Log in

from our SCOPE membership

  • 01/27/2022 11:01 AM | Anonymous

    Breyer: Facts and Theories  by Tom Reynolds

    Supreme Court Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer has announced his retirement. Since a radical progressive President will probably nominate a radical progressive replacement for a radical progressive justice, this will have no immediate effect on the Supreme Court philosophical balance. It will, however, lock in that seat for a longer period since whoever is nominated for this lifetime appointment will be much younger than Breyer.

    This will almost surely be bad news for the 2nd Amendment, as radical progressives ignore the Constitution if it suits their purposes. (Don’t bet against the three progressive judges ignoring the Constitution and siding with New York State in NYSRPA v Bruen?)

    President Biden has said he will nominate a black woman as his first Supreme Court nominee. Biden, as usual, made blatant race discrimination on the part of Democrats a central part of his actions. If he follows through on his promise, the nominee will be decided based on race and sex and not qualifications. Whites, Asians, men, etc. need not apply. When this naked political partisanship happens, it further destroys the ever-decreasing confidence American citizens have in their government.

    The Senate can approve the nomination by a simple majority. In case of a tie, the Vice President casts the deciding vote. This raises three interesting but distant possibilities: what if something happened and either party lost a sitting Senator and especially if it was a Democrat Senator; what if something happened to Biden and Kamala Harris became the President, leaving the tie breaking Vice Presidency vacant; what if Biden were temporarily disabled and Harris was serving as Acting President, would she be eligible to cast the tie breaking vote? Remote possibilities, but history has turned on even more remote possibilities.

    Filibustering the nomination is not a possibility. When the Democrats controlled the Senate, it was to their benefit to change the filibuster rules to exempt judiciary appointments from being filibustered (but Supreme Court appointments were still eligible to be filibustered). So, when Republicans subsequently controlled the Senate and it was to their benefit, they changed the no-filibuster exemption to include Supreme Court nominees. This is a lesson currently lost on the Democrats except for Manchin and Sinema; that power can change hands and turnabout is fair play.

    The nominee only needs a majority vote in the Senate. Democrats have been pretty good at holding their own in-line, until they recently became so radical that Manchin and occasionally Sinema fell out of line. Might Biden nominate someone so radical that it would break the Democrat’s “Iron Curtain”, again? Not such a remote possibility since Biden nominated a communist for Controller of the Currency and his current nominee to the Federal Communications Commission has a huge ethics problem. (And don’t forget gun grabber Chipman to head BATFE.) In a party that embraced riots - except on January 6th - and where A O-C is considered the de-facto speaker of the House, radicalness is more often the rule than the exception.

    Will the Republicans be able to hold the line? Several Republicans have often been willing to reach-across-the-aisle. But a Supreme Court justice is not a part of the President’s administration, but is a member of the independent 3rd branch of our government and deference to the presidency should not be the rule. Still, past history has shown that Republicans are more likely to be “bi-partisan” than Democrats.

    Looking forward, one can’t help in believing that the upcoming November election had an impact on this.

    It’s heavily believed (but never certain until the “fat lady has sung”) that Republicans will win control of both houses of Congress. A Republican Senate would insure a much more moderate nominee and this may have pushed Breyer to retire now, to increase the chances of a radical progressive successor.

    Biden may also feel further pressured to nominate a black woman as most polls show him and the Democrats losing voter support amongst their historically Democrat black voters. Any vote against a black or woman will be touted as racism or sexism and not based on disqualifications.

    Who will be the nominees? Since we can expect an overtly political nomination, let me suggest three overtly political (and unqualified) possibilities: Michelle Obama (like the Clintons before them, the Obamas will never go away. However, this would seem to eliminate her from running for President); Kamala Harris (but could she ethically and legally cast the tie breaking vote as VP if she were the nominee. Ethics? Legality? Since when has that been an issue for Harris?); Susan Rice (will she give up running the country for Biden to step down to a Supreme Court decision. And like Michelle Obama, this would eliminate her running for President).


  • 01/26/2022 11:05 AM | Anonymous

    SCOPE Political Questionnaire  by Tom Reynolds

    This is an election year at both the state and federal level and many of us will have the opportunity to ask questions of the candidates. To get you started, below are a series of questions, some of which you might want to ask. Pick and choose as appropriate.

