Thanksgiving Non Talk

Most of us find Thanksgiving to be a time of cultural and religious enjoyment and relaxation.  But to those on the far left, politics is their religion and culture and there is never a time for relaxation.  To prove that, Billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety has published a Thanksgiving gun-control infomercial titled Debunking Gun Myths at the Dinner Table. Everytown says: “There are a lot of widespread myths and conflicting information about guns, gun violence, and gun safety laws in America” that you can discuss around Thanksgiving Dinner. 

Yeah, they are right about the myths but most of the myths come from ‘Everytown’ and its sister organizations, so let’s set the record straight.

Everytown says that it is a myth that: Criminals will always find a way to get their hands on a gun.

Everytown argues: Laws like background checks stop gun sales to criminals every day. 

Reality: Studies show that the vast majority of criminals don’t obtain their guns from legal sources that include undergoing a background check. (1)  So, they do find a way to get guns.

Everytown says that it is a myth that: Strong gun laws don’t work. Look at Chicago.

Everytown argues: Strong gun laws work.  Many of the crime guns recovered in Chicago (and in other cities in states with strong gun laws) are trafficked from states with weaker gun laws.

Reality:  Other less regulated states aren’t having Chicago-like crime spikes - or even other parts of Illinois.  Exclude the Chicago metropolitan area and there was a 55% decrease in the Illinois’ homicide rate. (2)  Perhaps this is because all the guns were shipped to Chicago and there were none left elsewhere?  (Sarcasm intended.)

Everytown says that it is a myth that: The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

Everytown argues: If more guns made us safer, America would be the safest country on earth. Instead, we have a gun homicide rate 26 times that of other high-income countries.”

Reality: Defensive gun uses by people lawfully armed are responsible for saving lives and preventing crimes every day and total at least one million times a year. (3) (4)  

Crime Prevention Research Center has found that the United States ranks below average on firearm homicide rates across countries, even though “many countries that clearly have higher gun homicide rates than the United States… simply don’t report firearm homicide data.” (5)

Everytown says that it is a myth that:  Federal law prohibits ALL domestic abusers from having guns. 

Everytown argues: Federal law does not prohibit current or recent former dating partners subject to a domestic violence restraining order from purchasing or possessing guns.

Reality: First, I doubt if any responsible person actually said ALL?

Federal law on guns and domestic violence restraining orders uses the term “intimate partner” which includes: spouses (past or present); cohabitation partners during dating relationships; having a child together; anyone convicted of a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence;” anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence against a current or recent former dating partner.  That seems to cover A Lot.

Strict gun control laws that make a gun more difficult to obtain only disarm potential victims and make them unable to defend themselves.

Everytown says that it is a myth that:  Having a gun for self-defense makes individuals and their families safer.

Everytown argues: Guns in the home increase the risk that anyone in the house, including children, will die by firearm suicide, homicide, or unintentional injuries.” 

Reality: Studies show guns make people safer and people are voting with their wallets as gun sales for self-defense have been skyrocketing.

In 1993, Florida State University Criminology Professor Gary Kleck conducted the National Self-Defense Survey to study the prevalence of defensive gun uses (DGUs).  He stated that “each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans.” (6)

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted its own surveys of DGUs from 1996 to 1998. However, the agency didn’t make its research public at the time.  The CDC survey data finally came to light in 2018. Analyzing the CDC survey along with his own survey, Kleck found that the CDC data indicated that there are likely more that 1 million DGU’s per year. (7)

Everytown started the article with a statement of their own: “Every day, 120 Americans are killed with guns and more than 200 are shot and wounded.”

SCOPE responds: As usual, ‘Everytown’ needs to add some meat to this, which SCOPE did in a Firing Lines article. (8)  Almost 60% of those killed are suicides - which is a very different issue and needs to be addressed differently – leaving only 48 daily deaths.  And in those remaining deaths, about 6 are legal Defensive Gun Uses. Of the 42 daily deaths left, most are committed with illegal guns.  Everytown also omits how many of these homicides happen in ‘Gun Free Zones.’

Don’t be like Everytown.  Politics are not a religion.  Have a safe, happy and relaxing holiday and remember to give thanks for all that God has given this great nation; including the freedom to write an article like this.

