Log in

from our SCOPE membership

  • 11/05/2021 4:43 PM | Anonymous

    NYSRPA versus Bruen  by Tom Reynolds

    On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard the 2nd Amendment case called NYS Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.  (Bruen is the Superintendent of the NY State Police.)  This was the first major SCOTUS case since the Heller & McDonald cases, a decade ago.

    Always looking for a way to neuter 2A, the left is trying to infringe on the right to carry “outside the home”.  Heller & McDonald didn’t specifically include “outside the home”; bearing arms outside the home would only be done by a government authority, if left up to the New York government.    

    If you surf the web for this case and look at the usual leftist web sites, which are by nature anti-2A, most of them are conceding that they will lose this case.  Some were conceding even before the case was heard.  That’s encouraging but seems premature since SCOTUS has been known to surprise and Chief Justice Roberts, in particular, is a wild card.  The left has been known to find additional votes in the middle of the night.

    In NYSRPA v. Bruen, there is a strong constitutional argument against NY State law and SCOTUS now consists of five justices with strong 2A credentials - and possibly six if Roberts goes along. It’s expected that the three liberal justices will blindly vote against NYSRPA no matter what facts are put forth.

    NY is a “show cause” state and many NY counties – and especially NY City – force the citizen to prove they have a need-to-carry a handgun and apply a very high bar to the ordinary citizen demonstrating that they having that need.  Most states reverse that and in those it is the state that has to “show cause” why the citizen does not have a need-to-carry; and there is a low bar to establishing need. 

    In presenting their case, New York State’s attorneys showed their true liberal base as they almost completely ignored the question of the constitutionality of the law and just wanted to deal with the social consequences the law – as they saw the consequences, of course.  They spoke of social issues, which would seem to concede that NY law was unconstitutional.  That approach ignores that we are a nation of laws and if a law’s social consequences are deemed to be negative by enough citizens, there are legal ways to replace it.  Judges do not have the right to legislate, under the Constitution, but that doesn’t stop liberal judges.  The left knows that they can’t replace the 2nd Amendment so they frequently make a desperate appeal to the social aspects. 

    The NY State attorneys tried to make the point that gun control has a long history in the United States, going back to the 1800’s.  Black Public Defenders had previously obliterated this argument in their amicus brief but that doesn’t stop the left from out-of-context characterizations.  Many of the laws in the 1800’s were used to prevent freed blacks from “keeping and bearing arms” in the South.  In essence, NY State was using racist Jim Crow laws to justify current gun control. 

    The NY State attorneys seemed to put their hopes on SCOTUS not issuing a decision but sending it back to lower courts for further hearing.  That’s a delaying tactic to drag out the case and hope for a change in the makeup of SCOTUS, if the case comes back to SCOTUS.  Remember, the left also wants to pack SCOTUS with enough new liberal justices to create an anti-2A majority, so a delay keeps their hopes alive for a decision that ignores the Constitution  

    The left has another hope in that SCOTUS will issue a very narrow ruling.  This might save anti-2A laws in other states or allow some high level of gun control to remain in force.  For instance, a narrow ruling might allow wide government discretion in designating places as “sensitive places” or “gun free zones”.  Remember what happened with wide government discretion over designating “essential” businesses that stayed open during the China Virus lockdowns. 

    The positions presented by NYS before SCOTUS reflect similar efforts by the left on other issues.  The left hopes that people (and judges) will not use logic.  For instance, NY State’s attorneys pointed out that seven states have similar laws to New York, hoping that justices can’t do basic math or are not aware that the USA consists of 50 states and, therefore, 42 states do not have these unconstitutional laws. 

    As usual, the left tried to pit one group of citizens against another.  In this case it was urban versus rural Americans.  NY’s attorneys talked about local discretion and how rural commuters might have a greater need for bearing arms outside the home.  (One liberal web site made fun of the idea that there was much crime on NY Subways.)  NY Attorneys were appalled at the idea of a crowd of people carrying.

    Let’s hope that the commentators and pundits on both sides are correct and SCOTUS finds for NYSRPA and against New York State.  Of course, it’s your taxpayer dollars that are financing the legal effort to take away your 2nd Amendment rights.

  • 11/03/2021 6:21 PM | Anonymous

    The CDC and Gun Violence Research  by Tom Reynolds

    Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) partners with SCOPE on a number of things. DRGO’s column on the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the CDC’s new director’s efforts is extremely worthwhile for SCOPE members.  Restoring confidence in the CDC after their flip-flops over the China Virus is a big task and Rochelle Walensky does not make it easier by her unfounded war on guns. 

    The left would like people to believe that the CDC was barred by Congress from gun violence research but, in fact, it was only barred from advocating for gun control.  As a result, the CDC took the position that: if they could not use research to advocate for gun control, what’s the use of doing research.

    The following is a reprint of DRGO’s column that destroys the myths on the CDC and gun research.

