.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: BILL NO. A02689, RULES NO. 24,

SIMON, LENTOL, HEASTIE, PEOPLES-STOKES, ORTIZ, DICKENS, PICHARDO,

GOTTFRIED, MOSLEY, GALEF, GLICK, JOYNER, L. ROSENTHAL, O'DONNELL,

FAHY, SEAWRIGHT, D'URSO, ENGLEBRIGHT, QUART, CARROLL, PAULIN,

MAGNARELLI, HUNTER, DE LA ROSA, TAYLOR, ABINANTI, LAVINE, RIVERA,

BARRON, VANEL, ZEBROWSKI, NIOU, STECK, DINOWITZ, SIMOTAS, BLAKE,

JAFFEE, ROZIC, AUBRY, WRIGHT, OTIS, WEPRIN, DAVILA, BICHOTTE, ARROYO,

BUCHWALD, BURKE, GRIFFIN, JACOBSON, MCMAHON, STERN, BRONSON, CRUZ,

REYES, SAYEGH, FRONTUS. AN ACT TO AMEND THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND

RULES AND THE PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING EXTREME RISK

PROTECTION ORDERS AS COURT-ISSUED ORDERS OF PROTECTION PROHIBITING A

PERSON FROM PURCHASING, POSSESSING OR ATTEMPTING TO PURCHASE OR

POSSESS A FIREARM, RIFLE OR SHOTGUN.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SIMON, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED.

MR. GOODELL.

AN EXPLANATION IS REQUESTED, MS. SIMON.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. FAMILY AND

HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS AND SCHOOL OFFICIALS ARE VERY OFTEN THE FIRST TO

KNOW WHEN SOMEONE IS EXPERIENCING A CRISIS OR EXHIBITING DANGEROUS

BEHAVIOR. MANY EVEN REPORT THEIR FEARS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT. IN NEW

YORK, AS IN MANY STATES, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MAY NOT HAVE THE

AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE BASED ON THE EVIDENCE THEY'RE PROVIDED WITH,

INTERVENTIONS THAT COULD HELP PREVENT TRAGEDIES FROM OCCURRING

INCLUDING INTERPERSONAL GUN VIOLENCE AND GUN SUICIDE. ONE NEW

YORKER DIES BY SUICIDE BY GUN EVERY 19 HOURS.

IN 2014, CALIFORNIA BECAME THE FIRST STATE IN THE NATION

TO ENACT A LAW EMPOWERING FAMILY MEMBERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT TO

PETITION A COURT TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL'S ACCESS TO GUNS TEMPORARILY

SUSPENDED WHEN THEY ARE AT RISK OF HARMING THEMSELVES OR OTHERS. IN

2016, WASHINGTON STATE ENACTED SIMILAR MEASURES THROUGH A BALLOT

INITIATIVE. LAWS PROVIDING A PROCEDURE FOR THE REMOVAL OF FIREARMS

FROM AT-RISK INDIVIDUALS HAVE EXISTED FOR YEARS IN THE STATE OF INDIANA.

NOW, WITH THE ESCALATION OF SCHOOL SHOOTINGS AND

OTHER MASS SHOOTINGS, A TOTAL OF 13 STATES HAVE PASSED BILLS LIKE OUR

EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER BILL TODAY, OR ERPO, WHICH IS ALSO

KNOWN AS A RED FLAG BILL. STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT A SIMILAR PROVISION

IN CONNECTICUT HAS RESULTED IN A MEASURABLE REDUCTION IN SUICIDE RATES

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AND SINCE OCTOBER 1ST IN MARYLAND, ERPO HAS STOPPED 148 PEOPLE

WHO ARE ARMED AND A DANGER TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS FROM ACTING ON

THOSE IMPULSES, SAVING AN UNTOLD NUMBER OF LIVES.

THIS BODY TOOK A VERY IMPORTANT STEP PROTECTING NEW

YORKERS WHEN IT PASSED THIS MEASURE THE PAST TWO SESSIONS. SINCE ITS

FIRST PASSAGE, THE NATION HAS SUFFERED FROM SEVERAL MASS SHOOTINGS,

WHICH HAVE SHOCKED OUR CONSCIENCE, INCLUDING AT MARJORY STONEMAN

DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL IN PARKLAND, FLORIDA, WHEN THE EXTREME RISK

PROTECTION ORDER COULD HAVE PREVENTED A MASS MURDER. IN PITTSBURGH,

WHERE A GUNMAN WHO HAD DEMONSTRATED WARNING SIGNS THAT HE WAS

ARMED AND A DANGER TO HIMSELF OR OTHERS, KILLED 11 PEOPLE WORSHIPING

IN THEIR SYNAGOGUE.

SINCE THE FIRST OF THIS YEAR AMERICA HAS EXPERIENCED

27 MASS SHOOTINGS. TODAY IS JANUARY 29TH. THERE IS NO TIME LIKE THE

PRESENT. FORTY-PERCENT OF MASS SHOOTERS WERE KNOWN TO OTHERS TO HAVE

EXHIBITED SIGNS OF BEING A DANGER TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS. WE GRIEVE

FOR THOSE WHO HAVE SUFFERED, AND I'M CERTAIN THAT THIS LEGISLATIVE BODY,

BY PASSING THIS COMMONSENSE BILL, WILL PREVENT NEEDLESS TRAGEDIES HERE

IN NEW YORK. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. MONTESANO.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A FEW QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

SIMON?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. SIMON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU, MS. SIMON. THIS

IS A BILL WE'VE DEBATED ONCE BEFORE AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS BILL A

COUPLE OF TIMES ON THE FLOOR, AND I NOTICE NOW THIS BILL, SINCE IT WAS ON

LAST YEAR AND NOW THIS YEAR, IT TALKS ABOUT NOW INCLUDING SCHOOL

TEACHERS AND SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS AS PART OF THE REPORTERS AND PEOPLE

THAT COULD BRING ON A PETITION IN THIS SPECIAL PROCEEDING; IS THAT

CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: YES. ACTUALLY, IT WOULD BE A PERSON

THAT WOULD BE DESIGNATED BY THE SCHOOL.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. NOW, THIS PERSON THAT

GETS DESIGNATED BY THE SCHOOL, SO THEY'RE THE SOLE PERSON THAT COULD

BRING ON THE PETITION; AM I CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: I'M SORRY. CAN YOU ASK THAT QUESTION

AGAIN?

MR. MONTESANO: SO THEY'LL BE THE ONLY PERSON

WITHIN THE SCHOOL THAT CAN BRING ON THE PETITION?

MS. SIMON: THAT IS THE WAY IT IS SET UP AT THIS

JUNCTURE, SO THAT A TEACHER, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY HAD THIS INFORMATION

COULD BRING IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE APPROPRIATE PERSON IN THEIR SCHOOL

AND THE SCHOOLS CAN ACT, DESIGNATE WHO IT IS, WHO WOULD BE THE PERSON

TO ACTUALLY FILE SUCH A PETITION.

MR. MONTESANO: NOW THE PERSON THAT'S GOING TO

BRING ON THIS PETITION, ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE TO RECEIVE TRAINING IN ANY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WAY ON HOW TO COMMENCE THIS PROCEEDING?

MS. SIMON: NO. THEY'RE FREE TO HAVE COUNSEL. MY

GUESS IS THAT SCHOOL DISTRICT MIGHT HAVE COUNSEL BE THERE. THERE WILL

BE A PROCEDURE CREATED BY THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE FILING OF SUCH

ORDERS AND, TODAY, IF SOMEONE NEEDS AN ORDER OF PROTECTION, THEY ARE

FREE TO GO -- FOR ANOTHER REASON, LET'S SAY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, A WOMAN

IS FREE TO GO TO COURT TO SEEK A PROTECTIVE ORDER. SHE DOESN'T NEED

PARTICULAR TRAINING IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. YES. BUT NOW WE'RE

INCLUDING SCHOOL TEACHERS AND SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS TO GET THEMSELVES

INVOLVED IN A LEGAL PROCEEDING. AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHEN

A PARENT DOES IT OR, YOU KNOW, A SPOUSE DOES IT. WE'RE INVOLVING

SCHOOL TEACHERS AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DEBATES TODAY ON WHETHER WE

SHOULD INVOLVE SCHOOL TEACHERS AND MANY DIFFERENT EVENTS THAT GO ON IN

THE SCHOOL. SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY FUNDING PROVIDED TO THE

SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THIS TYPE OF SERVICE OR PROCEEDING?

MS. SIMON: NOT IN THIS BILL. THAT WOULD BE,

PERHAPS, A REQUEST YOU WOULD MAKE IN THE BUDGET.

MR. MONTESANO: SO THE WAY THE BILL GOES NOW AT

THIS TIME, IT COULD BE DETERMINED TO BE AN UNFUNDED MANDATE UPON THE

SCHOOL DISTRICTS; AM I CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD DISAGREE WITH

-- WITH YOUR TERMINOLOGY, BUT THIS IS NOT A MANDATED REPORTING. THIS IS

NOT A MANDATE. THIS IS A TOOL THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE WHO ARE AWARE THAT

SOMEONE IS DEMONSTRATIVELY DANGEROUS, SUCH AS THE SHOOTER AT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PARKLAND, SUCH AS THE SHOOTER IN SO MANY OTHER INSTANCES.

MR. MONTESANO: SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS: IF WE

HAVE THIS KIND OF SITUATION PRESENT ITSELF IN THE SCHOOLS, WHY CAN'T THE

SCHOOL AUTHORITIES SIMPLY CALL THE POLICE AND ALLOW THEM, UNDER THIS

BILL, OR OTHER PROCEEDINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO COMMENCE A PETITION IN THE

COURTS?

MS. SIMON: THEY COULD.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO WHY ARE WE PUTTING

THE TEACHERS AND SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS INTO A LEGAL PROCEEDING RATHER

THAN LETTING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE TAKE CARE OF THIS?

MS. SIMON: WELL, WE'RE NOT PUTTING THEM INTO THE

PROCEEDING. WE ARE PERMITTING THEM TO DO SO IF THAT IS THE DECISION

THEY MAKE BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. AND SO, THEY CAN GO TO LAW

ENFORCEMENT. RIGHT NOW, LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN'T ACT BECAUSE WE DON'T

HAVE THE RIGHT FOR A TEMPORARY EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER.

MR. MONTESANO: UNDERSTOOD, AND THAT'S NOT MY

ARGUMENT BECAUSE I KNOW IN PREVIOUS VERSIONS OF THE BILL THAT I COULD

SUPPORT THAT INVOLVED LAW ENFORCEMENT AND MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS AND

EVEN THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST OR PSYCHIATRIST, SCHOOL NURSE, DON'T HAVE

AN ISSUE WITH. BUT NOW, WE'RE INCLUDING SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS AND

TEACHERS INTO THIS WHERE I THINK IS -- IT NOW BECOMES THE PROBLEM AND

PUTS THEM AT AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE -- DISADVANTAGE, I'M SORRY. SO, AS --

AS WE MOVE ALONG, AND YOU SAY THEY'RE NOT MANDATED REPORTERS, BUT THIS

IS A PROVISION OF LAW THAT WE'RE PASSING. DOESN'T IT MAKE IT INCUMBENT

UPON THEM TO DO SOMETHING AND IF THEY DON'T ACT, THEY CAN BE HELD

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

CIVILLY LIABLE FOR NOT TAKING ACTION?

MS. SIMON: WELL, THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE,

NUMBER ONE, BECAUSE THERE'S NO MANDATE SO THEY WOULD NOT BE HELD

CIVILLY LIABLE FOR NOT TAKING AN ACTION. AND, NUMBER TWO, BECAUSE OF,

IN FACT, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED PREVIOUSLY, WE HAVE

TIGHTENED UP THE LANGUAGE IN THIS BILL. AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE BILL

READS, "WHERE A SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR IS DEFINED IN SECTION 1125 OF THE

EDUCATION LAW, OR A SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR'S DESIGNEE OF ANY SCHOOL IN

WHICH THE PERSON AGAINST WHOM THE ORDER IS SOUGHT IS CURRENTLY

ENROLLED OR HAS BEEN ENROLLED IN THE SIX MONTHS IMMEDIATELY

PROCEEDING THE FILING OF THE PETITION." SO, IT IS NOT NEARLY AS

OPEN-ENDED OR IS PERMISSIVE OF JUST ANYBODY IN THE SCHOOL

ENVIRONMENT TO SIGN SUCH A PETITION.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. NOW, AS FAR AS THE DUE

PROCESS PROCEDURE THAT IS INVOLVED IN THIS, THIS APPLICATION IS MADE EX

PARTE; AM I CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: IT CAN BE, YES.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. AND SO LET'S TALK NOW

ABOUT A 16-YEAR-OLD STUDENT, OR A 15-YEAR-OLD STUDENT IN MIDDLE SCHOOL.

HE BECOMES THE -- HE OR SHE BECOMES THE SUBJECT OF THIS PETITION AND

SPECIAL PROCEEDING IN SUPREME COURT AND THE JUDGE SIGNS AN EX PARTE

ORDER, BECAUSE ANY JUDGE GETS THIS CASE IN FRONT OF THEM CERTAINLY WILL

SIGN IT AND NOT RISK HIMSELF, AND HE ENTERS THE ORDER THAT THE INDIVIDUAL

HAS TO SURRENDER ALL HIS FIREARMS AND ET CETERA. NOW, GENERALLY,

16-YEAR-OLDS ARE NOT PERMITTED TO POSSES FIREARMS, BUT THE STUDENT'S

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PARENTS LEGALLY POSSES FIREARMS IN THEIR HOMES. WILL THIS COURT ORDER BE

THE CAUSATION OF THESE PARENTS LOSING THEIR FIREARMS BECAUSE THE

16-YEAR-OLD LIVES IN THE HOUSE WITH THEM?

MS. SIMON: ACTUALLY, THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE

BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT WOULD GO IN, PROBABLY GO IN WITH HIS PARENTS,

AND WHAT THE COURT WOULD REQUIRE IN THAT INSTANCE IS THAT THE FIREARM BE

SAFELY STORED. THAT IS THE REMEDY FOR THAT.

MR. MONTESANO: WELL, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S

SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE BILL THAT DIRECTS THE JUDGES TO TAKE THAT ACTION.

SO, WHAT'S TO STOP THE JUDGE FROM ISSUING AN ORDER AND SAYING, I WANT

THE FIREARMS REMOVED FROM THE HOUSE. WHAT DO WE DO IN THE CASE

WHEN ONE OF THE PARENTS IS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR A MILITARY

PERSONNEL AUTHORIZED TO POSSES FIREARMS. WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT?

MS. SIMON: WHAT WE DO IN THAT INSTANCE IS WE

REQUIRE THEM TO SAFELY STORE THEIR -- THEIR FIREARMS.

MR. MONTESANO: AND WHEN YOU USE THE

DEFINITION "SAFELY STORE", IS IT STILL WITHIN THEIR POSSESSION IN THE

HOUSEHOLD?

MS. SIMON: YES, IT IS, BUT IT IS LOCKED AWAY.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. NOW, AS FAR AS WE TALK

ABOUT THE DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT CAN BRING ON THIS PETITION AND YOUR BILL

HAS DEFINITIONS.

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. MONTESANO: IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE EXTENDED

THE DEFINITION A LITTLE BIT. SO, I'M LOOKING AT -- YOU HAVE A PROVISION

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THERE AND IF I'M READING IT CORRECTLY, THAT ONE OF THE CATEGORIES IS "ANY

OF THE CATEGORY OF INDIVIDUALS DEEMED TO BE A VICTIM OF DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE AS DEFINED BY THE OFFICE OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES SERVICES IN

REGULATION." COULD YOU TELL US WHAT THAT'S ABOUT?

MS. SIMON: COULD YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING

AT? I'M LOOKING AT THE DEFINITION OF WHAT A PETITIONER IS.

MR. MONTESANO: WELL, IT IS, AND IT SAYS WHO MAY

BE A PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 459.82 OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW. AND

SO, IT DELINEATES WHO CAN BE THE PETITIONER. AND IT TALKS ABOUT PERSONS

RELATED BY CONSANGUINITY, AFFINITY, LEGALLY MARRIED TO THE OTHER, AND IT

GOES ON AND ON AND ON WITH A LIST. THEN IT MAKES AN EXCEPTION AND THE

EXCEPTION, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, IS THAT FRATERNIZATION BETWEEN TWO

INDIVIDUALS IN A BUSINESS OR SOCIAL CONTACT SHOULD NOT BE DEEMED TO

CONSTITUTE AN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP. BUT THEN THE FURTHER DEFINITION IS,

ANY OF THE CATEGORY OF INDIVIDUALS DEEMED TO BE A VICTIM OF DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE AS DEFINED BY CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES REGULATION.

SO, WE HAVE A SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY THAT CREATES ITS

OWN REGULATION AND THAT'S GOING TO BE BINDING ON THE COURTS, ALSO. SO,

HOW BROAD IS THE SCOPE OF PEOPLE THAT COULD BRING ON THIS PETITION?

MS. SIMON: WELL, THIS WOULD BE IF SOMEBODY IS A

VICTIM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, THAT WOULD BE A FAMILY MEMBER OR A

MEMBER OF THE HOUSEHOLD, BUT ALSO THIS IS THE DEFINITION THAT IS USED

BOTH IN THE FAMILY LAW AS WELL AS IN THE PENAL LAW. SO, THIS IS ALREADY

SOMETHING THAT EXISTS IN OUR LAW THAT HAS BEEN IN OPERATION FOR MANY

YEARS, AND THE COURTS ARE MORE THAN FAMILIAR WITH THE STANDARD THAT THEY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WOULD NEED TO MEET TO PERMIT SOMEONE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO IS -- WHO

WOULD COME UNDER THIS CATEGORY TO FILE SUCH A PETITION.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO NOW I WANT TO REVISIT

THE DUE PROCESS PROCEEDING AGAIN. SO, THE PETITIONER GOES TO COURT,

TAKES OUT THE PETITION EX PARTE AND AT THAT TIME, A TEMPORARY ORDER IS

ISSUED. AND ONE OF THE THINGS IT DOES IS IT PROHIBITS THEM FROM

POSSESSING, OWNING AND HAVING ACCESS TO FIREARMS. HOW MANY DAYS

ELAPSE BEFORE THAT PERSON HAS TO BE SERVED AND APPEAR BEFORE THE

JUDGE?

MS. SIMON: SO THEY HAVE TO HAVE A HEARING WITHIN

THREE TO SIX DAYS.

MR. MONTESANO: THREE TO SIX DAYS.

MS. SIMON: THREE TO SIX DAYS.

MR. MONTESANO: AND THAT'S SPECIFIC IN THE

STATUTE?

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. AND WHAT'S THE REMEDY

IF THE JUDGE DOES NOT HOLD THAT HEARING WITHIN THE THREE TO SIX DAY

PERIOD?

MS. SIMON: HIRE COUNSEL.

MR. MONTESANO: SO IS THE ORDER VACATED?

MS. SIMON: I -- I -- I -- I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW, BUT I

THINK THAT THE COURTS KNOW HOW TO DO THIS.

MR. MONTESANO: WELL --

(LAUGHTER)

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. SIMON: THIS IS THE LAST THING I'M WORRIED ABOUT

THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A HEARING WITHIN THREE TO SIX DAYS.

MR. MONTESANO: WELL, LISTEN, I KNOW YOU AND I

ARE BOTH ATTORNEYS --

MS. SIMON: THAT'S RIGHT.

MR. MONTESANO: -- AND WE BOTH GO TO COURT AND

WE KNOW OTHERWISE. SO -- AT LEAST I KNOW OTHERWISE.

MS. SIMON: FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, I'M NOT -- I

HAVE NO DOUBT AT ALL.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. AND SO NOW ON THE

RETURN DATE OF THE COURT -- OF THE PETITION, ON THE RETURN DATE, A HEARING

TAKES PLACE; AM I CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. MONTESANO: AND THE PETITIONER HAS THE

BURDEN TO SUSTAIN THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE PETITION THEY SIGNED?

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. AND WHAT KIND OF

EVIDENCE DO THEY HAVE TO INTRODUCE AT THIS HEARING?

MS. SIMON: WELL, EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF EVIDENCE

THAT WOULD BE -- THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE TO THE COURT IS LISTED IN THE

STATUTE. AND SO, SOME OF THE FACTORS COULD BE A THREAT OF VIOLENCE OR

THE USE OF PHYSICAL FORCE TOWARDS THE PETITIONER, FOR EXAMPLE, OR

ANOTHER PERSON; A VIOLATION OR ALLEGED VIOLATION OF AN ORDER OF

PROTECTION; A PENDING CHARGE FOR USE OF A WEAPON; RECKLESS USE, DISPLAY

OF BRANDISHING OF A FIREARM; A HISTORY OF VIOLATION OF EXTREME RISK

100

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PROTECTION ORDER, OR A RECENT OR ONGOING ABUSE OF CONTROLLED

SUBSTANCES OR RECENT ACQUISITIONS OF FIREARMS, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MIGHT

BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS.

