SCOPE NY

Briefings  from SCOPE President, Tom Reynolds

  • 04/08/2022 11:57 AM | Anonymous

    One Man One Vote - Again

    Last April 29th, SCOPE wrote about “One Man One Vote.  (It is available on SCOPE’s website under Briefings, Page 11).  It ended saying, “…one man one vote was another constitutional aberration of the Warren Court and needs to be overturned.  That would overcome the tyranny of the majority that is now the rule of law in NY State and give gun owners and Upstate NY a voice in their government that is currently denied to them”.

    In his recent letter to Second Amendment for EVER members (SAFE), Ed Pettitt reiterated that issue and it is reproduced, below, with his permission.  As he points out, this is a long-overlooked issue.  It doesn’t get mentioned during Senate confirmations of judges, but needs to be resurrected.  We need to keep reminding ourselves and our legislators about this issue if we are ever to get this changed and restore a legislative voice to rural areas.      

    A Direct Hit on the Republican Form of Government

    by Ed Pettitt

    If you are like me, you are probably frustrated by a seemingly continuous onslaught of ridiculous legislation passed by NYS that targets gun owners, small businesses, farmers and actually anything that seems to be part of life in rural areas. They all seem to be coming from legislators in the NYC area.

    The floodgates opened once the NY Senate majority switched and there was no longer a means to balance the Assembly.  There is more to this than Republican Party vs. Democrat Party.  This is really about a change in the structure of our Republic that occurred under our noses and has been completely overlooked, in my opinion. And it is fundamentally about the rights of rural communities to have equitable representation in the making of State Law.


    In 1964, US Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren orchestrated a direct hit on the Republican form of government guaranteed to every state by Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution.  The decision in Reynolds vs. Sims, where Warren, basically, directed every state to district their state Senates by population instead of by county.
    The first step of solving any problem is to recognize and expose its cause. That is the purpose of my letter to you here.  Look it up, ask your representatives about it, make your friends aware of it.  In the end, the solution can only come from restoring electoral equity to our counties.

    As you know, our founders built in checks and balances to the structure of our Republic and part of that was having bicameral legislatures with a Senate representing sub-governments while the House or Assembly represented "The People."  Warren disregarded that balance in order to subvert the ability of rural areas to balance the representation of the urban areas.  After shifting over to population-based districts, the state Senates have become controlled by urban areas.  In New York State, 38 of the 63 senators are from NYC and 48 counties are controlled by 14 of the more urban counties.  There really is no balance in the legislature where both houses are dominated by NYC.

  • 04/06/2022 10:00 AM | Anonymous
    • Survey: Pandemic First-Time Buyers Younger and More Diverse, Oppose Gun Control  Jake Fogleman, March 28, 2022; Adapted and edited by Lee Edgcomb

      People who purchased a gun for the first time during the pandemic may not look like previous gun owners, but they overwhelmingly share the same opinions on gun laws. Those were the findings of a new survey released Thursday from National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago (NORC):

    • 86 percent of first-time buyers identified in the survey were under 45, compared to 41 percent for pre-pandemic owners.
    • 5 percent of all adults in America purchased a gun for the first time during the two-year period between March 2020 and March 2022.
    • 46 percent of American households now report having a gun in the home.

    Increasing, gun sales during the pandemic were driven in nearly equal parts by people purchasing a gun for the first time and existing gun owners purchasing additional firearms,” John Roman, NORC Senior Fellow, said in a press release. “New gun owners during the pandemic were much more likely to be younger and People of Color compared to pre-pandemic gun owners in America.” The data provides more support for the observation that the landscape of American gun ownership has shifted massively in just the last two years.

    Attitudes toward gun control among new owners largely mirror those of existing gun owners. Equal shares of first-time and existing gun owners (68 percent) support allowing people to carry concealed firearms into more places. Likewise, 41 percent of both first-time and existing gun owners said they supported allowing them to do so without a permit. “First-time gun buyers’ attitudes toward gun control look remarkably similar to those of the pre-pandemic U.S. gun owner,” Roman said. “Whether they bought a gun because of existing beliefs about gun control—or owning a gun changed their policy views—is unknown, but it is notable that the policy positions of new gun owners are so different from non-gun owners.”