    - Do you believe the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is:

    Hunting? Self Defense? Defense against foreign threats? Defense against domestic threats?
    Constitutional Carry?    Shall Issue?     May issue?
    Handguns?  Rifles?  Shotguns?  Automatic firearms?  Semi-automatic firearms?  Firearms?
    30 round magazines?    10 round magazines?     5 round magazines?
    Does it require Senate approval as a treaty?
    More Crime?     Less Crime?     Has negligible effect?

    - Do you believe a gun owner must retreat, before using deadly force, when faced with an unlawful intruder inside their house?

    - Do you believe a home owner has the right to use deadly force inside the house to protect lives and/or property?

    - Do you believe a gun owner engaged in self-defense must retreat, before using deadly force, when outside their house?

    - Do you believe a home owner has the right to use deadly force outside the house to protect lives and / or property?

    - As to firearm licenses, should New York State be:

    - Do you support legislation for total or partial bans any of the following:

    - Do you support the USA rejoining the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty? 

    - Do you support New York residents being able to directly (not through an FFL) purchase ammo over the internet?

    - Do you support New York residents being able to directly purchase firearms over the internet, using an FFL and following NICS regulations?

    Do you believe localities can pass more restrictive firearms laws than state statutes without the state’s permission?

    - Since 1988, The United States Undetectable Firearms Act made illegal any firearm that is not detectable by walk-through metal detection. Given that, do you believe we need more state or federal “Ghost Gun laws?

    - Do you believe that increased civilian firearms ownership leads to:

    - Do you support the 2005 “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” (PLCAA)?

    - Do you believe the 2005 PLCAA supersedes and nullifies any state laws to the contrary?

    - Do you believe that the NYS law classifying firearms as a nuisance violates the PLCAA?

    - Do you believe Self-Defense is a right and the 2nd Amendment protects - and does not grant that right?

    - Does the 2nd Amendment restrict firearms only to members of militia or other government agencies?

    - Do you support legislation requiring microstamping?

    - Do you support pistol permit reciprocity with other states?

    - Do you support Safe Storage laws?

    - Do you support a gun purchase waiting period longer than the NICS required 3 days?

    - Do you support laws limiting firearm purchases to a specific number per time period?

    - Do you support laws limiting ammo purchases to a specific number per time period?

    - Do you believe firearm possession is limited to only inside the residence?

    - Do you support restricting ammo purchases only to the caliber of gun owned by the purchaser?

    - Do you support mandatory liability insurance for all gun owners?

    - Do you support enhanced sentences for those that use a firearm while committing a felony?

    - Do you support a ban on firearms over a certain caliber? If so, what caliber_______________

    For a Printable copy of the questionnaire: CLICK HERE

  • 01/21/2022 10:10 PM | Anonymous

    The Left Never Stops: A8684  by Tom Reynolds

    SCOPE has written that the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) case NYSRPA v Bruen looks very favorable for the 2nd Amendment but one key is how broad or narrow the decision will be. 

    On November 5th, SCOPE wrote: “…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.” ( NYSRPA v Bruen: )

    The Left was listening and here is one of their first attempts – but certainly not their last attempt - before SCOTUS even hands down a decision, to designate “sensitive spaces” as gun free zones. 

    Assemblywoman Jo Simon (of Brooklyn) introduced proposed bill A-8684 on January 10th.  It would make it illegal, and a Class E Felony to possess a rifle, shotgun or firearm in the following locations:

    • Any  form  of public transportation, including but not limited to railroads, ride sharing services, paratransit services, subways,  buses,  air travel, taxis or any other public transportation service; or
    • Food and drink establishments; or
    • Large  gatherings,  which  for the purposes of this section shall mean a gathering together of fifteen  or  more  persons  for  amusement, athletic,  civic,  dining,  educational, entertainment, patriotic, political, recreational, religious, social, or similar purposes.

    How is the prohibition on large gatherings going to be enforced?  Will the local sheriff / police chief or state troopers want to enforce it when, presumably, some members of those public “large gatherings” are carrying (concealed) in order to provide security for their fellow members, not because they’re part of the criminal element?

    Will you need to register and get a permit for family gatherings over 15 so that “big brother” can monitor them?  (Remember, gun registration is a key agenda item for the left, so why not “large gathering” registration as a way to criminalize gun ownership?

    Notice the recent terrorist attack on a Jewish Temple?  Sorry, no protection for religious meetings.

    Will SCOPE chapter’s and member’s meetings have to be disarmed.

    How about the Rod & Gun Club?

    Meantime, much of the left has paid security.  Will politician’s security be disarmed in the state capitol chambers, which is a large gathering of over 15 people for political purposes?  How about county legislature meetings?  The “brilliant attorney” Jo Simon didn’t carve out an exception for those or for law enforcement.  Oops.

