NYS PL Section 400 Paragraph 2

Parts a through i make no mention of "Sportsman", "Target", "Hunting" etc... Your license is a NYS carry license, valid in all of NYS with the exception of NYC. Mine actually says "TYPE: CARRY" on it, but there is a rubber stamped ink'd "TARGET - TO AND FROM RANGE ONLY" on it.

If you get "caught" doing so, you will be hassled, given a hard time, and potentially collared depending on the officer, but at most all they can do with respect your pistol license is send a message (supposedly has to be official fax/letter and in writing) to the licensing authority, be it a judge or a CLEO/Sheriff and inform them of the incident.

Straight from the State Trooper's website

Q - What section of the Penal Law authorizes the placing of restrictions on pistol permits by the issuing authority?

The Penal Law does not specifically authorize the placing of restrictions on pistol permits. However, court decisions have consistently supported the ability of licensing officials to impose these restrictions. Such an imposition is an administrative function of the licensing officer.

Licensees in violation of these restrictions would therefore not be subject to criminal prosecution but would face action being taken by the court of issuance in the form of suspension or possible revocation of the license.

aka - if your issuing authority decides to issue restrictions on your license, the staties aren't going to be the ones enforcing it. County/Town level might, but that is at their discretion.

Unfortunately, the licensing authorities across the state have total discretion with respect to issuing restrictions on said license, and while they hold no legal weight (I repeat, cannot get charged with CPW in any degree because you are licensed to have/posses/carry the firearm legally despite administrative restrictions)

Post the court decision in Woolard vs. Sheridan down in MD (who has the same issue/permitting scheme as NY) it was found that this practice is unconstitutional.

As per Legg's decision -

A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and substantial reason' why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.

Alan Gura, lead attorney for the Second Amendment Foundation, utilized this victory in his scathing appeal in the Westchester pistol licensing case (Kachalsky v. Cacase). A victory in that case (which should be coming soon hopefully) - will change things for the better here in NY. Read that appeal if you get a chance, it is really fantastic and unbelievably well written.

In addition to that, there are bills put through the NYS assembly every year that work to remove the "good and substantial reason" clause in section 400, which would do away with the unconstitutional administrative restrictions.

Sorry for the wall of text, it is just, this sort of thing is very important to me, and should be to you as well as a fellow New Yorker.

Feel free to message me or continue to reply here if you have any more thoughts, questions, or comments. :)

Also, just FYI - concealed means concealed, and in NY you have no legal duty to inform an officer that you are carrying a firearm (like in some states)

Cheers mate.