(1)     Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016
(2)    NRA-ILA | The Desperate Deflection to the “Red State Murder Problem”
(3)    Defensive Gun Use Archives - Crime Prevention Research Center
(4)    UPDATED: Compiling Cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped likely mass public shootings - Crime Prevention Research Center
(5)    Comparing murder rates and gun ownership across countries - Crime Prevention Research Center
(6)    Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun
(7)    A Second Look at a Controversial Study About Defensive Gun Use
(8)   September2025  Page 6

Internet Insecurities

Section 6 of Firearms Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986 prohibits a registry of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions. The pertinent language of Section 926 reads:

No such rule or regulation…may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter…be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.

However, there are numerous government lists of gun owners: National Firearms Act of 1934 registry; state and local registries; Federal Firearms Licensees’ records; etc. 

If you think your personal and gun information is secure, think again. There are marketing companies that legally search these government lists and will provide lists of gun owners, including personal information on them.  And most troubling, Legal Insurrection just wrote an article that wasn’t about firearms but gave some troubling statistics about government records that should scare gun owners:

In 2020, reports indicated the number of exposed government records increased…from four and a half million (4.5 million) breaches of records in the first quarter of 2019, to seventeen million (17.0 million) breaches in the first quarter of 2020.  (Emphasis added.)

And things have only gotten worse.

The IRS can provide whatever privacy assurances it likes, but the record of government data breaches and purposeful leaks, and the resulting harm to millions of individuals, is well-documented and will continue to occur.

______________________________________________________________

Many people get some or all of their news from social media.  Legal Insurrection also wrote about on-line fake identities meant to mislead you about the writer and meant to give that writer more credibility.  The article was about misleading information that was being posted on-line about Israel by people under fake names and biographies.  But the warning applies to us all:

Now we know that it was all a massive foreign influence operation of fake MAGA accounts meant not to promote Trump, but to turn Americans against Jews and Israel and to sow chaos and division among actual Trump supporters.

If it’s happening on X, it’s happening elsewhere on social media.  (Emphasis added.)

However, there is some hope -on X - until the scammers figure out a way around it.  Legal Insurrection explained and gave examples of the fakes they uncovered:

X has turned live a “location” function that lets you know from where the account is posting (and whether they are trying to hide location through a VPN). The result is that many of the most manipulative supposedly MAGA accounts were frauds posting from abroad. 

So many “America First” accounts turned out to be from Pakistan, Egypt, and other places that have no connection to America whatsoever.

They’re doing their best to somehow radicalize Americans against Israel.

Accounts like @1776General are interesting. It has 141k followers. Bio says: "Constitutionalist, Patriot, Ethnically American, Colonial Stock, 1620 Host on Ethnic American Broadcast."  And it's based in Turkey.  (Emphasis added.)

What about all the other social media platforms? 

We recognize the sources of some information (such as ‘Brady’, ‘Everytown’ and ‘Moms’) and we can discount it as propaganda.  There is enough misleading information already out-there by these organizations that we know are anti 2nd Amendment, we don’t need more misinformation from cowards hiding their true identity. 

Looking Back and Forward  by Richard Rossi

Thank you to the citizens that went to the polls and voted.  I hope everyone did their civic duty as well as their due diligence and voted for the candidate who respects our Rights and Freedoms as American Law-abiding citizens. We had much more on the line than just our Second Amendment Rights!

Unfortunately, there is little time to relax, regardless if your candidate lost or won.  Election season is over for 2025 and 2026 will soon be upon us.  Take a break and, come January 2nd, it will be time to go into election mode - the Midterms are just around the corner. 

The 2026 Mid-term elections are going to be crucial in New York State. Our Governor, Attorney General, ALL seats in Albany (both Assembly and State Senate), and ALL the seats in the U.S. House of Representative will be on the line. 

As you all know, Zohra Mamdani was elected New York City’s mayor.  Yes, we have a socialist / communist Mayor elected in NYC and also one who has endorsed numerous gun control schemes.  This will hit home to upstate residents since NYC is the economic hub of New York State and controls Albany politics.  Don't be fooled for one second, Mamdani’s election will greatly impact upstate New York. Mamdani’s previous statements indicate that he is a threat, not only to the 2nd Amendment but to the very foundations of American prosperity.  His actions and the responses in Albany could have significant impact on the elections.