SO, WE USE THE EXAMPLE OF SAN BERNARDINO WHERE THE

PERSON WHO WAS THE SHOOTER HAD BEEN STOCKPILING AMMUNITION AND

GUNS FOR A LONG TIME AND HIS PARENTS KNEW IT, EVERYBODY IN THE

NEIGHBORHOOD KNEW IT. HE WAS GETTING OTHER PEOPLE TO BUY

AMMUNITION FOR HIM. THAT IS A SIGN THAT IS DEMONSTRABLE AND PEOPLE

DO NOT STOCKPILE AMMUNITION IF THEY ARE -- JUST FOR KICKS. THIS IS NOT

LIKE A --

MR. MONTESANO: UNDERSTOOD.

MS. SIMON: -- YOU KNOW, A COLLECTOR'S ITEM.

MR. MONTESANO: SO LET'S TALK ABOUT, I THINK YOU

JUST MENTIONED PEOPLE THAT ARE DRUG USERS OR... AM I CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: THAT IS ONE OF THE FACTORS THE COURT MAY

CONSIDER.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO IF THAT'S A FACTOR THAT

THE PERSON IS A DRUG USER, SO ANYBODY THAT MAY BE IN A REHABILITATION

PROGRAM, GOING UNDER TREATMENT OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, THEY COULD

BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS PETITION; AM I CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: IT'S ONGOING ABUSE OF CONTROLLED

SUBSTANCES. SOMEBODY WHO IS OUT OF REHAB, JUST HAD A HIP REPLACED

AND IS USING THE MEDICATION THAT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED FOR THEM WOULD

NOT BE A PERSON WITH A RECENT OR ONGOING ABUSE OF CONTROLLED

SUBSTANCES.

101

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO NOW THE -- THEY HAD

THE HEARING. IF THERE'S NO FINDING, THE JUDGE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE

THE RETURN OF THE FIREARMS, CORRECT?

MS. SIMON: YES. THE COURT IS EMPOWERED TO DO

THAT.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. AND ONCE THEY DO THAT

AND THAT ORDER GOES TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT HAVE TAKEN

THOSE WEAPONS AWAY IN THE CASE OF THE PERSON WAS A PERMIT HOLDER AND

THE PERMIT WAS SUSPENDED DURING THIS PROCEEDING, WHAT PROVISIONS IS

THERE IN THE LAW THAT THESE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE TO

IMMEDIATELY COMPLY WITH THE JUDGE'S DIRECTIVE?

MS. SIMON: I'M SORRY. I'M NOT SURE THAT I EVEN

UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION.

MR. MONTESANO: BASICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS LAW

ENFORCEMENT IS DIRECTED TO TAKE THE FIREARMS AND PUT THEM IN SAFE

STORAGE, AND IF THE COURT DIRECTS THEIR RETURN, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO RETURN

THEM.

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. MONTESANO: BUT SOME LAW ENFORCEMENT

AGENCIES RIGHT NOW WHEN THEY DEAL WITH PEOPLE WITH ORDERS OF

PROTECTION AND THE ORDER OF PROTECTION IS RESCINDED AND THE JUDGE

ORDERS THE RETURN OF THE WEAPONS TO THE PERMIT HOLDER, IN THE CASE OF

FIRE -- YOU KNOW, HANDGUNS, MANY POLICE DEPARTMENTS TAKE A POSITION

ADMINISTRATIVELY, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO WAIT AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS

BEFORE WE RETURN THESE FIREARMS. IS THERE ANYTHING IN YOUR LAW THAT

102

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SAYS THAT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES HAVE TO IMMEDIATELY COMPLY

AND RETURN THE WEAPONS WHEN THE JUDGE RESCINDS AN ORDER?

MS. SIMON: I BELIEVE THE REMEDY WOULD BE TO FILE

AN ARTICLE 78 PROCEEDING.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO BASICALLY WHAT I SEE

HERE IS SOMEBODY BRINGS ON THIS PETITION, THE RESPONDENT HAS TO RETAIN

LEGAL COUNSEL, OR HIS PARENTS HAVE TO RETAIN LEGAL COUNSEL FOR

THEMSELVES, IN SOME CASES BECAUSE THERE COULD BE A CONFLICT BETWEEN

THE RESPONDENT CHILD AND THE PARENT, THEY MAY HAVE TO HAVE TWO

ATTORNEYS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND IF THEY'RE EXONERATED AND LAW

ENFORCEMENT DOESN'T RETURN THEIR WEAPONS, THEY HAVE TO INCUR THE

ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO TAKE OUT AN ARTICLE 78 PROCEEDING.

NOW, WE'RE CAUSING GREAT EXPENSE TO PEOPLE OVER A

PETITION BROUGHT BY A LAYPERSON IN A SCHOOL. YOU KNOW, LAW

ENFORCEMENT BRINGING THIS IS ONE THING, BUT OTHER PEOPLE BRINGING THESE

PETITIONS, IT BECOMES COSTLY AND RECKLESS AND THEY CAN USE IT TO

RETALIATE. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE LAW THAT PROTECTS THE RESPONDENTS

ALONG THE LINE?

MS. SIMON: THE RESPONDENTS ARE PROTECTED

EVERYWHERE ALONG THE LINE, BOTH IN TERMS OF THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT

RIGHTS AND THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS. AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE

EXAMPLES YOU CITE WHERE, LET'S SAY, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT IS SORT OF

DILLY-DALLYING IN RETURNING THE WEAPONS. THERE'S NO REASON WHY THE

RESPONDENT COULDN'T GO BACK TO THE COURT AND SEEK AN ORDER ENFORCING

THE RETURN OF THOSE WEAPONS. THAT WOULD BE A PERFECTLY VALID PROCESS

103

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

FOR THEM TO ENGAGE IN AND THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN DO -- PEOPLE, THEY

DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HIRE COUNSEL. THEY MAY NEED TO DO THAT OR

MAY DECIDE TO DO THAT, BUT I'M SURE THAT THERE'S A PROCESS FOR -- FOR

SEEKING TO ENFORCE THAT ORDER.

MR. MONTESANO: SO LET'S GO BACK TO THE COURT FOR

A MOMENT. LET'S -- I GUESS I'M OUT OF TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BUCHWALD.

MR. BUCHWALD: MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. BUCHWALD: AND I RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A

STORM COMING OUR WAY, SO I WILL TRY TO BE VERY BRIEF, MR. SPEAKER, BUT I

DO NEED MORE THAN TWO MINUTES SO I APPRECIATE THE INDULGENCE

BECAUSE, MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TO TELL A STORY. IT'S NOT A STORY OF PERSONAL

LOSS. IT'S NOT A STORY OF SOMETHING HAPPENING IN MY COMMUNITY OR ONE

OF THE TRAGEDIES THAT HAS OCCURRED FAR TOO OFTEN IN OUR COUNTRY THAT

MOTIVATES A LOT OF TODAY'S DEBATE, BUT IT'S A STORY I THINK ALL OF US CAN

RELATE TO BECAUSE IT BEGINS WITH MY FIRST RUN FOR THE STATE ASSEMBLY.

SIX-AND-A-HALF YEARS AGO I RAN FOR THIS OFFICE AGAINST

MY -- THE INCUMBENT, MY PREDECESSOR, IN PART ON A PLATFORM OF BEING IN

SUPPORT OF SENSIBLE GUN SAFETY LEGISLATION. AND IT'S FAIR TO SAY I MADE

AN ISSUE OF CONTRAST WITH MY OPPONENT ON THAT FRONT. BUT AT THE TIME,

THERE, FRANKLY, WAS NOT A GROUNDS FOR ORGANIZATION OF FOLKS ON THE

GROUND, IN MY DISTRICT OR OTHERWISE, BACKING UP THE POINT OF VIEW THAT

MANY OF US ARE EMBRACING TODAY. BUT I DO REMEMBER THE WEEKEND

104

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AFTER THE AURORA MOVIE THEATER SHOOTING WHEN I THINK IT WAS ON SOUTH

GREELEY AVENUE IN MY DISTRICT, SOME FOLKS STARTED APPROACHING ME

SAYING WE REALLY HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, AND I WAS PLEASED TO

TELL THEM ABOUT MY POSITIONS. AND IT DOESN'T GIVE TOO MUCH AWAY IN

THE STORY TO SAY THAT I WAS ELECTED. I HAVE THE HONOR OF SERVING THE

93RD ASSEMBLY DISTRICT, BUT BETWEEN MY ELECTION AND WHEN I TOOK

OFFICE JANUARY 1ST, 2013, THE SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING

OCCURRED NOT TOO FAR FROM MY DISTRICT THAT BORDERS THE STATE OF

CONNECTICUT. AND THAT REALLY GALVANIZED US AND MANY NEW YORKERS

INTO ACTION. I'M VERY PROUD OF THE FACT THAT NEW YORK IS ONE OF THE FEW

STATES TO HAVE RESPONDED SO FIRMLY THEN. CERTAINLY, WASHINGTON NEVER

STEPPED UP TO THE PLATE, AND I DO THINK, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT SAID OFTEN

ENOUGH ON THIS FLOOR, THAT OUR GOVERNOR DOES DESERVE GREAT CREDIT FOR

THE FACT THAT WE WERE ENABLE TO ENACT THE NEW YORK SAFE ACT AND I

FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT THAT BILL HAS MADE NEW YORK STATE A SAFER PLACE.

AND THOUGH YOU CAN'T CONNECT ANY PARTICULAR LIFE SAVED TO REALLY ALMOST

ANY PIECE OF LEGISLATION, I THINK THE STATISTICS SHOW THAT NEW YORK IS A

SAFER STATE AS A RESULT. IN 2017, WE ARE THE STATE WITH THE THIRD LOWEST

RATE OF DEATHS BY GUN VIOLENCE AND THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT

THAT ENACTMENT OF A BILL, THE FIRST BILL THAT I VOTED ON A STATE

ASSEMBLYMEMBER, A BILL THAT I CO-SPONSORED, HAS HAD BENEFITS IN

KEEPING NEW YORKERS SAFE.

BUT FUNDAMENTALLY, WHAT WE'VE SEEN ACROSS THE

COUNTRY IN THE LAST SIX YEARS HAS BEEN TRAGEDY AFTER TRAGEDY, WHETHER IT'S

IN PLACES OF WORSHIP, A NIGHTCLUB, PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT OR OTHERWISE,

105

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY TIMES OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS THAT ALL THE MORE

NEEDS TO BE DONE IN THIS COUNTRY AND, THANKFULLY, MOST OF THOSE

HIGH-PROFILE MASS SHOOTINGS HAVE NOT OCCURRED IN THE STATE OF NEW

YORK, BUT WE CAN LEARN LESSONS FROM THEM AND I THINK THIS BILL AND WITH

OTHERS THAT WE ARE ENACTING TODAY, ARE PART OF THAT SENSE THAT WE WILL

NOT REST WHILE THERE ARE PREVENTABLE GUN DEATHS HERE IN OUR STATE.

AND I VERY MUCH WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR OF THIS

BILL AND THE SPONSORS OF ALL THE BILLS THAT WE ARE ENACTING TODAY BECAUSE

I -- I FEEL THAT TIMES CERTAINLY HAVE CHANGED. IT IS BY NO MEANS A LONELY

FIGHT TRYING TO ADDRESS THE SCOURGE OF GUN VIOLENCE. IT SHOULD NOT HAVE

TAKEN ALL THOSE TRAGEDIES, FRANKLY, FOR US TO HAVE ADDRESSED THEM.

THERE ARE, WITHOUT A DOUBT, MANY FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE

BEEN DRIVEN BY GUN VIOLENCE AND THAT WAS TRUE IN NEW YORK. WELL,

BEFORE SIX YEARS AGO, IT'S TRUE BEFORE TODAY, BUT WE HAVE BEEN SHOCKED

INTO ACTION NOW. I CAN PROUDLY SAY THAT THERE ARE MANY CONSTITUENTS

AND MANY FELLOW NEW YORKERS WHO ARE ON THE SIDE OF THESE PIECES OF

LEGISLATION, I'VE BEEN PROUD TO MARCH WITH THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF

CONSTITUENTS IN MY DISTRICT IN SUPPORT OF SENSIBLE GUN SAFETY LEGISLATION,

BUT WE REALLY NEED TO CONTINUE TO SHOW THAT WE WILL LOOK AT WHAT'S

HAPPENING AROUND OUR COUNTRY AND NEW YORK WILL CONTINUE TO LEAD

AND THAT'S WHY, MR. SPEAKER, I URGE SUPPORT FOR THIS LEGISLATION AND THE

OTHER PIECES OF OUR PACKAGE DEALING WITH GUN VIOLENCE TODAY. THANK

YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. WALCZYK.

106

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MS. SIMON: YES, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WELL, WE NEED -- ONE

MINUTE, BEFORE WE DO THAT. WE WOULD LIKE A LITTLE QUIET AROUND THE --

HELLO? GOOD. NOW WE CAN PROCEED. THANK YOU.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU. DO YOU CONSIDER

FOOTBALL AND WRESTLING SPORTS THAT INCLUDE PHYSICAL FORCE?

MS. SIMON: THEY CAN.

MR. WALCZYK: I WOULD AGREE. SO, PARAGRAPH 2

UNDER DEFINITION, SUBPARAGRAPH C, MY QUESTION IS ANY DESIGNEE OF THE

ADMINISTRATOR WHO AT A MINIMUM HOLDS A TEMPORARY COACHING LICENSE.

WHO WOULD THAT INCLUDE, TEMPORARY COACHES?

MS. SIMON: WHO -- I'M SORRY. YOU WANT TO KNOW

WHO WOULD BE INCLUDED AS TEMPORARY COACHES?

MR. WALCZYK: YEAH, I GUESS --

MS. SIMON: THAT WOULD BE AN EMPLOYMENT

DECISION OF THE SCHOOL BOARD IF THEY HIRE SOMEONE FOR A TEMPORARY

POSITION.

MR. WALCZYK: OKAY. SO COULD A -- COULD A

TEMPORARY COACHING LICENSE BE FOR AN ASSISTANT FOOTBALL OR WRESTLING

COACH?

MS. SIMON: I DON'T SEE WHY NOT.

107

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. WALCZYK: UNDER THE -- UNDER THE ASSURANCE

OF EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER IN PARAGRAPH 2, SUBPARAGRAPH

ALPHA, A THREAT OR ACT OF VIOLENCE OR USE OF PHYSICAL FORCE TOWARD ONE

SELF, THE PETITIONER OR ANOTHER PERSON IS ONE OF THE -- ONE OF THE

QUALIFIERS THERE, ONE OF THE TRIGGERS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE EXTREME

RISK PROTECTION ORDER. DO YOU SEE PLAYING SPORTS AGGRESSIVELY OR

VIOLENTLY AS ONE OF THOSE TRIGGERS?

MS. SIMON: I WOULD NOT READ THE STATUTE THAT WAY AT

ALL.

MR. WALCZYK: OKAY. THAT'S -- THAT'S ENCOURAGING

TO HEAR. DOES THIS BILL SAY THAT PHYSICAL FORCE IS A RELEVANT FACTOR IN

DETERMINING THE PROTECTION ORDER?

MS. SIMON: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A LIST, A

NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF FACTORS THAT THE COURT MAY CONSIDER. THERE --

DEMONSTRATION, LET'S SAY, OF SOMEBODY WHO WAS A LITTLE TOO AGGRESSIVE

IN A WRESTLING MATCH WOULD NOT BE PROBABLY RELEVANT. IT WOULD

PROBABLY NOT BE VIEWED BY A COURT THAT WAY. BUT THIS IS ABOUT A THREAT

OR AN ACT OF VIOLENCE OR USE OF PHYSICAL FORCE TOWARDS THE PERSON, RIGHT,

SO SOMEBODY WHO IS CUTTING, LET'S SAY, SOMEBODY WHO IS HURTING

THEMSELVES, OR AN ACT OF VIOLENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER OR ANOTHER

PERSON. SO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACTS OF VIOLENCE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

-- I THINK YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOMEBODY FIGHTING AND

USING VIOLENCE AND A WRESTLING MATCH.

MR. WALCZYK: I DO, YEAH. I KNOW THE

DIFFERENCE --

108

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. SIMON: GOOD, I'M GLAD.

MR. WALCZYK: -- AND I KNOW A LOT OF REFEREES THAT

ALSO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE --

MS. SIMON: GOOD, SEE?

MR. WALCZYK: -- AND THROW OUT THINGS LIKE RED

CARDS, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH AS I READ THIS LEGISLATION, MAYBE YOU CAN

HELP EASE MY MIND A LITTLE BIT. WOULD A RED CARD FOR GOING ABOVE AND

BEYOND THE ACTIVE PLAY AND BEING TOO AGGRESSIVE AS A HIGH SCHOOL

STUDENT BE A TRIGGER OR A THREAT OF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE OR FORCE AGAINST

ANOTHER?

MS. SIMON: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THIS WOULD BE

EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE COURT AND THE PERSON COULD MAKE THAT VERY

ARGUMENT. NOW, THE REALITY IS THAT THERE'S A CONTEXT HERE. THIS HAS TO

BE SOMEBODY WHO IS THREATENING THE USE OF FORCE AND LIKELY WITH A -- A

GUN. THIS IS ABOUT REMOVING FIREARMS. THIS IS NOT ABOUT A RED CARD IN

PLAY. IF SOMEONE DOES NOT HAVE POSSESSION OF A FIREARM AND THEY

HAPPEN TO BE ACTING IN A VIOLENT WAY, THERE MAY BE MANY DISCIPLINARY

ISSUES THAT ARISE WITHIN THE SCHOOL CONTEXT, FOR EXAMPLE, OR IT MIGHT, IN

FACT, BE ASSAULT AND BATTERY. IT MIGHT BE CRIMINAL MENACING. THERE ARE

A WHOLE HOST OF THINGS THAT ACTING VIOLENTLY COULD BE. WE ARE NOT

TALKING ABOUT EVERY RANDOM ACT OF VIOLENCE.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR

ANSWER AND I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP THE POINT OF FIREARMS. ARE YOU

AWARE THAT MANY HIGH SCHOOLS ACROSS NEW YORK STATE, ESPECIALLY IN THE

FRONT YARD OF AMERICA WHERE I REPRESENT, HAVE FIREARMS AS PART OF THEIR

109

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SPORTING PROGRAMS. SO, ONE OF THESE -- ONE OF THESE PETITIONERS COULD

BE OUT OF A -- A TRAPSHOOTING LEAGUE OR A HIGH SCHOOL RIFLE TEAM.

MS. SIMON: SO HERE'S THE THING: I WOULD ASSUME

THAT IN THOSE PROGRAMS THAT THE STUDENTS ARE BEING INSTRUCTED IN THE

PROPER USE OF FIREARMS, THAT THEY ARE PRACTICING TARGET PRACTICE. THEY

ARE LEARNING HOW TO USE AND HOW TO CLEAN AND TAKE CARE OF THEIR

WEAPONS. AND THEY WOULD BE DOING THAT UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

PEOPLE WHO ARE PROPERLY TRAINED; HOWEVER, I AM QUITE SURE THAT THE

HEAD OF ANY CLUB, THE FACULTY MEMBER WHO IS THE COACH, LET'S SAY, OF

SUCH A CLUB, WOULD KNOW IF JOHNNY IS PLAYING AROUND WITH HIS GUN IN A

WAY THAT EXHIBITS A LACK OF SAFETY WITH THAT WEAPON OR IS THREATENING TO

OTHERS. I AM ABSOLUTELY SURE. CALL ME NAIVE, BUT I AM QUITE SURE THAT

NO COACH WHO IS COACHING A TEAM IS, A, NOT GOING TO NOTICE THAT, NOT

GOING TO SAY ANYTHING TO THAT CHILD, OR WOULD IN ANY WAY ENCOURAGE

THAT. WE NEED TO -- WE NEED TO MODEL GOOD BEHAVIOR, WE NEED TO TEACH

STUDENTS HOW TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR WEAPONS IF, IN FACT, THEY HAVE THEM

AND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BILL AT ALL.

MR. WALCZYK: AND I HEED THAT POINT VERY WELL.

MS. SIMON: GOOD.