    The CDC’s Forever War on Gun Owners

    Posted on October 26, 2021 by DRGO

    (Photo from

    [Ed: This is the full text of the piece Drs. Faria & Wheeler published in the 
    Washington Examiner September 9.]

    Twenty-five years ago, Congress reprimanded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for its political advocacy of gun control. Now, President Joe Biden’s CDC Director Rochelle Walensky is planning a new round of activism against gun owners. In an emotive video interview with CNN’s Elizabeth Cohen, Walensky recently signaled her intention to resume CDC research on “America’s epidemic of gun violence.”

    Since the CDC’s 1990s activism, consequential shifts in science, public opinion, and law have transformed the firearms debate. Firearm homicides are a fraction of what they were then. Mountains of criminology research and law enforcement experience have shown firearm carry license holders to be exceedingly responsible. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that gun ownership is an individual right. Walensky ignores it all, repeating tired tropes about “gun violence” and implicitly conflating average gun owners with chronically violent criminals.

    We testified before the House Appropriations Committee in March 1996, at the height of the controversy. The public health community had just launched its campaign to portray firearms as “dirty, deadly, and banned,” as top CDC official Mark Rosenberg put it. President Bill Clinton’s Surgeon General David Satcher used his bully pulpit to rail at the National Rifle Association.

    In the CNN video, interviewer Cohen alleges that the NRA, in the 1990s, “convinced Congress to cut funding for all gun research.” That myth has been the narrative of the public health community ever since. In reality, Congress only put a stop to the CDC’s “activities to advocate or promote gun control,” as the full House Appropriations Committee report put it.

    And what were those activities? Along with two other witnesses, we laid the evidence out for the Appropriations Committee:

    1) A CDC-funded 1993 New England Journal of Medicine article by Dr. Arthur Kellermann and co-authors. They used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool, to claim that having a gun in the home triples the risk of becoming a homicide victim. The sample population was a group of crime-prone urban residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical gun owners.

    2) The winter 1993 CDC publication “Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence,” co-authored by Rosenberg. It offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries: “restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.”

    3) Shockingly frank admissions made on the record by CDC officials, describing their clear anti-gun political agenda. “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities,” said P.W. O’Carroll, acting section head of the Division of Injury Control, CDC, in “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation” in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1989.

    4) A CDC-funded newsletter from the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco-based gun prohibition advocacy group. The newsletter urged readers to “organize a picket at gun manufacturing sites” and to “work for campaign finance reform to weaken the gun lobby’s political clout.”

    And now, after all that, the CDC director wants gun owners to believe her invitation to “have a conversation” and “come to the table” to “be part of the solution.” Nowhere does Walensky even hint that she has actually reached out to the National Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, or Gun Owners of America.

    For decades, the CDC has quietly expanded its activities from its original critical mission of infectious disease control. The agency now supports far-afield research projects in spousal abuse, juvenile delinquency, and other subjects far better explored by criminologists and sociologists. Our CDC director seems to think that now, even as we struggle with the most lethal pandemic in a century, is a good time to once again direct the agency’s resources against gun owners. The public is not likely to agree.

  • 11/01/2021 12:59 PM | Anonymous

    Voter Fraud  by Tom Reynolds

    Less than ten years ago, the Democrat Party was in the minority in the NYS Senate.  They were afraid that the majority Republican Party would use their power in redistricting after the 2020 census, so the Democrats agreed to back a constitutional amendment aimed at preventing the majority party from abusing their redistricting ability.  Then, to their surprise, the Democrats won the majority in the Senate and they now want to change that amendment, before it is ever used, so that the majority party can abuse redistricting. 

    Not stopping with just redistricting, the Democrats want to further their environmentalist and accessibility credentials by creating an environment where voter fraud and cheating and abuse of power are much more accessible to the average politician.

    Three of the five proposals on the back of Tuesday’s ballot have to do with voting and redistricting.  Proposal One would create a redistricting scenario that would allow the Democrat Party to be forever in power.  Proposal Three and Four would facilitate fraud and cheating through relaxed voter registration and absentee ballot requirements.

    But, but, but…the Left and its media partners claim there is no voter fraud.  Perhaps we should look closer at Arizona to see if that claim holds any water.

    The Maricopa County Arizona audit is important because Joe Biden won Maricopa County by 45,000 votes but he only won the entire state by 10,500 votes.  Obviously, Maricopa County was the key to his win.  If there was sufficient voter fraud, the Electoral College certification of Biden, in Arizona, was wrong.  (It would still stand.)  And if Arizona was wrong, could it have happened in other states?

    After the Maricopa County Arizona audit, the leftist media published that the vote counts barely changed; anyone claiming there was fraud (like Donald Trump, for instance) were labelled as “falsely claiming” there was fraud.  But the devil-is-in-the-details, which tell a completely different story - that the Left ignores.