    The survey was conducted March 3–7, 2022 among 1,106 adults aged 18 and up. It has a margin of error of +/- 3.85 percent.

    SCOPE note from NORC’s web page:

    NORC at the University of Chicago conducts research and analysis that decision-makers trust. As a nonpartisan research organization and a pioneer in measuring and understanding the world, we have studied almost every aspect of the human experience and every major news event for more than eight decades. Today, we partner with government, corporate, and nonprofit clients around the world to provide the objectivity and expertise necessary to inform the critical decisions facing society.

  • 04/04/2022 4:17 PM | Anonymous

    Jackson (Not Andy) and the 2nd Amendment or Guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt  by Tom Reynolds

    Last week, we asked if we can believe the words of Joe Biden and his Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson.  It’s not just what they say, but what they don’t say, that matters.

    In a trial, it’s good for the prosecution if there is a great deal of provable evidence against the accused.  But sometimes there is enough circumstantial evidence to find the person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  Biden’s nomination for Supreme Court Justice, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, should be familiar with that concept.  Even though she never ruled on a major gun rights case during her nine years on the U.S. Court of Appeals, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence to find her guilty of being anti-2nd Amendment. 

    And one thing the anti-2A crowd has in common is activism in their war on guns, which makes Ketanji Brown Jackson a dangerous nominee for the Supreme Court.

    She was a Barack Obama nominee to the Court of Appeals, which should tell you something right there.  Obama was certainly a believer in radical, anti-constitutional activism and his close advisor, Susan Rice, followed in that category. As part of being nominated by Biden, Jackson surely would have been interviewed by Biden’s advisor Susan Rice.  When Rice is not busy running the Biden administration, she also oversees a “gun violence” team.  It is beyond question that any Supreme Court nominee who did not voice strong support for Biden’s anti-gun agenda during the nominee screening process would immediately have been rejected. To believe otherwise makes no sense.

    During her Senate confirmation hearings, she was asked, “Do you believe the individual right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right?”  She responded: “Senator, the Supreme Court has established that the individual right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right.” She did not say it’s part of our God-given right to self-defense and that the 2nd Amendment only protects that right. It’s likely that she believes it is a right established by the Supreme Court and what the Supreme Court giveth the Supreme Court can taketh away.

    As to other Second Amendment issues, Judge Jackson sidestepped questions during her confirmation hearings. It was clear she had spent considerable time learning how to not give away her intentions.

    Without question, Biden is one of the most – if not the most - anti-gun President to ever occupy the White House. For instance, he nominated a fiercely anti-2A David Chipman to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.  (He was so radical his nomination was withdrawn).  And his nomination of leftist extremists is not limited to anti-2A.  The nominations of communism admirer Saule Omarova (Comptroller of the Currency), Neers Tanden (Office of Management and Budget) and Sarah Bloom Raskin (Federal Reserve Board of Governors) had to be withdrawn.  David Weil (Department of Labor) was recently defeated in a Senate vote.  Is there any reason to believe that Judge Jackson is not in the mold of previous Biden / Rice nominees, since Biden / Rice do not seem to be easing off in their pursuit of their radical leftist agenda. 

    Some of the extremist anti-2A policies that Biden has embraced are: a ban on the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons” and standard-capacity magazines; placing all existing “assault weapons” under the regulatory authority of the National Firearms Act; instituting a mandatory “buy-back” – gun confiscation – of “assault weapons” and standard-capacity magazines; banning private firearm sales.  Gun rights will disappear if Biden can fill the Supreme Court with activist judges who will legislate from the bench, (Jackson will become 3 of 9).

    It’s a given that a President will nominate a Supreme Court justice who supports the president’s position on issues.  But the Biden Administration, by its words and deeds, has declared itself so radical and so partisan and so out-of-touch with America that every one of its nominees must be presumed to also be radical. 

