Two Flags  by Bohdan Rabarsky

For some, the thought of the 2nd Amendment conjures up gun rights and hunting privileges. For others, it’s self-defense against an intruder wanting to harm you or your family. (For those on the Left, it’s called a mistake.)  In any case, the 2nd Amendment has been interpreted in many ways depending on who is doing the interpreting.

James Madison is the father of the Bill of Rights, which is the first Ten Amendments to our Constitution.  Madison drew tremendous influence from 16th century philosopher John Locke on topics such as Separation of Powers, Limited Government, Religious Freedom and Natural Rights. Madison and Locke believed in fundamental principles of liberty, including the idea that individuals possess inalienable rights to life and liberty. These rights, of life and liberty, weren’t afforded by government but were God-given rights with which we were born.  Fundamental rights of self-defense are amongst the God-given rights you were born with and not enabled by government or the 2nd Amendment. Government can list them & protect them, but our rights are not theirs to take away.  

The Don’t Tread on Me Flag (Gadsden Flag) was created during the American Revolution and is often mentioned when the 2nd Amendment is discussed. That flag is an historical symbol of liberty, individual rights and defiance against an over reaching authority. In essence it says that we have our rights and trying to take them away will be like stepping on a rattlesnake.  It is quite often presented at 2nd Amendment rallies aimed at fighting for gun rights in defiance of anti-gun government legislation. 

To the gun grabbers on the Left, the Gadsden Flag symbolizes their greatest fear.  If they trample on our rights, under 2nd Amendment protections, we have the means to protect those rights.  The Left prefers unarmed masses, such as currently in Iran, where the common people do not have the means to defend their rights against a tyrannical government, which restricts their religious liberty rights, too. 

A lesser-known flag was the Pine Tree Flag featuring a green pine tree and slogan “An Appeal to Heaven.”  It symbolizes an appeal to divine justice when earthly authority fails; resistance against tyranny.  The phrase “An Appeal to Heaven” originates from John Locke’s philosophy, justifying revolution when no earthly authority exists to settle grievances. But resistance needs the means to resist; hence, the 2nd Amendment. 

The Pine Tree Flag still has meaning.  In recent times, it was displayed by Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who is deeply religious and has explicitly stated that his Christian faith is the most important aspect of his life. He is a Baptist whose political worldview is derived directly from the Bible.  He also believes in the 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment is a check that ensures we have a choice that was not given to us by government, but a choice that is protected from government. What government can give, government can take, hence the Founding Fathers enshrined the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights as a preexisting right that government cannot take away.  Defense of both our personal rights and our constitutionally given rights are God given rights, not rights provided by the 2nd Amendment. Never the two should be confused.  

James Madison was also a strong proponent of religious liberty, as he wrote the 1st Amendment.  The 2nd Amendment protects the 1st Amendment. 

The 2026 S.C.O.P.E.  Annual Members
Meeting is Saturday, April 18th.

The Member's Meeting will start at 10:00AM followed by lunch at noon.

Your January/February issue of the Firing Lines has the RSVP form on page 4.

You must RSVP for the meeting. The form is also attached HERE.

Please mail your RSVP by April 6th.

*Also, the Ballot for At-Large directors is inside the back cover of your January/February Firing Lines. Please vote for 4 of the listed candidates and mail your ballot (ballot only, addressed to SCOPE Ballot) postmarked no later than April 10th

March is Women’s History Month  by Bohdan Rabarsky

The history of women’s rights in America often starts with the 20th century when Congress, led by men, enacted laws to give women the same rights as men. But there is an earlier law – a Constitutional Amendment – that may be the most empowering of them all.  There is a saying that God created men (& women) but Samuel Colt made them equal.  The 2nd Amendment made that possible. 

Let’s look at some of the more important ones that were enacted into law in the 20th century:

1920-the 19th Amendment guaranteed women the right to vote.

1963-Equal Pay Act, prohibiting wage discrimination based on sex.

1972-Title IX in federal programs pertaining to women’s sports and academic opportunities.

1974-Equal Credit Opportunity Act-allowed women to apply for credit and loans without a male co-signer.

But the one that really made them equal didn’t require an act of Congress in the 20th century.  It protects women’s rights and it goes back to December 15, 1791; the ratification of the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is taking on new meaning in the 21st century. 

For years, the right to bear arms focused on a “well-regulated militia” and since women were not, historically, a part of that militia, they were an afterthought.  The Bruen case and its successors took the emphasis off militia and emphasized a historical context. 

