By Sarah Hall

Editor

Few would be surprised to learn that Mike Mastrogiovanni opposes the SAFE Act.

Mastrogiovanni, of Liverpool, is the Onondaga County Chapter Chair and a board member for the Shooters Committee on Public Education (SCOPE), a New York gun owners’ rights group. He belongs to a number of local rod and gun clubs. He’s an active proponent for the Second Amendment.

“Of course. Of course. All the gun owners of Upstate New York are basically against [the SAFE Act],” Mastrogiovanni said. “You’ll find certain people that think it’s fine. But the majority of gun owners are totally against it.”

So it’s not surprising that Mastrogiovanni supports a bill before the New York State Assembly to repeal portions of the controversial gun control legislation throughout Upstate New York, leaving it in place only in New York City. The SAFE Act was passed in January 2013 in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

The bill, known in the Assembly as A06140, proposed by Marc W. Butler (R,C,I,Ref-Newport) and Sen. Rob Ortt (R,C,I-North Tonawanda), would dispose of the SAFE Act’s five-year pistol permit recertification requirement, mental health restrictions, limitations regarding transfers of ownership and a background check database, and the definition of an assault weapon would revert back to its pre-SAFE Act classification. Other provisions would stay in place statewide (see sidebar).

The bill is co-sponsored by 120th District Assemblyman Will Barclay (R,C,I-Pulaski), who said the proposal came about after multiple efforts to repeal the act in its entirety were unsuccessful.

“We tried to repeal it in totality. We’ve tried to chip away at different parts of it. Obviously there have been court cases on it. Some of it did actually get beaten in court, not all of it, obviously,” Barclay said. “So this is just one more effort to try and do it.”

Barclay noted that the act was passed “in a very rushed manner, pushed through by the governor with the support of mostly New York City legislators and downstate legislators” with significant opposition from those Upstate. He said the effort to split the legislation is not dissimilar to minimum wage laws passed last year, which operate on a different schedule for Central New York and Upstate than they do for New York City.

“If ride-sharing or the minimum wage, which offer specific carve-outs for certain regions of the state, can be negotiated as part of the budget, this should be as well,” he said. “[If downstate] still wants to have [the SAFE Act], keep it for their constituents, I guess, fine for them. We in the upstate never liked the bill. If they like it, we can keep it in New York City and we can repeal it Upstate.”

The most recent polling on the SAFE Act is from 2015; it does show a marked difference in opinions on the legislation. A Siena Research Institute poll in October of 2015 found that, statewide, 62 percent of New Yorkers approved of the SAFE Act. But when the poll focused on Upstate, it found that 51 percent opposed the legislation.

Still, passing even a limited repeal is going to be an uphill battle. Assembly Democrats are highly unlikely to support the measure, though some agree that the SAFE Act is flawed. Among that number are 127th District Assemblyman Al Stirpe (D-North Syracuse).

“While the assemblyman has said that there are aspects of the SAFE Act he didn’t totally agree with, including how it was passed, he thinks outright repeal of the entire law — even just in Upstate — isn’t the right approach either,” said Cort Ruddy, a spokesman for Stirpe, in an email.

A spokesman for Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie (D-Bronx) echoed those comments in the Binghamton Press Sun and Bulletin.

“It’s not something we would consider,” Mike Whyland said. “The SAFE Act has widespread support across the state and in our conference.”

The SAFE Act also has staunch support from gun control advocates. While New Yorkers Against Gun Violence did not respond to a request for comment, the following statement is on their website: “Strong, common sense gun laws like NY SAFE do work — and they’re a big reason why New York, a state of 20 million people, has the fourth lowest gun death rate in the nation. NY SAFE respects gun rights, keeps weapons from dangerous individuals, and toughens criminal penalties — and should be the model for other states to follow.”

Mastrogiovanni is also doubtful about the chances for the bill’s passage.

“Do I think it’ll get passed? Seeing that there’s 103 representatives from New York City in the assembly, and 47 from Upstate, I doubt it’ll pass,” he said.

While he may not be particularly optimistic about A06140, Barclay said he’s “seen crazy things happen sometimes.”

“I’m realistic,” he said. “It’s going to be a challenge, but I think we’ve got to keep at this and I think continuing to raise awareness about the SAFE Act is important. Maybe a new governor will come in and maybe this can get some traction.”

What stays SAFE?

According to Assemblyman Will Barclay’s office, the proposal to repeal portions of the SAFE Act in New York state outside of the five boroughs of New York City would leave the following provisions of the legislation in place:

• Pistol permit holders statewide can still request an exception from having their names and addresses made a part of the public record.

•The provision that prohibits additional individuals from being eligible for a pistol permit remains statewide, including:

• -unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance as defined in section 21 U.S.C. 802;
• -being an alien and is illegally or unlawfully in the United States;
• -U.S. citizens who have renounced their citizenship

•Aggravated murder and murder in the first degree: Enacts Mark’s Law to include intentional murder of certain first responders within these class A-1 felony crimes, punishable by life imprisonment without parole.

•Criminal purchase or disposal of a weapon: Increases penalty from a class A misdemeanor to a class D felony for straw purchasers who knowingly sell or dispose of a gun to someone prohibited from possessing one.

•Possession of a weapon on school grounds or on a bus: Increases penalty from a class A misdemeanor to a class E felony.

•Assault in the second degree: Includes within this class D violent felony crime recklessly causing physical injury to a child by intentionally discharging a gun.

•Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree: Includes within this class D violent felony crime possession of an unloaded firearm during a drug trafficking felony or any violent felony, mandating a three-and-a-half-year minimum determinate sentence.

•Aggravated criminal possession of a weapon: Creates this class C violent felony crime when a person possesses a loaded firearm and commits any violent felony or drug trafficking felony and imposes a mandatory minimum five-year determinate sentence.

•Criminal facilitation: Adds providing a “community gun” to a person when the gun later aids in the commission of a crime.

•Aggravated enterprise corruption: Establishes this class A-1 “armed” felony crime.

•Criminal use of a firearm in the first degree: Imposes an additional five-year prison sentence on first- and second-time offenders for committing a crime with a firearm that was previously afforded only to persistent violent felony offenders.