    At a time when the country was evenly divided and it was only the ability of the Vice President to break ties in the Senate, Biden ignored that even-divide and tried to implement his radical agenda.  Now, according to all polls, the country has moved strongly against Biden’s radical agenda, but that does not stop him from still pursuing it.  Common sense (a term the left loves to apply to anti-2A laws) tells us that Biden has nominated a radical leftist to the Supreme Court.  Senators need to keep this in mind when they vote.

    Senators who support Judge Jackson’s nomination must answer to the voters when their elections draw near.  They cannot claim ignorance of any infringement of our 2A gun rights, since the circumstantial evidence is clear.

  • 03/31/2022 4:34 PM | Anonymous

    Do Politicians Ever Mean What They Say?  by Tom Reynolds

    Referring to Vladimir Putin, Joe Biden said, “…this man cannot remain in power.”  The White House staff immediately walked back Biden’s words as not meaning what they meant. The issue is not if Biden’s words were appropriate but that they were almost immediately disavowed by those speaking on behalf of Biden.

    When questioned about his unsuccessful sanctions to deter Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Biden said, “I did not say that…the sanctions would deter him.”  Fox news and talk radio have played numerous quotes from Biden and his staff saying that sanctions would deter Putin. (Apparently, CNN and MSNBC were not able to find those same quotes.)

    Biden said that the United States and NATO would respond "in kind" if Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine.  To those who regularly use the English language, that meant that the USA would respond with chemical weapons if Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine.  Once again, the English-speaking world had incorrectly interpreted Biden’s remarks, according to the clean-up crew at the White House. 

    Of course, Biden has a lifetime of such verbal misadventures.  In 2008, he said of Barack Obama, “I mean, you’ve got the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean.”

    Which brings us to Biden’s nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson (KBJ) to be the first black woman on the Supreme Court. 

    In 2005, Janice Rogers Brown, a black woman, was on George Bush’s short list to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court. She (not KBJ) would have been the first black woman to ever serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. But – guess who – Joe Biden appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to warn that if Bush nominated Brown, “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered.”   

    Today, Biden calls the filibuster a relic of the Jim Crow era.” Biden now wants to get rid of the filibuster and also claim credit for putting the first black woman on the Supreme Court. Again, we have the issue of Biden’s actual words being dishonest.

    It would be nice if Supreme Court nominees were always the best person available but both major parties want Supreme Court justices who reflect their party’s philosophy; nothing new about that.  But be honest about it and don’t nominate or reject someone based on race or sex.  It would be nice if judicial decisions were decided outside of personal feelings but few people can put them completely aside and most Supreme Court nominees come from a political background. 

    Then, there is the issue of racism.  Biden and the Left often speak of having a government which “looks like America”.  America is 12% black.  The Supreme Court is already 11% black.  It aint gonna get any closer than that!  Has Biden considered that another black Supreme Court justice puts that court out-of-step with looking like America?   

    Biden gets a two-fer by limiting his selection to a black woman, which was both racist and sexist.  Ponder this: if he nominated a transexual woman, would the Left count a transitioned “woman” as a woman?  

    Is KBJ the best black woman available or the most likely to be confirmed black woman or the black woman most likely to view the law from a far-left radical perspective?  The latter possibility is particularly worrisome, for several reasons.

    There is the matter of those supporting her.  Radical liberals support her and some of them actually recommended her. That says something that gun owners do not want to hear since those same radical liberals are inti-2nd Amendment.

    And in a case of guilt by association, she’s distantly related by marriage to former House Speaker Paul Ryan.  When KBJ was earlier nominated to the federal bench by President Obama in 2012, Ryan introduced her.  Conservatives might sooner forgive her radical left relationships faster that one with RINO Paul Ryan.

    And let’s not forget the issue of KBJ’s testimony.  Can we believe her, any more than we can believe Joe Biden?

    During an earlier Senate confirmation hearing, KBJ said she did not have a political philosophy.  Now she says, "I'm very acutely aware of the limits on my power" and she has expanded on several issues in a way which made her sound like former Justice Antonin Scalia.  Would Biden have nominated a Scalia look alike?  About as likely as Nancy Pelosi voting for Donald Trump. 