At first glance, relying on historical precedence is a problem since, in 1791, women did not have the same rights as men.  For instance, married women had no legal identity, independent of their husbands.  But even today’s most far left, anti-2A judge would not dare rule against a woman’s equal right to “keep and bear arms.”  The Bill of Rights doesn’t differentiate by gender, so I’m pretty sure that women’s 2A rights are as safe as men’s 2A rights - which in New York State, they are far less safe than they should be.     

When a woman becomes a single Mom, sometimes they’ll turn to organizations and to social services to survive.  They also rely on the legal system to protect them from abusive partners. But an order of protection or restraining order is a piece of paper and doesn’t offer very much protection.  And of course, there is the unrelated criminal who is always willing to take advantage of anyone they see as easy prey.

Where a protection order is just a legal piece of paper, a firearm can stop an intruder or abuser dead in their tracks - no pun intended.  In many situations, women need to take the lead in protecting themselves and their family. If trouble arises, depending on where they live, getting help from a 911 call may take many minutes, when all they have are seconds. Women are the first line of defense against intruders while waiting for law enforcement to arrive, so they need to be able to protect themselves and their loved ones.  An armed woman is no longer easy prey. 

The fastest growing demographic of gun ownership in America is women, which can be viewed as sort of a "first responder" mentality.  With a gun in hand, no one could accuse women of being the weaker sex. 

When listing the laws that empowered women, the 2nd Amendment should be prominently displayed.

Monkey See Monkey Do  by Tom Reynolds

SCOPE often writes how one blue state follows another blue state when it comes to laws restricting our 2nd Amendment protected rights.  We have excellent examples of that with bills recently passed by the Virginia legislatures.

Virginia’s SB749 has been approved by the legislatures and is awaiting the expected signature of Virginia’s radically Left governor.*  Below shows the similarities between SB749 and existing law in New York State.

Notes:

Virginia’s SB749 is shown in black, starting with VA-    

NY States existing law is shown under Virginia’s in red, starting with NYS-

In a few cases, one state does not have a comparable law so it is shown only with the heading VA- or NYS- and nothing after it.

The following comes from the sections dealing with the definition of Assault Rifles.  There are similar sections dealing with other Assault Weapons such as pistols, shotguns, etc., but you will get the point!

VA- Any person who imports, sells, manufactures, purchases, or transfers an assault firearm is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

NYS A person is guilty of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree when that person knowingly possesses an assault weapon.

VA- Assault firearm means

NYS- Assault weapon means

VA- A semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 15 rounds;

NYS-

VA- A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine…and that has one or more of the following characteristics:

NYS- A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics:

VA- A folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock;

NYS- A folding or telescoping stock

VA- A thumbhole stock or pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle;

NYS- A thumbhole stock.  A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon

VA- A second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand;

NYS- A second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand

VA- A grenade launcher 

NYS- A grenade launcher

VA- A threaded barrel capable of accepting: 

NYS- A threaded barrel designed to accommodate:

VA- A muzzle brake, 

NYS- A muzzle break

VA- A muzzle compensator, 

NYS- A muzzle compensator

VA- a sound suppressor 

NYS-

VA- A flash suppressor

NYS- A flash suppressor

VA-

NYS A  bayonet mount

VA-

NYS A grenade launcher

New York State likes to be first with new restrictions on our 2nd Amendment rights, but keep your eye on other states.  If another blue state comes up with a new approach to encroaching on 2A, you can be sure New York State will follow. 

*Virgina’s new Governor Abigail Spanberger gave the Democrat’s response to Trump’s State-of-the-Union speech.  She started saying she would report “plainly and honestly.”  Her first point was to attack Trump’s tariff’s as raising the cost of living for Americans.  She omitted that she has introduced more than 50 proposals, new rules and taxes: dog walking and grooming tax; guns and ammunition tax; new income tax brackets; storage facility tax; dry cleaning tax; home repair tax; electric leaf blowers’ tax; electric landscaping equipment tax; tax on deliveries made by Amazon, Uber Eats, FedEx and UPS orders.  She was elected as posing as a moderate!   