  • 01/15/2022 7:13 PM | Anonymous

    On behalf of the New York State SCOPE Board, we want to introduce you to one of the Candidates for the Republican Party nomination for Governor of New York State, Congressman Lee Zeldin.

    As you are aware, the Second Amendment has been and continues to be under attack in this state.  Congressman Lee Zeldin is reaching out to Firearm owners across New York.   Congressman Zeldin would like to talk with you and, introduce himself on January 18th on a Zoom Conference call (or you can call in by phone to meet him).

    Please share this email with any interested persons, gun clubs, and all persons that value our 2nd Amendment.  Education is the key to selecting all of our elected officials as we head to election day which, for New York State, is November 8, 2022.

    When: Jan 18, 2022, 7:30 PM Eastern Time
    Topic: Zeldin for Governor 2A Discussion

    Please click the link below to join the video webinar:

    Or call-in by telephone: 
    (312) 626-6799

    Jack Prendergast                                                Tom Reynolds
    NYS SCOPE Chairman of The Board               NYS SCOPE President

  • 01/14/2022 10:25 PM | Anonymous

    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.

  • 01/12/2022 10:38 AM | Anonymous

    Jed Clampett is Out-Of-Luck  by Tom Reynolds

    Beverly Hills Guns (BHG) is the only Federal Firearms Licensed gun store in Beverly Hills.  You may be amused over some of the “cultural differences” between your local gun store and BHG.  And if you think New York makes it difficult to buy firearms…California gives our New York liberals a goal to aspire to.

    From BHG’s web site:

    BHG was founded by security expert Russell Stuart to cater to the distinguished customer who accepts nothing less than the best products & service in the world, and require the utmost care & confidentiality in every experience.

    Highlights include:

    • Private, one-on-one, concierge-style firearms services.
    • Similar to a dealer of rare art or high value jewelry, every client is discreetly identified & verified.
    • Every appointment experience is carefully crafted for security, comfort, and confidence.

    Gun sales are by appointment only.

    (Concierge service like buying rare art!  Most of us enjoy walking into our local gun dealer – unannounced - wearing jeans and a sweatshirt and expecting way less than “concierge” service.)

    BHG’s web site features a picture of a leisurely Steve McQueen sitting indoors in an easy chair pointing a revolver at something with the hammer cocked and his finger on the trigger.  (Is this where Alec Baldwin learned about gun safety?)

    Under the BHG’s Section Buying Firearms in California, it lists requirements too extensive to list here.  BHG does warn: California handgun laws are among the most restrictive in the country. There are a lot of regulations…Due to the hostile political environment of anti-gun legislators in California, gun laws are constantly changing.

    Among the hostile political environment, BHG warns: While there is no limit on how many handguns you can own…but you may only purchase 1 new handgun within a 30-day period.

    And for those of us who like a variety of choices, BHG states: California legislation has severely limited the options we have access to in California. As a California resident, you are able to choose from a minuscule “roster” of “safe” handguns.

    California has a 10 day “cooling off” period (including the background check) before you can pick up your purchase.   But BHG warns, “During times of panic or high-demand, these checks have been known to be extended to an unknown amount of time”. 

    (Would the last two years of riots, ordinary thefts and flash & grab robberies qualify as “panic” times?)

    Under the section Buying Ammunition in California, BHG says:

    Buying ammunition has become a convoluted process…it may not guarantee that you will be able to walk out of the store with ammunition.  (Due to the ammo shortage - not a convoluted process - I have that same problem.)

    To buy ammo, one must undergo a “Standard Check”.  But if you don’t qualify for  that check, one has to undergo a “Basic Check”.  This check can take up to 10 days, per BHG. 

    Just In case you are planning on shopping there, it appears to be conveniently located within walking distance of the Waldorf Astoria.  But you will need your limo to get from the California Rehab Institute.  (Although, if you are living at the Rehab Institute you probably won’t qualify to purchase a firearm.) 

    On a recent interview on Fox, it was pointed out that 686,435 new guns were sold in California in 2020, which is a 65+% increase from 2019. 

    On Fox, BHG’s owner Russell Stuart (who appears very normal, even by our standards) stated, “…I get no pleasure whatsoever by having a 60-, 70-year-old woman walk into my store … who looks terrified, and say, ‘I have never liked guns. In fact, I've even hated guns. I would have never considered buying one. But I'm so afraid for my life’.”  (I’ll bet she still votes for the liberal in the next election.  Oh hell, in Beverly Hills there are only liberals running – the only difference is how far left they are.)