    Here are some of the key audit findings:

    • 23,344 mail-in ballots by people who moved before 10/5/20. Mailed ballots are not forwardable per election law.  
    • 2,382 in-person voters had moved out of Maricopa County prior to 10/5/2020.”  
    • Note: Voters who moved out of Maricopa County between 10/5/20 and 11/3/20 were still legally entitled to vote in the presidential election The above two categories moved out before 10/5/20 and were ineligible for presidential elections.  But somehow, they voted.
    • 9,041 more ballots returned by voters than were sent to voters;
    • 5,295 voters with the same first, middle and last name and the same birth date voted in two different Arizona counties;
    • 2,592 more duplicates than original ballots”.  (Note: A duplicate ballot was created because of a problem with the original ballot that could be cured with a duplicate ballot);
    • 1,551 more votes cast than voters.  (Note: Votes cast would be expected to be less- not more - than voters since voters do not always vote in every election on the ballot.)
    • 282 individuals who were deceased prior to 10/5/20 voted in the election.

    Numerous other problems are listed, such as voters whose ballots were counted despite the fact that they registered to vote after the state deadline for registration had already passed.

    Maricopa election officials provided simplistic explanations and the leftist media parroted the Maricopa explanations as “nothing to see here”.  Instead, the leftist media were able to claim that the election results remained almost the same.  (Note: In a secret ballot and there is no way to tell for who got the illegitimate votes.)  It seemed as if there would be no follow up to the issues raised by the audit even though there appear to be potential crimes.  (Note: the FBI is probably too busy investigating parents at school board meetings to worry about voter fraud.)

    Then, this past Friday:

    According to Arizona Senate President Karen Fann, Arizona’s Attorney General Mark Brnovich has opened a “formal investigation” into any misconduct by Maricopa County election officials.  This decision comes following the revelations found in Arizona’s independent election audit.  Fann said, “Some of that report is inconclusive…And the reason why it is inconclusive is because Maricopa County did not turn over the routers, did not (turn) over the splunk logs. They have now admitted before Congress that they deleted files the day before everything was supposed to be turned in and over to us.”  Before Congress, they said that they had to delete them to make room for an upcoming election. But Fann continued, “Congressmen then pointed out that there were still elections on the server from previous – before 2020 - and they couldn’t explain why that was.”  When they said, “don’t worry, the deleted files are on a backup archive”, Congressman Biggs asked “did you turn that over to the auditors in the Senate”?  They said, “well, no, they didn’t subpoena our backup archives.” 

    By the way, in covering this issue, the leftist media fact checkers labelled as false that Maricopa officials deleted the information and fact checkers explained that it is on backup drives; omitting that Maricopa isn’t turning them over and omitting that there was no need to delete it to make space.

    “I mean, you don’t hold information from the voters and the constituents and just think you are going to get away with it,” Fann said.

    Obviously, Fann isn’t familiar with New York State. 

    And then there is Proposal Two that disguises a political power grab behind words about clean water, air and a healthful environment.  Approving this Amendment would give the left one more hammer with which to hit the 2nd Amendment or anything else they oppose.  They are already trying to ban lead ammunition and a constitutional amendment gives them one more weapon.

    2A supporters are hopeful the Supreme Court will give us a victory this year but this election is an attempt to snatch defeat from victory.  Off year elections, such as this one, generally do not get much turnout.  It’s vital that 2A supporters rouse themselves, and their fellow 2A supporters, to vote.

  • 10/29/2021 9:32 PM | Anonymous

    It pays to commit crimes  by Tom Reynolds

    If you thought the Biden Administration was busy with using the proper gender pronouns, passing huge spending bills and attacking 2nd Amendment rights…there is always time for more.

    On October 28th, the Wall Street Journal reported that the several agencies of the Biden administration (Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services) are working to resolve lawsuits filed on behalf of illegal immigrant parents and children who say the government subjected them to lasting psychological trauma.  In their lawsuits, border crossers allege that their separation from the children they arrived with at the U.S.-Mexico border spurred mental health issues and trauma that they have struggled to overcome.

    Lawyers for the border crossers want around $3.4 million per family unit.  But the Biden administration is fighting for your tax payer dollars (Sarcasm intended.)  Biden only wants to pay illegal immigrant families $450,000 a person or about $1 million per family. (Most of the families that crossed the border illegally from Mexico to seek asylum in the U.S. included one parent and one child.)

    The final numbers could shift.

    The Journal further reports that, “…a Department of Homeland Security attorney involved in the settlement talks complained on a conference call that the payouts could amount to more than some families of 9/11 victims received... The 9/11 victim compensation fund averaged awards to the dead of around $2 million, tax-free…the administrator of the fund has said”.

    Senior departmental officials disputed the 9/11 comparison because the U.S. government hadn’t been responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.  (With a payout like this, there will be no doubt that the US government will be responsible for future illegal immigrants’ trauma since $450,000 a person is certainly an invitation to illegal immigration.)

    Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) said it well in a statement, “It would be unthinkable to pay damages to a burglar who broke into your home for the ‘psychological trauma’ they endured during the crime…And yet the Biden administration wants to reward migrants who illegally entered our country with up to $450,000 each for just that reason.”

    Obviously, this is controversial.

    If you believe it is the correct move, it’s likely that Democrat Senators Schumer and Gillibrand will favor this – at some payment level – and I am sure they would be encouraged to follow through on it if they hear from you.  Democrat President Biden might also like to hear from you.

    If you do not favor this, you might want to contact Schumer and Gillibrand and Biden and your Congressperson and let them know the government has gone bat shit crazy...or words to that effect.

    And if you think that Conservatives and 2A supporters are on the outside looking in, it was reported that four of the top ten songs on itunes are versions of “Let’s Go Brandon”.  It’s probable that the majority of itunes users are the younger generation who tend to be Democrats, so there may be a message there as to the popularity of Biden’s programs.  Based on their above efforts on immigration, it seems to be a message that Biden is ignoring.

  • 10/27/2021 7:06 PM | Anonymous

    Various Thoughts  by Tom Reynolds

    ANTI-2A companies and CEO’s

    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) has published a list of companies and/or their decision makers that have instituted anti-firearm corporate policy or have pressed lawmakers to enact further anti-gun legislation.  SCOPE makes no claims as to its accuracy (but has no reason to doubt it, either).  We thought it worth passing on to our members.  The following is the link:

    Don’t Feed The Gun Prohibitionists! | Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms (


    Tannerite has been used for explosive targets for years.  These targets can be bought on-line or home-made.

    A SCOPE member pointed out something that members should be aware of:

    In 2019, Governor Cuomo signed bill S5276a which: “…would prohibit the storage, use or purchase of the explosive Tannerite or similar product sold under a different name without the proper license or other authorization to do so under the provisions of law”.

    Shooting Movies

    Alec Baldwin has been a frequent critic of gun owners (and all things not liberal).  He just shot and killed one person and wounded a second person on a movie set. 

    It’s a tragedy that anyone gets killed in an accidental shooting.  This would never happen if people followed basic firearm safety.  Whatever happened, it’s certain that Baldwin did not follow basic safety procedures.

    Be careful in accepting the explanations that will be forthcoming.  It happened in Santa Fe, New Mexico, which is heavily used in movie productions.  Local officials will not want to antagonize their source of revenue.  Look for some lower-level person to get the blame in the media. 

    By the way, California passed Proposition 63 in 2016.  In contains many anti 2A restrictions but it exempts “Hollywood” from these restrictions.  The “Hollywood Reporter” wrote that at “any moment, between 5,000 and 7,000” of just one studio supplier’s guns “are in circulation”.

    No background checks or waiting periods required when it’s Hollywood.  One of the questions on a NICS check has to do with the use of illegal drugs.  That would disqualify half of Hollywood.

    BATFE news

    CBS News uncovered allegations of fraud, waste and abuse at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

    Wait a minute...Fraud, waste and abuse in a government agency!  “Say it ain’t so, Joe.  Say it ain’t so.”

    Remember, it was this agency that Joe Biden nominated a fiercely anti-gun person to be its director.  Perhaps, Biden should have passed on his anti-gun agenda and made cleaning up corruption a higher priority. 

    California Dreaming – a nightmare

    There are 100 cargo ships waiting to be unloaded off California’s coast in a major supply chain boondoggle.  The backup is due to a lack of trucks to transport the containers off the docks and warehouses.  The truck shortage is a direct result of fewer trucks meeting California’s strict environmental laws.  This also leads to a growing a lack of storage space, as containers are filling up every available storage space while waiting for a truck. 

    This is a good example of why SCOPE sent Monday’s e-mail about Proposal Two on the November ballot; ceding more power to Albany on the basis of environmental concerns will only further fracture our society and our economy and make NY more like California (than it already is).

    Thankfully, shipments of guns and ammo from Russia are not part of this problem since Joe Biden had already stopped them.  (Sarcasm intended.) 

    With Biden’s unerring sense of getting to the root cause of the problem - using his and Pete Buttigeig’s lack of real-world experience as guidance - Biden is blaming the “Just in Time Inventory” programs that have been around for decades without this problem.  He has also decided to open the port to unloading 24 hours a day but has yet to figure out where the extra containers will be stored as they wait for trucks. 

    Didn’t Ronald Reagan say that the most dangerous words were, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.  

    Biting back at the left

    Gun owners are not the only ones who are in the sights of the radical left, who have made destruction of the 2nd Amendment one of their priorities.  It’s always nice to see the radical left’s positions come back to bite them.

