Asm. Joe Angelino

As a former motor vehicle crash reconstructionist, warned that heavier vehicles increase accident severity, extend stopping distances by several feet (a life-or-death factor in cities), and pose greater risks to pedestrians and cyclists who may not hear quiet electric vehicles.

As a former motor vehicle crash reconstructionist, he warned that heavier vehicles cause more severe accidents, longer stopping distances, and greater risks to pedestrians and cyclists. He noted guardrails cannot resist heavy vehicles and battery-operated vehicles lack audible cues.

Representing a rural district, argued the bill creates burdens for law enforcement, particularly in urgent situations like bar fights where family members are typically available to interpret. Concerned cases could be thrown out on technicality if certified translators are required in all circumstances.

Argued the bill infringes the Second Amendment, which explicitly states rights 'shall not be infringed.' Expressed concern about demonizing firearms and law-abiding owners, noting that evil people—not guns—commit crimes. Warned of unintended consequences like false sense of security leading to unsafe storage practices.

Expressed concern that the medical cannabis program declined after the 2021 adult-use legalization and questioned why medical cannabis is still taxed like a recreational product rather than being treated as medication available through pharmacies.

Questioned why the bill is limited to assault charges rather than other violent crimes like robbery, and why it singles out healthcare workers when the existing Executive Law section 642 already broadly covers all victims and witnesses. Noted that his wife, an RN, was assaulted and robbed but the robbery would not be covered under this bill.

Argued the bill is unnecessarily specific to one workplace and one crime, lacks law enforcement input, and duplicates existing Executive Law 642 requirements. Contended local police-hospital relationships could address the issue without legislation, and expressed concern that handwritten statements in emergency rooms would be less thorough than typewritten statements at police stations with forensic equipment.

Expressed concern about the return of firearms to upset individuals and lack of protection for police officers who return weapons. Objected to "shall" language seizing property when the Constitution protects against such seizure.

Priorities are misplaced; 70 acres of native goldenrod fields in his area were clearcut for solar panels, which is a greater threat to pollinators than HOA restrictions.

Raised practical concerns about rural implementation, noting his county has only three designated interrogation locations for 905 square miles. Argued the requirement is cumbersome for field interrogations and cited unintended consequences including increased DSS involvement when officers cannot locate parents at home.

Argued the requirement is cumbersome and impractical in rural areas where designated interrogation facilities are scarce and law enforcement operates miles away with no cell service. Raised concerns about unintended consequences, including increased DSS involvement when officers cannot locate parents at home.

Questioned whether 100% viability is achievable and expressed concern that false sense of security could lead to complacency and unsafe storage practices. Argued the technology is not mature enough, citing New Jersey's 2002 mandate that was repealed and 2019 amendments. Warned that programming errors are common in electronics and the 18-month timeline is too aggressive. Criticized the bill as part of a pattern of demonizing firearms rather than focusing on criminals.

Questioned whether the bill addresses problems not already covered by PSC procedures, expressed concern about cumbersome written response requirements for simple complaints, and worried utilities might seek rate increases to cover administrative costs.

Argued the bill creates a de facto registry of firearm purchasers in violation of the Second Amendment and 1986 Firearms Privacy Act. Cited statements from Visa and Mastercard indicating they have paused implementation due to legal uncertainty and concerns about tracking individual purchases.

Expressed personal concerns about EV fire risks from lithium-ion batteries in attached garages, noting that solid-state battery technology is imminent and current infrastructure may become obsolete. Stated dealers discourage EV purchases due to service concerns and range anxiety.

Opposed the product liability provisions, arguing Glock pistols work as designed and are used responsibly by thousands of law enforcement officers and civilians. Contended that federal law already bans machine guns, that criminals—not manufacturers—are responsible for illegal conversions, and that design changes will simply lead to workarounds via 3D printing technology.

Opposed the product liability provisions in General Business Law, arguing Glock pistols work as designed and are used responsibly by thousands of law enforcement officers and civilians. Contended federal law already bans machine guns, and that manufacturers cannot be held responsible for criminal modification. Warned the bill will lead to endless litigation while criminals will find technological workarounds.

Opposed the product liability provisions, arguing the pistols work as designed and are used responsibly by thousands of law enforcement officers. Contended that criminals, not manufacturers, are responsible for illegal conversions, and that design changes would be circumvented by 3D printing technology.

Raised practical concerns about rural areas with poor cell service and the difficulty of obtaining interpreters quickly, noting that police officers often use bilingual employees or neutral third parties to take initial complaints.

Raised practical concerns about rural areas with poor cell service and situations where officers on patrol may lack immediate access to interpreters, arguing that one-size-fits-all legislation does not account for real-world policing conditions.

As a former police administrator, stated officers already exercise sensitivity toward children and that the bill's requirements are operationally difficult; noted the State Police Superintendent has no authority over local police departments and that accreditation standards already address safeguarding children of arrested parents.

Representing agricultural district, noted 3,000 farms lost in five years and generational farms closing; argued bill places another burden on farmers with thin profit margins and will drive more farms out of business, urging colleagues to stop trying to save the world on backs of New York farmers.

Stated that Pennsylvania's fracking has produced prosperity for farmers and reliable energy without the predicted catastrophes; argued New York cannot meet electricity demand with solar and wind alone and that banning CO2 fracking is another attempt to eliminate natural gas while importing it from neighboring states, harming the upstate economy.

Voted against the bill because a large corporation in his district needs natural gas for its process. The company cannot switch to all electricity due to power provider limitations and a micro-grid would be prohibitively expensive, potentially forcing the company to relocate.

Police officers will be caught in the middle, blamed either for not protecting victims without Orders of Protection or for escalating situations when Orders exist. The bill's messaging that Orders of Protection can escalate violence will trickle down and confuse law enforcement response.

Argued that while well-intentioned, the bill is impractical for real-world law enforcement situations, particularly in rural areas with poor cell service. Stated it would prevent victims from getting justice and perpetrators from being caught in a timely manner.