Grand Jury: Man indicted on two felonies for allegedly possessing assault weapon and large capacity ammo feeding device in Bryon
Charles S. Ganoung IV is indicted for the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, a Class D felony. It is alleged that on March 25 in the 6300 block of Transit Road in the Town of Byron that Ganoung possessed an assault weapon. According to the indictment, it was a DPMS Panther Arms semiautomatic .223-caliber rifle, equipped with a telescoping stock, pistol grip, detachable high-capacity magazine, loaded with 28 live rounds, flash suppressor/muzzle break and a bayonet mount. In count two, he is accused of the same crime for also allegedly possessing a large capacity ammunition feeding device. The indictment says it was a large capacity .223-caliber magazine loaded with 28 live .223-caliber rounds.
Tawny L. Collazo is indicted for the crime of aggravated driving while intoxicated, as a Class E felony. It is alleged that on May 25 in the Town of Pembroke that Collazo drove a 2013 Dodge on Route 5 while in an intoxicated condition and while a child 15 years of age or less was a passenger. In count two, she is accused of aggravated DWI, per se, as a Class E felony. In is alleged in count two that she had a BAC of .08 or more at the time with passenger age 15 or under. In count three, Collazzo is indicted for the crime of aggravated DWI as a Class E felony for allegedly driving while intoxicated while a second child age 15 or less was a passenger. In count four, she is again accused of aggravated DWI, per se, as a Class E felony, for allegedly having a BAC of .08 or more at the time with a second passenger age 15 or younger.
Michael J. Wojdyla is indicted for the crime of driving while intoxicated, as a Class E felony. It is alleged that on June 3 in the Town of Darien that Wjodyla drove a 2009 Chevrolet on Main Park Road while in an intoxicated condition. In count two, he is accused of DWI, per se, as a Class E felony, for allegedly having a BAC of .08 or more at the time.
Didn't the courts recently come down on the side of gun owners in cases involving both Washington, DC and Chicago/Illinois?
Don't give up on the courts to decide this issue. Just be ready to live with that decision - you can whine if you disagree with the decision (I prefer cheese with mine), but that becomes the law of the land.
Brian, here is another abuse of the SAFE ACT. I know a person in the Rochester area. He was having a medical issue and called 911. Lockley, he was OK. But there was a police report that he appeared to be under the influence of something. Soon afterward, the Police came and took all his guns.
When he went for a further medical checkup, he found out he was diabetic and his episode was due to that. Until then, he never knew he was a diabetic.
Despite providing tons of medical documentation that his problem was related to being a diabetic, and not under the influence of any drugs, they refused to return his guns. This went on for quite awhile with nobody seeming to be able to help him.
But then the American Diabetes Association got involved. Seems the Police did not want to tangle with them and end up saying that Diabetes was reason enough under the SAFE ACT to take way your guns, They were returned to him.
Gun control laws will not,have not.and won't work. I think NY has just found a new cow to milk.
I must admit, Howard. I was somewhat amused by the article that you linked to. Especially the statement from author Leah Libresco, which said, "I was still anti-gun, at least from the point of view of most gun owners, and I don’t want a gun in my home, as I think the risk outweighs the benefits."
How anyone could say that they were anti-gun (from the point of view of most gun owners) is very confusing. I highly doubt most gun owners are "anti-gun".
But, I think we can all agree that the world is probably a little safer because author Leah Libresco doesn't have a firearm. From the sounds of it, she apparently doesn't know how to minimize the "risks" of possessing a firearm.
Should someone break into her home in the middle of the night, meaning to do her bodily harm, maybe she can throw her keyboard at them.
Me, I'll stick with my 12ga. Stevens.
Interesting article, Howard. Still, not enough to convince me that reasonable gun control is not achievable.
I did have to chuckle at the comment "Magazine limits were a little more promising, but a practiced shooter could still change magazines so fast as to make the limit meaningless." Comparing a trick shot artist to an average or even skilled shooter is a joke.
It doesn't take much practice to change a magazine quickly, especially with prior planning.
Of course, the anti-gun crowd has never been interested in reasonable gun control, hence the SAFE Act.
So how much practice would it take to allow someone to fire 90 shots in 10 seconds (estimated rate of LV shooter) using multiple magazines?
Anyways - I mentioned "reasonable gun control", not the SAFE act. Legislation should at the very least be feasible (limiting magazines to 7 rounds when 7 round magazines are not manufactured is not reasonable).
Trying this again,the barrel magazines hold up to 90 rounds,so the only practice he needed was holding the trigger.
Like I said before, there is no reason any civilians should be allowed to own these types of guns for any reason!!! No automatic or semi-auto weapons. You want to protect your home, a shotgun is probably the best. The right to protect yourself is one thing, the right to cause mass destruction is another!
Jim - are you aware that you can purchase a semi-automatic shotgun?
That`s well and good but you aren`t going to perch yourself in a building and kill mass people with one over as big of an area. It doesn`t take a genius to know what kind of guns I am talking about.