    The leftist Commissioner of Major League Baseball (MLB) moved this summer’s All Star game from Atlanta to Denver over Georgia’s new voter laws.  He, of course, ignored that Colorado probably has more restrictive voter laws than Georgia and, in addition, he has no problem doing business with China and Cuba (the latter two are not exactly paragons of human rights). It was another attempt by the left to punish anyone who disagrees with them, while ignoring all other aspects of their actions.

    Now, the Atlanta Braves are in the World Series and in the center of the baseball universe.

    Whoever you favor in the World Series, you must admit that it would be sweet if Atlanta won the series in five games and the Commissioner had to present the trophy to Atlanta - in Atlanta.

    Will the leftist Commissioner call the team the “Braves” since that’s another made up issue by the left to exert their power?      

    Will he even show up for the games?  If he does, will the stadium erupt in “Let’s go Brandon” cheers and, if they do, what will the announcers do.

    What’s the Metaverse?

    Tuesday’s newspaper had a big article on the Metaverse.  For those of you who are not versed in the Metaverse - like me – apparently, it’s a movement to spend even more of your life on the computer instead of the real world.  (Like right now!)

    The same day’s Dilbert cartoon was ironic:

    Wally to Dilbert – “I’m falling in love with my Amazon Alexa device...Are you sticking with humans?

    Dilbert - “For now, but keep me in the loop on how your thing works out.”

    There are lots of video games that allow you to shoot imaginary guns.  But I’ll stick to a real firing range (and real women).  And not just for now!

  • 10/25/2021 11:29 AM | Anonymous

    Ballot Proposal Two  by Tom Reynolds

    Hunters and farmers are environmentalists and conservationists for the sake of the environment and not for power and control.  If they sit silently by and don’t vote this November or vote because something sounds nice, they will be losing their rights as property owners, hunters and gun owners, all in the name of so-called “environmental justice”. 

    On the back of November ballot are five proposals.  Proposal Two amends the NY State Constitution to provide that “each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and a healthful environment.”  Few will speak out against it, as it is so appealingly labelled and is framed as “racial environmental justice”.  (Since the Left uses racism like Dirty Harry used his .44 magnum, this should immediately give you pause.) 

    The environment relates to health and if you liked the way health issues have impacted our country’s social and economic system during the past year, you will love Proposal Two.

    Do we need another law? NYS has strict environmental laws and a state bureaucracy to enforce them.  (Think hydro-fracking.  Try getting a pistol permit in a Democrat controlled city.)  But a NYS Constitutional Amendment supersedes any state laws and the radical Left wants that really big hammer to beat us over-the-head in support of their “green” agenda and, more importantly to them, their never-ending pursuit of power.

    The federal Constitution specifically limits federal government power and puts law-making exclusively in the hands of the legislature - not the courts.  This amendment would have the opposite effect by giving the NY government virtually unlimited power to legislate through bureaucracies and the courts by labelling everything environmental. (Note how the Left changed the definition of “infrastructure” to be all inclusive.)  If the Left can’t get a law passed, activist judges will legislate by setting environmental standards, even though judges don’t have the expertise to determine what constitutes an undefined “healthful environment.”

    This amendment might better be called “Full Employment for Lawyers”. It doesn’t define terms or spell out enforcement and penalties, which provides maximum latitude for lawyers and political activists to label anything “environmental” and then challenge both state regulations and private industry.  Philip K. Howard said, “It would start an arms race among environmental groups and social justice groups for who can concoct the most dramatic theories.”  It will allow delays and raise legal costs both for private industry and for public agencies.  (Public agencies don’t care; it’s only taxpayer money.  But private businesses vote with their feet and we can’t afford to lose more jobs.) A few states have similar laws but they are more narrowly defined to try to eliminate these issues.

    Private property rights will disappear.  Want to put up a shed on your lot?  Want to blacktop your dirt driveway? Maybe plant some trees and bushes?  Are you a farmer and want to hunt on your property?  Expect environmentalists to demand that YOU pay for an environmental study.  Farmers will be particularly open to lawsuits.  And be careful that you don’t cross a local bureaucrat.

    Proposed law, S5058, prohibits the use of lead ammunition on land contributing surface water to the New York city water supply.  Ballot Proposal Two gives the gun control left an alternate avenue to implement S5058 and eliminate land available for hunting and, thus, eliminate guns and hunting.  If it’s okay for NY City, why not give equal protection to other city’s municipal water supplies.  Then, private wells must also be protected.  Land available for hunting will disappear, all by judicial and bureaucratic fiat.

    And by-the-way, NY proposed law S3018 would require a hunting license be procured before purchasing a rifle or shotgun.  See how it works: no land for hunting equals no hunting equals no ability to legally buy a rifle or shotgun.  But don’t worry, there is still the illegal market which happens to be where most criminals get their guns.

    NYS is committed to eliminating carbon emissions from the electrical grid by 2040, which necessitates construction projects.  Construction is a dirty, noisy business and this amendment will cover environmental impact during construction as well as the finished product.  (Noise is a part of the environment.  Perhaps “silencers” will be more effective on jackhammers than they are on guns.)