Annual Member Meeting To the SCOPE Membership, SCOPE leadership is pleased to announce that this year’s guest speaker will be GOP/Conservative gubernatorial candidate Bruce Blakeman. The latest edition of Firing Lines includes an RSVP notice*. Please mail your RSVP by April 6th to reserve your seat.  SCOPE President Each year, SCOPE brings its membership together twice to celebrate and support the defense of the Second Amendment with fellow like-minded individuals. These gatherings include the All Members Meeting in April and the SCOPE Banquet in September. The All Members Meeting is fast approaching and will be held on Saturday, April 18, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the Moose Lodge in Montour Falls, New York. This is a great opportunity to meet Mr. Blakeman and learn more about his platform. We hope to fill the room for Mr. Blakeman, so please submit your RSVP as soon as possible. Lunch will also be provided. I hope to see you there. With All Honor and Respect, John R. Elwood

Oregon, Initiative Petition 28  by Tom Reynolds

Non-voting hunters may believe that their hunting right is safe from the radical Left’s gun control efforts.  They forget that things one could never have imagined a few years ago often become commonplace in Democrat dominated states.  If you doubt that… 

In Oregon, Initiative Petition 28, would outlaw hunting, fishing and a host of other things, including cattle ranching. Backers of this measure say they have gathered about 105,000 of the required 117,173 valid signatures, which must be turned in by July 2.

Writing at Northwest Sportsman, editor Andy Walgamott explains, “Initiative Petition 28 cloaks itself as an anti-animal cruelty campaign, but in reality it would essentially criminalize hunting, fishing and trapping in the Beaver State, put ranchers out of business, and prevent you from even raising your own chickens for the table or trapping rodents damaging your home or business.”

Like New York State, Oregon is a Democrat dominated state and many gun owners use the excuse for non-voting, “my vote won’t make a difference.”  Or in this case in Oregon, “Initiative 28 is so extreme it will never pass.”  We estimate only about one-third of the gun owners in NY State will vote and I’ll bet Oregon is similar. 

In order to add credibility to this animal cruelty’ proposal and seem less like hypocrites targeting just guns, they added fishing and cattle ranching to the list of no-no’s.  That could be their undoing.  This one bill manages to antagonize everyone not on the radical Left.   

Since the Democrats are concerned about ‘affordability,’ have they considered that this will force meat eaters to import beef from other states, thus raising prices?  As a solution, they might offset this by making meat eating illegal in Oregon!  Couldn’t happen?  I started this saying, “things one could never have imagined a few years ago often become commonplace in the Democrat dominated states.”

Whether or not you like Trump, this was a great line: “When the world needs courage, daring, vision and inspiration, it is still turning to America. And when God needs a nation to work his miracles, He knows exactly who to ask.”

The problem is, it’s the Oregon Democrats who proposed Initiative Petition 28 that are showing “courage, daring, vision and inspiration.”  I don’t believe they are doing God’s work, but the Left doesn’t care.  They don’t need God to manufacture a miracle,’ they just need gun owners to continue to stay home on election day.

______________________________________________

For those gun owners who avoid registering to vote in order to avoid Jury Duty, Claudine Ewing on WGRZ points out that, “New York draws potential jurors from five source lists, including the Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Taxation and Finance, Department of Labor, Department of Social Services and the Board of Elections.”

Basically, if you an adult living in NYS, you are going to be on most of those lists, unless you are an illegal alien.  In that case, you can probably figure out a way to vote and still avoid Jury Duty; after all, no ID is required to vote.

Planning Ahead  by Tom Reynolds

People In leadership positions are supposed to consider both the short-term and long-term effects of their decisions.  For instance, NY Democrats want to disarm the average citizen but they passed “Bail reform” that ties the hands of prosecutors and judges, flooding our streets with repeat offenders.  NY State prisons face a staffing crunch following Governor Hochul’s decision to fire 2,000 correction officers; to solve the problem, Hochul wanted to release thousands of inmates convicted of violent crimes.  And cooperating with federal officials to keep criminal aliens off-the-street is a no-no.

In light of Albany’s decisions, it seems to me that they made carrying a gun for protection into a good idea, in spite of the NY Democrats objections.

It’s not 2A, but since it will crush your pocketbook, here is another example of how well thought out are the NY legislature’s efforts.   

In 2019, New York State legislature passed and Governor Cuomo signed a law called the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCP.)   It set mandatory goals of a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and net-zero by 2050.  It also requires that 70% of the state’s electricity come from renewable resources by 2030 and be carbon free by 2040.

On February 26th, the CEO of the New York State Energy Research and Development Agency (NYSERDA) sent a memo which basically said, “OOPS.”

Under CLCP’s mandatory requirements, according to NYSERDA, by 2031, if you live in upstate NY and heat with oil or Natural Gas you can expect their heating bills to increase by $4,000, annually.*  That’s $4,000 more than you are paying now! 

Gas at the pump could increase by $2.00 a gallon to about $5.00 a gallon. 

And in case you don’t have a calendar handy, 2031 is only five years away.