    Stuart says the rise in gun sales are directly attributable to the rise in crime under George Soros’ D.A. George Gascon’s soft on crime regime. 

    Maj Toure of Black Guns Matter described the situation as, Oh, we're wealthy, we can just go buy [guns]…But yet and still, the areas that have the most crime have the most restrictive gun laws.

    Geneva Solomon, the co-owner of Black-owned Redstone Firearms in Los Angeles County’s Burbank said, The gun control laws here are set up and intended to disproportionately affect those within the minority communities.

    (Pity the poor Beverly Hills celebrity now caught in a liberal’s nightmare; he/she/it wants to buy a gun but the they want the only person in Beverly Hills that sells a gun to be cancelled because he went on the much-despised Fox.  And if he/she/it buys a gun, they will be delaying a black person from getting one; that would be called white supremacy, even if the celebrity is black.)

  • 01/10/2022 10:45 AM | Anonymous

    Guns are Used Responsibly  by Rob Morse. September 21, 2021; Adapted and edited by Lee Edgcomb

    All you hear about is “gun violence”, not the well-earned safety record of gun ownership in America.  A few facts:

    Shooting for fun-

    The most common use of a firearm is recreation: training, practice, competition, and hunting.

    We have about 430,000,000 firearms in civilian hands.

    About 140,000,000 people (42 percent of the USA) live with a gun in our home. Gun owners are everywhere and in every lifestyle.

    About 21,000,000 adults have their carry permits.  An estimated 17,000,000 carry “regularly”.

    Armed citizens defend themselves at home, at work, and in pubic.

    There were over 1,200,000 reported cases of violent crime in the United States in 2019. Those are cases of murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

    The US CDC recorded 486 accidental deaths involving a firearm. Only 1-in-350 accidental deaths involved a firearm.

    •   173,000 total accidental deaths
    •     39,000 falling accidents
    •     35,500 vehicle deaths
    •     65,700 unintentional poisonings

    With surprisingly few exceptions, your gun owning neighbors act the way you want them to act.
    Ammo supply-;jsessionid=3E2027CADD8B68E44F8837FBA050

    The industry trade group for the shooting sports is the NSSF -National Shooting Sports Foundation- which estimates there will be 12,000,000,000 firearms’ cartridges sold in the US civilian market in 2021. That is 32,000,000 cartridges a day used for fun. Half are .22 Long Rifle.

    Guns in the US-  We have about 430,000,000 firearms in civilian hands.

    Living with a gun-  About 140,000,000 people (42 percent of the USA) live with a gun in our home. Gun owners are everywhere and in every lifestyle.

    Firearms fit many purposes. Like shoes, the gun owner must find the right gun for the right purpose and one that fits. Most guns are seldom if ever used and they sit in storage day after day.

    Citizens carry concealed-  At any given time, one in twenty persons around you are armed.

    Self-defense incidents-  Government numbers vary depending on which report you read. Reports vary from a low of 500,000 to a high of 3,000,000 cases of armed defense each year.

    1,500,000 may be the best estimate, based on the frequency of armed defense from numerous reports at the CDC (United States Center for Disease Control).

    Thus, citizens used a firearm to stop criminal activity about 4,000 times a day.

    Most armed self-defense incidents end with no shots fired. Most criminals stop and run away when an armed citizen simply presents his or her gun.

    Legally armed citizens shot and killed a criminal 344 times in the entire year of 2019, less than once a day.

    Criminal activity-  There were 10,000 cases where one person killed another with a firearm. That includes all types of guns. Most of these incidents are gangs fighting over territory and crimes of passion.

    Accidents-  The US CDC recorded 486 accidental deaths involving a firearm. Only 1-in-350 accidental deaths involved a firearm.

    For perspective:

    Gun owners are remarkably law abiding and non-violent-

    They save lives thousands of times a day because they are armed and resist attackers.

    They understand the responsibility to act, act safely, and statistics show this fact.

    US population-

    Guns in the US-

    Calculated rate of concealed carry-

    Armed defense-

    Violent Crime-,compared%20with%20the%202010%20estimate.