    Proposal Two can be interpreted to require a quiet environment.  Guns make noise, which will be an environmental issue for the courts to sort out.  Are “silencers” the answer?  They are illegal in NY State.  Since they don’t really silence, maybe that isn’t such a big deal.  On the other hand, if it outlawed Rap Music…    

    Remember when hydro-fracking was knee-capped by Andrew Cuomo and Joe Biden stopped pipeline construction (just before he gave the Russians the go-ahead on their pipeline) and hydro-fracking was stopped on government land and off-shore (just before Biden asked OPEC for more oil)?  Under Proposal Two, the cost of implementing any of those in New York State would be prohibitive, even if Dr. Fauci gave them a complete bill of health.

    It shouldn’t be enough to give a proposal a catchy title.  The devil is in the details and this proposal will create a hell of a social, economic and legal environment.  Of course, Proposal Two is about creating a “healthful environment” but who would have thought that was the definition of Hell?  Actually, Ronald Reagan did think of it when he said, “Socialism only works in two places, Heaven where they don’t need it and Hell where they already have it”.

  • 10/20/2021 7:25 PM | Anonymous

    November Ballot Proposals  by Tom Reynolds

    On November 2, 2021, New York voters will vote on five proposed amendments to the New York State Constitution.  These five ballot measures may have a greater impact on the future of the Empire State than the candidates running for election.

    Be sure to flip your ballot over and vote on them.

    Proposal One:

    In 2014, we (the voters) passed a constitutional amendment that substantially changed the redistricting process, which happens after every 10-year census.  Now, before that process has even been used, the Legislature is pushing to change it.

    Proposal One would:

    • repeal the requirement that the two co-executive directors of the redistricting commission be members of different parties;
    • repeal the requirement that a commission redistricting plan be approved by commission members of both parties; and
    • repeal the requirement that a redistricting plan be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature, if the Senate and the Assembly are each controlled by the same political party.

    This is exactly the opposite of the way a fair redistricting process should operate.  It seems clear that the purpose of this proposal is to cause the majority party to have unfettered control of the process. 

    Do you believe Democrats would be for this if Republicans currently had control?

    Proposal Two:

    It would amend the New York State Constitution to provide that “each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and a healthful environment.” Progressives are framing this issue as one of racial and environmental justice.   

    Everyone wants clean air and water but this sounds like another club to beat us over the head with their radical “green” agenda. 

    Would this give them another lever to ban lead ammunition?  Of course, it would.

    Of course, this sounds really good but the devil is in the details.

    Proposal Three

    It would remove the NY constitutional requirement that a voter wishing to vote in an election be registered to vote at least 10 days prior to that election.

    It would open the door to the passage of a same-day voter registration law, an open invitation to more voter fraud.  How would local election boards effectively check if the registration is valid?

    Proposal Four:

    This would allow no-excuse absentee balloting in New York. 

    Currently, the New York State Constitution allows absentee balloting only if: a voter expects to be outside of his/her county of residence on Election Day; or a voter is unable to vote in person due to disability or illness.

    Unlimited absentee balloting creates a climate in which voter fraud is very difficult to detect.

    But if you don’t believe there is voter fraud in New York- and especially New York City – and you believe one party rule will refrain from fraud even though they have the levers of power to do it…

    Proposal Five:

    It would expand the jurisdiction of the New York City Civil Court from $25,000 to $50,000.

  • 10/13/2021 1:25 PM | Anonymous

    Happy belated Indigenous Peoples Day!  by Tom Reynolds

    In his never-ending effort to be “woke”, Joe Biden does away with Columbus Day because of Columbus’ connection to slavery.  Biden honors Indigenous People, instead. 

    A special shout out to the Aztecs on their holiday.

    The Aztecs had religious festivities at the end of their 20-day months and human sacrifice was an essential feature of these festivities.  (And you thought giving up something for Lent was hard.)

    Human sacrifice also was part of the legend around the founding of the Aztec capital city, Tenochtitlan, which was accompanied by the sacrifice and skinning of the daughter of the King Coxcox of Culhuacan.  (By contrast, Jefferson, Madison and Hamilton decided on the current site of Washington D.C. over dinner and a glass of wine.)

    Another aspect of Aztec human sacrifice was children who were made to cry before the sacrifice. The tears were thought to wet the earth and thus appease the gods. If a child did not cry, the priests would sometimes tear out the nails of the child to make him or her cry.

    The Aztec practice of human sacrifice also served a political purpose.  Since the Aztecs were small in number compared to the other subjugated tribes and, thus, there was always a danger of an alliance between these tribes against the Aztecs.  To avert this, Aztecs demanded humans as a tribute from the subjugated tribes.  As a result, these tribes would constantly raid each other to procure humans for sacrifice. This minimized or eliminated the chance of an alliance between the tribes.  (Sounds like the current effort to keep the left in power by dividing people over race and gender issues.)