Keep in mind that the government almost always underestimates costs.

But according to the NYSERDA memo, “The acceleration in clean energy deployment…as required to meet CLCP’s targets is infeasible today.”  The marketplace does not have the capacity to deliver the volume of renewables that would be called for and it is “difficult to envision how all the actors in the state could adequately ramp up to spend the $28 Billion that such a policy would generate annually quickly after program launch.”  (Emphasis added.)     

NYSERDA believes it would “…lead to high burdens to New York households…”  Ya think so!

Not to defend energy companies (mine is NYSEG) but they will take the knee-jerk blame when people see their energy bill go up.  However, in this case, they are just the middle man passing through costs mandated by Albany politicians.

New York State has enacted a plan, mandated in law, that cannot be met.  Will we see Kathy Hochul hauled off in handcuffs for violating the law?

Not so shockingly, New York politicians are blaming President Trump.

Three years after passing CLCP, because the NY Legislature has done such fine work, they rewarded themselves with a $32,000 raise from $110,000 to $142,000. 

In light of NYSERRDA’s report and being tone-deaf to NY taxpayers, State Senator James Sanders Jr. (D) is sponsoring a bill to again raise the legislators’ pay; this time to $180,000.  If you are math challenged, that is a $38,000 (26%) raise!  And to be sure our state legislators don’t get further burdened, he included an annual cost-of-living adjustment, too.  (See, they can plan ahead when it involves their own pocketbook.)

By the way, at $142,000, NY State has the highest paid legislators in the nation. 

Governor Hochul and the legislative leaders are always saying that NY State needs to lead the nation.  Unfortunately, in lacking any appreciation for the consequences of their actions, NY State legislators and Governor Hochul are challenging California for the nation’s lead. And in greed and self-interest they are leading the nation.

*Rebecca C. Lewis on X: "NEW: NYSERDA has sent a memo to the governor's office on the "likely costs of CLCPA compliance. This is after both Gov. Hochul and her budget director cited costs in the thousands for New Yorkers. The memo says upstaters could face up to $4,000 in costs and NYC residents $2,300 https://t.co/zbN5hfeGjO" / X

Good News  by Tom Reynolds

It seems that there is always bad news to spread about 2A, so here is some positive ‘stuff.’

Over fifteen years ago, a man was convicted, in Pennsylvania, of carrying a firearm without a state license. Fifteen years later, he was stopped by another state’s police officer, whom he told of a pistol in the center console of his car. The man was charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

Being a non-violent felon with no other criminal history, his defense lawyers made a motion that the state firearm law was “unconstitutional both facially and as applied to him.” However, the trial court denied his motion and the man pled no contest to the felon in possession state charges – and then appealed his conviction.

Recently, the state’s Attorney General responded to the appeal and wrote that the conviction for possessing a firearm by a felon violates the 2nd Amendment. “On studied reflection, the Attorney General has concluded that the conviction does indeed infringe (the man’s)right, as a nondangerous felon, to keep and bear arms. The state must therefore confess error and urge this Court to reverse.”

The A G writes that, since he swore an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution,  “It is thus the Attorney General’s duty to admit when he believes the State has obtained a conviction in violation of the Constitution.”  The A G wants to file a brief for this case in which he will “discuss the lack of historical evidence supporting the dispossession of all felons as distinct from the strong historical evidence supporting the dispossession of dangerous felons.”

Wow, has Tricia James seen the light?

Not a snowball’s chance…  It was Florida’s Attorney General, James Uthmeier and it was not his first venture into defending 2A.

 A Florida law bars those under 21 from carrying concealed firearms.  Uthmeier recently asked a state appeals court to uphold a teen defendant’s right to carry.

In another case, Florida’s First District Court of Appeals ruled that Florida’s open carry ban was unconstitutional.  Uthmeier backed that up when he wrote on X: “I’m issuing guidance to Florida’s prosecutors and law enforcement in light of the 1st DCA’s decision…Because no other appellate court has considered the constitutionality of Florida’s open carry ban since the SCOTUS decision in Bruen, the 1st DCA’s decision is binding on all Florida’s trial courts. Meaning that as of last week, open carry is the law of the state.”

Any chance Uthmeier could be persuaded to move to New York?

__________________________________________________________________

For over 30 years, veterans who lacked the ability to manage their financial affairs — often due to service-related disabilities — were automatically reported by the VA to the NICS’ check as “prohibited persons.” This reporting effectively barred them from legally owning or purchasing firearms.

