The NY2A Grassroots Coalition will be posting periodic updates on the status of the lawsuit put forth by Tresmond Law. Our first update can be found here: http://www.ny2agrassroots.com/lawsuit-status-from-tresmond-law-april-29-2013/
On July 8, 2013 we phoned attorney Jim Tresmond to learn the status of the class action law suit, filed by Tresmond Law, against the State of New York. Mr. Tresmond, attorney at law, Buffalo, New York, was the first to challenge this gun-grabbing bill known as the “NY SAFE Act.” Background on the bill can be found at http://nysecond.org/.
On January 14, 2013, the Tresmond Law firm announced that they would challenge the bill. The next day Jim and Max Tresmond began a class action lawsuit based on these complaints, among others:
- The fact that the SAFE ACT is an unconstitutional law, based on NY state and the US constitutions
- The fact that no “buy back” offer is on the bill.
Your firearms will simply be taken, sold, auctioned, used by law enforcement or destroyed. Especially the large list of firearms included on the new “BAN LIST,” for example, as of January 15, 2013 you may not sell, transfer, loan, or hand down to your family any firearm on that NY ban list. Once a “banned rifle” is registered to your name, these firearms must be turned over to the state within a short time frame of your passing, or the executor of your will automatically become a felon and can be charged with numerous felonies.
Do not be fooled into believing this is ONLY New York state. Other states have passed their own version of the SAFE ACT – laws with the same infringements on the second amendment. Thus, the gun control advocates are disarming NY state and someday all of America in one generation! This is being accomplished slowly and without the knowledge of most Americans.
Status of State filing proof that NY SAFE Act is Constitutional
The Tresmond lawsuit is filed in the state supreme court. On one of the first court appearances, the Judge had given the state of New York 30 days to “…prove the law is a constitutional law…” The April 30th deadline for the State attorneys to answer the demand has come and gone.
To date, The state of New York attorneys have not answered the judge’s demand to “explain how the law is a constitutional law.” Deadlines to file other required paperwork have also passed. Needless to say, lack of action such as this is a sign of disrespect and does not please any judge.
Status of Negotiations
Negotiations have been ongoing between Jim Tresmond and a representative with the right to make changes to the SAFE ACT. Mr. Tresmond had initially believed that “negotiations went really well,” and agreements were made to satisfy both sides.
Unfortunately, the state has reneged on much of the time consuming agreements that were tentatively reached. We are going to trial if an agreement cannot be worked out at an upcoming conference. This unconstitutional law needs to be revoked and by rights the judge needs pass proper judgement here and dismiss the state and the safe act.
According to Mr. Tresmond, “We are going to trial…our negotiations seem to be that we were pretty convinced that we had almost everything that we wanted…but I believe the attorney general has backed off of some of the commitments that were made already… so we are going to have to go to trial…” [Note: on July 15, 2013, 6:00 PM, we were told by Mr. Tresmond that a conference is set up and not a trial, with hopes of coming to an agreement with the judge present, to avoid a trial.]
Agreement Reached on Ammunition Background Check
We are able to make public this: One infringement removed from the bill, during negotiations, and not yet reneged on is that “New Yorkers will NOT be required to go to our New York State police for a new back ground check when we wish to purchase ammo.”*
*Remember this is NOT yet AMENDED in the SAFE ACT, this must be officially, re-written into the safe act.
Q&A with Jim Tresmond
Below are a few questions and answers which are an exclusive update from Jim Tresmond. For obvious reasons we are remaining somewhat vague regarding the conference, for this week, and possible trial, if an agreement cannot be met, and if motions are not accepted, since we don’t want to reveal information that could be useful to the state.
- Question: “What about the section that states we must go to the NY state Police for a new background check to buy ammo. I was told this is off the table now. Did the state renege on that also?”
- Jim Tresmond: “Not as far as I know.”
- Question: “So, you are working on gun registrations, will they revoke this section or revise this? They are not going to revoke the safe act but they will revise it?”
- Jim Tresmond: “They might revise it. We have so many arguments in our favor, under the constitution of the United States and [cases cited - not for publication] .”