MR. WALCZYK: AND I THINK IF YOU SPENT ANY TIME

WITH RIFLE TEAMS OR TRAPSHOOTING LEAGUES, YOU'D KNOW THAT GUN SAFETY IS

ABSOLUTELY PARAMOUNT. THEY HAVE AN EXCELLENT SAFETY RECORD ACROSS

NEW YORK STATE AND IT'S PARAMOUNT TO THE PARENTS AND -- AND COACHES

THAT ARE INVOLVED THERE. WOULD PARTICIPATING IN A RIFLE OR A

TRAPSHOOTING TEAM PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS A FIREARM, WHICH IS

110

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ANOTHER ONE OF, SORT OF THE TRIGGERS IN THIS BILL?

MS. SIMON: IT IS POSSIBLE, RIGHT? I MEAN, ANYTHING

IS POSSIBLE. IF SOMEONE IS ON SUCH A TEAM AND HAS THE POSSESSION OF A

WEAPON AND IS BEHAVING IN A WAY THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE SAFE USE

OF THAT WEAPON AND THEY ARE THREATENING VIOLENCE TOWARDS OTHERS WITH

THAT WEAPON, THAT MIGHT BE EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE A WEAPON.

MR. WALCZYK: SO, IF I'M -- IF I'M HEARING YOU

PROPERLY, THERE ARE SEVEN DETERMINING FACTORS FOR THE PETITIONER AND FOR

THE COURTS TO CONSIDER WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL. ONE OF THEM

INCLUDES PHYSICAL FORCE; THE OTHER INCLUDES PROOF OF A FIREARM. SO, MY

CONCERN AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION IN YOUR

RESPONSE, MY CONCERN HERE IS THAT THE PHYSICAL FORCE OF PLAYING CERTAIN

SPORTS AND THE ACTUAL SPORT OF SHOOTING SPORTS PROVIDE TWO OUT OF JUST

PLAYING THESE SPORTS AGGRESSIVELY AND THE FACT THEY'RE INVOLVED IN A --

IN A SPORT THAT DOES SHOOTING, PROVIDE TWO OUT OF THE SEVEN OF THE

THINGS THAT THE COURTS OR THE PETITIONER ARE LOOKING FOR BEFORE WE EVEN

GET INTO MENTAL HEALTH OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND WHAT I WANT TO AVOID

AND I HOPE ISN'T THE CASE AND I HOPE YOU CAN PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION

THERE, THAT STUDENTS WHO ARE PARTICIPATING IN, AND I CERTAINLY WOULD

ENCOURAGE THEM TO, TO PARTICIPATE IN SPORTS WHERE THEY ARE PHYSICALLY

ACTIVE, AND WE HAVE A GREAT RECORD AND SOME EXCELLENT SHOOTING SPORTS

IN NORTHERN NEW YORK WHERE I REPRESENT.

MS. SIMON: WE HAVE THEM IN BROOKLYN, TOO.

MR. WALCZYK: I WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT A -- I

WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT A TARGET ON THOSE STUDENTS' BACKS BECAUSE THEY'RE

111

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ALREADY AT A DISADVANTAGE OR CONCERNED THAT THIS IS SOMEHOW GOING TO

AFFECT THEIR FAMILY'S SECOND AMENDMENT. AND I'LL LISTEN TO YOUR

RESPONSE. THANK YOU.

MS. SIMON: I HAVE TO TELL YOU, I CANNOT IMAGINE A

CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SOMEONE WHO IS PLAYING FOOTBALL WOULD BE AT RISK

FOR HIS PARENTS LOSS OF THEIR -- THEIR WEAPONS, OR EVEN AN ORDER

REQUIRING THEM TO BE LOCKED UP, ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY SHOULD BE LOCKED

UP, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY PLAY FOOTBALL. THAT, I THINK, IS JUST A BRIDGE

TOO FAR AND NOT AT ALL RELEVANT TO THIS. AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THE

BILL REFERS TO RELEVANT FACTORS THAT SHALL BE CONSIDERED. THAT'S

CONSIDERATION. IT'S NOT AN AUTOMATIC. THIS IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE. IF YOU

HAVE PUNCHED SOMEBODY IN THE NOSE, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU'RE GOING

TO BE AT RISK FOR HAVING AN EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER, RIGHT?

SO, THESE ARE FACTORS THAT THE COURT MAY CONSIDER AND

IT IS A NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF FACTORS. THE COURT IS FREE TO CONSIDER

ADDITIONAL FACTORS IF THEY ARE RELEVANT, AND THAT'S WHAT COURTS DO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. BYRNES.

MS. BYRNES.

HELP ME OUT.

(LAUGHTER)

MS. BYRNES: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MA'AM.

MS. BYRNES: WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. SIMON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON DOES

112

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

YIELD.

MS. BYRNES: THANK YOU. MY APOLOGIES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YEAH. AND I REALIZE

IT'S -- POLITE SOCIETY, YOU LOOK BACK AT THE PERSON YOU'RE SPEAKING TO,

BUT WE CAN'T HEAR YOU, SO YOU NEED TO ADDRESS THE MIC, SHE'LL HEAR YOU.

MS. BYRNES: MY APOLOGIES TO THE SPONSOR FOR

TURNING HER BACK TO HER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: NO PROBLEM.

MS. BYRNES: NOBODY WANTS DANGEROUS PEOPLE TO

HAVE GUNS, BUT MY QUESTION TO YOU, MADAM SPONSOR, IS IF MY HOME IS

SEARCHED AND MY GUN IS SEIZED BECAUSE A COURT EX PARTE PERCEIVES THAT

SOMEBODY IN THE HOME IS AN EXTREME RISK, I'M NOT THE PLAINTIFF OR THE

PETITIONER AND I'M NOT THE RESPONDENT. WHAT STANDING DO I HAVE AS THE

LAWFUL OWNER TO HAVE ANY DUE PROCESS RIGHTS MYSELF IN THE PROCEEDING

TO GET MY OWN PERSONALLY-OWNED WEAPONS RETURNED TO ME?

MS. SIMON: WELL, ACTUALLY YOU WOULD HAVE ALL THE

DUE PROCESS RIGHTS THAT ARE ATTENDED TO YOUR RIGHT AS A -- AS A GUN

OWNER. SO, FIRST OF ALL, THE COURT WOULD BE -- WOULD HAVE THAT EVIDENCE

BEFORE THEM. IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THE WEAPON IN THE -- IN THE HOME IS NOT

THE -- IS NOT OWNED BY, LET'S SAY, THE YOUNG PERSON, ASSUMING IT'S A

FAMILY MEMBER, IT MIGHT BE AN ADULT WHO IS PERMITTED TO -- TO HAVE A

WEAPON LEGALLY IN THIS STATE. IF IT IS YOUR WEAPON, THE REMEDY FROM THE

COURT WOULD BE TO REQUIRE THAT WEAPON TO BE SAFELY STORED. AND I

ASSUME THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT ANYBODY WOULD WANT TO DO IF

THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT SOMEONE IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD WAS AT RISK. AND

113

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

REMEMBER THAT THERE'S A HEARING HERE TO DETERMINE THAT, AND IT MUST BE

DONE ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE; IN FACT, THAT EVIDENCE MUST BE

DEMONSTRATED TO A CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE, WHICH IS A MUCH

HIGHER BURDEN THAN THE NORMAL CIVIL PROCESS. REMEMBER, THIS IS NOT A

CRIMINAL PROCESS, IT'S A CIVIL PROCESS. SO, WE'RE GOING ONE BETTER AND

REQUIRING A VERY SUBSTANTIAL LEVEL OF EVIDENCE OF DEMONSTRABLE DANGER,

RIGHT, SO I'M NOT GUESSING THAT THE PERSON MIGHT BE DANGEROUS. I HAVE

TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PERSON IS, IN FACT, A DANGER TO THEMSELVES AND

OTHERS.

MS. BYRNES: BUT FOR ME TO GET MY -- MY LAWFULLY

OWNED WEAPONS RETURNED TO ME, I'M NOT A PARTY TO THE PROCEEDING AND I

HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN ORDER TO PROVE THAT THE WEAPON IS MINE,

AND I'M NOT EVEN A PARTY TO THE ACTION. WHAT KIND OF DUE PROCESS IS

THAT TO LAWFUL GUN OWNERS? THESE ARE THE CONCERNS RAISED IN OUR

COMMUNITIES.

MS. SIMON: OKAY. SO I AM LOOKING AT THE BILL AND

IT IS SECTION 5B WHICH SAYS, "IF ANY OTHER PERSON DEMONSTRATES THAT HE

OR SHE IS THE LAWFUL OWNER OF A FIREARM, RIFLE OR SHOTGUN SURRENDERED OR

REMOVED PURSUANT TO A PROTECTION ORDER ISSUED IN AN ACCORDANCE WITH

THIS ARTICLE, AND PROVIDED THE COURT HAS MADE A WRITTEN FINDING THAT

THERE IS NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT TO THE PERSON'S POSSESSION OF A

SURRENDERED OR REMOVED FIREARM, RIFLE OR SHOTGUN, THE COURT SHALL DIRECT

THAT SUCH FIREARM BE RETURNED TO SUCH LAWFUL OWNER AND INFORM SUCH

PERSON OF THE OBLIGATION TO SAFELY STORE SUCH FIREARM." SO, YOU WOULD

HAVE NO DIFFICULTY, PRESUMING YOU COULD PROVE THAT IT WAS YOUR GUN,

114

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HAVING YOUR GUN RETURNED TO YOU.

MS. BYRNES: SO YOU'RE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE

BURDEN IS ON THE NON-PARTY TO PROVE THAT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO POSSES

THEIR OWN LAWFULLY-OWNED GUN.

MS. SIMON: YOU HAVE STANDING PURSUANT TO THIS LAW

TO APPEAR, AND THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT. YOU MUST HAVE STANDING AND

YOU ARE GIVEN STANDING BY THE STATUTE TO DO THAT, YES.

MS. BYRNES: BUT YOU'RE NOT A PARTY. SO --

MS. SIMON: IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU'RE A PARTY, YOU

HAVE STANDING.

MS. BYRNES: -- IF A JUDGE RULES -- IF A JUDGE RULES

THAT YOU'RE NOT A PARTY TO THE PROCEEDING BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT A

PETITIONER AND YOU'RE NOT A RESPONDENT, YOU COULD BE DENIED THAT RIGHT.

IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU AUTOMATIC STANDING BECAUSE IT'S YOUR GUN.

MS. SIMON: IT DOES. IT DOES. THE STATUTE GIVES YOU

STANDING. SO, YOU HAVE STANDING TO -- TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AND

REQUEST THAT YOUR FIREARM BE RETURNED. YOU DO NOT NEED TO BE A PARTY

TO MAKE SUCH A REQUEST, YOU ONLY NEED STANDING.

MS. BYRNES: CAN WE ADD AN AMENDMENT TO THE

STATUTE TO INCLUDE AUTOMATIC STANDING FOR ANY LAWFUL PERSON WHO

ASSERTS THAT THEY ARE THE LAWFUL OWNER OF THE WEAPON?

MS. SIMON: NO AMENDMENT IS NEEDED BECAUSE THE

STATUTE PROVIDES FOR IT.

MS. BYRNES: WHAT PROVISIONS ARE THERE SHOULD THE

LAWFUL OWNER NOT BE HOME OR NOT BE AWARE THAT A SEARCH HAS TAKEN

115

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PLACE OF THEIR PROPERTY? WHAT PROVISIONS ARE THERE TO NOTIFY THE LAWFUL

OWNER THAT THEIR GUN HAS BEEN SEIZED?

MS. SIMON: THAT WOULD BE PURSUANT TO THE COURT

ORDER.

MS. BYRNES: WHAT IS THERE THAT REQUIRES THE COURT

ORDER SO THEY NOTIFY THE LAWFUL GUN OWNER --

MS. SIMON: SO THEY -- CAN I FINISH ANSWERING YOUR

QUESTION?

MS. BYRNES: -- AS OPPOSED TO JUST THE RESPONDENT?

MS. SIMON: CAN I FINISH ANSWERING YOUR FIRST

QUESTION?

MS. BYRNES: PLEASE.

MS. SIMON: SO, THE COURT HAS TO WRITE UP THE ORDER

AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT WHO IS EXECUTING THE ORDER HAS TO TAG

EVERYTHING AND PROPERLY RECORD IT SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE NOTICE

IMMEDIATELY THAT THOSE WEAPONS WERE REMOVED.

MS. BYRNES: FROM WHO? IF YOU'RE NOT THERE,

YOU'RE NOT PRESENT, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT YOUR WEAPONS HAVE BEEN

TAKEN AND THAT YOU HAVE RIGHTS THAT ARE AT STAKE?

MS. SIMON: I ASSUME WHEN YOU COME, YOU'D NOTICE.

MS. BYRNES: YOU'RE MAKING A LOT OF PRESUMPTIONS.

SOMEONE COULD BE ON VACATION --

MS. SIMON: WELL, YOU KNOW...

MS. BYRNES: -- SOMEBODY COULD BE ANYWHERE IN

FLORIDA FOR THE WINTER AND THEY'RE -- YOU'RE PUTTING A BURDEN ON

116

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT A PARTY AND YOU'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE A

PRESUMPTION A JUDGE WILL SIGN IT. I'VE LOOKED AT ENOUGH COURT ORDERS.

I'VE DRAFTED ENOUGH COURT ORDERS THAT I KNOW THAT A LOT OF THINGS ARE

FREQUENTLY OMITTED THAT WE -- OR EVEN BY THE POLICE WHO MIGHT DRAFT

THEM AND SUBMIT THEM FOR SIGNATURE THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THESE TYPES OF

PROVISIONS. AND I THINK THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THIS BODY SHOULD THINK

ABOUT AND SHOULD CONSIDER BEFORE THEY VOTE ON THIS BILL.

MS. SIMON: WELL, THIS TYPE OF ORDER DOES NOT YET

EXIST, SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH IT IN NEW YORK. THAT HAS

NOT BEEN AN ISSUE OR A CONCERN IN ANY OTHER STATE THAT HAS THESE

PROTECTIONS. AND THE COURTS ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE OF ISSUING ORDERS

AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT IS MORE THAN CAPABLE OF NOTIFYING OWNERS THAT

THEIR WEAPON MAY HAVE BEEN REMOVED PURSUANT TO A COURT ORDER AND, OF

COURSE, THERE IS A HEARING AND THERE ARE APPEAL RIGHTS, AS WELL, SO THAT IF

THERE IS ANY QUESTION, YOU HAVE STANDING, YOU HAVE NO QUESTION THAT

YOU COULD APPEAR AND SEEK THE RETURN OF YOUR WEAPON.

MS. BYRNES: I WOULD RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE, BUT

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. REILLY.

MR. REILLY: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

SIMON?

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. REILLY: I HAVE A -- I HAVE A SCENARIO THAT

117

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HAPPENED LAST YEAR IN STATEN ISLAND AND I WANT TO SHARE IT AND THEN

FOLLOW UP JUST TO ASK IF THIS WOULD BE COVERED UNDER THIS LEGISLATION.

YOU HAVE AN ACTIVE DUTY POLICE OFFICER. HIS CHILD WENT TO A SCHOOL IN

THE DISTRICT. SHE -- HIS CHILD HAD SOME -- SOME ISSUES, SHE WAS GETTING

PICKED ON AT SCHOOL. SHE WENT AHEAD AND SAID THAT SHE WAS GOING TO

THE BRING A GUN TO SCHOOL AND SHOOT THEM. NOW, HE'S AN ACTIVE DUTY

POLICE OFFICER. UNDER THIS BILL, WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS EVEN THOUGH YOU

MENTIONED IT BEFORE, THE ACCESS PART IS WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT

BECAUSE EVEN IF HE HAS IT LOCKED UP IN HIS HOUSE, THERE'S STILL, EVEN

THOUGH IT'S IN A CASE, THERE'S STILL ACCESS BECAUSE IT'S IN THE HOUSE,

WHETHER THEY CAN -- WHETHER SHE CAN BREAK INTO IT OR WHATEVER.

UNDER THIS LEGISLATION, HE WOULD MOST LIKELY FIT THE

CRITERIA FOR THE EXTREME REMOVAL, RIGHT, THE EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES

BECAUSE OF THE -- IT WOULD ONLY REQUIRE PROBABLE CAUSE THAT SHE WOULD

COMMIT THAT ACT. AND PROBABLE CAUSE, AS A POLICE OFFICER MAKING AN

ARREST ON THE STREET, IT'S NOT THAT FAR TO GET TO PROBABLE CAUSE WHEN

YOU'RE GOING UP THE CHAIN OF LEVELS OF --

MS. SIMON: IS THIS AN ADMISSION? IT'S A JOKE. IT'S A

JOKE. GO AHEAD.

(LAUGHTER)

MR. REILLY: WOW, OKAY. SO -- AGAIN, THANK YOU.

SO WOULD, IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, HE BE SUBJECTED TO HIS FIREARMS BEING

REMOVED, HE'D BE PLACED ON MODIFIED DUTY. HE PROBABLY WOULD NOT GET

HIS FIREARMS BACK FROM THE NYPD FOR AT LEAST A YEAR, ONLY BECAUSE THEY

WOULD NOT WANT TO TAKE THE CHANCE LEGALLY IN CASE THERE WAS SOME

118

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ISSUE. WOULD THAT -- WOULD THAT CASE RISE TO THIS LEVEL DO YOU THINK?

MS. SIMON: SO, HERE'S THE -- FIRST OF ALL, PROBABLE

CAUSE IS JUST TEMPORARY FOR THAT TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, RIGHT, AND

WITHIN THREE DAYS, THREE TO SIX DAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HEARING, OKAY?

SO, FIRST OF ALL, THE ISSUE WOULD ORDER AGAINST THE DAUGHTER, THE ORDER

WOULD ISSUE AGAINST THE DAUGHTER, NOT THE FATHER. AND SO, THE FATHER,

UNDER THE STATUTE, WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SAFELY STORE HIS WEAPON. AND,

IN FACT, THAT WOULD BE GOOD PRACTICE FOR ANY --

MR. REILLY: WELL, ABSOLUTELY, I AGREE.

MS. SIMON: AND FRIENDS OF MINE WHO ARE POLICE

OFFICERS, THEY STORE THEIR GUNS SAFELY BECAUSE THEY HAVE CHILDREN AND

THEY'RE CONCERNED AND THEY'RE ACTING RESPONSIBLY, AND THAT'S ALL THIS

ORDER REQUIRES -- THIS STATUTE WOULD REQUIRE OF SOMEONE WHO HAD A

MEMBER OF THEIR HOUSEHOLD THAT WAS, IN FACT, A DANGER OF USING THAT

WEAPON.

SO, THE ISSUE WOULD BE: HOW ARE THEY GOING TO, IN

FACT, SAFELY STORE THAT WEAPON? OF COURSE, WE ARE CONCERNED THAT A KID

MIGHT GET INTO A LOCKED CASE OR A LOCKED CABINET AND, PERHAPS, THAT

CABINET ISN'T ONE THAT IS -- HAS GOT GLASS IN THE FRONT SO THAT WE'RE NOT

WORRIED ABOUT SOMEONE BREAKING IN, FOR EXAMPLE.

MR. REILLY: OKAY.

MS. SIMON: SO, THIS IS A VERY REAL CONCERN, BUT WE

ARE -- THIS BILL IS DRAFTED VERY NARROWLY TO ENSURE THAT NO ONE'S 2ND

AMENDMENT RIGHTS, NO ONE'S RIGHTS TO THEIR WEAPON ARE INFRINGED UPON

AND THAT THEIR WEAPONS ARE NOT REMOVED IF, IN FACT, THEY ARE NOT THE

119

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PERSON WHO IS IN DANGER OF ACTING AS A THREAT TO -- OF HARM TO OTHERS.

AND THAT IF, IN THESE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, WHERE VERY OFTEN

SOMEONE IN THE HOUSEHOLD GETS A HOLD OF A WEAPON, THIS HAPPENS EVERY

DAY IN THIS COUNTRY, THAT A KID GETS A HOLD OF A WEAPON BECAUSE THE

PARENTS HASN'T SAFELY STORED IT. AND THERE'S NO REASON THAT THE PARENT

HAS ACTED IRRESPONSIBLY IN ANY OTHER WAY. THIS HAPPENS EVERY DAY.

WE'RE SEEKING TO ENSURE THAT THOSE WHO WE CAN DEMONSTRATE ARE A

DANGER TO THEMSELVES AND OTHERS DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT WEAPON.