As we look ahead to the midterm elections in 2026, Governor Hochul is running for re-election.  The state of New York is in the balance.  This is a 'do or die' scenario for our upstate community.  The elections could start to turn around NY State, depending on whom we elect in 2026.

Elise Stefanik recently announced her run for governor in New York against Hochul. She has, at this crucial time, a chance to dethrone the Democrats from another term as governor.  Stefanik is a strong defender of 2A and Hochul is definitely not.  (There is more about these two in the upcoming Firing Lines.) 

This will not be the only challenge for New Yorkers.  State Attorney General Letitia James has also been an enemy of 2A.  Michael Henry has established 2A credentials and has often spoken at SCOPE events, such as the recent annual banquet.

Stefanik and James are the early leading candidates but there may be more. 

The Dem's currently have all the power in Albany; a governor and a super majority in the Albany legislature.   All this can change in 2026, if we organize and unite!  But we can’t depend on others to do it for us.  Allow me to give you examples from the recent Delaware County elections of issues that commonly occur beyond just Delaware County.

Every political commentator says that a “Get out the Vote” effort is one of the keys to winning.  The intense 'Get out the Vote" effort for our candidates did not materialize.  

“Letters to the Editors” of newspapers are still valuable but less impactful as newspapers are being replaced by other media. An effort to reach potential voters via our local newspapers' "Letters to the Editor" was almost non-existent. 

Comments on social media are now as important as “Letters to the Editor” and I know of little or no effort in this area.  (Note: SCOPE is developing a social media presence to be used in the upcoming election.)

With the lack of “Letters” and “Comments”, we missed an opportunity for citizens to voice their support or concerns and, most importantly, an opportunity to voice the facts and cut through all the political campaign rhetoric; especially the many falsehoods about our 2nd Amendment protected rights.

The Delaware County Republican Committees did run ads in our local papers for our candidates but their impact was limited, as they were not run early enough to coincide with the Absentee Ballot time-frame.  In addition, I believe there was no similar effort on social media.  A critical opportunity to reach voters cannot be overlooked in the future. 

One of my personal “pet peeves” is when political parties endorse candidates before the voters speak in primaries. Our local Representatives in Albany endorsed the eventual loser in the primary - before the primary - and they were then slow in endorsing the primary winner.  This contributed to a Republican candidate versus Republican candidate in the general election. So much for unity in maintaining our Rights & Freedoms.

New York State's survival is on the line in 2026.  It is going to take dedication, organization, unity, timeliness and effort to overcome the radical, liberal, democratic, socialist wave that is upon us.  This will not be easy but we have no choice! Sitting back and saying we can't win is not an option.

Frey v. City of New York, No. 23-365 (2d Cir. 2025)

In New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the court stated that certain areas could be designated as “sensitive,” (such as court and government buildings) but the designation must be used sparingly. It cannot be applied simply because a large number of people gather in a location.

NYS’ misnamed Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) ignored Bruen and banned firearms in Times Square because of the large number of people gathered there. Many other places were included in CCIA as “sensitive.” Various lawsuits have emerged, suing New York State over what some have called “thumbing their nose” at the Supreme Court under the Bruen decision.  One of those is Frey v City of New York.

Highlights of Justia Opinion Summary about Frey v City of New York:

The plaintiffs objected to three main provisions:

the prohibition on carrying firearms in designated “sensitive locations” (specifically Times Square, the New York City subway, and the Metro-North rail system);       

the statewide ban on open carry of firearms;

and the requirement that state concealed carry license holders obtain a separate, city-specific permit to carry a firearm in New York City.

The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of these provisions, arguing they violated the Second Amendment.  The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied the motion for a preliminary injunction…On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (a three-judge panel) affirmed the district court’s order...The court concluded that each challenged provision—sensitive location restrictions, the open carry ban, and the city-specific permit requirement—fell within the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation and did not violate the Second Amendment.

The court found that:

the government had demonstrated a historical tradition of regulating firearms in crowded public places, supporting the sensitive locations restrictions;            

regarding the city-specific permit, the court determined that localities have historically imposed their own firearm regulations...