    Safety of permit holders and police-

    Number of police-

  • 01/06/2022 5:31 PM | Anonymous

    Progressive Prosecutions  by Tom Reynolds

    Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals number 5 is: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.  Conservatives are less likely to do this but it’s just getting too easy!  Case in point: just when you thought the progressives couldn’t get crazier, along comes Manhattan’s new DA, Alvin Bragg.  The New York Post reports that he has issued some “interesting” directives to his staff, all of which should have people aching for more personal protection guns in the “Big Apple”.

    Armed robbers who use guns or other deadly weapons to stick up stores and other businesses will be prosecuted only for petty larceny, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there’s no “genuine risk of physical harm”.  (Isn’t a genuine risk of physical harm the reason criminals use guns in holdups?)

    Convicted criminals caught with weapons other than guns will have those felony charges downgraded to misdemeanors unless they’re also charged with more serious offenses. (Will licensed gun owners caught with guns while passing through Manhattan also be treated so well?)

    Drug dealers believed to be “acting as a low-level agent of a seller” will be prosecuted only for misdemeanor possession.  (Will drug dealers now open kiosks next to grammar schools since they will be mostly off-the-hook?)   

    Suspected drug dealers will only be prosecuted on felony charges if they’re also accused of more serious crimes or are actually caught in the act of selling drugs.  (Basic management for drug dealers: delegate responsibilities and avoid responsibility.)

    The DA’s office will only seek prison time for homicides and a handful of other cases.  (Roaming around free to commit crimes while on parole is such a disincentive for criminals!)

    The Office will not seek a sentence of life without parole. (For a murder victim, the life sentence is still in order.)

    When prosecutors seek a prison sentence that can’t be reviewed or changed by a parole board, the request can be for no more than 20 years.  (Do murderers often get parole before 20 years are up?)

    “Charges should be brought consistent with the goal of providing services to such individuals…”  (Commit crimes to get government services!  What a novel method of getting attention from government bureaucrats?)

    ADAs should evaluate the person arrested, and identify people: who suffer from mental illness; who are unhoused; who commit crimes of poverty; or who suffer from substance use disorders.  (Does the criminal’s criminal intent ever enter into this evaluation?)

    Bragg also told prosecutors to take into account the impact prison would have on the defendant’s life.  (Perhaps Bragg would follow Biden’s example and give the criminal $450,000 because committing a crime and getting caught separates the criminals from their family.)

    In an accompanying “Day One” letter to his staff, Bragg claimed, “These policy changes…will, in and of themselves, make us safer…”  (Wanna bet?)

    He also pledged that “new initiatives and policies on guns, sex crimes, hate crimes, and other matters will be announced in the coming weeks.”  (Let me guess: criminals good, guns bad.)

    Bragg, also made clear his mission is to reduce the number of defendants locked up pretrial; “…we must reserve pretrial detention for very serious cases.”  (Since Bail Reform has gone so well.)

    He won’t prosecute low level crimes like prostitution and resisting arrest.  (Criminals should now feel free to resist arrest as, unlike with George Floyd, there will be no down side.)

    “Bragg gives criminals the roadmap to freedom from prosecution and control of our streets,” said the head of the NYPD Detectives’ Endowment Association.  (Any west coast cities that might be good examples of this?)

    Not to be outdone, the District Attorney of Albany County, N.Y., on Tuesday announced that his office was dropping a misdemeanor sex crime criminal case of forcible touching against former Governor Andrew Cuomo.  It allegedly occurred on the second floor of the governor’s mansion.  (One wonders if the decision would be the same if Cuomo were a Republican?

    Never fear, New York Attorney General Letitia James is trying to take a tough law-and-order stance in her investigation of whether fraud “permeated the Trump Organization.”  James requested to take a deposition from former President Donald Trump on January 7th and she has now subpoenaed Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump.  (None of the Trumps are complying.  Perhaps the Trumps should “identify” as Democrats to make this go away.)

    NYC’s Bragg also has to decide if he will pursue a separate investigation into Donald Trump and his business practices, inherited from his predecessor.  (Any bets on whether or not he pursues that one?

    New York City residents should petition the Supreme Court for a quick decision on NYSRPA v Bruen.  They’re gonna need more guns.

  • 01/04/2022 11:00 AM | Anonymous

    The Audacity of Deception  by Tom Reynolds

    On Monday, we wrote about Newsweek presenting a thoroughly dishonest piece about guns.  Although unrelated to the Constitution, here’s another example of the media’s audacity in deception.

    In Rolling Stone, Jeff Goodell writes that cracks and fissures in the Thwaites Eastern Ice Shelf (Antarctica) suggest that ice mass “could fracture” and would cause the disappearance of “virtually every low-lying coastal city in the world.