MR. REILLY: SO, WHO WOULD MAKE THE

DETERMINATION IF IT WAS PROPERLY SECURED? BECAUSE THE APPLICATION

COULD COME FROM THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR, RIGHT, WHO'S SAYING THAT

THERE'S A THREAT THAT WAS MADE AND NOW WE KNOW THAT THE STUDENT'S

FATHER IS A POLICE OFFICER. NOW, WHO AT THAT POINT IS GOING TO MAKE THAT

DETERMINATION THAT THE FIREARM IS SECURELY SAFEGUARDED AND THE STUDENT

DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS?

MS. SIMON: WELL, THAT IS ALREADY IN THE PENAL CODE

AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A DEFINITION OF "SAFE STORAGE DEPOSITORY",

MEANING A SAFE OR OTHER SECURE CONTAINER WHICH, WHEN LOCKED, IS

INCAPABLE OF BEING OPENED WITHOUT THE KEY, COMBINATION OR OTHER

LOCKING MECHANISM AND IS CAPABLE OF PREVENTING AN UNAUTHORIZED

PERSON FROM OBTAINING ACCESS TO AND POSSESSION OF THE WEAPON

CONTAINED THEREIN. SO, THAT WOULD BE IF YOUR CONTAINER MET THAT

REQUIREMENT, YOU WOULD BE -- YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE

ANYTHING ELSE.

MR. REILLY: SO, WHO WOULD --

120

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. SIMON: SO IF THE COURT TELLS YOU THAT YOU MUST

SAFELY STORE YOUR WEAPON, THIS IS WHAT THEY MEAN.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO WHO IS -- HOW ARE THEY

GETTING INTO THE HOUSE TO INSPECT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SAFELY SECURED?

IS THERE A REQUIREMENT? WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THEY WOULD NEED A

SEARCH WARRANT NOW TO COME IN AND MAKE SURE THAT THE FIREARM IS

SECURED?

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. REILLY: OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO JUST TAKE

FIREARMS WITHOUT -- IF IT'S IN THE HOUSE, WE'RE GOING TO COME IN WITHOUT

A SEARCH WARRANT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE IT.

MS. SIMON: NO, THE COURT WOULD ISSUE THAT WARRANT.

IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, THE COURT WOULD BE ISSUING A WARRANT, RIGHT? AND

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THOSE WEAPONS WERE SAFELY STORED, THE PERSON WHO

COMES TO EXECUTE ON THE WARRANT WOULD KNOW THAT AND THEY WOULD

KNOW THE DEFINITION OF SAFE STORAGE.

MR. REILLY: THE WARRANT THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING IS

THE REMOVAL WARRANT, OR IS IT A SEARCH WARRANT? BECAUSE WOULDN'T THEY

NEED TWO?

MS. SIMON: I'M SORRY, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE COURT

ISSUES. IF THE COURT IS ISSUING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, OKAY, A

TEMPORARY PROTECTIVE ORDER, TO REMOVE THOSE WEAPONS THAT WOULD BE IN

THE COURT'S ORDER. THAT IS THE JOB OF THE JUDGE.

MR. REILLY: SO WOULD THEY BE APPLYING FOR A

SEARCH WARRANT, THEN, TOO? THAT'S --

121

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. SIMON: THE COURT MIGHT ISSUE SUCH A SEARCH

WARRANT, YES.

MR. REILLY: OKAY.

MS. SIMON: BECAUSE THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED.

MR. REILLY: OKAY.

MS. SIMON: AND IF TURNS OUT THAT THE LAWFUL OWNER

IS ABLE TO SAFELY STORE THEM, THE COURT WILL RETURN THEM.

MR. REILLY: WILL RETURN THE FIREARM.

MS. SIMON: OF COURSE.

MR. REILLY: BUT, YOU JUST SAID THAT THEY WERE

REMOVED, BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING THEY WOULD RETURN THEM.

MS. SIMON: NO, BUT IT'S TEMPORARY. THIS IS NOT LIKE,

NOBODY'S TAKING YOUR GUNS FOREVER. THIS IF A -- IF THERE'S A TEMPORARY

ORDER OF PROTECTION, WITHIN THREE TO SIX DAYS THERE WILL BE A HEARING. IF

YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAFELY STORE THAT WEAPON

AND YOU ARE A LEGAL OWNER OF THAT WEAPON, AND YOU ARE -- THE COURT IS

CONCERNED THAT YOUR CHILD IS SUICIDAL OR YOUR CHILD IS -- HAS EXPRESSED

TO PEOPLE THAT THEY WANT TO TAKE YOUR GUN AND SHOOT SOMEONE, THEN THE

COURT WOULD TELL YOU, LOCK THAT UP. SAFELY STORE IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH

THE LAW.

MR. REILLY: BUT BEFORE IT GETS TO THAT POINT WHERE

YOU'RE GOING TO THE COURT TO PLEAD YOUR CASE, YOUR GUNS HAVE ALREADY

BEEN REMOVED.

MS. SIMON: AND THEN THEY WILL BE RETURNED UNDER

THIS LAW.

122

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. REILLY: BUT THAT -- BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING

TO GET AT. AT THE TIME THAT THEY'RE COMING TO REMOVE IT, IF I HAVE IT

SAFELY SECURED AND I'M THE OFFICER SAY, THEY WOULD STILL TAKE IT?

MS. SIMON: HERE'S THE THING: YOU'RE ASSUMING THAT

THE FIRST ISSUANCE OF THE PROTECTIVE ORDER WOULD BE A REMOVAL ORDER;

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE CASE. IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE

THE COURT. SO, IF SOMEONE COMES IN AND THAT HEARING IS THREE DAYS LATER

AND SAYS, YOUR HONOR, I HAVE X, Y, Z, YOU KNOW, CONTAINER THAT I

BOUGHT AT SUCH AND SUCH A PLACE AND THAT'S WHERE I SAFELY STORE MY

WEAPONS, THE COURT MAY NEVER REMOVE THE WEAPONS. THERE'S NO

REQUIREMENT TO REMOVE THEM. THERE IS AN ISSUANCE OF THIS THAT PERMITS

THE REMOVAL OF WEAPONS IN THE CASES WHERE SOMEONE IS A DANGER TO

THEMSELVES OR OTHER DEMONSTRABLY SO AND THEY ARE NOT SAFELY STORED. IF

IT WAS MY WEAPON, THEY COULD REMOVE IT FROM ME. IF IT IS MY SISTER'S

WEAPON AND SHE'S SAFELY STORING THAT, THE COURT DOES NOT -- IS NOT GOING

TO ISSUE AN ORDER REMOVING THE WEAPON BECAUSE YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE

IT'S SAFELY STORED.

MR. REILLY: BUT THAT -- PARDON ME FOR ASKING

AGAIN. TO ME, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEY CAN DEMONSTRATE, THEY DON'T GET

-- YOU'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO

DEMONSTRATE THAT IN THE THREE TO SIX DAYS.

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. REILLY: SO, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED

ALREADY.

MS. SIMON: THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN REMOVED

123

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ALREADY. THE -- THAT'S WHAT I SAID. IT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE CASE THAT THE

COURT WOULD ISSUE A -- A -- AN ORDER TO REMOVE THE WEAPONS IN THE FIRST

INSTANCE, BECAUSE THERE MAY ALREADY BE EVIDENCE THAT THE WEAPON IS

NOT IN THE POSSESSION OF THAT PERSON, BUT THERE'S A CONCERN THAT THE

PERSON COULD GET POSSESSION OF.

MR. REILLY: ACCESS, THAT'S THE --

MS. SIMON: EXACTLY, IT'S ABOUT ACCESS.

MR. REILLY: OKAY.

MS. SIMON: AND SO, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS HAVE

PEOPLE WHO ARE LAWFUL OWNERS OF GUNS HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR WEAPONS

AND WE WANT OTHER PEOPLE WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE THOSE GUNS NOT TO HAVE

ACCESS TO THOSE WEAPONS.

MR. REILLY: NO, I DEFINITELY GET THE INTENT, AND I

JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW, WHAT WE -- DEALING WITH IT WHEN I WAS IN THE

POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I SAW LEGISLATION AND LAWS, HOW THEY'RE

ENACTED, IT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE SEE ON PAPER HERE AND

WHAT PLAYS OUT IN THE STREET. AND IT JUST -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT

THERE'S SOME REALIZATION HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT ON THE STREET, BECAUSE

I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW IF I'M THE PATROL SERGEANT IN NEW YORK CITY

AND THAT SCENARIO, AND I COME IN, WE'RE GETTING PROBABLE CAUSE, WE'RE

TAKING THE WEAPON NO MATTER WHAT, EVEN IF YOU HAVE IT -- YOU KNOW

WHY? BECAUSE IF WE DON'T, IT'S COMING BACK TO BITE US IN THE BUTT.

MS. SIMON: AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS FREE TO

MAKE THAT DETERMINATION FOR ITS EMPLOYEES. THAT IS NOT --

MR. REILLY: I'M NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE

124

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

EMPLOYEES, I'M TALKING ABOUT JUST ANYONE, ANYONE. IF I'M THE -- IF I'M

THE PATROL SERGEANT AND I COME TO THE SCENE AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

THIS ACTUAL LAW, I'M TAKING IT JUST TO BE CAUTIOUS, AND THAT'S WHAT GOING

TO HAPPEN --

MS. SIMON: AND, IN REALITY --

MR. REILLY: -- EVEN IF IT'S LOCKED UP.

MS. SIMON: THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE WEAPONS ARE

FREE, THEY HAVE STANDING IN THE COURT TO HAVE THOSE WEAPONS RETURNED. I

CAN'T CONTROL WHAT THE NYPD DOES, WHETHER THEY'RE SITTING ON

SOMETHING AND NOT REMOVING -- NOT RETURNING SOMETHING THEY SHOULD BE

RETURNING THAT'S, YOU KNOW --

MR. REILLY: JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I CAN TELL

YOU FIRSTHAND WHAT WE DO IN THESE CHAMBERS ACTUALLY DEMONSTRATES

WHAT THE COPS ON THE STREET DO. AND I MEAN THAT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,

BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. I'M LOOKING AT HOW THIS IS GOING TO

TURNKEY FROM HERE, OUR VOTES, TO WHAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY ON THE STREET,

AND THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS. SO, THANK

YOU SO MUCH.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU.

MR. REILLY: I APPRECIATE IT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. EPSTEIN.

MR. EPSTEIN: ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. EPSTEIN: SO, I KNOW THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE

125

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

FOR MANY OF US AND AN EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER IS SOMETHING

WE'VE SEEN AS A POTENTIAL ACROSS THE COUNTRY, A WAY TO PREVENT GUN

VIOLENCE, A SHAMELESS LOSS OF LIFE. BUT REALLY, I JUST WANT TO TALK TO YOU

ABOUT A PERSONAL MATTER AND HOW THIS WOULD HAVE HELPED ME AND MY

FAMILY. THESE RED FLAG LAWS ARE REALLY MEANINGFUL. AND IF WE HAD HAD

THESE LAWS IN PLACE IN NEW YORK, A TRAGEDY THAT AFFLICTED MY FAMILY

MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED. MY SPOUSE, ANITA, AND I WERE WORKING WITH

HER BROTHER WHO HAD A SERIOUS SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEM AND HE WAS IN

AND OUT OF REHABS FOR MANY YEARS. WE WORKED WITH OUR TOUGH LOVE TO

GET HIM CLEAN, TO GET HIM ALONG A BETTER PATH. BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, HIS

LIFE BEGAN TO SPIRAL OUT. AND HIS WIFE RHEA NEEDED TO GET AWAY AND GET

SOME SPACE.

SO, SHE ENDED UP MOVING IN WITH MY WIFE ANITA'S

MOM, GET SOME SPACE FROM HER BROTHER. AND HE BASICALLY FLIPPED OUT.

WE KNEW THAT HE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND WE WERE

CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL VIOLENCE, BUT WE HAD NOTHING THAT WE COULD

DO. THERE WAS NO OPPORTUNITY TO PROTECT MY FAMILY FROM A POTENTIAL

OPPORTUNITY THAT HE MIGHT TAKE, AND THAT'S WHAT HE DID. HE LEGALLY

PURCHASED A GUN IN NEW YORK, WENT TO MY MOTHER-IN-LAW'S HOUSE, SHOT

HER AND THEN SHOT HIMSELF. THIS LAW, THIS LAW COULD HAVE PREVENTED

THAT. THIS LAW WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE IN MY FAMILY.

SO THESE HAVE HUMAN CONSEQUENCES. STANDING UP

SAYING A CONCERN ABOUT A GUN OWNER, THAT'S REAL, BUT THINK ABOUT THE

CONSEQUENCES FOR NEW YORKERS ALL OVER NEW YORK STATE. THINK ABOUT

THE CONSEQUENCES FOR FAMILIES LIKE MINE WHO HAD TO GRIEVE AND SUFFER

126

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AND THE LOSS THAT WE EXPERIENCED THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF THIS

LAW WAS IN PLACE. IT COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF WE COULD HAVE STAND

UP AND SAID IF FAMILY MATTERS -- FAMILIES KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR

FAMILY. PEOPLE WHO ARE CLOSEST TO THEM KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING AND IF

WE RESPECT THEM ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THIS, RESPECT

THEM ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE ARE NOT LIGHT DECISIONS, WE COULD

HAVE DONE THIS AND MAYBE SAVED HUMAN LIFE.

WE CAN'T CHANGE WHAT HAPPENED TO MY FAMILY, BUT WE

CAN CHANGE WHAT'S HAPPENING TO FUTURE FAMILIES ACROSS NEW YORK. I

WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I WANT TO THANK

THE SPEAKER FOR LETTING US MOVE FORWARD ON THIS BILL AND I WILL BE

VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. FITZPATRICK.

MR. FITZPATRICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MS. SIMON: CERTAINLY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON YIELDS.

MR. FITZPATRICK: THANK YOU, JO ANNE. I'D LIKE

TO GO BACK TO THE -- THE PETITIONER PORTION HERE, ESPECIALLY WITH REGARD

TO SCHOOL PERSONNEL. WE HEARD IN THE DEBATE ON THE PRIOR PIECE OF

LEGISLATION ABOUT HOW TEACHERS ARE PRIMARILY EMPLOYED TO TEACH, NOT TO

BE INVOLVED IN SCHOOL SAFETY. ARE WE NOT DEALING WITH A SIMILAR

SITUATION HERE BY NAMING THEM AS PETITIONERS, OR POTENTIAL PETITIONERS.

127

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PRIMARILY THEY'RE EDUCATORS, BUT NOW WE'RE ASKING THEM TO ALSO BE

SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS, ARE WE NOT?

MS. SIMON: ACTUALLY, NO. WE'RE ALLOWING TEACHERS

TO BE TEACHERS, TO DO THE TEACHING THAT THEY DO. SOMETIMES KIDS TALK TO

TEACHERS. SOMETIMES TEACHERS KNOW WHEN THEIR -- THEIR STUDENT IS

SUFFERING AND THEY MAY HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THAT STUDENT COULD BE A

DANGER. THAT TEACHER WOULD BE PERMITTED, NOT REQUIRED, BUT PERMITTED

TO BRING THAT INFORMATION TO THE APPROPRIATE PERSON WHO HAS BEEN

DESIGNATED BY THEIR SCHOOL AND SAY, I'M REALLY WORRIED ABOUT MIKE

FLANAGAN.

MR. FITZPATRICK: SO THE SCHOOL WILL DESIGNATE

ONE INDIVIDUAL OR MORE THAN ONE INDIVIDUAL, OR COULD EVERY TEACHER BE

A DESIGNATED PERSON TO BE A PETITIONER?

MS. SIMON: THE SCHOOL COULD DESIGNATE A PERSON OR

TWO. THERE WOULD ONLY BE ONE PERSON WHO WOULD ACTUALLY FILE THE

PETITION. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE WERE TWO PEOPLE AUTHORIZED BY THE

SCHOOL, ONLY ONE OF THEM WOULD BE NEEDED TO FILE THE PETITION.

MR. FITZPATRICK: CORRECT. SO YOU COULD HAVE --

A SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT COULD DESIGNATE ONE PETITIONER OR COULD THEY

POSSIBLY SAY, YOU CAN ALL BE PETITIONERS. EVERY TEACHER COULD

POTENTIALLY BE THEIR OWN PETITIONER UNDER THIS LEGISLATION.

MS. SIMON: WELL, THAT WOULD BE ON A CASE-BY-CASE

BASIS, RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT'S -- IT MAY BE THAT THE PETITIONER HAS NO

NEXUS TO THAT STUDENT. LET'S SAY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DESIGNATES

SOMEBODY AND THAT PERSON DOESN'T HAVE ANY NEXUS TO THE SCHOOL THAT

128

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THAT CHILD ATTENDS. THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WOULD BE FREE TO IDENTIFY A

COUPLE OF PEOPLE WHO COULD ACT AS PETITIONERS IN A PARTICULAR

CIRCUMSTANCE. THAT IS REALLY THE JOB OF -- AND WE DO THIS, YOU KNOW,

TEACHERS ARE MANDATED REPORTERS OF CHILD ABUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, RIGHT?

THE SCHOOLS ALREADY HAVE PROTOCOLS FOR THAT.

MR. FITZPATRICK: RIGHT, OKAY.

MS. SIMON: EVERY TEACHER IS NOT FILLING OUT FORMS

FOR ACS OR THE -- THE LOCAL AGENCY THAT WOULD RECEIVE SUCH REPORTS.

AND SO, IT WOULD -- AND WHEN I'VE TALKED TO THE SCHOOL BOARDS PEOPLE

AND THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD FOLLOW A SIMILAR PROTOCOL IN

THIS INSTANCE, AND THEY SUPPORT THIS BILL.

MR. FITZPATRICK: OKAY. ARE NON-TEACHING

PERSONNEL, SAY A JANITOR; WOULD A JANITOR POTENTIALLY BE A PETITIONER?

MS. SIMON: THE BILL INDICATES THAT IT WOULD BE A

SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR AS DEFINED BY THE LAW, OR THEIR DESIGNEE, RIGHT?

FOR PURPOSES OF THAT, THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR'S DESIGNEE HAS TO BE

EMPLOYED BY THE SAME SCHOOL AS THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR AND TO BE

ONE OF THE FOLLOWING WHO HAS BEEN DESIGNATED IN WRITING TO FILE A

PETITION. SO, THAT'S UP TO THE SCHOOL. IF THE SCHOOL SAYS, I'D LIKE THE

PART-TIME JANITOR TO BE THE AUTHORIZED PERSON --

MR. FITZPATRICK: AS YOU SAID BEFORE, YOU KNOW,

STUDENTS --

MS. SIMON: OKAY, SO IT'S LIMITED. BUT LET ME JUST --

MR. FITZPATRICK: YEAH, YEAH.

MS. SIMON: -- CORRECT MYSELF. IT'S LIMITED TO THE --

129

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE POSITIONS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED ALREADY IN THE EDUCATION LAW.

MR. FITZPATRICK: OKAY. SO IF A, AS YOU SAID

BEFORE, A STUDENT, STUDENTS WILL CONFIDE IN THEIR TEACHERS, BUT WHAT IF

YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE SAY A JANITOR IS BUSY IN THE JANITORIAL CLOSET

JUST WITHIN EARSHOT OF OUR LOCKERS AND TWO STUDENTS ARE IN AN ARGUMENT,

ONE THREATENS THE OTHER. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT?

MS. SIMON: WELL, WHAT COULD HAPPEN IS THAT THE

JANITOR GOES AND SPEAKS TO THE PRINCIPAL --

MR. FITZPATRICK: OKAY.

MS. SIMON: -- OR SOMEONE, A DESIGNATED

ADMINISTRATOR, AND SAYS, I'M REALLY WORRIED ABOUT THIS KID, AND THEN

THAT PERSON WHO IS AUTHORIZED TO ACT WOULD -- WOULD MAKE A

DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD BE ACTING.

MR. FITZPATRICK: OKAY. WHAT -- WHAT IF YOU

HAVE A SITUATION WHEREBY --

MS. SIMON: SO THE JANITOR IS NOT AUTHORIZED, BUT HE

WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO SOMEBODY.

MR. FITZPATRICK: OKAY. SO, WHAT --

MS. SIMON: THE JANITOR COULD GO TO THE COPS, TOO.