    During her Senate hearing, KBJ was asked, “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman”?  “No”, Jackson replied, “Not in this context…I’m not a biologist.”  This is troubling from two standpoints: it shows too much concern for leftist political correctness that will probably influence her decisions; the woman who is being touted as the first black woman on the Supreme Court says she doesn’t know how to define a woman, which sounds remarkably like something Joe Biden would say.

    KBJ has a history of defending criminals and even Guantanamo Bay detainees.  In addition, she served on a sentencing commission.  These raise the question, is she soft-on-crime and will she put criminals’ rights ahead of law-abiding citizens’ rights?  A sentencing commission debate gives us some answers.  Recidivism amongst released criminals is a problem and, in 2011, KBJ argued that longer sentences do not affect the rate of recidivism.  The U.S. Attorney argued that while longer sentences may not affect the rate of recidivism, when criminals are in prison, “…they are not out committing new crimes”.  KBJ was unmoved by such logic.  With soft-on-crime issues being a major factor in increased crime rates, this should worry us.  (And give us another reason to buy a new gun.)

     

    Hanging in the balance is a lifetime appointment to a court where the Left expects activism of radical left appointees.  Should we believe anything KBJ and Joe Biden say in order to get her confirmed?

  • 03/28/2022 12:52 PM | Anonymous

    Big Brother is Watching and Regulating  by Tom Reynolds

    The Russian government, otherwise known as Vladimir Putin, has been shutting down opposition viewpoints.  TV stations have been shuttered and social media shut down.  Criticizing the government is against the law and it can get you fifteen years in prison.  (Or 24 hours watching videos of Kamala Harris’ and Joe Biden’s speeches, whichever is considered the harsher punishment.)

    It could never happen here, could it?  (Censorship…not watching Biden and Harris speak.)

    It did and still does.

    John Adams was a great believer in the rights that were later enshrined in the Bill of Rights.  But when he was president, the Sedition Acts were passed, which made it illegal to criticize the government.  Adams’ defenders try to minimize his participation, but his Attorney General put people in prison because of it.  And if you don’t believe it was political, the Act expired on the last day of Adams’ presidency.  (Proving that given power, even the well intentioned can be corrupted.)

    When Woodrow Wilson was president, the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918 sent people to prison for criticizing the government.  In addition, newspapers were denied mailing privileges, the major source of wide spread circulation in that era.  Most worrisome is that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of these acts!

    Unlike Adams, Wilson was never well intentioned.  His stance should not come as a surprise, since he was not a fan of the US Constitution.  He did not care for those pesky ideas about separation of powers, which interfered with his progressive ideals of the USA becoming an administrative state run by experts and not run by “We the People”.  (Hmm….where have we seen that lately?) 

    Franklin Roosevelt considered Huey Long one of the two most dangerous men in America.  (The other most dangerous person was General Douglas MacArthur.)   Those two were possible opponents in a future presidential election.  Roosevelt also went after a former Treasury Secretary, Andrew Mellon, and had the IRS investigating both Long and Mellon.  Long was assassinated before anything could come of it and Mellon was tried and acquitted on tax fraud charges.  While neither Mellon nor Long qualified for sainthood, their main fault, in Roosevelt’s eyes, was the sin of opposing him and his policies and possibly denying him another presidential term.

    Currently, Joe Biden, through his Press Secretary Jan Psaki, revealed that the US government was actively coordinating with Facebook to flag the posts of United States citizens for being “problematic” and containing COVID-19 “misinformation.”  Psaki said, “In terms of actions that we have taken or we’re working to take…we’ve increased disinformation research and tracking”.   “Problematic”, “disinformation” and “misinformation” can best be described as anything that disagrees with the Biden administration.  

    Judicial Watch revealed that State of California pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google/YouTube) to censor posts about the 2020 election. For instance, a California state agency successfully pressured YouTube to censor a Judicial Watch video concerning “vote by mail” and also a Judicial Watch lawsuit settlement about California voter rolls clean up.

