Skip to main content

Hawley continues push to repeal SAFE Act

By Howard B. Owens

Press release:

Assemblyman Steve Hawley (R,C,I-Batavia) continued his fight to restore the Second Amendment rights of his constituents in Albany by pushing for a repeal of the SAFE Act. Hawley helped force a vote on legislation he cosponsors (A.6238) in the Assembly Codes Committee, which unfortunately was unsuccessful. While vowing to continue fighting to repeal the SAFE Act, Hawley noted that his bill was defeated by Downstate, New York City interests.

“I am working hard with my colleagues who cherish the Second Amendment to see the rights enshrined by it restored. We got a vote on legislation that would repeal the SAFE Act, but it was unfortunately voted down by Downstate Assembly liberals,” Hawley said. “They voted to put honest, law-abiding people in jail for exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protect their families. Their actions have only strengthened my resolve to stand up for the good people of Western New York who should be enjoying their full Second Amendment rights.”

As long as the Assembly is controlled by Downstate liberals, Hawley recognizes that repeal through legislative means is likely dead on arrival. However, he is hopeful that a lawsuit working its way through the court system will find the SAFE Act unconstitutional when it arrives at the Supreme Court. In the meantime, Hawley vows to continue doing his part to restore the Second Amendment through outspoken advocacy and organizing fellow Second-Amendment enthusiasts.

Brian Graz

This doubletalk is really getting annoying. Both Assemblyman Hawley and Senator Ranzenhofer voted YEA for this portion of the budget that funds the SAFE Act, JUST LAST WEEK!

It's pretty obvious what this section is referencing "development of a public safety solution" {Gun Registration}, "records management system" {Database}, "design and construction of evidence storage facilities" {Confiscated Gun storage}.

NYS Budget 2014-2015
Section A8554-E/S6354-E
Capitol Projects

422 12654-10-4



1 For the comprehensive construction programs, purposes and
2 projects as herein specified in accordance with the
3 following:


5 Capital Projects Fund - Other 16,000,000 65,065,000
6 ---------------- ----------------
7 All Funds ............................ 16,000,000 65,065,000
8 ================ ================

9 IT INITIATIVE PROGRAM (CCP).................................. 10,000,000
10 --------------

11 Capital Projects Funds - Other
12 Capital Projects Fund
13 Program Improvement or Program Change Purpose

14 For services and expenses related to the
15 development of a public safety solution
16 center including but not limited to a
17 records management system. Funds appropri-
18 ated herein may be suballocated to the
19 office of information technology services
20 to achieve this purpose. The division of
21 criminal justice services, after consulta-
22 tion with the division of state police and
23 the office of information technology,
24 shall submit a plan to the legislative
25 leaders setting forth the plan to develop
26 such a solutions center and assessing any
27 privacy and security implications, and no
28 expenditures may be made from this appro-
29 priation until the plan has been approved
30 by the legislative leaders (06SC1408) ... 10,000,000

32 --------------

33 Capital Projects Funds - Other
34 Capital Projects Fund
35 Program Improvements Purpose

36 For services and expenses associated with
37 the design and construction of evidence
38 storage facilities at troop headquarters,
39 including but not limited to the costs of
40 studies, appraisals, surveys, preparation
41 of plans, design, construction, equipment,
42 and renovations including liabilities
43 incurred prior to April 1, 2014 (06EV1408) ... 6,000,000

Apr 10, 2014, 1:22am Permalink
Kyle Slocum

The only real answer is to start the process of divorcing downstate. Public support is there, we just need buy-in by the Republican Party north of the Bronx. The corrupticrats and corrupticans in downstate will fight like hell to stop us, we're just bumpkins that "need" our betters to live our lives for us. We have about as much in common with the anthill as a village in Botswana does.

All we need is a kickstart of funding by a wealthy patron and someone who can explain to the "community" leaders in our upstate cities how divorcing our downstate betters will mean that instead of standing in line after all the downstate interests and only getting the crumbs that are left over, THEY WILL BE THE LINE.

Apr 10, 2014, 12:31am Permalink
Patrick Lyons

New York residents ask yourselves this.
As citizens of New York State,
are we winning or are we losing ?

If your response is losing,
Vote for Rob Astorino this November.

Take a little time, and research what good things
Rob Astorino has done for Westchester County as their County Executive. And more importantly what his plans are if elected as N.Y.S. Governor.

Here are a few examples of Rob Astorino's platform,
1. N.Y.S. Legislature Term Limits
2. Repeal of the unconstitutional NY SAFE ACT
3. Put a stop to the common core disaster in the education system.

Andrew Cuomo has to be voted out of power,
Andrew Cuomo is no good for us in upstate NY

Rob Astorino 2014 !!!

Apr 10, 2014, 9:05am Permalink
Kyle Slocum


I think you missed a few very salient points:

Can Andwew explain/justify at least seven "emergencies" requiring the bypassing public input and reaction to legislation he forced through the corrupticrat/corruptican state legislature?

Can Andwew offer a legitimate defense for banning cosmetic features on some firearms and claiming that it will magically reduce the number of murders committed using an entirely different type of firearm?