In the Frey case, New York State’s examples were from the early 1900s and a North Hampton law from the 1300s. Many thought the lack of historical analogues would be the death of the law, but the judges said they took a “flexible” approach to applying the Bruen standard and upheld the law.  The judges wrote “…In short, Times Square is our modern-day, electrified, supersized equivalent of fairs, markets, and town squares of old. We therefore need not stretch the analogy far,’ to conclude that [the law] is entirely consistent with our historical tradition of regulating firearms in quintessentially crowded places.”

The court’s ruling brings up a continuing issue in many similar cases that will require the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to decide; do historical analogues concerning the 2nd Amendment go back to the founding era, which most consider to be the ratification date of the Second Amendment in 1791, or does 2nd Amendment history begin with the ratification date of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868.

And what could be more of a “flexible” approach than the court saying: it also concluded that the open carry ban was consistent with historical regulations that allowed states to prohibit one form of public carry (open or concealed) as long as the other remained available.  Based on this logic, the 1st Amendment’s “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” would not stop NY State from banning, for instance, the Catholic Church since other Christian churches are available.

The decision wasn’t the one that plaintiff Jason Frey wanted to hear, but he was not too surprised because of past anti-gun rulings from the Second Circuit.  “The mental gymnastics used to reference laws from before the nation was formed show us just how deep the hatred for our Second Amendment is to some of these people that currently hold positions of power.” 

All this was over the request for a preliminary injunction.  The plaintiffs could request an en banc review from the full bench or could go directly to SCOTUS. There is no guarantee that either request will be granted.

If you want to run for a SCOPE Leadership Position

SCOPE by-laws require anyone wishing to run for an At Large Directorship in 2026 to publish their intentions by January 1, 2026.

At Large Directors to the Board of Directors are elected by the entire membership. These positions are full-fledged board members with full voting rights.  At Large Directors represent the SCOPE membership as a whole, whereas County Chairs represent their county.

    __________________________________________________

Section 3.2a states:

Any member wishing to become a candidate for an at large directorship must provide written notice of candidacy and a biography, sent by first class mail to the attention of the secretary at the corporation’s offices, postmarked no later than January 1of the election year, or by email sent to the secretary no later than January 1 of the election year.

Section 3.3a states: 
The at-large directors shall be elected to hold office for two-year terms.
PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052-0165

Section 3.4a states:

At-large directors must be at least 21 years of age and must also have been a member in good standing continuously for at least two years prior to their nomination. The corporation’s board of directors may waive the two-year requirement for good cause at its discretion.

 _________________________________________________

If you feel you qualify and have interest, please forward your intentions with biography to:

SCOPE, Inc. Election Committee

Intentions & Biographies must be postmarked or emailed by January 1, 2026

email to:   sue.scopeny@gmail.com

To All SCOPE Members,  (A message from the president of SCOPE)

Seventy-one years ago, on June 1, 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation officially changing the name of the holiday from Armistice Day to Veterans Day. Originally established as a federal holiday in 1938 to honor the end of World War I, Armistice Day was renamed in 1954 through an act of Congress to recognize all U.S. military veterans.

Since the nation’s founding in 1776, more than 41 million Americans have served in the U.S. Armed Forces — including 16 million who served during World War II. Of those who have served, over 1.1 million made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our nation.

To every veteran who continues to serve through the SCOPE Corporation, I want to express my deepest gratitude for your dedication and service to our country. The oath you once swore—to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic—remains deeply rooted in your heart. For that enduring commitment, I offer my sincere and heartfelt thank you.

Freedom is NOT free!

THANK YOU!

With All Honor and Respect,
John R. Elwood,  SCOPE President

Veterans Day

A history lesson on what brought about the Veteran’s Day holiday and its parallels with today’s global situation should give all of us a reason to pause, remember and take action.  We don’t need another holiday to celebrate the end of another war.

In June 1914, a Bosnian Serb assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. Then… 

Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia.     

Russia came to Serbia's defense. 

Germany, France, Britain and the Ottoman Empire soon joined the war.

Then, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Italy and others joined. 

In the Pacific, New Zealand occupied German Samoa

Australian Forces landed on Germany’s island of New Britain.   