MR. FITZPATRICK: IF THERE'S A -- WHAT IF YOU HAVE

A SITUATION WHERE, SAY THERE'S SOME CONFLICT INTERNALLY WITHIN A SCHOOL

DISTRICT, SAY BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND LABOR, AND THE SUPERINTENDENT

WOULD LIKE TO DESIGNATE A PETITIONER, BUT NO TEACHERS ARE WILLING TO DO

THAT BECAUSE OF THE LABOR, YOU KNOW, THE LABOR CONFLICT. WHAT WOULD

HAPPEN IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT AND WOULD THE SUPERINTENDENT BE THE

130

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PETITIONER? WHAT IF THE SUPERINTENDENT WOULD PREFER NOT TO BE A

PETITIONER AND WOULD LIKE TO DESIGNATE SOMEONE ELSE, BUT THE TEACHERS

ARE SAYING, NO, MAYBE WE'D LIKE TO COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN FOR, YOU KNOW,

IF YOU WANT US TO DO THIS, WE WANT SOMETHING IN RETURN. IS THERE A

POTENTIAL FOR THAT TYPE OF SITUATION TO DEVELOP IN DISTRICTS WHERE THERE

MIGHT BE SOME, YOU KNOW, AN EXPIRED CONTRACT AND THIS BECOMES A

LABOR ITEM AND WHAT HAPPENS IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT?

MS. SIMON: WELL, THAT WOULD NOT BE THE SITUATION

BECAUSE IT WOULD BE SOMEBODY WHO IS DESIGNATED TO BE THE PETITIONER

ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. SO, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THAT SOMEBODY HAS A

JOB AND THEIR JOB IS DESIGNATED PETITIONER, RIGHT? IT WOULD BE A PERSON

THAT WOULD CONFORM TO THE LAW THAT WOULD BE SOMEBODY THAT WOULD BE

DESIGNATED FOR THE PURPOSES OF FILING THAT PETITION WITH REGARD TO THAT

CHILD.

MR. FITZPATRICK: WELL, WHAT I'M ASKING IS WHAT

IF THERE IS NO ONE IN THAT SCHOOL WHO IS WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT

RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE THERE MAY NOT BE A CONTRACT AT THAT TIME OR THERE

MAY BE SOME LABOR STRIFE? WHAT -- WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A

SITUATION LIKE THAT?

MS. SIMON: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, IF SOMEONE DOESN'T

WANT TO REPORT, THIS IS NOT MANDATORY.

MR. FITZPATRICK: RIGHT.

MS. SIMON: RIGHT. SO, THE TEACHER COULD GO TO THE

SUPERINTENDENT WHO WOULD BE A DEFAULT PETITIONER, LET'S SAY, OR THEY

COULD GO TO THE POLICE. RIGHT NOW, IF THEY WENT TO THE POLICE, THE

131

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

POLICE COULDN'T ACT EITHER. THIS WOULD ALLOW THEM TO -- TO ACT IF THEY

WERE DESIGNATED BY THEIR SCHOOL TO ACT IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE WITH

REGARD TO THAT PARTICULAR STUDENT --

MR. FITZPATRICK: RIGHT.

MS. SIMON: -- OR IF THEY WERE THEMSELVES UNWILLING

TO DO THAT, THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WITHIN THE SCHOOL INSTITUTION THAT

COULD DO IT, OR THAT PERSON WOULD BE FREE TO GO TO THE POLICE, FOR

EXAMPLE, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT COULD DO THAT. AND, IN FACT, I BELIEVE

THAT PROBABLY THAT MAY HAPPEN. IT MIGHT ALSO HAPPEN IN A FAMILY

CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SOMEONE IS AFRAID OF THE PERSON THEY'RE LIVING WITH

AND THEY DON'T WANT TO BE THE PETITIONER, AND THAT'S WHY HAVING LAW

ENFORCEMENT BE ABLE TO DO THIS IS SO IMPORTANT.

MR. FITZPATRICK: OKAY. JO ANNE, THANK YOU

VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU, MIKE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RAIA.

MR. RAIA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD JUST FOR A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS?

MS. SIMON: YES.

MR. RAIA: THANK YOU, JO ANNE. I VOTED FOR THIS

LAST --

MS. SIMON: YOU'RE WELCOME, ANDY.

MR. RAIA: PARDON ME?

MS. SIMON: YOU'RE WELCOME, ANDY.

MR. RAIA: OH, THANK YOU. I VOTED FOR THIS LAST YEAR

132

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AND I PLAN ON VOTING FOR IT AGAIN, BUT I DO HAVE SOME NEW QUESTIONS

THAT HAVE ARISED FROM LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR, AND THE PRIMARY -- PRIMARY

CONCERN IS WE STAND ON THE CUSP OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA. NOW, WHEN

YOU APPLY FOR A NIC'S CHECK, BACKGROUND CHECK, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO

SWEAR THAT YOU DO NOT USE MARIJUANA. HOW IS THIS GOING TO -- BECAUSE

THERE'S PROVISIONS THAT DEAL WITH DRUG ABUSE AND WHAT HAVE YOU. HOW

IS THIS GOING TO PLAY WHEN, ESSENTIALLY, A FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

COULD ARREST YOU OR TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS JUST BASED ON MARIJUANA USE,

BUT WE STAND READY TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA FOR ADULT RECREATIONAL USE.

AND BASED ON THAT, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE COULD FILE A COMPLAINT,

GO FOR AN ORDER BASED ON SOMEBODY'S LEGAL RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA USE,

BECAUSE IT RUNS CONTRARY TO THE FEDERAL LAW.

MS. SIMON: NOT BECAUSE IT RUNS CONTRARY TO THE

FEDERAL LAW, BUT BECAUSE IT IS AN ABUSIVE USE OF THAT SUBSTANCE. NOW,

IF MARIJUANA IS LEGALIZED, IT WOULDN'T BE A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, BUT THE

LAW ALSO INDICATES ALCOHOL AND, AS YOU MAY KNOW, ALCOHOL IS PERFECTLY

LEGAL AND MANY PEOPLE ABUSE IT AND THAT IS WARNING SIGN THAT MIGHT BE

TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT IN MAKING A DECISION WHETHER TO

REMOVE A WEAPON FROM THE HOUSEHOLD.

MR. RAIA: I -- I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT STANDPOINT,

BUT SOMEBODY WHO ABUSES ALCOHOL TENDS TO BE MORE READILY

IDENTIFIABLE. WHEN I'VE SAT IN NUMEROUS LEGALIZATION HEARINGS WHERE

I'VE HEARD MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN NEVER

OVERDOSE ON MARIJUANA, THERE'S NO SPECIFIC TEST TO SEE IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY

REALLY HIGH AT A PARTICULAR TIME, WHEREAS YOU CAN TAKE A BREATHALYZER

133

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

TEST. SO, I SEE POTENTIAL ISSUES DOWN THE ROAD AND IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO

CORRECT THEM OR BE AWARE OF THEM IN THIS LEGISLATION, I HOPE WE SEE

SOME TYPE OF CHAPTER AMENDMENT DOWN THE LINE THAT CLARIFIES IT A LITTLE

BIT MORE AND SPELLS OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT'S FEDERAL LAW,

WHAT'S STATE LAW, BECAUSE I DO SEE SOME POTENTIAL PROBLEMS HERE.

MS. SIMON: WELL, I'M PRETTY THAT WHEN WE ACTUALLY

GET AROUND TO LEGALIZING MARIJUANA THAT WE WILL, IN FACT, ADDRESS THOSE

ISSUES.

MR. RAIA: THANK YOU.

MR. SIMON: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. ASHBY.

MR. ASHBY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

MS. SIMON: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. ASHBY: I HAVE A -- I HAVE JUST A FEW QUESTIONS.

IN TERMS OF THE LANGUAGE, IN TERMS OF "THREAT", IS THERE A SPECIFIC

DEFINITION THAT YOU'RE WORKING OFF OF?

MS. SIMON: SO, IT'S NOT -- FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A THREAT OF

BEING A DANGER TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS, AND THAT IS A STANDARD THAT IS IN

THE LAW ALREADY AND IS WELL RECOGNIZED BY THE COURTS. SO, IT'S NOT -- YOU

KNOW, AS I SAID, IT'S NOT SOMEBODY WHO GOES --

MR. ASHBY: OKAY. IT SEEMS RATHER SUBJECTIVE.

134

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AND IN OTHER STATES THAT HAVE ADOPTED LAWS SIMILAR TO THIS -- FOR

EXAMPLE, IN NEW JERSEY, THERE WAS A STUDENT WHO MADE A REMARK ON

THE SECURITY THAT WAS IN PLACE AT HIS SCHOOL, AND IT RESULTED IN AN ERPO

BEING FILED. THE EXACT LANGUAGE WASN'T DETERMINED IN THAT, BUT I'M

CURIOUS AS TO WHETHER THE INTERPRETATION OF THE SCHOOL OFFICIALS

RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING A PETITION FOR THIS, WHAT TYPES OF PARAMETERS

ARE WE ALLOWING HERE? IS IT --

MS. SIMON: WELL --

MR. ASHBY: -- FREELY -- IS IT FREELY UP TO -- IS IT

FREELY UP TO THEIR INTERPRETATION AS TO WHAT A THREAT ACTUALLY IS?

MS. SIMON: I DON'T BELIEVE SO. FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A

THREAT OF SERIOUS HARM, SERIOUS HARM TO HIMSELF OR OTHERS AS DEFINED BY

THE MENTAL HYGIENE LAW. SO, THE MENTAL HYGIENE LAW ALREADY KNOWS

WHAT IT MEANS. NOW, THE PERSON FILING THAT PETITION WOULD HAVE TO

MEET THAT STANDARD OR THE COURT WOULD NOT, IN FACT, ISSUE THAT TEMPORARY

PROTECTIVE ORDER.

MR. ASHBY: ONE OTHER -- ONE OTHER QUESTION.

GOING BACK TO THE -- THE SAFE -- THE SAFE STORAGE DISCUSSION THAT WAS

GOING ON PREVIOUSLY, IF LAW ENFORCEMENT COMES TO A PERSON'S HOME

WHO ISN'T THE RECIPIENT, BUT THE PARENT, AND IT'S FOUND THAT THEY ARE

SAFELY STORING THEIR WEAPONS, WILL THEIR WEAPONS BE REMOVED

TEMPORARILY?

MS. SIMON: I DON'T SEE ANY REASON UNDER THIS LAW

FOR A COURT TO MAKE SUCH A DETERMINATION.

MR. ASHBY: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

135

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. ASHBY: I -- I THANK THE SPONSOR OF THE BILL FOR

TAKING MY QUESTIONS, BUT THE LANGUAGE IN -- THE LANGUAGE IN THIS BILL IS

-- IS VERY BROAD. AND I THINK THAT SCHOOL OFFICIALS, IN AUGMENTING THE

LANGUAGE TO INCLUDE MANY MORE SCHOOL OFFICIALS TO EXECUTE SUCH --

SUCH A SUBMISSION IS -- IT STRETCHES THE BOUNDARIES AND IS DEFINITELY AN

INFRINGEMENT ON OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: MR. MONTESANO FOR

YOUR SECOND.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. SIMON: CERTAINLY.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU --

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO

ASK A FEW QUESTIONS. LET'S LOOK IN THE AREA OF A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

VICTIM WHO HAS BEEN THE VICTIM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BY AN ABUSER,

AND NOW HAS OBTAINED A VALID PISTOL LICENSE TO HAVE EITHER A HANDGUN

ON THE PREMISES OR A RIFLE OR A SHOTGUN, AND THE ABUSER BRINGS ON THIS

TYPE OF APPLICATION AGAINST HER TO GET THE WEAPONS TAKEN AWAY. IS THERE

ANYTHING IN THIS LEGISLATION THAT PREVENTS THAT FROM HAPPENING?

MS. SIMON: THE -- SO THE ABUSER, IF I UNDERSTAND

YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, IS FINDING A -- FILING, IN YOUR -- IN YOUR MIND, A

SCENARIO OF A RETALIATORY --

136

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. MONTESANO: MM-HMM. CORRECT.

MS. SIMON: OKAY. I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT THE COURT

WOULD -- WOULD RECOGNIZE THAT. THEY HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE BY CLEAR AND

CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS SERIOUS HARM ABOUT TO BEFALL THAT

PERSON WHO IS THE ABUSER.

MR. MONTESANO: MM-HMM. RIGHT.

MS. SIMON: AT THE -- THE ACTION OF THAT OTHER

PERSON. THEY'D HAVE TO PROVE THAT IN COURT. AND MY GUESS IS THAT THAT

PERSON, AND I DON'T MEAN TO BE FLIP, BUT I THINK IT'S PROBABLY -- WOULD

BE A VERY SIGNIFICANT BURDEN FOR THAT ABUSER --

MR. MONTESANO: RIGHT.

MS. SIMON: -- WHO IT WOULD BE KNOWN TO HAVE BEEN

AN ABUSER IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE THEY ALREADY WERE ADJUDICATED TO BE AN

ABUSER, TO BE ABLE TO MAKE OUT THAT APPLICATION.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU. BUT LET ME ASK

YOU, WHAT HAPPENS IN THE CASE NOW WE GET IT BACK TO THE COURT

PROCEEDING, SO A HEARING TAKES PLACE AND THERE'S A-- A FINDING AGAINST A

RESPONDENT. SO, THE JUDGE NOW ENTERS A PERMANENT ORDER --

MS. SIMON: IT'S -- IT'S STILL A TEMPORARY ORDER OF

PROTECTION.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. AND FOR HOW LONG DOES

THAT --

MS. SIMON: FOR UP TO A YEAR.

MR. MONTESANO: UP TO A YEAR.

MS. SIMON: THE PETITIONER COULD REAPPLY IF THOSE

137

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WERE STILL AN IMMEDIATE THREAT OF HARM. AND

OTHERWISE, THE -- THE WEAPONS WOULD BE RETURNED.

MR. MONTESANO: OKAY. SO THERE IS A REVIEW

PERIOD BUILT INTO THE BILL.

MS. SIMON: MM-HMM.

MR. MONTESANO: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND --

OKAY. ON THE BILL. THANK YOU.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU.

MR. MONTESANO: ON THE BILL, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ON THE BILL.

MR. MONTESANO: THANK YOU. WELL, I SAID THIS

BILL HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE AND WHEN IT FIRST CAME INTO EXISTENCE,

I WAS VERY HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT BECAUSE IT HAS CERTAIN IMPORTANT

PROVISIONS IN THERE. AND ALTHOUGH I'M NOT THRILLED ABOUT SOME OF THE

DUE PROCESS PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FROM EXPERIENCE NOW,

MY NINTH YEAR HERE AND SEEING A LOT OF BILLS THAT WE PASS AND THEN SEE

OR HEAR HOW THEY HIT THE GROUND IN REALITY AT HOME, THERE'S A BIG

DIFFERENCE.

SO WHEN WE PASS A BILL LIKE THIS, THE LANGUAGE

CONTAINS -- SAYS CERTAIN THINGS, BUT THEN THE POLICYMAKERS WHEN THEY

IMPLEMENT IT, WHETHER IT BE THE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION, IT BE

THE DIFFERENT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, MAYBE EVEN THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL'S OFFICE, WILL TAKE A DIFFERENT POSITION ON HOW THINGS ARE GOING

TO BE HANDLED. HOW IS THE COURT GOING TO ENTERTAIN THIS PETITION? HOW

IS IT GOING TO BE PROCESSED IN THE TIMELY FASHION? WHAT'S THE ORDER

138

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

GOING TO LOOK LIKE? ALL THESE THINGS HAVE TO COME INTO EFFECT, AND

THEY'RE GOING TO -- AND THEY'RE GOING TO IMPLEMENT IT THE WAY THEY SEE

FIT. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF OUR AGENCIES THAT ARE ENACTED BY AN ACT OF THE

LEGISLATURE GET TO MAKE A LOT OF THEIR OWN POLICIES, LIKE DEPARTMENT OF

MOTOR VEHICLES, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES. AND UNLESS WE TAKE

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION TO CHANGE THEIR POLICIES, SOME WRONG CAN HAPPEN.

WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOLTEACHERS AND THE

ADMINISTRATORS, I THINK WE'RE PUTTING A SUBSTANTIAL BURDEN ON THEM TO

DO -- TO DO THIS TYPE OF PROCEEDING. WE'RE PUTTING THEM, I BELIEVE, IN

HARM'S WAY BECAUSE IF THEY BRING ON A PETITION AGAINST A STUDENT, AND

LET'S ASSUME FOR THE MOMENT IT'S UNFOUNDED, THE PARENTS OR THE STUDENT

CAN TAKE RETALIATORY ACTION AGAINST THE TEACHER. THEY CAN SUE THAT

TEACHER, NOT SURE IF THE TEACHER IS GOING TO BE INDEMNIFIED UNDER THE

SCHOOL DISTRICT'S INSURANCE POLICY, AND OTHER PERSONAL ATTACKS UPON THE

TEACHER. SO, WE'RE PUTTING THEM IN HARM'S WAY, WHEN SIMPLY ALL THEY

WOULD HAVE TO DO WHEN THEY GET A STUDENT WHO EXHIBITS SOME BEHAVIOR

THAT CONCERNS THEM, IS TO NOTIFY THE POLICE AND LET THE POLICE BRING ON

THIS APPLICATION. LET THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY BRING ON THE APPLICATION.

LET THE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES BRING ON THE

APPLICATION. BRING IN CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES. IF A STUDENT MAKES

THREATS IN SCHOOL, HE CAN BE PROSECUTE -- ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED FOR A

TERRORIST THREAT, WHICH IS A FELONY IN THIS STATE. AND MANY A STUDENT

HAS ALREADY BEEN ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED FOR MAKING THREATS ON

WEBSITES, INTERNETS AND ALL THE SOCIAL MEDIA, THREATENING OF THE

CHILDREN, PASSING NOTES, SO THEY HAVE A LOT OF REMEDIES IN PLACE NOW.

139

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BUT TO, IN MY OPINION, DRAG TEACHERS INTO THIS TYPE OF

SITUATION, I BELIEVE IT CREATES AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN UPON THEM, IT PUTS

THEM IN HARM'S WAY WHEN SIMPLY, PAID LAW ENFORCEMENT WHO ARE

TRAINED TO MAKE THESE ASSESSMENTS AND EVALUATIONS CAN DO THIS, THE

SCHOOL NURSE CAN BE INVOLVED, THE SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST COULD BE

INVOLVED. ALL THOSE PEOPLE ARE PROPERLY TRAINED FOR THESE TYPES OF

THINGS, THAT THE TEACHER CAN GO TO. BUT TO TURN AROUND AND HAVE THE

TEACHER BE DESIGNATED AS SOMEONE TO COMMENCE THE PROCEEDING, SIGN

THE PETITION, MAKE THE SWORN AFFIDAVIT, HAVING TO GO TO COURT, IS VERY

BURDENSOME ON THE TEACHER; BUT ALSO FINANCIALLY TAXING ON THE SCHOOL

DISTRICT WHO HAS TO PAY THIS TEACHER TO DO ALL THIS EXTRA WORK, TAKE TIME

OUT OF THE CLASSROOM TO GO TO COURT FOR THIS PROCEEDING, A SUBSTITUTE

TEACHER HAS TO NOW BE BROUGHT BACK IN TO COVER THAT CLASS, AND WE'RE

NOT FUNDING THIS AT ALL.

SO, IT'S AN UNFUNDED MANDATE, IT'S AN EXTREME BURDEN

ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS. I DON'T BELIEVE THE -- THE DUE PROCESS IS

ADEQUATE, THERE'S A LOT OF SPECULATION AS TO WHAT LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL

DO WHEN IT CONFISCATES WEAPONS, ESPECIALLY TO PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE

SAME HOUSEHOLD WITH THE RESPONDENT. AND IN THE CASE OF A LAWFULLY

ISSUED PERMIT, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THEIR PERMIT? SO FOR THOSE REASONS,

UNTIL THIS BILL IS AMENDED WHERE IT TAKES OUT THE TEACHERS AND WE CLEAR

UP SOME OF THIS DUE PROCESS STUFF, FOR THOSE REASONS STATED AND MANY

OTHERS, I WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY

COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. MANKTELOW.

140

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MS. SIMON: YES, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON YIELDS.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MA'AM. ON THIS

BILL, I'VE READ THROUGH IT AND REREAD THROUGH IT, AND THE ONE QUESTION

THAT COMES UP TO MY MIND, AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS, LET'S --LET'S SUPPOSE I

HAD A GIRLFRIEND FOR 20 YEARS --

MS. SIMON: GOOD FOR YOU.

MR. MANKTELOW: -- AND NOW SHE LEAVES ME AND

SHE KNOWS I HAVE A LOT OF GUNS IN MY HOUSE --

MS. SIMON: I'M SORRY.