- Question: “The state did not answer the judge on a timely basis. Can you submit motions on the grounds that the state did not reply on a timely basis? Such as a “motion to dismiss and revoke the safe act because the state did not answer on a timely basis?”
- Jim Tresmond: “Yes, absolutely! Motions are prepared…we’re prepared to use every legal tactic in our arsenal to get the state to back off on this unconstitutional law…that takes people property and requires people to do things that are unconstitutional.” [The motions will not be named here].
- Question: “I saw the NRA lost in the recent class action lawsuit and on appeal, I believe they were moving on different grounds. Will this affect your own case against the NY SAFE ACT in a court of law?”
- Jim Tresmond: “Yes, the NRA did lose the lawsuit. Yes – they were going on different grounds. NO! That loss will not hurt us at all! Not to say the judge is not going to [find] something else, but we have this thing well planned.”
- Question: “It sounds like the judge is being fair do we have a good chance with the motions being filed by your law firm?”
- Jim Tresmond: “Yes, the judge is a fair judge, a woman that we have a lot of confidence in. In fact both of these ladies are fine judges, we have a lot of confidence in both of them. They do not take marching orders from Albany.”
After discussing what should be posted online and NOT, Jim Tresmond stated, “Give the people hope, give them a lot of hope.” He also wanted to make sure that people know the next time the elections roll around “we have to go after these guys…they are in bed with all of the other… [use your imagination here] in Albany and we just can’t tolerate it.”
Jim stressed the importance of voting out the legislators who voted for the SAFE Act. These legislators have a two-year term, and will be up for re-election in November 2014. It was a NEW legislature that passed the SAFE Act. This bill was thrown at the new legislators on their first day in office. They didn’t even have time to read it before voting for it.
- Question: “It sounds like you are defending this with all your heart and soul, you are into it, I can tell you are really into it.”
- Jim Tresmond: “Well, we are and we are staking our reputation on this and you know, after all, in LAW, what else do you have but your good reputation?”
- Question: “What can we do to help?”
- Jim Tresmond: “Just moral support at this time. We spent everything we can spend in terms of our [allotted] capital, our energy, and of our ability to write and create a good document. Just give us the best wishes and keep us in mind when the time comes give your legislatures a shout and say hey this _____ and lets get going on changing this thing!”
Why was the Tresmond webpage and Facebook support page taken down?
In ending our conversation, I asked Jim again, “what more do you want the people to know and what can we do to help?” Mr. Tresmond wants to encourage all of you to not give up hope, watch what you post online, stand behind him, show support, do not be silent, and do not let those negative people, as they have been known through out history, get the best of us. We have to get ahead of this and we are going to work hard to do so!!
- Question: “Your web page, we have noticed one of the web pages has been taken down?”
- Jim Tresmond: “We had to take our pages down the forth department required us to do so. We could not keep a Facebook page up anymore, the department told us ‘no’.”
- Question: “We wanted to ask you about this because people were wondering if something was wrong with the lawsuit status because the web page and Facebook page were removed.”
- Jim Tresmond: “The department doesn’t want lawyers on their web sites talking, we have an ethical responsibility.”
Next Steps for the Lawsuit
Jim and Max Tresmond have a great, positive attitude towards the expected outcome of the conference date set for July 18, 2013. The judge’s chambers may bring an abrupt end to the the SAFE ACT and the controlling agenda of Gov. Cuomo. If all goes well, the SAFE ACT may very well be revoked.
At this point in time I am free to state – one motion addressed today is a “MOTION to DISMISS” and revoke the SAFE ACT!
So What Can YOU Do To Help?
We can’t just sit around waiting for this and the other lawsuits to proceed.
- We are going to keep the pressure on our legislators, now.
- We are going to work on replacing these legislators with new and constitutional candidates in the 2014 elections.
- Make sure you are registered to vote, and get others registered too!
- Find out more actions at http://www.ny2agrassroots.com/a-winning-strategy-to-defeat-the-ny-safe-act/.
That means each and every one of you, anyone can run for office, lets find these good people and support each and every one of them, no matter what county you reside in!
*Note the time is now* Keep the pressure on, be professional, but call your reps, and call everyday! Do not let them believe we have forgotten about the demand to revoke the SAFE ACT!!!
July 18, 2013