Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested
Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!
There’s a Slight Problem With NY’s Hastily-Made New Gun Laws: They Forgot to Exempt Cops!

Members of the New York Police Department are seen Jan. 26, 2012 in New York City. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
In their rush to push through tough new gun control laws, the New York State Legislature made a huge mistake: They failed to exempt police officers from the regulations regarding “high-capacity magazines.”
This means that when the new laws take effect in March, it will be illegal for any law enforcement official to carry a magazine that holds more than seven rounds. For point of reference, almost every law enforcement agency in the state uses handguns that carry 15 rounds.
“We are still working out some details of the law and the exemption will be included, currently no police officer is in violation,” a spokesman for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office told ABC 7 Eyewitness News:
“The PBA [Patrolman's Benevolent Association] is actively working to enact changes to this law that will provide the appropriate exemptions from the law for active and retired law enforcement officers,” the group’s president said in a statement.
Sen. Eric Adams told ABC 7 Eyewitness News he’s going to introduce an amendment to exempt law enforcement from the new regulations.
“You can’t give more ammo to the criminals,” he said.
Final Thought: So basically New York lawmakers are telling us they had to pass it to see what was in it?
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
Featured image courtesy Getty Images.
(H/T: Hot Air)
Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

















































































































Comments (114)
merton42
Posted on January 19, 2013 at 9:24amGOOD, GOOD, GOOD. Cops need to live by same laws we do!! If some Autocrat does BAN HANDGUNS, take the cops guns too!!
Report this comment
G-WHIZ
Posted on January 19, 2013 at 9:14amAll laws bend or ellimminate rights! Laws are like cockroaches…they never stop multiplying and at an exponential rate!!
Report this comment
Ceefour
Posted on January 19, 2013 at 7:57amNo no…they need all the bullets their weapons can hold. We all know they can’t hit what they are aiming at cause they don’t get enough practise. And thats a fact,Jack..
Report this comment
sasquatch08
Posted on January 19, 2013 at 6:33amWhat this!? Cops will be treated like every other citizen!? Say it ain’t so!
Report this comment
Coyote1953
Posted on January 19, 2013 at 5:56amSo, the police union in NY legislates now.
What other unions are writing laws?
Report this comment
Grand design
Posted on January 19, 2013 at 12:51amNew Yorkers, keep voting Democrat! Sheeple!
Report this comment
taintso
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 9:40pmNY law makers should be prosecuted for hate crime if they exempt police, holding one class above the other.
Report this comment
CommonSenseTalk
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 9:06pmThese laws are only for the sheeple. The government, media and elite don’t care about these laws because they don’t apply to them. From what they are telling us, if all the police turn in their guns in NY, then there is not more guns in the city. No more guns, so no more crimes. I’m glad we pay these people so much money to look out for us. I know that I could not make up my own mind on guns.
Report this comment
Charles Curtis
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 8:55pmimperium posse ledo quid vobis intendis.
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficient… The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.” — Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis
The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their possession any swords, short swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other types of arms. The possession of unnecessary implements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues and tends to foment uprisings. — Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Shogun, August 1588
Report this comment
ENIGMA28724
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 8:51pmGiven the NYPD’s propensity to spray and pray [and wound innocent citizens], maybe magazine limits might be a good idea for them. But for the rest of us, I see no reason for police to be exempted. After all, they have back up available but we civilians are on our own. especially if there are multiple assailants.
Report this comment
HI_Don
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 8:14pm“We are still working out some details of the law and the exemption will be included, currently no police officer is in violation,”
How so? Shouldn’t they arrest themselves?
“actively working to enact changes to this law that will provide the appropriate exemptions from the law for active and retired law enforcement officers,”
So, your working to make sure retired military and veterans are exempt as well right? Certainly if a patriot is willing to lay down their life for their country, is dully trained for combat and weapons safety, you wouldn’t need to restrict their 2nd amendment rights? Especially if you feel you should not for retired cops, some of which were probably forcibly retired if you catch my drift.
“You can’t give more ammo to the criminals”
Isn’t that precisely what you did – legislate honest citizens to a disadvantage?
Report this comment
media-bias-steals-elections
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 7:58pmSen. Eric Adams told ABC 7 Eyewitness News he’s going to introduce an amendment to exempt law enforcement from the new regulations.
“You can’t give more ammo to the criminals,” he said.
^^
New Yorkers are now all criminals, guilty until proven innocent? Who revoked their civil rights? New York citizens have surrended their civil rights with their apathy to defend them?
And you elect politicians that make it easier to make you a felon, unemployable for the rest of your life? You should feel safer already?
No one voted in Philadelphia?
One shot gun shell can rapidly fire how many buckshot?
Voting and using the court system is the only way to control the assault weapons of political anxiety?
Report this comment
pahrumper
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 7:39pmYou know why the New York gun ban is for 7 rounds only and includes cops,,,,it is because the last shooting in the City the police shot the killer and 6 other by standers,,,,hence 7 rounds for the public safety!!! If the police had 10 rounds they would have shoit 10 in all
Report this comment
South Philly Boy
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 6:23pmTYPICAL Liberal Communist Abortion Loving DemonCrats… PASS IT BEFORE YOU READ IT.
Report this comment
WaterTheTree
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 6:00pm“No one needs ten bullets to kill a deer!”
Except police, it seems.
Report this comment
panick
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 3:51pmLets give a round of applause to our well-intentioned but highly incompetent frogressives !! Rib-it ! Best argument, along with BO, for limited central government since FDR
Report this comment
agent2x0r
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 3:44pmSen. Eric Adams: How could the criminals possibly have more rounds (in their magazines) than law enforcement; didn’t this law just pass to stop that? Oh, are you saing that the law doesn’t stop the criminals? So, really this law just stops law-abiding citizens from having more rounds in their magazines than law enforcement. Now I get it.
Report this comment
Junter
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 3:01pmYes new laws for the peasants but exclude the elite class.
Report this comment
OBAMANATIONOFDESOLATION
Posted on January 18, 2013 at 2:03pmSen. Eric Adams told ABC 7 Eyewitness News he’s going to introduce an amendment to exempt law enforcement from the new regulations.
“You can’t give more ammo to the criminals,” he said.
So it’s not OK for police to have less ammo than the criminals, but it is OK that NY State subjects have less ammo than criminals.
Liberal Logic meets Critical Thought
Report this comment