A German cruiser sank a Russian cruiser. 

Japan declared war on Germany and Austria-Hungary in what was a land grab. 

German forces attacked South Africa. India supplied large quantities of food, money, ammunition and soldiers to the British.

In early 1917, the United States entered the war on the side of the Allies.

Later in 1917, the Bolsheviks seized power in the Russian October Revolution and the Soviet Union was born.

Millions died.  WW1 led directly to genocide, a pandemic and the rise of the Soviet Union.  A worthless worldwide political body was established in the aftermath.

On November 11, 1918, an armistice was signed and on the "eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month" of 1918 and hostilities ceased on the Western Front of World War I.  (On June 28, 1919, the Treaty of Versailles was signed which formally ended the war.)

November 11th was declared as “Armistice Day” to celebrate the end of the “Great War.”    (It wasn’t yet known as World War 1, since World War 2 was still twenty-one years in the future.)

Commemorations of November 11th were initially focused on honoring the military dead of the First World War and the return to peace. Later, many countries changed the name to include all veterans of their armed services and a few honored their war dead both uniformed and civilian. Most member states of the Commonwealth of Nations adopted the name Remembrance Day.

In 1954, the United States changed the name to ‘All Veterans Day’, later shortened to 'Veterans Day'.  (The United States has a separate holiday, “Memorial Day’, to honor and mourn the U.S. military personnel who died while serving in the United States Armed Forces.) 

Tuesday is the 107th anniversary of the armistice.  Have we learned anything from history?  WW1 started because one person was assassinated and it rapidly grew from there.  Today’s international situation sounds a lot more explosive than just one royal being assassinated.

We need to honor veterans on this Tuesday and the best way to honor these veterans is to be sure that history does not repeat itself.  They sacrificed too much for it to be in vain.

Glock

Rumors are that Glock may be preparing to discontinue the majority of its commercial handgun lineup by November 30, 2025.  Glock has announced the discontinuation of more than thirty models to “streamline” its commercial portfolio.  Glock’s FAQ states discontinued models will continue to be supported.  (‘Supported’ should mean spare parts still available, but a halt in new production inevitably tightens supply and reshapes the secondary market.) 

According to posts attributed to GlockStore and echoed by industry influencers, only the Glock 43, 43X, and 48X models will remain available.

The old models will be replaced by a new “V line” that will be rolled out in December, this year.

Why is this happening?

Glock says it will concentrate its production, marketing and R&D on the models that will “drive future innovation and growth. 

Another rumored reason is the expiration of Glock’s patents which will make cheaper copies available.

However, what cannot be ignored are lawsuits around illegal “switch conversions” that turn semiautomatic pistols into functionally automatic weapons.  Over the last year, three government lawsuits—Chicago, New Jersey, and Seattle—have accused Glock of selling pistols that are “too easily” converted by illegal auto-sear devices (so-called “switches”). In addition, California Assembly Bill 1127 was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom on October 10th.  It will ban the sale of firearms that include a cruciform trigger bar which is a key component within the trigger mechanism in Glock handguns.  FFL’s in California would not be able to sell any handgun that uses this component after July 1st, 2026. 

According to retailer reports, the move toward new “V Models” would include mechanical changes intended to make those conversions difficult or impossible.

Several gun rights groups are challenging Assembly Bill 1127 saying it violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments by outlawing one of the most popular and commonly owned handgun platforms in America.

And of course, criminals won’t be busy seeking a way around these new changes. Right?

And the lawsuits against Glock will probably continue stating that Glock should have done it sooner.

As you can imagine, it will be difficult to sort out rumors from fact.  So, check with your local gun store for later and more specific information.

2nd Amendment Task Force Strikes Again

SCOPE had previously reported the formation of a Department of Justice (DOJ) “Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force.” A.G. Bondi noted, “For too long, the Second Amendment, which establishes the fundamental individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms, has been treated like a second-class right. No more. It is the policy of this Department of Justice to use its full might to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

Scope also reported on the Task Force’s first high-profile move; the DOJ filed a federal lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, alleging deliberate delaying tactics by the Sheriff’s Department in processing applications for California concealed carry licenses.

We now can report on a second case.