    Government is the most powerful body in the nation – and in the case of the U.S.A., in the world.  Only the government can legally imprison you or take your life, in accordance with laws the government makes and enforces.    Anyone subject to direct government inspection in order to operate a business or organization knows the power of “Big Brother”; inspectors and regulators can shut you down.  No one wants an IRS audit, even if you have done nothing wrong.  Conform to the government’s party line or die.

    Standing in the way of big government is the US Constitution. Big government and those who promote big government are not happy with that limitation, so they look for ways to skirt around the Constitution.  Adams and Wilson used laws to shut down opposition but Biden has figured out that the Constitution only limits the government and private parties are generally free to do things that the government cannot.  Private parties simply need a nudge from big government in order to do things the government cannot legally do.

    “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”, does not apply to private property.  Feel free to declare your property a gun free zone – or not.  But what if the local zoning board makes it apparent that, if you want a building permit, your property must be a gun free zone?

    Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” does not apply to TV and radio; TV and radio can “abridge” - or not “abridge” - all they want.  But the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates and licenses TV and radio stations and has discretion in issuing or denying licenses.  An FCC dominated by Biden appointed commissioners could find reasons to deny licenses to those that do not conform to Biden’s ideology.          

    Trust the science.  But science is based on the free exchange of ideas and the freedom to challenge any ideas.  As pointed out earlier, the Biden administration is strong-arming private social media organizations to label those who disagree with “government approved science” as disinformation and then to censor it.  (If science is based on the free exchange of ideas and that free exchange is prohibited, is what remains science?)

    Our founders understood the dangers of an all-powerful central government but also understood the need for that same central government to exist.  They put direct limits on government, such as the Bill of Rights, and structural limits, such as the separation of powers.  The Left will use laws as a way to increase and stabilize their power, whenever they can.  Which is why we need a truly independent Judicial System that rules in accordance with the Constitution, as written.

    Through another branch of government, the Left has found a way to threaten our rights protected by the Constitution.  Donald Trump named it the “Swamp”, when he should have called it the “Sewer”.  It consists of the administrative experts that Woodrow Wilson so loved.  It’s career bureaucrats who ignore executives that do not agree with the Sewer’s beliefs and it rules like the kings of old, by divine right rather than the Constitution.  Using too many laws giving them too much power, the Sewer can destroy those they target.  Things like the FCC and the Department of Education can force ideas and values on private citizens, using the powers to regulate and budget. 

    Ronald Reagan said the most dangerous words were “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.  More government is not the answer and it forms a real threat to our rights.  If “We the People” do not take back control of our government in November, we may well be forfeiting our rights.  The Left never stops undermining the Constitution, either directly or indirectly.

  • 03/22/2022 11:44 AM | Anonymous

    Another Shooting  by Tom Reynolds

    The leftist media is quick to publicize any shooting that furthers their goal of doing away with the 2nd Amendment.

    Not every shooting.  Only those that serve their purposes.  They ignore defensive uses of a gun, of which the minimum estimate is that defensive use of a gun happens 500,000 times a year.  (That minimum estimate is by the Center for Disease Control, not exactly a rabid fan of 2A.)  We won’t expand on those incidents since they are easy to look up – although, not in the NY Times.

    On March 14th, a U S Consulate came under fire.  Twenty-two military installations and sixteen road blockades were also attacked. Spike strips were put across the road to interrupt traffic and several semi-trucks were set on fire.  700 military personnel and 4 helicopters were required to secure the area.  No, not in the Ukraine or some other hot spot overseas.  And not in Spokane Washington where BLM and ANTIFA have rioted.  But in Mexico, only a few blocks from the US Mexican border.  It happened in Nuevo Laredo which is just across the Rio Grande from Laredo Texas. Reuters News Agency has characterized this area as “one of the most violent regions of the country”.  This occurred because a Mexican drug lord, “El Huevo”, was arrested and extradited to the USA.

