The New York State Senate

Section 2 establishes the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

Under current law, if an individual threatens a fire, explosion or
release of a hazardous substance on school grounds, he or she is guilty
of a class D felony of falsely reporting an incident in the first
degree.

However, in the years that have passed since the enactment of the
current law, the nature of the threats facing schools have changed.  Any
threat of mass violence against a school, regardless of the implement
threatened to be used, creates immense fear for both students and staff,
disrupts the learning process, and ultimately dilutes the response if an
actual incident were to occur.

In one such instance, a community in central New York, Walton (in Dela-
ware County), has been the victim of repeated threats. Starting in Janu-
ary 2013, just after the tragic events in Newtown, CT, an individual
made a series of threat using social media. These threats, which
required police presence and cancellation of school events, were explic-
it, and were accompanied by photos of dead children. Due to their under-
standable fear, parents kept their children home while the investigation
proceeded.

When the perpetrator (an adult woman in the community) was apprehended,
she was charged with misdemeanor harassment. The school was informed
that this type of threat did not legally rise to the same level as a
bomb threat and this was all that could be done.

After the perpetrator was convicted and subsequently released, the
threats resumed in May. The end of the year was terrifying for parents,
students, faculty and staff. Recess was moved indoors, activities
cancelled, and schools were put on lockdown. Eventually the same perpe-
trator was rearrested and reconvicted. Again, the charge was misdemeanor
harassment. Again, she was released with the same explanation that she
had not made a threat with a bomb or similar device and therefore the
crime did not rise to the level of a felony. This story represents the
experience of a single district, yet it highlights an inadequacy in the
current law. If a school is threatened with mass violence, the implement
threatened to be used should not mitigate the crime; the charge should
be commensurate with the devastating harm such threats have on a commu-
nity.

 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2017-18: S.2521/A.7848 Passed Senate/Referred to Codes
2015-16:  S.430-A/A.2800-A Passed Senate/Referred to Codes
2013-14:  S.7931/A.9784-A Referred to Rules/Referred to Codes

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall have
become law.