In Washington D.C., Juan Peterson had been found guilty, in 2023, for possession of a large-capacity ammunition feeding device under D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b). Peterson challenged his conviction to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals on Second Amendment grounds, arguing that the statute infringes upon his constitutionally protected rights.

THE DOJ filed an unopposed motion to vacate Peterson’s conviction: “It is the United States position that § 7-2506.01(b) is unconstitutional. As a result, the United States is not prosecuting violations of § 7-2506.01(b), and believes that, in the interests of justice, Peterson’s conviction should be vacated*…because the United States would not charge a defendant similarly situated to Peterson under D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b) if arrested today, vacatur of Peterson’s conviction would ensure fundamental fairness.”

The DOJ referred to the Supreme Court’s “Heller” and “Bruen” decisions which established that arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes receive Second Amendment protection. With standard-capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds numbering a reported 700 million in circulation nationwide, that would seem to qualify as common use. **

As SCOPE previously reported, the DOJ’s actions in defense of 2A are huge.  The anti-2A states have passed unconstitutional laws and basically said, “sue me” knowing that it would cost the plaintiff tens of thousands of dollars to “sue them.”  This helps takes the financial burden off of individuals.

*Magnus v. United States: “a conviction for conduct that is not criminal, but is instead constitutionally-protected, is the ultimate miscarriage of justice.”

** NSSF Report Reveals Firearm Magazines with Capacity Over 10 Rounds is National Standard • NSSF

There has not been much discussion on this, which since we live in New York State has got to make us leery of anything our politicians do, especially without much transparency.  Most of what is on-line just repeats the same story without much depth.  Here is a quick summary.

This is how Ballot Proposal 1 appears on the ballot: “Amendment to Allow Olympic Sports Complex In Essex County on State Forest Preserve Land”

It’s on the ballot in elections across the state because passing this proposal requires a change to the New York State Constitution. 

A “Yes” vote: Authorizes the existing Olympic sports complex (after the fact) and allows the state to acquire more protected land in the Adirondacks while regulating its development. 

A “No” vote: The Olympic sports complex remains in violation of the state constitution, meaning the state can’t develop it further without another amendment. 

History: 

The Mount Van Hoevenberg Olympic Sports Complex in Essex County, New York has long operated on forest preserve land, which should be “forever wild” under the state constitution as part of the vast Adirondack Park. This means it generally can’t be developed. 

But when it was first built — for the 1932 Winter Olympics — the state allowed the construction of the sports complex for holding the event, without amending the state constitution.  So, the sports complex has been in violation of the “forever wild” clause. Its facilities have so far made use of 323 acres of the 1,039 acres within the complex’s designated boundaries. 

If it passes, it authorizes the use of ski trails and related facilities in the sports complex.

New York state could only develop within the designated 323 acres of the 1,039 acres in the sports complex. The only developments allowed would be for trails and facilities such as access roads, parking lots, offices, small lodges and snowmaking equipment.   

New York could not use these acres to build hotels, condos, swimming pools, tennis courts, zip lines, off-road vehicles or other equipment or facilities of the sorts included in this bill.

To compensate for greater use of the sports complex land, 2,500 acres of forest land that’s now under a lesser form of protection would be added to Adirondack Park.

What supporters say: 

“This is the best-case scenario for both the human and ecological communities of the Adirondacks: it protects wildlands while an historic attraction continues to host world-class sporting events, drawing athletes and visitors from the region and around the world.” – Adirondack Council, environmental nonprofit

“This proposed amendment would help to right historical wrongs,” fixing the sports complex’s past mistakes and ensuring the site is managed properly going forward. — Protect the Adirondacks, environmental nonprofit

What opponents say: 

“New York’s ‘forever wild’ protections are not a suggestion. I oppose carving exceptions into the constitution for new construction on protected lands. Once we weaken these safeguards, it becomes easier to do it again.” — City Councilmember Robert Holden (Democrat, represents central and western-central parts of Queens)

“This doesn’t affect us directly, but opens the door to further encroachment on protected state lands, and the potential for government corruption.” — The Queens Village Republican Club, citing Councilmember Holden

You now don’t know a lot about this proposal but at least you won’t be completely surprised when you go to vote.