(LAUGHTER)

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU. WHAT HAPPENS IF

SHE DOES THE SAME THING AND SAYS, MR. MANKTELOW, HE'S NOT IN GOOD --

GOOD MIND OR ANYTHING AND GOES AHEAD AND DOES THE PETITION, WHAT

HAPPENS TO MY -- MY GUNS THAT ARE IN THE HOUSE?

MS. SIMON: WELL, SHE WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT YOU

WERE, IN FACT, AN IMMINENT THREAT OF DANGER TO YOURSELF OR OTHERS; THAT

YOU HAD DEMONSTRATED CONDUCT THAT WOULD JUSTIFY THE REMOVAL OF YOUR

WEAPONS. AND I -- IT MAY BE THAT YOU HAVE ACTED IN SUCH A WAY AND

SHE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT IF SHE'S NO LONGER IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD,

THEN SHE WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED UNDER THIS STATUTE. SHE COULD GO TO

141

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ASK THEM TO MAKE OUT SUCH A -- A PETITION.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO, DID YOU SAY IF SHE'S NOT IN

MY HOUSEHOLD, SHE DOESN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY?

MS. SIMON: THAT'S RIGHT.

MR. MANKTELOW: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,

MA'AM.

MS. SIMON: YOU'RE WELCOME.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. MANKTELOW: NOTHING ELSE -- NOTHING ELSE,

SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IN 180 DAYS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. BRAUNSTEIN TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. BRAUNSTEIN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I

RISE TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR INTRODUCING

THIS LEGISLATION AND PUSHING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PASS IT TODAY. I THINK

OVER THE YEARS WE'VE SEEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN MASS SHOOTINGS IN OUR

COUNTRY, AND OFTEN WE SEE THE EVIDENCE THAT THE SHOOTER HAD EXHIBITED

CHARACTERISTICS OF SOMEONE WHO IS LIKELY TO CAUSE HARM TO THEMSELVES

OR OTHERS. AND WE ASK OURSELVES, WHY DIDN'T SOMEONE DO SOMETHING?

WHY DIDN'T SOMEONE INTERVENE? AND NOW WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO

142

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PETITION A COURT, WHETHER IT'S A FAMILY MEMBER, WHETHER IT'S LAW

ENFORCEMENT, WHETHER IT'S A SCHOOL OFFICIAL, TO HAVE FIREARMS TAKEN

AWAY FROM INDIVIDUALS WHO EXHIBIT THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR. THIS WILL

MAKE OUR COMMUNITIES SAFER, AND IT'S COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION.

I THINK IT'S INTERESTING, A QUINNIPIAC POLL LAST YEAR SAID

THAT OF AMERICANS POLLED, 89 PERCENT SUPPORTED EXTREME RISK

PROTECTION ORDERS. SO, I THINK WE'RE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF COMMON

SENSE, WE'RE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF WHAT AMERICANS WANT TO SEE DONE.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR ALL HER HARD WORK IN

MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THIS LEGISLATION PASSED TODAY. THANK YOU,

MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LAVINE.

MR. LAVINE: WELL, WE'VE ALREADY 25 MASS

SHOOTINGS IN THE UNITED STATES THIS YEAR ALONE. AND AS I GET READY TO

VOTE, I AM THINKING OF THE DEAD AND THOSE WHO GRIEVE FOR THE DEAD.

AND I'M THINKING OF THE 58 SOULS LOST AT LAS VEGAS, 49 AT ORLANDO,

ANOTHER 25 AT SUTHERLAND SPRINGS. AND IT'S GETS CLOSER TO HOME. CLOSER

TO HOME WHEN WE THINK OF SANDY HOOK, WHICH IS A SHORT DRIVE AWAY

FROM ALBANY. IT'S CLOSER TO HOME WHEN WE THINK OF PARKLAND, AND

SCOTT BEIGEL BEING KILLED AT PARKLAND. SCOTT GREW UP WITH A COUSIN OF

MINE IN DIX HILLS, AND HE WAS THE CAMP COUNSELOR FOR CHILDREN OF OTHER

FRIENDS OF MINE AT CAMP STARLIGHT. I HAVE NO MORE TEARS. AND THE

TEARS I HAD WERE BITTER TEARS. IT IS NO MORE TIME FOR CRYING. IT'S NO

MORE TIME FOR THE OFFERING OF SANCTIMONIOUS AND HOLLOW EXPRESSIONS OF

OFFERING OUR THOUGHTS AND OUR PRAYERS.

143

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

DISCUSSION HAS CENTERED TODAY ON THIS BILL PERHAPS

BEING AN UNFUNDED MANDATE. WELL, HOW LONG CAN WE GO ON WITHOUT

TAKING ACTION TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS? AND TRY TELLING THE FAMILIES WHO

ARE PAYING FOR FUNERALS ABOUT THE FACT THAT THAT'S AN UNFUNDED MANDATE,

WHILE WE REMAIN SILENT. BUT WE REMAIN SILENT NO LONGER. TODAY WE

TAKE ACTION. ENOUGH OF THIS RITUALIZED SLAUGHTER, SLAUGHTER AT THE ALTAR

OF THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION. SO, TODAY IS A DAY FOR ACTION AND I

AM GOING TO BE CASTING MY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. AND LET US STAY

STRONG, BECAUSE THIS BATTLE WILL CONTINUE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GLICK.

MS. GLICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY

VOTE. FIRST, I WANT TO CONGRATULATE THE SPONSOR FOR NOT JUST BRINGING THE

BILL BEFORE US, BUT FOR A VERY CALM, CLEAR DEBATE, EXPLAINING THE LIMITED

NATURE OF THIS. THIS IS NOT SOMEBODY WHO IN A SNIT, CAN "RAT-OUT" SOME

FRIEND OR FAMILY MEMBER.

SUICIDES ACTUALLY OUTPACE HOMICIDES IN OUR COUNTRY.

AND WHEN A GUN IS AVAILABLE, FIREARMS ARE AVAILABLE, THEY ARE MORE

LIKELY TO BE USED IN A SUICIDE. AND IN STATES LIKE WYOMING, WHERE 63

PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS REPORTED OWNING GUNS, RATES OF SUICIDE WERE

HIGHER. PEOPLE CAN ACT IN A MOMENT OF DESPAIR AND NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE

BACK THAT ACTION. FAMILY MEMBERS SHOULD BE ABLE TO INTERVENE AND

ENSURE THAT A FAMILY MEMBER WHO IS DEPRESSED AND EXPRESSING DESIRES

TO DO AWAY WITH THEMSELVES CANNOT CONTINUE TO HAVE A FIREARM FOR THE

PERIOD OF TIME THAT THEY ARE EXPERIENCING THOSE EMOTIONAL DISTRESSES.

SO, I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

144

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GLICK IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. [SIC] FRONTUS. MS. FRONTUS.

MS. FRONTUS: THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

I RISE TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL, MY

COLLEAGUE AND EVERYBODY ELSE IN THIS CHAMBER WHO, LIKE ME, HAS BEEN

FIGHTING AND ADVOCATING AROUND THIS ISSUE.

I WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TALK

ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE, IT'S FINE A LOT OF TIMES WE THINK ABOUT MASS

SHOOTINGS, OF COURSE. THOSE ARE EXTREME CASES THAT ARE VERY, VERY

PAINFUL FOR US AS AMERICANS I'D LIKE TO SAY, TOO, THAT ON A LOCAL LEVEL,

MANY OF US ARE FROM COMMUNITIES WHERE GUN VIOLENCE HAVE RAVAGED

OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. I STAND HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE 46TH ASSEMBLY

DISTRICT. IN MY HOMETOWN OF CONEY ISLAND WHICH IS KNOWN, FRANKLY,

FOR ITS AMUSEMENT PARK AND HAS A KIND OF ICONIC STATUS AROUND THE

WORLD, UNBEKNOWNST TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, THERE IS A COMMUNITY THERE

BEYOND THE RIDES THAT HAS LONG BEEN PLAGUED BY GUN VIOLENCE.

WHEN I WAS A LITTLE GIRL GROWING UP, THE CONVENTIONAL

THINKING WAS THAT PEOPLE WOULD GO TO COLLEGE AND WOULD GET OUT OF

THERE AS SOON AS THEY CAN BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, WE -- WE

WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM HERE. NINETEEN YEARS AGO THIS MONTH, MY

NEIGHBOR JUST A COUPLE OF DOORS DOWN FROM THE HOUSE THAT I GREW UP IN,

JOHNNY WONG, WHO WAS ONLY 18-YEARS-OLD, LOST HIS LIFE DUE TO GUN

VIOLENCE. IT HAPPENED RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIS DOOR, AND I REMEMBER IT LIKE

IT WAS YESTERDAY.

145

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OVER THE YEARS, I'VE SEEN A TWO-YEAR-OLD SHOT, A

TEN-YEAR-OLD BOY GOING TO THE STORE, A MOTHER WITH CHILDREN IN HER

HANDS GOING TO THE STORE AFTER SCHOOL SHOT RIGHT THERE IN THE

NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT INSTEAD OF RUNNING AND LEAVING

THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SAYING THIS IS NO PLACE TO LIVE, I DECIDED TO DO

SOMETHING ABOUT IT. AND I'M VERY PROUD TODAY TO SAY THAT I STARTED TWO

ANTI-GUN VIOLENCE ORGANIZATIONS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, THE CONEY ISLAND

COALITION AGAINST VIOLENCE IN 2009, AND THE CONEY ISLAND

ANTI-VIOLENCE COLLABORATIVE IN 2013. AS I SIT HERE TODAY AS AN

ASSEMBLYMEMBER, I'M PROUD THAT THE ANTI-VIOLENCE --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. FRONTUS.

MS. FRONTUS: OH, AM I OUT OF TIME?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YES, YOU ARE.

MS. FRONTUS: FORGIVE ME. FORGIVE ME. I --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: HOW WOULD YOU

VOTE?

MS. FRONTUS: I'M PROUD TO CAST MY VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. FRONTUS IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. MOSLEY.

MR. MOSLEY: TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE, MR. SPEAKER. I

WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR, WHO I HAVE SEEN OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS

FROM COAST TO COAST, LITERALLY FROM LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA TO NEW

YORK AND SEVERAL POINTS IN BETWEEN, DILIGENTLY ADVOCATE FOR THIS PIECE

146

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

OF LEGISLATION.

TO THE ADVOCATES, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR PUSHING THE

ENVELOPE EACH AND EVERY YEAR, EACH AND EVERY DAY. WITHOUT YOU, WHO

KNOWS WHERE WE WOULD BE WITH THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. WE HAVE

SEEN IT PASS IN OTHER FAR LESS PROGRESSIVE STATES THAN OURS, BUT FINALLY IT'S

COME TO PASS AND I LOOK FORWARD TO NEVER HAVING TO SEE THIS DEBATE

EVER, EVER AGAIN.

AND LAST, BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST, IN THE MEMORIES OF

THE FAMILIES AND LOVED ONES WE'VE LOST, NOT ONLY HERE IN NEW YORK

CITY AND NEW YORK STATE, BUT THROUGHOUT THE NATION, WHO DON'T HAVE

AN ERPO POLICY IN PLACE. WE ALWAYS ASK OF OURSELVES, WHAT CAN WE

DO MORE TO MAKE SURE THOSE THAT WHO -- WHO ARE EXPOSED TO GUN

VIOLENCE DON'T HAVE TO EXPERIENCE WHAT MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE IN

THIS CHAMBER AND MY -- I, MYSELF, PERSONALLY HAVING A FAMILY VICTIM

GUNNED DOWN RIGHT BEFORE OUR EYES.

AND CERTAINLY LAST, BUT NOT LEAST, I WANT TO THANK ALL OF

YOU, FOR WE HAVE NOW PUT ONE MORE NAIL IN THE NRA'S COFFINS, AND

WE'RE LOOKING TO PUT FURTHER NAILS GOING FORWARD IN AN EFFORT TO SEE ONE

THING DIE THAT ALL OF US BELIEVE, AT LEAST ON OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE, WILL BE

TO THE BETTERMENT OF OUR STATE, AND THAT'S THE NRA BEING OUT OF

BUSINESS. THANK YOU, MS. (INAUDIBLE).

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. WALCZYK.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TO

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. JUST 21 DAYS AGO IN THIS CHAMBER, WE RAISED OUR

RIGHT HAND AND WE SWORE TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED

147

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

STATES OF AMERICA, WHICH INCLUDES THE SECOND AMENDMENT. SIX DAYS

AGO WE RESTRICTED AN AMERICAN'S RIGHT TO LIFE, AND TODAY WE'RE ATTACKING

THE LIBERTY BY INFRINGING ON OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. NEXT

WEEK, I HOPE THERE ISN'T AN ATTACK ON THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, BECAUSE

I'M GOING TO CARRY ON NONETHELESS. BUT YOU SWORE AN OATH -- YOU

SWORN AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION. STICK TO THAT OATH. PURSUE

LIFE, PURSUE LIBERTY, PURSUE HAPPINESS IN NEW YORK STATE, AND DO SO FOR

YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

MR. SPEAKER, I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND I VOTE NO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. ORTIZ.

MR. ORTIZ: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I, TOO, WOULD

LIKE TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR HER CALM AND DEDICATION TO THIS PARTICULAR

PIECE OF LEGISLATION DURING HER DEBATE. IN 1994, WHEN I FIRST GOT

ELECTED TO OFFICE, MY FIRST -- MY FIRST WELCOME TO THE ASSEMBLY WAS A

TRAGEDY THAT HAPPENED IN THE GOWANUS IN BROOKLYN, WHERE A YOUNG

MAN BY THE NAME OF HEYWARD WAS -- WAS KILLED IN THE PLAYGROUND. SO,

BY SAYING THAT, SO I MAKE ANY COMMITMENT TO ENSURE THAT EVERY DAY

THAT I COME TO THIS CHAMBER THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK HARD TO GET

GUNS OFF THE PEOPLE THAT THEY DON'T DESERVE TO HAVE. SO, TODAY IS A

GREAT DAY THAT WE HAVE PASSED ALL THIS LEGISLATION. TODAY'S A GREAT DAY

THAT WE FINALLY MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, NOT JUST BY THIS BILL, BUT WITH THE

PRIOR BILL TO ENSURE THAT TEACHERS ARE THERE TO TEACH, NOT TO HAVE GUNS TO

BRING TO SCHOOL.

AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO -- TO THANK THE SPEAKER,

BECAUSE I THINK THAT WHAT WE HAVE MANAGED TO DO HERE IN THE LAST TWO

148

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WEEKS, IT'S VERY SIMPLE, IS TO ENSURE THAT WHAT WE COULD NOT HAVE DONE

IN 20 YEARS OR 25 YEARS, NOW WE HAVE THE GREEN LIGHT TO DO WHAT IS THE

BEST FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS AND THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY THEY ELECT US TO BE HERE TODAY, TO MAKE SURE

THAT SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO TAKE TOUGH VOTE, DIFFICULT VOTE, BUT TO THE

BENEFIT OF OUR CHILDREN AND THE SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND

COMMUNITY. AND AS CLOSE -- AND I CLOSE WITH THIS QUOTE, MR. SPEAKER,

AND THE QUOTE IS GO, AND I CLOSE QUOTE, "YOU CAN PUT A SILENCER -- A

SILENCER ON A GUN, BUT NOT ON THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. AND THE PEOPLE

HAVE SPOKE TODAY." AND I CLOSE QUOTE AND I VOTE IN THE POSITIVE, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. STERN.

MR. STERN: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. SCOTT BEIGEL

WAS KILLED IN THE SHOOTING THAT TOOK PLACE ON FEBRUARY 14TH, 2018 AT

THE MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL IN PARKLAND, FLORIDA.

THE SCHULMAN'S WHO ARE HERE WITH US DAY ARE MY HOMETOWN

NEIGHBORS, AND WE WELCOME THEM TO BE WITH US IN THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE

TODAY. SCOTT GRADUATED FROM HALF HOLLOW HILLS HIGH SCHOOL EAST ON

LONG ISLAND. HE WAS A TEACHER AND A COACH AT MSD. HE WAS TRULY

LOVED BY ALL; HIS STUDENTS, HIS ATHLETES, HIS ENTIRE COMMUNITY. HE DIED

PROTECTING HIS STUDENTS DURING THE VALENTINE'S DAY SHOOTING THAT TOOK

THE LIVES OF 16 OTHERS. SCOTT PLACED HIS OWN LIFE IN PERIL TO SAVE OTHERS,

AND WAS SHOT OUTSIDE HIS CLASSROOM DOOR AFTER HURRYING IN AS MANY

STUDENTS AS HE COULD TO SAFETY. HE WAS 35-YEARS-OLD.

149

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

SCOTT BEIGEL IS A HERO. HIS PARENTS HAVE MADE IT THEIR

MISSION TO HELP ENSURE THAT SCOTT'S MURDER WILL NOT BE IN VAIN AND HAVE

BECOME TREMENDOUS LEADERS IN THE FIGHT TO KEEP OUR FAMILIES AND OUR

COMMUNITIES SAFE FROM GUN VIOLENCE. ANYBODY THAT HAS HAD THE

OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH LINDA SCHULMAN AND HEAR HER STORY KNOWS,

PARTICULARLY AS SHE SPENT TIME DOWN IN FLORIDA, THAT EVERYONE KNEW.

TEACHERS KNEW. ADMINISTRATORS KNEW. FELLOW STUDENTS KNEW. SO

MUCH OF THE COMMUNITY OF PARKLAND, FLORIDA, KNEW THAT THE KILLER HAD

ISSUES AND PRESENTED A THREAT TO HIS FELLOW STUDENTS IN THE SCHOOL.

CLEAR WARNING SIGNS FOR TOO LONG WENT EITHER IGNORED OR TOO MANY IN

THAT COMMUNITY SAID THAT THEY SIMPLY HAD NO ALTERNATIVE, THERE WAS

NOTHING THAT THEY CAN DO.

MR. SPEAKER, I WILL BE VOTE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

FOR, YES, IT'S AN EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER INITIATIVE, BUT WHAT I

CONSIDER TODAY TO BE THE SCOTT BEIGEL RED FLAG LAW, BECAUSE IT IS A

COMMONSENSE PRO-ACTIVE INITIATIVE THAT WILL KEEP HANDS OUT OF THE GUNS

-- OUT OF THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE THEM. AND THIS IS

AN INITIATIVE THAT WILL SAVE LIVES. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. JACOBSON.

MR. JACOBSON: MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TO EXPLAIN MY

VOTE AND EXPLAIN WHY I'M VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. THE NEXT TIME

THERE'S A SCHOOL SHOOTING, I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION,

WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT ALLOWING THE MENTALLY-ILL

TO LEGALLY BUY GUNS? THE SAME IS ALSO TRUE THE NEXT TIME WE READ IN

150

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE NEWSPAPER ABOUT ONE SPOUSE SHOOTING -- SHOOTING HIS OR HER

SPOUSE, AND THEN SHOOTING THE CHILDREN. AND THEY'LL SAY, WHEN ARE YOU

GOING TO STOP ALLOWING THE MENTALLY-ILL TO BUY GUNS? THE SAME WILL BE

SAID FOR SUICIDE; WHEN HIS FAMILY KNEW HE WAS REACHING OUT FOR HELP,

BUT INSTEAD HE REACHED FOR A GUN. SO, I THINK THAT WE CAN AT LEAST SAY

TODAY THAT WE TOOK ONE LITTLE STEP TO PREVENT THESE KIND OF SHOOTINGS.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MISS -- MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WELL, WE'VE

HAD A VERY EXTENSIVE DEBATE. I WOULD JUST WANT TO JUST QUICKLY EXPLAIN

WHAT MY VOTE IS. I THINK OUT OF THE PACKAGE OF BILLS THAT WE'VE BEEN

ASKED TO CONSIDER TODAY AND WHATEVER ONES WE'RE STILL GOING TO

CONSIDER BEFORE WE TRY TO GET HOME, THIS ONE REALLY WORRIES ME THE

MOST. I -- WE DEBATED THIS LAST YEAR, I WASN'T IN FAVOR OF IT LAST YEAR. I

THINK -- I'M GOING TO JUST OFFER TWO QUICK REASONS WHY I'M SO WORRIED

ABOUT THIS BILL. THE FIRST IS THAT, HAVING WORKED IN FAMILY COURT FOR A

NUMBER OF YEARS, I'VE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE SUCH A LARGE

GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ABLE TO COME FORWARD, WHETHER THEY'RE

EX-BOYFRIENDS, EX-GIRLFRIENDS, EX-SPOUSES, PEOPLE WHO USED TO LIVE

WITH SOMEBODY, BUT NO LONGER DOES, WHEN YOU HAVE A GROUP OF PEOPLE

LIKE THIS THAT ARE ABLE TO COME FORWARD AND MAKE ALLEGATIONS, I'M VERY

CONCERNED, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN, THAT THEY -- IT CAN BE USED --

THE PROCESS CAN BE MISUSED TO HARASS AND ANNOY AND TRY TO GAIN SOME

TYPE OF TACTICAL OR STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE IN -- IN A COURT PROCEEDING.

