Cuomo Administration Claims SAFE Act Would Have Stopped Orlando Attack, Quickly Proven Wrong

Cuomo administration officials have been bragging that the SAFE Act, New York’s anti-Second Amendment gun law, would have prevented the terrorist attack in Orlando. New reports indicate otherwise.

Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi took to social media on Monday, linking to an article about the AR-15 style weapons used in the attack and concluded the SAFE Act resulted was worth it.

“Paid a price in the polls,” he wrote, “but was the right thing to do.”

Also on Monday, Lt. Gov Kathy Hochul proclaimed “When people criticize the governor for instituting the SAFE Act, I think they should know that they are safer in our state so someone cannot a week before an assault like this can walk into a gun shop and just buy it.”

Turns out, he could have.

First problem – the weapon used in the Orlando attack was not an AR-15.

Via Townhall:

Folks—the demonization of the AR-15 rifle has begun in the media. The usual talking points about its lethality, its rate of fire, and its scariness are coursing through the veins of the anti-gun Left following the Orlando attack. Omar Mateen committed the worst mass shooting in U.S. history on Sunday morning, which will likely be reclassified as a terrorist attack, when he murdered 49 people at a gay nightclub (Pulse). As Bob Owens and Streiff noted at Bearing Arms and RedStaterespectively, Mateen didn’t use an AR-15 rifle, but the media has a narrative to dole out (via CBS News):

A law enforcement source said that the shooting suspect legally purchased recently the two weapons used in the attack at the shooting center in Port St. Lucie near his Fort Pierce home. He had a Glock 17 handgun purchased on June 5, a Sigsauer MCX assault rifle purchased on June 4 on his person during the shootout, and investigators later found a .38-caliber weapon in his vehicle.

Owens noted that the rifle Mateen bought “has no major parts that interface with AR-15s in any way, shape, or form.”

Further, a WNYT investigation revealed that if the terrorist decided to try and buy his ‘assault rifle’ under the SAFE Act, he would have had little issue.


Would the SAFE Act have stopped him?  We went to Target Sports in Glenville, to see if he could walk out with the same rifle on the same day.

“If (the SAFE Act) was implemented in Florida, it wouldn’t have prevented anything like this from happening,” said Borst, Target Sports owner.

Owner and outspoken critic of the SAFE Act, Steve Borst, says the shooter wouldn’t have been allowed to get a classic AR-15 with its pistol grip and adjustable stock.  But gun manufacturers are now designing very-similar guns to comply with New York’s law.

“So this rifle is perfectly legal to sell in New York. It’s been altered,” said Borst while holding another semi-automatic rifle.

We reported on gun manufacturers being able to design weapons that were SAFE Act compliant by changing a few cosmetic issues back in 2014.

Even the ten bullet limit under the SAFE Act would have failed to stop the Orlando attacker, because his weapon was easy to reload.

Borst explained that the attacker “would’ve taken the same five to ten minute FBI background check at his shop and passed.”

Viết một bình luận