    A U S Consulate within walking distance of the U S Mexican border was caught in heavy fighting.  If this happened overseas, we could expect an immediate call to send in the U S military to protect our interests and, perhaps, evacuate personnel from such a dangerous area.  But since it happened at our southern border – hey, no big deal.  Admitting that our open southern border abuts such a violent area that military personnel had to be used to put down the violence would not reflect well on Joe Biden’s immigration policies.

    Remember, in 2004, when the mutilated and charred bodies of four American civilian contractors were dragged through the streets of Falluja?   Closer to home, last November, the tortured bodies of nine men were found hanging from a bridge in the Mexican state of Zacatecas. 

    Mexico is aflame with wars between drug cartels and on civilians.  And it doesn’t stop at the border.  These same violent cartels are the wholesalers of drugs into the USA.  For over half a decade, the DEA has been warning that Mexican drug cartels transport drugs into the country where they wholesale it to local distributors, such as the gangs that sell it on the street.  (We should point out that the Biden administration is focused-like-a-laser on the opioid epidemic by going after “Big Pharma” and is not interested in closing the border that the Mexican drug cartels must cross.) 

    What does this have to do with gun rights and the 2nd Amendment?

    Gun grabbers love to use statistics about children being killed by guns but, for some reason, usually neglect to point out that most of these murders are youth gang related.  What finances these murderous gangs?  Mexican drugs.

    Gun grabbers also like to equate the record setting purchases of guns to the Covid epidemic while ignoring the real reason: riots in the USA that go unpunished and violence on our border.  They also like to blame the increase in crime on the increase in gun sales.  While the left may blame increased sales on Covid and increased crimes on more guns, those of us who – legally - bought the guns know that the soft-on-crime policies of mayors, governors and the president have led to our increased need to arm ourselves for protection. 

    The Left wants the American people to focus on only one side of any issue.  For instance, it points out the number of gun related crimes but ignores the number of instances when the gun stopped a crime or protected innocent lives.  In immigration, the Left focuses on those desperate illegal immigrants and ignores that an open border facilitates drug trafficking and border crossing by criminals. The Left spews statistics on the number of gun related crimes but ignores that most gun related crimes are committed with illegal guns.

    Some people who defend the 2nd Amendment do not want to get involved in other issues: it’s politics.  Well, they are right that it is politics but it’s all related.  Immigration, racial politics in schools, federal budget deficits, anti-2A proposals, etc.  They’re all related and we ignore any of them at our own peril.

    It is amazing that we are seeing at our southern border something close to a failed nation, which is engulfed in violence.  Instead of increasing border security, the leadership in Washington is doing nothing to protect American citizens.  It’s almost as if the Left has a plan…

  • 03/21/2022 7:40 AM | Anonymous

    Letter From a SCOPE Member

    SCOPE members often write to us with their thoughts on various issues.  Excerpts from one recent E mail is well worth wider redistribution.

    The Biden administration, media and Democrat party continue the takedown of America by carpet bombing our border, federal budget, health and education systems, judicial system, policing, energy independence, our military, the internal combustion engine and the social norms of gender identity, child rearing, family and marriage. There is little doubt that, at the (eventual) back end of this overturn of constitutional rights and societal norms, is the abolishment of the Second Amendment.

    The road to the gutting of the Second Amendment goes through the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment. Look for more red flag laws, a tie-in from guns to “national health,” mandatory firearm insurance, limits on ammunition by law and or costs and a new focus on “automatic” or “assault rifles,” because criminals are now using fully automatic weapons in the commission of crime.  (See the crime rise and automatic weapons being used in Houston.)  Many of these criminals are cartel members who have brought their automatic weapons with them as they relocate from Mexico to Houston and other Texas cities. 

    You know this. I know this. What is beyond knowing, exactly, is why not one Republican politician - state or national - dares to put all of this traitorous behavior in strong, clear speech on a meeting room floor. To remain silent (whether in fear or ignorance or complicity) at times such as these is well beyond the bounds of the generally accepted “don’t get upset or take it seriously, it’s only politics.” There is no excuse, there are no acceptable reasons for the political silence we now have as the nation collapses under an internal betrayal.