Can Andwew explain how the audio tape of his actual words didn't represent what he said about people who don't agree with him about Civil Rights should get the hell out of his New Yawk.

Can Andwew explain/justify his deal to end the ethics investigation of the corrupticrat/corruptican downstate politicians in exchange for their votes to approve his budget under "emergency" conditions so that the legal obligation to allow the peasants to react to proposed legislation before it is voted on could be bypassed?

Prince Andwew, Duchess of Queens, Duke of Manhatten, Prince of Albany, Governor of NYC, is a creature who disdains the common man. He is a hubristic fellow who sees the people as cattle who need to be herded and husbanded. The problem with viewing people in that way is that it isn't all that very long before you need cattle cars and rendering plants...

Apr 10, 2014, 10:56pm Permalink
John Roach

Wish he could defund it. But as you know, the Democrats control the Assembly (and in truth, the Senate also) and the budget is really their budget.

The only way to repeal this will be for all gun owners to get off their rear ends this November and vote Andrew out. If gun owners stay home, this law will be around for a long time.

Own a gun, register to vote. Own a gun, then vote.

Apr 11, 2014, 7:29am Permalink
Steve Hawley

I did NOT vote for funding for the UnSafe Act in last year’s budget! Additionally, in this year’s budget, I voted NO on the State Operations budget bill that authorized $3.2 million for personnel to administer the data base through the State Troopers! I voted Yes on the Capital Projects budget bill that contained $33 million for the STAMP Project! This bill had a carry over from last year’s budget for the construction of the data base…………………no new money! I have been and will continue to be a fervent and ardent supporter of our Constitution and specifically the Second Amendment!

Apr 11, 2014, 9:15am Permalink
Jeff Allen

Thank you Steve. It is always helpful to learn more about how the budget process works and how appropriations are bundled. Sometimes it gives the false appearance of support or lack thereof on issues when they are clouded by an unnecessarily convoluted budget structure.

Apr 11, 2014, 9:59am Permalink
Brian Graz

No error John.
Once again... Section A8554-E/S6354-E Capitol Projects provides $16 Million in new appropriations to the State Police to be used for Gun Registration, Database, and Lock-up of Confiscated Evidence (Guns). Both Hawley and Ranzenhofer voted YES for this!

You implication that because it was pretty certain to pass due to the lock on voting by the downstate pro-SAFE Liberals, then it didn't matter how Hawley voted is ridiculous. HE VOTED TO PASS FUNDING FOR THE SAFE ACT... PERIOD! And I don't give a damn how he voted last year, or if the money was carried over from last year, or if Dean Skelos said it was OK... HE VOTED TO PASS FUNDING FOR THE SAFE ACT, and that is NOT OK! IMO there is NO room for compromise when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. It's too bad that the STAMP Project was combined... that's nothing but Corporate Welfare anyhow.

Even Senator Maziarz admitted the SAFE Act Funding in Section A8554-E/S6354-E Capitol Projects.


Thank you for sharing this message. I greatly appreciate your point of view and your kind words of support.

Tom Marks’ point is based on a falsehood. It is simply not true that the entire Senate voted to fund the ammunition database created by the unSAFE Act in the recent state budget.

I encourage anyone who is interested in the facts to look it up. Assembly Bill 8554-E/Senate Bill 6354-E of 2014 enacted the Capital Projects portion of the state budget. There was exactly one vote against this bill in Senate, and it was mine. I voted NO on this bill because it included over $20 million for funding to create the statewide ammo and background check database.

I just wanted to set the record straight on this because while people are entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own set of facts. I voted against the bill in question, I continue to sponsor several bills to repeal the unSAFE Act, and I have collected thousands and thousands of signatures on petitions to build public support for our cause. I remain an active and outspoken Second Amendment support and sportsmen supporter, as you pointed out correctly. Those are the facts.

Best wishes,
George D. Maziarz
Senator, 62nd District

Apr 11, 2014, 4:26pm Permalink
Jeff Allen

This is just one of the unfortunate aspects of government (state and federal), appropriations being tied to unrelated projects so that representatives are faced with lose/lose propositions. Although we don't have a crystal ball, Sen Maziarz vote may have been different if there was a major capitol project in his district tied to it.

Apr 11, 2014, 4:57pm Permalink
Brian Graz

NOTHING should trump the Constitution, and especially the 2nd Amendment, because if we loose that everything else is up for grabs.

Apr 11, 2014, 5:22pm Permalink
Jeff Allen

I'm not disagreeing Brian, just saying that the corrupt budget process puts our reps in these positions and if Maziarz had to go back to his constituents having voted no to funding for a MAJOR capitol project in his district, he may have voted differently.

Apr 11, 2014, 6:05pm Permalink
Brian Graz

This is just a bunch of empty excuses to me. I expect our Representatives to "represent their constituents". Officially 52 of NY's 62 Counties have "gone on record" as Opposed to the SAFE Act, and yet only 10 of 140 Assembly members. and 1 of 61 Senators, voted NO on a Budget that provides Funding for the SAFE Act! What in hell is wrong with this picture? Who are these Representatives "representing"?? Why should we support/re-elect these people???

Apr 11, 2014, 11:20pm Permalink

Authentically Local