    Five years before Columbus discovered America, in 1487, “Templo Mayor” was dedicated in the Aztec city of Tenochtitlan, with a four-day celebration. How many were sacrificed during that time is a subject of scholarly speculation with the lowest estimate is 4,000. 

    It is hard to know how many Aztecs died under the sacrificial knife. Many reputable scholars today put the number between 20,000 and 250,000 per year for the whole Aztec Empire.  (Hitler, Mao and Stalin would have been proud of the Aztecs.)

    Indigenous People Day would not be complete without mentioning the Incas of Peru.  Although a little less bloodthirsty than Aztecs, the Incas had also enslaved the indigenous people further south along the Andes.

    Human sacrifices were practiced by the Incas to ward off danger, famine or an epidemic. The victims were usually children, sometimes men and virgins.  (Apparently, virgins have been sacrificial favorites, everywhere.) 

    More recently, archaeologists have discovered a site in northern Peru of mass child sacrifice.  Over 140 children were probably sacrificed about 550 years ago on a site known as Huanchaquito-Las Llamas.  Later the number of sacrificed children’s remains found rose to 269, with the discovery of another nearby site. 

    An interesting aspect of the Inca Empire is described in the book “A Socialist Empire: The Incas of Peru by Louis Baudin.  He writes that the regime imposed by the Inca rulers on the indigenous populations they had enslaved was a precursor of Marxist-style socialism.  Private property and individual initiative were prohibited; money and commerce did not exist.  Private life was subject to tough state regulation: people had to dress in a similar way; marriage was allowed only following the eugenic laws of the state, to avoid “racial contamination”.  Like any tyrannical system of this type, it was oppressive and didn’t work, so much so that the subjugated indigenous enthusiastically helped the few Spaniards who came to get rid of it.  (Sounds like the Incas deserve the Margaret Sanger award for eugenics.) 

    Wow - and the Aztecs and Incas enslaved other indigenous peoples.   Well, at least they weren’t racists.          

    Back in the U.S.A., the Indigenous People were not as advanced as the Aztecs and Incas had been. 

    Did you know that the 13th Amendment that abolished slavery did not apply to all slaves?  The “Five Civilized Tribes” of the southeast - Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole - also participated in the institution of slavery.  Because these tribes were located outside the sovereignty of the United States, constitutional amendments did not apply to them.  (Kinda like today’s Leftists who don’t believe the Constitution applies to them.)

    According to journalist Aliana E. Roberts, by 1800, the “Five Tribes” had developed “plantations that rivaled those of their white neighbors.”  She also notes that the percentage of black slaves in the population was not insignificant.  In 1860:

    •   Cherokee Nation citizens owned 2,511 slaves (15 percent of their total population),
    •   Choctaw citizens owned 2,349 slaves (14 percent of their total population), and
    •   Creek citizens owned 1,532 slaves (10 percent of their total population).
    •   Chickasaw citizens owned 975 slaves, which amounted to 18 percent of their total population.

    These were proportions equivalent to that of white slave owners in Tennessee, a large slaveholding state.

    Most other North American tribes also practiced some form of slavery, even before Columbus.  (Wait a minute – Columbus didn’t introduce slavery to America?)

    We should surely be glad that the “woke” left, under Joe Biden, has decided it’s better to honor Indigenous Peoples than Christopher Columbus.  Although, it’s lucky for those Indigenous Peoples that they weren’t “White European Heritage Peoples” or they would have to lose their new holiday because they practiced slavery.  If the day had to again be renamed, the “woke” would demand that it honor someone who did not practice slavery; that, of course, would eliminate just about every race and country in the history of the world.  But if you wanted to name it for someone who did not practice human sacrifice, Christopher Columbus is available.

  • 10/08/2021 12:14 PM | Anonymous

    Achille Lauro  by Tom Reynolds

    Yesterday was 36th anniversary of the beginning of the Achille Lauro hijacking.  The Italian MS Achille Lauro was hijacked by four men representing the Palestine Liberation Front off the coast of Egypt.  During the hijacking, a 69-year-old Jewish American man in a wheelchair, Leon Klinghoffer, was murdered by the hijackers and thrown overboard.

    Learning of the hijacking and that there were Americans on board, members of the Reagan administration in Washington, D.C. moved to take action. The Terrorist Incident Working Group (which included National Security Council staff member Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North) met in accord with predetermined counter-terrorist procedures. The Group recommended that the Pentagon dispatch a team of special operations forces to Europe in case the ship needed to be seized to rescue the hostages.

    By October 9th, the Reagan administration had implemented a plan for the Achille Lauro to be liberated by the U.S. military. SEAL Team Six embarked on board the USS Iwo Jima, an amphibious assault ship. It was decided that the raid would go ahead as long as the Achille Lauro was in international waters, but would be put on hold if it was found in Egyptian waters.