On February 17th, the VA formally ended this unconstitutional practice; the VA will no longer report veterans to NICS solely because they need fiduciary help and the VA is working with the FBI to remove veterans’ names that were improperly submitted in the past.  In its official announcement, the VA acknowledged that this practice violated both the Gun Control Act and the constitutional rights of veterans, because the department was making life-altering disability determinations without any judicial or quasi-judicial due process — a fundamental right in American law.

Congressional allies in both chambers have already introduced bills like the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act that would permanently prohibit the VA from submitting NICS reports unless the veteran is adjudicated a danger by a court.

Gun Control in Iran  by Tom Reynolds

With recent events in Iran and President Trump calling on the Iranian people to rise up and replace their tyrannical government, you might ask about Iran’s gun control policy… and it’s what you would probably expect. 

There is not much specific about it on-line, other than it is generally described as quite ‘restrictive’.  It appears that handguns and semi-automatic firearms are illegal (except for the government, of course.)  Hunting shotguns and some single fire rifles are available with a license, primarily in rural areas. 

There are few restrictions on the use of force by the government.

Obtaining a gun license in Iran, for those few guns that are legal, involves several steps:

Applying for a gun permit at the local police station

Submitting to a background check, including criminal records and military service status

Completing a psychological evaluation to ensure mental stability

Taking a firearm safety course and passing a written and practical exam

Paying the required fees

Waiting for approval from the authorities, which may take several months

Wow, notice the resemblance to New York State under Kathy Hochul and the Democrats.

A you might expect, where there is gun control there is a flourishing black-market trade in firearms.  So much so that the Iranian legislature recently passed laws imposing more severe penalties for illegal firearms.  Internet sites offer to illegally sell basic handguns for about 200 million Rials!  Don’t let that price amaze you, 200 million Rials is roughly $240.  (Runaway inflation is one of the reasons that Iranians are protesting.)

SCOPE recently wrote about gun free ‘sensitive’ places; traditionally in America, when citizens were not allowed to carry weapons in a ‘sensitive’ place, the government was supposed to provide security.  The assumption by gun control advocates is that the state remains a reliable guardian of public safety and will never devolve into an oppressor.  20,000 to 30,000 dead Iranian protesters would disagree with that assumption. 

When regimes face existential threats to their power and the state has a monopoly on violence, the state will resort to using their monopoly on violence against its own citizens.  And in Iran, the state is currently feeling threatened by its citizens and it holds an absolute monopoly on armed violence.

The complete removal of an armed citizenry leaves people at the mercy of those who hold all the guns. Iran's blood-soaked streets stand as a grim reminder of that reality.

Equal Protection  by Bohdan Rabarsky

Politicians have long been the target of criminals wishing to do them harm.  The FEC (Federal Election Commission) has ruled that federal members could use campaign funds for personal security services, as long as they have had credible threats of security lodged against them. Many Democrat lawmakers have taken advantage of this service, since then.  For example, some of the heaviest users in the Senate were:

Raphael Warnock $605,900;

Jon Ossoff $316,700; 
Mark Kelly $302,600.
Eric Swalwell $86,500;
Alexandria Ocasio Cortez $83,200;
Jasmine Crocket $80,000;
Ilhan Omar $31,200.

In the lower house they were:

Cori Bush $233,700;

While nobody regrets providing security to keep our representatives and their family members safe, these same Democratic representatives have consistently voted to take away our God given right of self-defense.

Every Congressional Democrat who used campaign funds (other people’s money) for their personal security voted for the Assault Weapons Ban of 2025 (HR3115 and SB1531.)  How hypocritical of them to want armed guards to protect themselves and their family members, but they don’t believe you should be allowed to be able to protect yourself and your family.

In addition, both New York State Senators, Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand voted in favor of that Assault Weapons Ban. Of the 19 Democratic New York Congressional Representatives, 13 of them voted in favor of the Assault Weapons Ban, including my own Central New York 22nd District Congressman John Mannion.   

Those same people also voted against HR 38, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025. Not only did they vote against you possessing those scary black weapons of war, but they voted against you being able to take your legal firearm across state lines to protect yourself and your family.  Constitutional Carry should be available in every state, the same way your driver’s license is recognized from state to state. Having a driver’s license is a privilege, not a right, but the right to keep and bear arms is a Constitutional Right, that shouldn’t be infringed.

The average citizen in America can’t afford private security nor does the average citizen have discretionary funds to install an expensive security system in their home. About all many homeowners have today is a Ring camera on their front door.  Why can’t citizens have protection the same as our government officials do?  Citizens should be able to rely on the Constitution, which allows them the right to bear arms.