151

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THAT'S ONE THING THAT REALLY DOES WORRY ME, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO

HAPPEN.

AND I THINK THAT THE OTHER THING -- I DON'T THINK THAT

THIS HAS REALLY BEEN MENTIONED YET, EVERYONE'S BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE

SECOND AMENDMENT, I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT

TO THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE OF THIS LEGISLATION. I THINK THAT WHEN WE

START FOCUSING ON POLICING PEOPLE'S THOUGHTS, WE'RE -- WE'RE ON A VERY

SLIPPERY SLOPE. AND I -- AND I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. WHETHER

-- IF SOMEONE IS MAKING A TERRORISTIC THREAT, WE HAVE ALREADY FOUND A

WAY TO ADDRESS THAT IN THE LAW. WHEN WE ARE STARTING TO THINK ABOUT

WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT BE THINKING, OR THINGS THAT THEY MIGHT BE

EXPRESSING, THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE CHILLING SPEECH AND I THINK THAT

THERE'S GOING TO BE A GRAVE OVERREACTION HERE.

I UNDERSTAND THE -- THE LAUDABLE INTENT BEHIND THIS BILL,

BUT I DO THINK IT'S -- IT'S A FRIGHTENING ONE TO ME AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I

WILL BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. CRESPO.

MR. CRESPO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN

MY VOTE. TODAY, THIS PACKAGE OF BILLS -- I FIRST WANT TO COMMEND ALL OF

THE SPONSORS, NOT JUST FOR THIS BILL, AND ALL THE OTHER ONES THAT WERE

TAKEN UP TODAY, THEY REALLY RESPOND TO SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED

NOT JUST IN THIS CHAMBER, NOT JUST IN OUR STATE, BUT NATIONALLY, IN DEPTH.

AND WHEN YOU SEE STUDENTS NOT ONLY VICTIMIZED, BUT ORGANIZING AND

ADVOCATING FOR CHANGE AROUND THESE ISSUES FOR SENSIBLE REGULATIONS THAT

152

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PROTECT THEIR FUTURE AND THEIR ABILITY TO REMAIN HEALTHY AND -- AND ALIVE,

I THINK THAT'S -- THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD RESPOND TO. THAT'S

SOMETHING WE SHOULD LISTEN TO.

AND FINALLY, IT'S GREAT TO SEE THAT BOTH THE SENATE AND

THE ASSEMBLY SPONSORS ARE UP THERE AND THAT THIS BILL NOT ONLY GETS

PASSED, BUT BECOMES LAW. THE FACT IS, THERE'S NOTHING SADDER WHEN WE

SEE THESE CASES, MORE SO THAN NOT JUST WHAT OCCURS, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK

AT THE STORY AND YOU REALIZE THAT SOMEBODY SHOULD HAVE REALIZED

SOMETHING WAS WRONG, THAT SOMETHING COULD HAPPEN, THAT SOMEBODY

KNEW AND JUST DIDN'T -- COULDN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. I THINK THIS BILL IS

A -- IS THE RIGHT APPROACH. I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROTECTION. I'D

RATHER ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION THAT IF -- IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO BE

DISCOMFORTED BECAUSE AN ALLEGATION COMES FORWARD, I'D RATHER THAT BE

ADDRESSED THE RIGHT WAY AND DEALT WITH RATHER THAN ADDRESS IT AFTER

THERE'S BEEN VICTIMS LEFT BEHIND. OR IN THE CASE HAS BEEN MENTIONED,

SOMETIMES WHEN THERE ARE SUICIDES, INDIVIDUALS WHO WE KNOW WERE AT

RISK OF DEPRESSION AND OTHER ISSUES, BUT WE ALLOWED THEM TO CONTINUE

TO HAVE THESE WEAPONS IN HAND.

I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THIS IS A MESSAGE

TO THE PEOPLE OF THE BRONX WHO HAVE SEEN ENOUGH GUN VIOLENCE IN OUR

-- IN OUR HISTORY, BUT ALSO TO THE STATE AND TO THE COUNTRY, THAT FINALLY

WE CAN DO MORE, TO DO THE RIGHT THING, TO DO THE SENSIBLE THING AND TO

PROTECT NEW YORKERS FROM THESE CONDITIONS. SO I'LL BE PROUDLY VOTING

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

153

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MS. SIMON TO CLOSE.

MS. SIMON: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. GUN

VIOLENCE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY, INCLUDING THE SCHOOL SHOOTING LAST

YEAR IN PARKLAND, FLORIDA HAS SHAKEN THE COUNTRY TO ITS CORE. I AM SO

PROUD OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE IN FLORIDA AND IN NEW YORK WHO ARE

STANDING UP AND SPEAKING UP FOR THEIR LIVES. THEY, THE FIRST OF THE

POST-COLUMBINE GENERATION, ARE CHANGING THE WORLD AND I FEEL

PRIVILEGED TO DO MY SMALL PART TO AMPLIFY THEIR VOICES AND BRING

CHANGE.

AFTER THE PARKLAND SHOOTING, WHICH CLAIMED 17 LIVES

AND LEFT MANY OTHERS INJURED, WE LEARNED THAT THE SHOOTER HAD A HISTORY

OF ESCALATING VIOLENCE; THAT FAMILY AND OTHERS CLOSE TO HIM WERE

CONCERNED ABOUT HIS BEHAVIOR AND REPORTED IT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT

THERE WAS NO MECHANISM FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ACT. A TEMPORARY

EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS TRAGEDY.

AND I POINT OUT THAT THE ARGUMENTS ABOUT UNFUNDED MANDATE ARE, IN

FACT, NOT VALID ARGUMENTS. IT IS NOT A MANDATE, IT IS PERMISSIVE, PEOPLE

ARE PERMITTED TO SEEK SUCH AN ORDER TO PROTECT THEIR LIVES.

A TEMPORARY EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER COULD

HAVE PREVENTED THIS TRAGEDY. WHEN PEOPLE EXHIBIT WARNING SIGNS THAT

THEY POSE A RISK OF SERIOUS HARM TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS, FAMILY AND

HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS OFTEN OBSERVE THESE SIGNS FIRSTHAND, BUT THEY FEEL

POWERLESS AND UNABLE TO INTERVENE, EVEN WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT

SUPPORT, BEFORE A TRAGEDY OCCURS. LIKE FLORIDA AND NEW YORK, EVEN IF

THESE CONCERNS ARE REPORTED, LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ACT TO

154

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HELP PREVENT THE TRAGEDIES FROM OCCURRING, INCLUDING INTERPERSONAL GUN

VIOLENCE OR SUICIDE INVOLVING A GUN. A TEMPORARY EXTREME RISK

PROTECTION ORDER WOULD RESTRICT THE PERSON'S ACCESS TO FIREARMS IF THEY

POSE A SERIOUS RISK OF HARM.

THIS BILL HELPS PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE AND ENSURES DUE

PROCESS UNDER THE LAW. IT REMOVES FIREARMS FROM THOSE WHO SHOULD NOT

HAVE THEM, AND DOES IT WITH RESPECT TO THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND FOR

PEOPLE'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS, WHICH I ADD IS IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING.

NEW YORK HAS WORKED HARD TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE

THROUGH A COMMUNITY GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS AND ENACTING

SENSIBLE GUN LAWS. THE SAFE ACT BECAME THE FIRST STATE LAW PASSED IN

RESPONSE TO THE SANDY HOOK SHOOTING IN 2012. BUT NOW SEVERAL YEARS

LATER, WE MUST DO MORE AND TODAY WE HAVE COMMITTED TO DO MORE.

WITH US TODAY FROM LONG ISLAND ARE LINDA --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. --

MS. SIMON: -- AND MICHAEL SCHULMAN, THE PARENTS

OF SCOTT BEIGEL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. SIMON.

MS. SIMON: SCOTT, A LONG ISLAND NATIVE, WAS A

35-YEAR-OLD TEACHER AT MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL IN

PARKLAND AND LOST HIS LIFE TRAGICALLY --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

155

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THE BILL IS PASSED.

(APPLAUSE)

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO

THANK MY COLLEAGUES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE FOR THE CONVERSATION

THAT WE'VE HAD HERE TODAY, IT'S BEEN HANDLED IN A VERY CIVIL, CALM

MANNER. ALTHOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN SOME DISAGREEMENTS, WE'VE MOVED

ON.

AND SINCE WE HAVE MOVED ON, MR. SPEAKER, WE HAVE

ONE LAST BILL THAT WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THIS EVENING, AND WE WOULD

ASK THAT YOU WOULD CALL MEMBER PAULIN ON RULES REPORT NO. 23, BILL

NO. 2686 -- 25.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: I'M SORRY. RULES REPORT

NO. 25, BILL NO. 2690.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A02690, RULES REPORT

NO. 25, PAULIN, LENTOL, HEASTIE, DINOWITZ, GALEF, GOTTFRIED, MOSLEY,

SIMON, JAFFEE, BLAKE, BUCHWALD, ABINANTI, OTIS, STECK, FAHY, TAYLOR,

D'URSO, SIMOTAS, ORTIZ, ENGLEBRIGHT, WEPRIN, HEVESI, PERRY,

SEAWRIGHT, BICHOTTE, CRUZ, FRONTUS, GRIFFIN, JACOBSON, PICHARDO,

REYES, SAYEGH, STERN. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PENAL LAW AND THE

GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING AN EXTENSION OF TIME

OF UP TO 30 CALENDAR DAYS FOR NATIONAL INSTANT BACKGROUND CHECKS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MS.

PAULIN, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

156

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

ADVANCED.

AND, MS. PAULIN, AN EXPLANATION IS REQUESTED.

MS. PAULIN: SURE. WHAT THIS BILL WILL DO IS WILL

EXTEND THE PERIOD OF TIME THAT THE FBI HAS TO INVESTIGATE GUN PURCHASES

FROM THE THREE-DAY BUSINESS MANDATE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO A 30-DAY

CALENDAR NOW WOULD BE STATE LAW.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

PAULIN?

MS. PAULIN: YES, I WILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. RA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF YOU RECALL, WE

HAD -- WE HAD A CONVERSATION ON A SIMILAR BILL LAST YEAR, SO I -- I THANK

YOU FOR -- FOR YOUR ANSWERS LAST YEAR, AND -- AND I JUST WANT TO GO

THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THE IMPACT OF THIS WOULD BE. I GUESS

STARTING WITH -- LAST YEAR WE DID A BILL THAT WOULD HAVE MADE THE

WAITING PERIOD TEN DAYS. AND PART OF THE DISCUSSION WE HAD WAS WHAT

MIGHT BE THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER. SO, I MEAN, IS THERE ANY INFORMATION

WE HAVE THAT SAYS 30 CALENDAR DAYS AS OPPOSED TO TEN BUSINESS DAYS IS

-- IS WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE LENGTH OF TIME?

MS. PAULIN: YES, WE DO. I'VE HAD A SUBSEQUENT

CONVERSATION WITH THE FBI/NICS PERSONNEL AND LEARNED IN THAT

CONVERSATION A FEW FACTS. THE FIRST IS THAT, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO WHAT

157

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

WAS TRUE LAST YEAR AND OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE NICS PERSONNEL

STRIVES TO HAVE ABOUT A 90 PERCENT DETERMINATION RATE AFTER THREE

BUSINESS DAYS, AND THAT'S ABOUT THE SAME AS THEY HAD. SO, WHAT

HAPPENS TO THE 9 TO 11 PERCENT, WHICH IS ABOUT A LITTLE LESS THAN A

MILLION GUN PURCHASES, AND IN NEW YORK THAT TURNS OUT TO BE ABOUT

42,000, A LITTLE BIT MORE; YOU KNOW, EVERY YEAR'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

SO, WHAT IS THAT 9 TO 11 PERCENT, AND HOW DO WE GET

THAT NUMBER DOWN TO FEWER? BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS FOR THE 9 TO 11

PERCENT ESSENTIALLY, OR WHO ARE THEY, IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME TYPE OF

GUN PURCHASES, BUT THEY'RE PRIMARILY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE MISDEMEANORS,

WHICH ARE DIFFICULT TO DETECT. YOU CAN ONLY GET DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

MISDEMEANORS DOWN TO ABOUT 70 PERCENT AT THAT THREE-DAY POINT. IT'S

ALSO A LARGE NUMBER OF CONVICTED FELONS, THEY'RE OLD -- THEY ARE OLD

CONVICTIONS, SO THEY'RE HARDER TO DETECT. SO -- SO, WHAT THE FBI SAID AS

TO ME WAS THAT THEY NEED ADDITIONAL TIME, PARTICULARLY FOR DOMESTIC

VIOLENCE. YOU DON'T REALLY REDUCE THE RATE UNTIL ABOUT 11 CALENDAR DAYS

TO THAT 30-DAY. AND FOR -- AND FOR OLD CONVICTIONS IT TAKES LONGER, AS

WELL.

SO, THE TEN-DAY LAST YEAR WAS MY EFFORT TO SEE IF I

COULD GET SOMETHING DONE ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS ON A -- A SENATE AND

ASSEMBLY BASIS, AND I WASN'T ABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT, SO I AMENDED THIS

YEAR TO BE 30 DAYS, WHICH IS MUCH MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT I HEARD IN

THE CONVERSATION I HAD LAST YEAR WITH THE FBI, AND IN SUBSEQUENT

CONVERSATION THIS YEAR.

MR. RA: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THE CURRENT

158

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

PROPOSAL THAT'S IN THE EXECUTIVE BUDGET IS THAT TEN-DAY NUMBER,

CORRECT?

MS. PAULIN: YES, IT IS. I THINK THAT IT WAS MERELY

COPYING THE BILL THAT I HAD LAST YEAR. IT'S -- THE ONLY, I THINK, DIFFERENCE

WAS THE EFFECTIVE -- YOU KNOW, DATE THAT IT WOULD TAKE PLACE. BUT, IN

FURTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AND EXPLAINING MY

CONVERSATIONS WITH THE FBI, I HAVE REASONABLE CONFIDENCE THAT THE

GOVERNOR WILL SUPPORT AND SIGN THIS BILL.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW, JUST TO WALK THROUGH THIS

PROCESS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS -- SO, SOMEBODY COMES IN TO PURCHASE

THE FIREARM, THEY RUN THROUGH THE -- THE SYSTEM, MOST OF THE TIME IT'S

GOING TO COME BACK IMMEDIATELY, YOU KNOW, TO PROCEED OR -- OR A

DENIAL, AND THEN THIS DEALS WITH THE SITUATIONS WHERE THERE IS A DELAY,

CORRECT?

MS. PAULIN: YES. SO FOR, LET'S SAY, EVERY HUNDRED

CASES, ALMOST -- IN FACT, INSTANTANEOUSLY, THEY SAY ABOUT 69 ARE

INSTANTANEOUS, OF THE HUNDRED. THIRTY-ONE THEN GET REFERRED TO THE

NICS PERSONNEL FOR FOLLOW-UP. WITHIN THAT THREE-DAY PERIOD, THEY GET

DONE MAYBE ANOTHER 20, LEAVING THE 11 PERCENT. AND THOSE 11 PERCENT,

YOU KNOW, COULD HAPPEN ON DAY FIVE, OR MORE LIKELY IT'S GOING TO TAKE

THAT EXTRA TIME, THE 20 TO 30 DAYS THAT ARE -- THAT REALLY REQUIRE A LOT

MORE INVESTIGATION. AND SO THEY -- AND -- AND THE FBI KEEPS THAT

RECORD OPEN FOR 88 DAYS, AND USUALLY AT DAY 88, WHICH IS JUST ARBITRARY,

IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THEY -- THEY GET DOWN TO ABOUT 1 PERCENT. BUT THEY

ALSO GET DOWN TO ABOUT 1 PERCENT, OR NEARLY 1 PERCENT AT DAY 30, WHICH

159

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

IS WHY WE CHOSE THAT.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW, I BELIEVE LAST YEAR, YOU KNOW,

WHAT YOU SAID AS THIS PROCESS GOES ON, IF SOMEBODY'S DELAYED, ONE OF

THE THINGS THAT THEY WOULD BE DOING IS PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, THEY -- THEY

KNOW THERE'S AN ISSUE AND THEY -- THEY TRY TO LIKE WORK WITHIN THE

CONFINES OF -- OF WHAT THE -- I BELIEVE IT'S NINE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE

CHECKED?

MS. PAULIN: YES, THERE ARE NINE PROHIBITORS BUT THE

-- OUR STATE HAS ADDITIONAL PROHIBITORS. THE NICS CHECK PERSONNEL

LOOKS AT BOTH THE NINE PROHIBITORS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, BUT ALSO THE

ADDITIONAL PROHIBITORS THAT WE HAVE PUT IN LAW AT THE STATE LEVEL.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW, WOULD ONE OF THOSE INCLUDE

THE TERROR [SIC] WATCH LIST?

MS. PAULIN: SO, WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE TERRORIST

WATCH LIST IS, THERE -- THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SET AT THE CONGRESSIONAL

LEVEL. ALTHOUGH, AS IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME BY THE FBI, YOU DON'T WANT

TO LET SOMEONE NECESSARILY KNOW, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE BEING

WATCHED. SO, WHAT DO THEY DO WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE'S ON THE

TERRORIST WATCH LIST? THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC DELAY. AN AUTOMATIC

THREE-DAY DELAY. AND THEN THEY LOOK FOR ONE OF THE PROHIBITORS,

WHETHER IT'S AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL NINE OR THE ADDITIONAL STATE

PROHIBITORS, TO REALLY FIND SOMETHING THAT COULD -- COULD CREATE A REAL

DENIAL, AND THEY GO -- THEY -- THEY REALLY INVESTIGATE AND THEY GO TO THE

COUNTERTERRORISM PORTION OF THE FBI TO WORK WITH THEM, AND THEY

REALLY LOOK FOR AN ADDITIONAL DENIAL.

160

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AND SO, WE'RE -- WE'RE HOPING THAT, YOU KNOW, IN NEW

YORK THAT WILL REALLY HELP US, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT MANY,

MANY, MANY -- I THINK THE NUMBER IS -- I HAVE IN MY NOTES IF YOU WANT

THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT MANY OF THE DELAYS TURN INTO AUTOMATIC GIVING

THEM THE GUN WHEN THEY'RE TERRORISTS. AND WE -- I THINK THEY DID A

SURVEY AND IT WAS MORE THAN 2,000 ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND, AGAIN, I

COULD EXTRAPOLATE NEW YORK DATA, BUT, FRANKLY, ONE TERRORIST IS TOO

MANY, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE GUN. SO -- SO, I THINK THIS

WILL GIVE THE TOOLS TO THE FBI THAT THEY NEED TO HELP AVERT ANY POTENTIAL

TRAGEDY.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW -- NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS

PEOPLE HAVE ALSO EXPRESSED THAT SOMETIMES CAN TAKE TIME IS LIKE

SOMEBODY THAT HAS A VERY COMMON NAME, PERHAPS, BECAUSE IT MAY BE

SUBMITTED AND IT MAY, YOU KNOW, TRIGGER WHO KNOWS HOW MANY

DIFFERENT PEOPLE WITH THAT SAME NAME AND THEN THEY -- YOU KNOW, DIG

FURTHER INTO IT AND THEY CAN MATCH WHO THIS PERSON ACTUALLY -- ACTUALLY

IS. WOULD -- WOULD THAT -- WOULD THIS CREATE, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT TYPE

OF INDIVIDUAL, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY A -- A 30-DAY WAIT -- WHEN REALLY

THEY HAVE NOTHING IN THEIR BACKGROUND THAT SHOULD DISQUALIFY THEM?