    On the morning of Thursday, October 10, 1985, Oliver North had contacted Israeli Major General Uri Simhoni, the military attaché at the Israeli embassy in Washington. He relayed to North that the four hijackers were at the Al Maza airfield near Cairo. American sources confirmed that the Egyptians were planning to transport the men out of the country at night, presumably to Tunis, aboard a commercial EgyptAir jet. The four hijackers boarded an EgyptAir Boeing 737 accompanied by Abu Abbas (later discovered to be the mastermind behind the operation), Ozzuddin Badrakkan (a PLO official), and several members of Egypt's counterterrorism unit Force 777. The flight was set to fly to Tunisia.

    Planes from the USS Saratoga intercepted the airliner and forced it down to Sigonella Italy where SEAL Team Six surrounded the plane.  This led to an armed standoff between Seal team 6 and 300 Italian soldiers.  The leader of SEAL Team 6 radioed, “I am not worried about our situation. We have the firepower to prevail. But I am concerned about the immaturity of the Italian troops. ... A backfire from a motorbike or a construction cart could precipitate a shooting incident that could lead to a lot of Italian casualties”. 

    Eventually, the diplomats worked something out.

    Abbas and Badrakkan were allowed to escape by the Italian government but an Italian Court convicted the four hijackers of various charges.

    This was not some Tom Clancy novel but a real-life incident and on October 16th, you will have the chance to meet and hear Oliver North at SCOPE’s annual banquet at breezes in Utica.  It’s a chance to meet living history.  A chance to hear someone who knows how military missions are supposed to be handled (as opposed to the recent debacle in Afghanistan).  A chance to hear someone who worked in the Reagan White House.

  • 10/07/2021 8:49 PM | Anonymous

    Doctor Robert Young on Politicized Science  by Tom Reynolds

    At the Second Amendment Institute’s “Defending Freedom Action Summit” September 25-26, “Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership’s” Dr. Robert Young had some strong words about the efforts of the political leadership of the medical profession in promoting gun control.  He sheds some light in areas many of us rarely see.  The following are some excerpts from his presentation.  

    “For 27 years, Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) has been fighting the politicization of gun policy by know-it-alls in our profession.  The medical profession, at large, thinks it knows everything about everything, from Gender Identity to Firearm Safety and on to Climate Change, all in the name of Public Health. Their problem is they don’t know what they don’t know. Learning how to diagnose & treat illnesses and do surgery qualifies us only in those areas”.

    “Public health interventions have been very important in preventing infectious disease in populations. Such authentic Public Health work has led to far more healthy lives and fewer early deaths than any other human endeavor. Developing medical treatments and preventive interventions have saved millions more lives”.

    “So why do doctors want to veer from this ancient, honorable lane”?

    “We don’t. Very few physicians want anything to do with the political goals of their professional organizations. That’s why the American Medical Association (AMA) now represents less than 20% of American physicians, down from 80% some 50 years ago, when men were men, women were women, and doctors were doctors”.

    “But the AMA’s leadership has become progressively more . . . ‘progressive’, as private practice has been mostly replaced by institutionally owned medical practices with physicians having to meet insurance demands to get paid. These pressure providers to meet the agendas of those organizations, not just to do what is best for their patients”.

    “And that, my friends, is the socialist, ‘progressive’ approach to modern medicine”.

    “Science is not a definitive oracle. It is a process that requires fair minds, openness to criticism, and the ability to change beliefs as research yields contrary data. These abilities seem sorely absent in most of the gun control industry”.

    “Careers depend on getting funding from the Bloombergs, Soros’s; their allied schools, foundations and organizations; and the government—none of which value individual responsibility.  It doesn’t take a graduate degree or statistical expertise to see the faults in advocacy research. You’ll find:

    o   Personal bias and cherry-picked data choices & interpretation

    o   Correlations passed off as causation, using irrelevant analogies and false attributions

    o   Inanimate firearms treated as if they cause shootings

    o   Casting blame and vilifying those who disagree

    o   Irrelevant questions & straw arguments used as diversionary tactics

    o   Data requests from other investigators being refused

    o   Statistical significance purporting to have real-world importance”

    “Finally, don’t let disputes among so-called “experts” distract you. The truth is out there. Without any reasonable doubt, the facts are on the side of liberty and individual responsibility”.

    “The foundation of our great American right to Keep and Bear Arms is not science but principle. We have the inherent responsibility to defend ourselves and our loved ones and are entitled to arm ourselves with the tools that enable us to do so, wherever & whenever”.


    Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO), a program of the Second Amendment Foundation, is a nationwide volunteer organization of health care professionals and supporters who value honesty and human rights. Its Second Amendment activities are all volunteer, as they are all full-time practitioners. They are the doctors who know guns. This material was also presented at this year’s Gun Rights Policy Conference, also September 25-26.

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