Beacon Passes Safe-Storage Gun Law

Gun locks will be available from Beacon police

By Jeff Simms

A hotly debated gun storage law has been adopted in Beacon, making it the first municipality in the Highlands to legislate safe storage while Philipstown considers a similar statute.

The Beacon law, passed Dec. 5 by the City Council on a 6-1 vote, requires gun owners to keep loaded firearms in a “safe-storage depository” (gun safe) or to be equipped with a “gun-locking device” when children and teenagers 16 years or younger live in or are visiting a home.

The law does not contain an earlier provision that would have allowed handgun bullets to be sold only to gun owners with a firearms license. During the Dec. 5 meeting, the council also removed language that would have applied the law to circumstances involving the mentally ill or persons under restraining orders.

Although Council members admit the law will be difficult to enforce, it includes  fines of up to $250 or jail time of up to 15 days. On a second offense or when a first offense results in injury or death, violators may be fined up to $1,000 or face jail time of up to a year.

Council member George Mansfield said that while he supports teaching gun safety to children and teenagers, “I don’t believe education is the answer to this and it certainly should not be in lieu of this. I don’t think you’re going to be educating toddlers, and toddlers are often the ones who are hurt in homes.”

Mayor Randy Casale cast the lone vote against the measure, calling it redundant and saying “it’s not going to accomplish what we want it to accomplish.”

The law is modeled after one passed by the Albany city council in 2015 but adds the language regarding minors. Gun-rights advocates criticized the proposal during two public hearings, calling it unconstitutional and unenforceable. However, City Attorney Nick Ward-Willis advised the council that the statute passes constitutional muster.

“Even if it’s never enforced and it’s only from education that people further secure the devices in these instances with minors, that’s a good thing,” Councilperson Lee Kyriacou said before the vote.

The safe-storage movement began to gain momentum in New York after Nicholas Naumkin, 12, was killed in 2010 in Saratoga County by a 12-year-old friend playing with a handgun found in the home. A proposal for a statewide law was approved by the Assembly last year but failed to pass the Senate.

Safe-storage measures have been adopted in Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo, Rochester, Saratoga Springs, Westchester County and New York City.

Gun-rights supporters were dissatisfied with the Beacon council’s vote, noting that New York already requires background checks on firearm buyers. Peter Pavelock, a Beacon resident and retired Dutchess County law enforcement officer, called the measure a violation of the Second Amendment. “It’s a fruitless law,” he said. “We don’t need a law like that and there’s nobody to enforce it.”

Philipstown resident Alex Dubroff, who is the Hudson Valley coordinator for New Yorkers Against Gun Violence and has urged the Philipstown Town Board to adopt a gun storage law, applauded the move.

“This law will increase awareness of the need to maintain the safe and secure storage of firearms and significantly reduce the possibility of a tragedy in the city of Beacon,” she said.

The Beacon Police Department recently received 100 locks for handguns and will be putting together a program to distribute the devices.


HOW WE REPORT
Trust MarkThe Current is a member of The Trust Project, a consortium of news outlets that has adopted standards to allow readers to more easily assess the credibility of their journalism. Our best practices, including our verification and correction policies, can be accessed here. Have a comment? A news tip? Spot an error? Email editor@highlandscurrent.org.

2 thoughts on “Beacon Passes Safe-Storage Gun Law

  1. A law that is said to unenforceable, saying even if it is not enforced it is educational and that in itself will increase safety are all evidence of liberal folly in this regard. What will Ms. Dubroff say to the first family that is victimized because they could not get to their security device — a firearm — in a timely manner? This is what we get in progressive New York and California, when fewer and fewer of our elected officials understand the Constitution and even less have served in the military or law enforcement.

    The city attorney should have his license reviewed, as should Albany and Saratoga counsel, as our right to self-protection is definitely being infringed upon. Does the Beacon law have the sane non-descriptive phrase “immediate possession”? Read some quotes from those in favor and the Albany police chief and you will see how ridiculous this is. I will not comply. Molon labe!

  2. Mr. Fryer’s defiant challenge — Molon labe! (Come and take it!) — suggests he fears the government will seize his weapons. This seems to fire his rage at what most people would think is common-sense, plain and simple: a law that “requires gun owners to keep loaded firearms in a ‘safe-storage depository’ (gun safe) or to be equipped with a ‘gun-locking device’ when children and teenagers 16 years or younger live in or are visiting a home.” There is no reason to think that the thing Mr. Fryer wants to protect –- his right to possess a weapon — and the thing this law provides for -– that those loaded weapons be safely stored when children are around -– are in any way mutually contradictory.

    Some argue that the law is unnecessary because responsible weapon owners already do what the law requires. Others argue that making sure loaded weapons are equipped with a gun-locking device or are safely stored when children are around would make those weapons useless for self-defense. Either responsible weapon owners, who safely store their weapons, are deluded, or the rest of the (irresponsible?) weapon owners are indifferent to the hundreds of children who die from gun-related accidents each year (613 in 2014, 697 in 2015).

    This law simply sides with the thinking of responsible weapon owners, just as seat-belt laws side with those who buckle up. Why wouldn’t we want to require weapon owners to do the right thing, and consider the safety of their children and those of their neighbors?