MS. PAULIN: USUALLY THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE

EASY TO FIGURE OUT. IT MAY TAKE A COUPLE OF EXTRA DAYS FOR, YOU KNOW, A

JOHN SMITH, LET'S SAY, BUT USUALLY THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, BRING THEM

DOWN TO THE LOCAL LEVEL. THOSE ARE NOT THE ONES THAT ARE THE REAL

PROLONGED DELAYS AND ALMOST ALWAYS GET SOLVED IN A -- IN A REASONABLE

TIME. THE REAL PROLONGED DELAYS ARE THE OLD CONVICTIONS AND THE DV

161

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MISDEMEANORS. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I'VE BEEN TOLD ARE THE ONES THAT

REALLY TAKE THOSE -- AND THE TERRORIST WATCH LIST, TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY

A PROHIBITOR. SO, THOSE ARE REALLY THE THREE CATEGORIES THAT ARE THE MOST

TIME-CONSUMING.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S

BEEN SOME EFFORTS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE, YOU

KNOW, THE SYSTEM IS MORE COMPREHENSIVE. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S ALWAYS

AN ISSUE OF MAKING SURE, YOU KNOW, DATA IS BEING SHARED BETWEEN

DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS SO THAT -- BECAUSE AT -- AT THE END OF THE DAY,

WHATEVER THE TIMEFRAME IS, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO BE AS GOOD AS -- AS THE

INFORMATION THAT IS THERE TO CHECK IT AGAINST. DO YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW,

IF ANY OF THE CHANGES THEY'VE MADE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL MIGHT ACTUALLY,

YOU KNOW, BE SPEEDING UP THIS PROCESS? BECAUSE ONE -- ONE OF THE

COMPLAINTS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD OVER THE YEARS WITH REGARD TO THE

THREE DAYS IS THAT THE SYSTEM IS HANDLING JUST SO MANY MORE

TRANSACTIONS THAN IT USED TO BACK WHEN IT WAS FIRST ESTABLISHED AND --

AND THAT'S PART OF THE ISSUE HERE. SO, HAVE -- HAVE THE CHANGES MADE IT

A LITTLE QUICKER?

MS. PAULIN: WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THE

NICS HAS DONE A VERY GOOD JOB AT KEEPING THE 90 PERCENT GOAL OF THREE

DAYS PRETTY MUCH CONSISTENT, YOU KNOW. BUT, AS YOU SAY, THERE'S MANY

MORE TRANSACTIONS. SO, THAT MEANS THERE ARE MORE DETERMINATIONS, OR

UN-DETERMINATIONS, YOU KNOW, NO DETERMINATION OUT THERE THAN THERE

HAD BEEN BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF GUN PURCHASES GENERALLY. WE'RE

ONLY AS GOOD AS WE COMMUNICATE TO NICS, BECAUSE IT'S UP TO THE STATE

162

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

TO SEND THAT DATA. NEW YORK IS FAIRLY GOOD AT IT, BUT THERE ARE

WEAKNESSES, YOU KNOW, THE MISDEMEANOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS ONE

EXAMPLE OF A WEAKNESS BECAUSE IT'S COMPLICATED. BUT WE'RE ONLY AS

GOOD AS THE STATE DATA.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, IN VIRGINIA TECH, THE,

YOU KNOW, THE -- THE SHOOTER WAS AN ADJUDICATED MENTALLY-ILL PERSON,

RIGHT? THAT SHOULD'VE BEEN IN THE SYSTEM. VIRGINIA DIDN'T DO IT. IF

THEY HAD DONE A BETTER JOB, YOU KNOW, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE -- THAT

WOULD HAVE TURNED UP A DENIAL. SAME THING FOR DEVIN KELLEY, WHO'S

THE TEXAS SHOOTER, THERE WAS A DISHONORABLE DISCHARGE, AND THE

MILITARY DIDN'T SEND IN THAT INFORMATION. SO, WE'RE ONLY GOOD AS THE

INFORMATION SENT.

SO, HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, IN NEW YORK, WE'RE DOING

BOTH THE BETTER JOB OF SENDING IN THE INFORMATION, WHICH WILL RESULT IN

IMMEDIATE, AND -- AND ALSO COOPERATING, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO COOPERATE

WITH NICS WHEN THEY CALL OUR LOCAL COURTS AND OUR LOCAL POLICE AND OUR

LOCAL JURISDICTIONS, TO IDENTIFY PEOPLE AND TO GET OUT THE INFORMATION.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY DOING A BETTER JOB? I -- I THINK THEY'RE DOING

THE SAME JOB BECAUSE THE STATS ARE RELATIVELY THE SAME, BUT THERE'S MORE

--THERE'S MORE GUN PURCHASES OUT THERE.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW, WITH -- WITH REGARD TO THE 30

DAYS, I TRIED TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, YOU KNOW, WHAT DIFFERENT

STATES HAVE AND SOME STATES, OBVIOUSLY, DON'T HAVE ANY WAITING PERIOD,

BUT I SAW A LOT OF -- SOME OF THE STATES THAT ARE ON THE LONGER SIDE

BEING, YOU KNOW, 14 DAYS OR SOME -- SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE. ARE

163

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THERE ANY STATES THAT CURRENTLY HAVE A 30-DAY PERIOD?

MS. PAULIN: YES. THE -- OR NEAR. SO, SORRY.

CALIFORNIA HAS A 30-DAY EXTENSION TIME FOR INVESTIGATIONS. THEY ALSO

HAVE A TEN-DAY ABSOLUTE WAITING PERIOD, WHICH IS NOT WHAT THIS BILL

DOES. COLORADO HAS LIKE ALMOST LIKE AN APPEAL PROCESS, BUT IT'S ALSO 30

DAYS. DELAWARE HAS 25 DAYS. FLORIDA ACTUALLY HAS AN INDEFINITE

AMOUNT OF TIME, AS DOES PENNSYLVANIA AND AS DOES -- NO, TENNESSEE

HAS 15 DAYS. UTAH HAS AN INDEFINITE TIME AMOUNT OF TIME, AND

WASHINGTON STATE HAS TEN DAYS.

MR. RA: OKAY. NOW, ONE OTHER CONCERN THAT HAS

COME UP WITH -- MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE NICS CHECK IS ONLY GOOD FOR

30 DAYS. AND I DON'T KNOW, HAVE -- HOW ANY OF THESE OTHER STATES HAVE

-- HAVE PERHAPS DEALT WITH THAT ISSUE. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME IF SOMEBODY

COMES IN AND THE CHECK'S ONLY GOOD FOR 30 DAYS AND NOW THEY'VE

WAITED 30 DAYS, THEORETICALLY THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A, YOU KNOW, A

NEW CHECK STARTED. SO, IS THERE POTENTIAL THAT SOMEBODY IN THAT

SITUATION COULD HAVE TO WAIT AGAIN, BECAUSE THEN THEY'D -- COULD THE

PROCESS START ALL OVER AGAIN?

MS. PAULIN: I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT MYSELF

AND SO I TALKED TO CALIFORNIA, AND HAVE AN E-MAIL THAT I'M HAPPY TO

SHARE --

MR. RA: OKAY.

MS. PAULIN: -- THAT IS FROM THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY

GENERAL, THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE

-- THE BILL THAT LOOKS THE MOST LIKE OURS, AND WHAT THEY HAVE ASSURED ME

164

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

THAT -- THAT THE TRANSACTION WILL HAVE STARTED, WHICH IS THE REGULATION FOR

NICS SO, THEREFORE, THE GUN DEALER, AT THEIR DISCRETION, CAN TRANSFER THE

WEAPON OR THE GUN OR RIFLE, WHATEVER, OVER TO THE PERSON IF IT'S -- YOU

KNOW, IF IT'S STILL UP IN THE AIR. BUT IT'S SO FEW CASES BY DAY 30, THAT,

YOU KNOW, CALIFORNIA'S EXAMPLE OR CALIFORNIA'S EXPERIENCE IS THAT

ALMOST NO GUN DEALERS DO THAT; IN FACT, THEY ALL -- GUN DEALERS ARE

REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW TO HAVE SOME KIND OF LIABILITY INSURANCE --

ACTUALLY, CALIFORNIA HAS THAT REQUIREMENT, AS WELL. AND -- AND SO, GUN

DEALERS ARE AFRAID TO TRANSFER. SO, YOU SEE VERY LITTLE TRANSFERRING.

AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE IN NEW

YORK, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ONLY SO FEW GUNS THAT ARE LEFT OUT

THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTED AROUND THE STATE, AND

IF ONE GUN DEALER SEES ONE CASE, YOU KNOW, THEY MIGHT BE A LITTLE LEERY.

WE SEE THE BIG GUN DEALERS LIKE WAL-MART ALREADY MAKING THAT

DECISION. THEY DO NOT TRANSFER IF THERE'S AN UNKNOWN. WHAT -- WHAT

WE'RE DOING HERE IS WE'RE ACTUALLY PROTECTING GUN OWNERS BECAUSE TO

SOME DEGREE, YOU KNOW, THEY WILL HAVE PASSED A BACKGROUND CHECK

AND THEN THAT'S GOOD FOR THE ENTIRE PERIOD IF WE JUST GIVE THE FBI A LITTLE

MORE TIME.

MR. RA: SURE. SO, IN -- IN THAT INSTANCE, SO IF THERE

IS A DELAY, THE 30 DAYS, YOU KNOW, GOES BY, AND THE -- AND THE GUN

DEALER DECIDES, YOU KNOW WHAT? I -- I DON'T WANT TO TRANSFER A WEAPON

TO THIS PERSON BECAUSE I HAVEN'T GOTTEN A PROCEED FROM THE FBI, CAN

THEY -- YOU KNOW, ARE THEY FREE TO DO THAT?

MS. PAULIN: THEY'RE FREE NOW. THEY CAN DO THAT

165

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

NOW. IT'S ALWAYS AT THE DISCRETION. SO, ON DAY FOUR, WHAT HAPPENS IN

NEW YORK, IT'S UP TO THE GUN DEALER TO MAKE THAT TRANSFER AT THEIR

DISCRETION. SOME GUN DEALERS DO IT AND SOME GUN DEALERS DON'T. FOR

EXAMPLE, AS I SAID, WAL-MART HAS MADE IT A POLICY NOT TO MAKE THOSE

TRANSFERS. SMALLER GUN DEALERS PROBABLY DO, BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT

SOME OF THEM PROBABLY DON'T.

MR. RA: YEAH, I WOULD -- I WOULD SAY --

MS. PAULIN: IT'S THEIR PREROGATIVE.

MR. RA: OR I WOULD THINK, LIKE -- LIKE YOU SAID,

MANY MIGHT BE CONCERNED OF POTENTIAL LIABILITY IF THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN

THE PROCEED ORDER. THANK YOU.

MS. PAULIN: THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. RA, YOU HAVE

EXHAUSTED YOUR 15.

READ -- READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 45TH

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. DINOWITZ TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. DINOWITZ: I WILL VERY BRIEFLY EXPLAIN MY

VOTE. YOU KNOW, IN -- IN THIS COUNTRY, ABOUT 40,000 PEOPLE DIE A YEAR

FROM CAR CRASHES, BUT WE TAKE ALL KINDS OF ACTION MAKING THE ROADS

SAFER, MAKING CARS SAFER, MAKING PEOPLE DRIVE MORE SAFELY. IN NEW

166

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

YORK CITY, WE HAVE THE VISION ZERO, WE LOWERED THE SPEED LIMIT. IT'S

GENERALLY AGREED THAT WE SHOULD BE TAKING STEPS TO SAVE LIVES BECAUSE

40,000 PEOPLE A YEAR DIE IN THE UNITED STATES FROM CAR CRASHES;

HOWEVER, 40,000 A YEAR PEOPLE DIE FROM GUNS, BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM

TO BE THIS UNIVERSAL AGREEMENT THAT WE SHOULD BE TAKING STEPS. THE

FACT IS, THERE ARE PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY WHO THINK WE SHOULD NOT

BE TAKING STEPS TO FIX THE PROBLEM. AND TO ME, FIXING THE PROBLEM

MEANS SAVING LIVES.

I THINK WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE TODAY BY PASSING THESE

BILLS IS THAT WE WILL BE SAVING LIVES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. AND

MAKE NO MISTAKE, THESE BILLS WILL BECOME LAW VERY, VERY QUICKLY. AND

I BELIEVE THESE WILL BE THE LAST TIME WE WILL BE VOTING ON THESE BILLS.

SO, THANKS TO EVERYBODY WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS AND WHO SUPPORTED

THESE BILLS, MANY LIVES WILL BE SAVED AND I THINK WE SHOULD ALL BE VERY

PROUD OF THAT. I CAST MY VOTE YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MS. BICHOTTE.

MS. BICHOTTE: YEAH, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO AFFIRM MY VOTE. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK ALL THE SPONSORS

OF THESE GUN SAFETY BILLS FOR BEING SUCH GREAT LEADERS AROUND GUN

REFORM. I TRUST THAT NEW YORK STATE WILL CONTINUE TO REMAIN THE

FOREFRONT OF THESE ISSUES, SUCH AS GUN CONTROL. I VOTE TODAY IN SUPPORT

OF THE SAFETY AND WELL-BEING OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND THE RIGHT OF

THE PEOPLE NOT TO BE HARMED.

I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO CLARIFY THAT THESE BILLS DO NOT

167

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

IMPEDE ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION. WE DO PURSUE

LIFE, LIBERTY AND HAPPINESS WHEN OUR COMMUNITIES ARE NOT VULNERABLE TO

MASSACRE AND GUN VIOLENCE. WE IMPLEMENT THESE LAWS TO MAKE SURE

THAT WE DO UPHOLD TO THE CONSTITUTION IN THE RIGHT AND HUMANE WAY.

AND, AS YOU KNOW, JUST LAST YEAR WE HAD A HORRIFIC TRAGEDY WHERE A

MASS SHOOTING ERUPTED IN A SYNAGOGUE IN PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA,

CLAIMING 11 VICTIMS AND INJURING MANY MORE. ANOTHER INCIDENT WAS

THE ASSASSINATION OF STATE SENATOR CLEMENTA PINCKNEY AT THE SHOOTING

AT CHARLESTON'S CHURCH IN SOUTH CAROLINA. THESE ATROCITIES HAPPEN IN

INSTITUTIONS THAT MAKES THEIR MISSION TO WELCOME INDIVIDUALS INTO THEIR

MINISTRY. THESE EVENTS BECKON THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER WE ARE SAFE

TO EXTEND INVITATION.

THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. AND OUR -- OUR HISTORY ALSO

HOLDS THE MEMORIES OF ACTIONS SUCH AS SHOOTINGS AT COLUMBINE IN

1999, KILLING 15; VIRGINIA TECH MASSACRE IN 2007 KILLING 32 PEOPLE ON

CAMPUS; THE SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING IN 2012 KILLING

27, INCLUDING 20 SIX- AND SEVEN-YEAR-OLD CHILDREN; AND THE PARKLAND

HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTING IN FLORIDA. THESE ARE ESTABLISHMENTS FREQUENTED

BY CHILDREN, AND WE SEEK TO ENSURE THAT GUNS ARE KEPT AWAY -- KEPT

AWAY FROM CHILDREN. SO, TODAY I PROUDLY VOTE FOR ALL OF THIS TO END,

ESPECIALLY IN LOVING MEMORY OF MY SORORITY SISTER WHO WAS GUNNED

DOWN BY HER PARTNER, ANGELA BLEDSOE. AND SO, I VOTE IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. SMULLEN.

168

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. SMULLEN: MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU. I -- I RISE

TO -- TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE ON THIS ISSUE. AS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER WITH

SOME OF THE OTHER BILLS THAT WE'VE PASSED, PARTICULARLY THE BUMP STOCK

ONES, I REFLECTED ON THE REASONABLENESS OF THE BILL. AND TO ME, THAT ONE

WAS REASONABLE. BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THIS ONE, WHEN IT TAKES THE WAITING

PERIOD AND IT -- AND IT -- IT NOT ONLY -- WE HAD TALKED ABOUT HAVING IT TEN

DAYS, WHICH IS THREE TIMES WHAT THE CURRENT LAW ALLOWS, BUT TO CHANGE

IT TO TEN TIMES, I FIND THAT TO BE UNREASONABLE AND THAT THE BUREAUCRACY

NEEDS TO GET BETTER TO CATCH UP SO PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO HAVE THESE -- THESE

ARMS IS NOT INFRINGED. SO, FOR THAT REASON, I'M VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

MR. SPEAKER, WE HAVE FOUR MORE BILLS THAT WE'RE GOING

TO TAKE UP, AND I REALLY HOPE THAT THESE DON'T TAKE AS LONG, AS WE HAVE

BEEN HERE FOR ALL DAY TODAY. THEY ARE ON THE CALENDAR, MR. SPEAKER,

THEY BEGIN WITH RULES REPORT NOS. 12, 13, 14 AND 15. AND I WOULD

ASK THAT YOU WOULD CALL THEM IN THAT ORDER, MR. SPEAKER. AND,

HOPEFULLY, WE WILL CAST OUR VOTES AS -- AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND MOVE

ON.

WITH THAT, I ALSO WANT TO MAKE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT,

169

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MR. SPEAKER. THERE WILL BE NO DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE TODAY. AS I

SAID EARLIER, WE ALL HAVE BEEN WATCHING THE WEATHER. SOME OF US

WOULD LIKE TO GET HOME. I HOPE THAT WE DO GET HOME SAFELY AND COME

BACK ON MONDAY AT 1:00 FOR A DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00208, RULES REPORT

NO. 12, GIGLIO. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 98 OF THE LAWS OF 2009,

AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF

CATTARAUGUS TO IMPOST AN ADDITIONAL MORTGAGE RECORDING TAX, IN

RELATION TO EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

GIGLIO, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED. HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK. READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER CAHILL: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00209, RULES REPORT

NO. 13, TAGUE. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 218 OF THE LAWS OF 2009

170

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF GREENE TO

IMPOST AN ADDITIONAL MORTGAGE RECORDING TAX, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING

THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER CAHILL: ON A MOTION BY MR.

TAGUE, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS

ADVANCED. HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK. READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER CAHILL: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MR. TAGUE, YOUR FIRST.

(APPLAUSE)

CONGRATULATIONS, SIR.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00210, RULES REPORT

NO. 14, STEC. AN ACT TO AMEND TO AMEND CHAPTER 368 OF THE LAWS OF

2008, AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF

WARREN TO IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL MORTGAGE RECORDING TAX, IN RELATION TO

EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

STEC, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

171

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK. READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A00211, RULES REPORT

NO. 15, STEC. AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 327 OF THE LAWS OF 2006,

AMENDING THE TAX LAW RELATING TO AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF ESSEX TO

IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL MORTGAGE RECORDING TAX, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING

THE EXPIRATION AND REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

STEC, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE. THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

HOME RULE MESSAGE IS AT THE DESK. READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. DANIEL STEC TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. STEC: THANK YOU, SPEAKER. I JUST WANT TO

PAUSE AND -- AND FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART, I WANT TO THANK THE

CHAMBER FOR BEARING WITH US ON THIS WINTERY DAY. THESE FOUR LOCAL

172

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

BILLS, THE LAST TWO OF WHICH WERE MINE, ARE EXTENDERS, VERY IMPORTANT TO

THOSE COUNTIES. THESE WERE HOLDOVERS FROM THE SUMMER, DIDN'T GET

DONE AT THE END OF SESSION. VERY IMPORTANT, THIS IS MONEY -- THE

CLOCK'S TICKING FOR THEM. SO, FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART, I THANK THE

SPEAKER AND THE CHAMBER FOR ENTERTAINING THESE AND GET THEM DONE.

AND I HOPE EVERYONE'S SAFE HOME.

(APPLAUSE)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR. STEC.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. COOK.

WELCOME, MRS. COOK.

MRS. COOK: THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

MRS. COOK: BUT I'D LIKE TO CALL ON MR. OTIS TO

MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. OTIS FOR AN

ANNOUNCEMENT.

MR. OTIS: I'M HERE TO ANNOUNCE THIS EVENING THAT ON

MONDAY, A REMINDER FOR MONDAY, THERE'LL BE A DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE

AT 1:00 P.M. SEE YOU ON MONDAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MONDAY, DEMOCRATIC

CONFERENCE AT 1:00 A.M. [SIC].

173

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 29, 2019

MRS. COOK.

MRS. COOK: MR. SPEAKER, I NOW MOVE THAT THE

ASSEMBLY STAND ADJOURNED UNTIL WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30TH, TOMORROW

BEING A LEGISLATIVE DAY, AND THAT WE RECONVENE ON FEBRUARY 4TH AT 2:00

P.M., THAT MONDAY BEING A SESSION DAY. THANK YOU. EVERYONE GET

HOME SAFE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE ASSEMBLY STANDS

ADJOURNED.

(WHEREUPON, AT 4:47 P.M., THE ASSEMBLY STOOD

ADJOURNED UNTIL WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29TH, WEDNESDAY BEING A

LEGISLATIVE DAY, AND TO RECONVENE ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 4TH AT 2:00

P.M., MONDAY BEING A SESSION DAY.)

174