    During the American Revolution a mere thirteen percent of colonists actively supported the revolution by putting life or fortune on the line.  The other eighty seven percent rode the fence or betrayed their fellow colonists by supporting the crown. Unfortunately, today, we don’t have that mere thirteen percent of elected representatives fearlessly speaking the truth in defense of America.  

    And that is sad because it would change everything.

    As the writer pointed out, we can’t rely on most politicians to take on issues unless we, the voters who keep them in office, are willing to spend the time prodding them into action.  This November’s election is less than 8 months away and the future of America is at stake.  Primaries that will determine who runs for office are coming in June.  Win or lose the Left will not stop trying to overturn the 2nd Amendment.  Work for and elect candidates who will defend the Constitution.

  • 03/17/2022 5:34 PM | Anonymous

    Westchester County Seeks Permission to Set Pistol License Fees  by Robert Romanowski 

    The Westchester County Board of Legislators has requested “home rule” legislation from Albany that would allow the County of Westchester to raise Pistol License fees to any amount.

    Bill A-07939 introduced in the Assembly by Steven Otis (D-Port Chester) and S06659 in the NYS Senate by Shelly B. Mayer (D- Port Chester) would allow Westchester to have home rule.  That is, to set its own licensing fees.  Westchester County currently uses the New York State fee schedule.  All of this is being done without any comment from the public, pistol licensees or gun owners.

    This legislation would allow the county to set fees for new applications, amendments and re-certifications.  It has been reported that the current $10.00 fee could rise to as much as $200.00 per year, raising the cost of a 5-year re-certification to $1000.00. This could make pistol licenses unaffordable to a whole segment of the community such as retirees, people on a fixed income and lower income wage earners.

    This legislation has nothing to do with any kind of budget shortfall in Westchester County and everything to do with making a Constitutional right unaffordable to as many Westchester County residents as possible and to discourage others from applying for permits.

    Beware of actions like this in our home county!

    All SCOPE members are urged to contact their State Senator and Assembly member and tell them to please oppose this legislation.  By killing these bills in Albany, Westchester County cannot act on this matter.

    If you are a Westchester County resident, please call 914-995-2800 to tell your County Legislator that you oppose this legislation.

  • 03/16/2022 11:04 AM | Anonymous

    Pistol Permit Recertification Email

    Several SCOPE members are getting emails about their pistol permit recertification and are, legitimately, concerned about a scam. SCOPE tried to get confirmation from the state police.

    A visit to the state police web site is not helpful in confirming if these Emails are valid.

    The state police web site “contact information” contains a phone number.  (You will have a better chance reaching the IRS on April 15th).  We tried.  After a very long message you get to press 1 and end up in oblivion.

    The web site also has an Email address - but it goes to the governor.  Good luck getting a timely response that does not refer you to the state police web site.

    Finally, calling the local troop headquarters got a human being who tried to help.  She investigated and could only say, “We believe Emails are being sent out”.  She could not confirm yes or no and she cautioned not to click on any links in the Email.

    Our best advice is to treat the Email as a reminder, only.  Do not click on the links.  Below is the information that SCOPE previously sent out.  It contains a legitimate link to start the recertification process. 

    The deadline for pistol permit renewal in New York is five years after your exact date of certification.

    Examples: 1/1/2017 is due 1/1/2022; 1/31/2017 is due 1/31/2022; 1/1/2018 is due 1/1/2023

    You can check on the date you certified on this site:  NYS Pistol Permit Recertification

    You will need your driver's license number.

    It's faster submitting the information on-line, but you can still submit a paper application

    Information is available at the NY website.   NYS Pistol Permit Recertification

    You will need all of the information on the pistols you will be submitting AND your New York Driver's license

    SCOPE strongly suggests that, before sending the information in,

    you TRIPLE CHECK the information, as just one mistake can cause a problem.

    After submitting, you can go back to the "HOME PAGE" and check for confirmation that your application has been accepted and that you're "good".

    Do yourself a big favor and print out the information so you can have it when you have to renew again.

  • 03/11/2022 10:35 PM | Anonymous

    You Gotta Be Kidding!  by Tom Reynolds

    When did Albany and Washington get transported to some alternate universe?

    Over the past two years, the U.S. has seen a rise in gun ownership and also a rise in crime.  The Left claims that gun ownership causes the rise in crime.  Since we are the ones buying the guns, we know that more crime creates more gun ownership; we buy guns to protect ourselves, not to commit crimes.

     The left ignores riots, looting, arson and murder as punishable crimes.  They also ignore other causes such as soft-on-crime D.A.’s and bail reform.  The latter, is a revolving door through the criminal justice system for criminals, as the Left puts criminal rights before victim rights.  There are unending reports of freed criminals committing even more crimes once they walk through the revolving door…again and again.

    Why stop with just bail reform to free criminals?  In a particularly tone deaf, in-your-face act, New York State is closing prisons.  With crime rising, wouldn’t it be logical to predict that more people will be jailed? Not so to Governor Hochul. In the future, watch for the excuse that we can’t jail criminals because prison overcrowding is inhumane.

    On another issue, most economists would agree that when any government prints money, inflation pressures mount.  The only real point of contention is whether or not the government has to do their printing over a short period in order to trigger inflation.  

    You may have noticed that we are in an inflationary spiral that even Joe Biden no longer calls “transitory”.  You may also have noticed that the government is spending money like a drunken sailor (with apologies to drunken sailors).  All fueling more and more inflation.

    In the midst of all this, Congress is about to pass another $1.5 trillion bill. It’s 2,741 pages long!  Anyone read all of it?  It’s reported there is $100 billion for Green New Deal initiatives.  Washington doesn’t see a down side to the endless printing of money or trillion-dollar deficits.  It’s as if both parties in Washington have just given up on fiscal self-control and are saying, “Let’s party” as the Titanic nears the iceberg.  For some, that iceberg is going to hit this November - if we can still afford the gas to drive to the polls. 

    Joe Biden believes the world’s biggest threat is Global Climate Change, so he is trying to shut down American oil production and oil pipelines.  But he is also asking foreign countries to pump more oil in the current crisis over oil and gas prices.

    The U.S.A. is definitely part of the “globe”.  But the last time I looked at a world map, so were Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Iran and Canada.  Apparently, Biden has different world maps than the rest of us.

    Since “Global whatever” is our biggest threat, China is somewhere down the list.  We can do sanctions against Russia because of the Ukrainian invasion and there’s not much Putin can do about it in economic retaliation against the USA. 

    But what about China if it invades Taiwan? Chinese interests bought Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer and processor in the world.  Another Chinese company bought AMC Entertainment, one of the largest movie theatre chains in the USA.  A Chinese company, Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc. is building a $100 million plant in Thomasville, Alabama.  Guizhou Gouchuang Energy Holdings Group spent 616 million dollars to acquire Triple H Coal Co. in Jacksboro, Tennessee. (Yeah, China is mining coal in the USA.  How’s that helping global whatever?)  After being bailed out by U.S. taxpayers, GM is involved in 11 joint ventures with Chinese companies.  A lack of Chinese made computer chips is affecting car production in the USA.

    Biden and our NATO allies ignored the implications of becoming dependent upon Russian oil and Natural Gas and that certainly had to embolden Putin’s war plans for the Ukraine.  Anyone in Washington concerned about Chinese sanctions against the USA if we take action against China in a Taiwan crisis?  Nah!  Let’s spend some more money on the Green New Deal and party!   

    After World War 2, Britain raised its income tax levels so high that many millionaires left Britain, often giving up their British citizenship.  ”Ozzy” Osbourne just announced that, because of high taxes, he is leaving California and moving back to England.

    The lack of Bipartisanship is often decried.  For example, Democrats want “Drop Boxes” for voting and Republicans believe that will lead to voter fraud.  How about a bipartisan compromise?  Andrew Wilkow suggests putting the Drop Boxes in gas stations.

A 2nd Amendment Defense Organization, defending the rights of New York State gun owners to keep and bear arms!

PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052

SCOPE is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization.

{ Site Design & Development By Motorhead Digital }

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software