    Sounds pretty serious.  What could possibly cause this? 

    Goodell’s entire article blames this potential catastrophe on global warming and devotes only one sentence to the real story. “Thwaites is…melting from below, due to warmer ocean water eating away at its underbelly.”   No direct explanation of how this “warmer water” was generated but if you read the article, you cannot help coming away with the (mis)understanding that the “melting from below” is related to global warming.  He opened the door as to the true cause but then shut it, without explanation.  (Could it be that he knows the cause but has an agenda?)

    Doomsday Glacier in Antarctica Could Collapse Soon: New Research - Rolling Stone

    The leftist media feeds upon itself.  For example, John Vidal also wants to be the Paul Revere of melting ice and in the Guardian decries politicians’ inattention when he wrote: “Thwaites underlines that global heating and glaciers do not wait for politicians, and every year action to reduce climate emissions is delayed only accelerates global disaster”.

    Just when you were sure – based on the above - that global warming was striking again in Antarctica, along comes Richard North writing in Turbulent Times on December 31, 2021: “…media reports cited are lying, directly by implying (and stating) that the potential collapse of Thwaites glacier is exclusively down to climate change, and by omission in not mentioning the geothermal activity”.

    Turbulent Times: Climate change: a licence to lie | Turbulent Times

    Media lies?  Say it aint so! 

    What’s Geothermal activity?  James Edward Kamis explained geothermal activity in the Climate Change Dispatch on 2/25/2019: “Rapid melting of Antarctica’s Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers is the result of subglacial bedrock heat flow from a well-known and precisely mapped regional geological ’hotspot’ called the Marie Byrd Mantle Plume, not global warming” In the Thwaites Glacier area, researchers have identified: “Twenty-seven semi-active subglacial volcanoes…study after research study has now proven (this) beyond any doubt”.

    So, the melting is caused by twenty-seven volcanoes, not global warming, and that fact is well known (but not by Goodell and Vidal, obviously).

    Kamis, like Richard North, thrusts an ice pick into the heart of the journalism of deception: “Failure of the media to include in their numerous articles this telling scientific evidence…is difficult to reconcile with proper scientific methodology”.

    Wait a minute!  The left, which constantly is telling us to believe the science, is not following proper scientific methodology? 

    Kamis does a nice job of explaining in layman’s terms the technical aspects of what a “sub-glacial plume” is and how the Thwaites Glacier melting would not directly add to the sea level rapid rises that Goodell describes, (but it could open the door to eventual rises in sea level).

    More Proof That Geologic Forces Are Melting W. Antarctic Glaciers (

    If the leftist media believes in global warming, they should not have to lie to prove their point.  Ditto for gun control. 

    And just like articles on guns, internet search engines point you to articles confirming the leftist, global warming position.  Search for “Thwaites Glacier and volcanoes” and you will not find any articles contesting global warming as a cause until you get to page two.  Sound familiar?

    Journalistic deception is not limited to just gun control.  The left believes lying or lying-by-omission is totally acceptable in their quest for power and control.   Just staying informed in the face of this mountain of disinformation is now a form of patriotism.

  • 01/03/2022 9:06 PM | Anonymous

    The Walking Dead Returns  by Tom Reynolds

    Formerly, Newsweek’s distribution seemed to be primarily in the waiting rooms of doctor’s offices.  So, when Covid removed magazines from those rooms, it was natural to assume that Newsweek had gone out of business.  Imagine my surprise when it suddenly reappeared, risen and walking the earth like some brain-dead zombie in the “Walking Dead”.

    In fact, Newsweek’s writer David H. Freedman all but equates the Walking Dead’s zombies to gun owners in his article “Millions of Angry Armed Americans Stand Ready To Seize Power If Trump loses in 2024”.  Apparently, Newsweek’s readers are expected to be just as mindless as those TV zombies were when they overthrew the U.S. government.  

    Like Custer at the Little Big Horn, Freedman fights a losing battle, this time with facts and not against arrows.  For instance, he says, “…militias, which have been a feature of American life at least since the Ku Klux Klan rose to power after the Civil War”.  As a liberal, it’s fully expected that he is not familiar with the U.S. Constitution which, famously, mentions militias in its 2nd Amendment.  Or that militias featured prominently in the Revolutionary War.  Both occurred 75 to 85 years before the Civil War ended. But as a writer, not as a liberal, shouldn’t he do some research before he impugns militias by linking their appearance to the KKK? 

    Then he says, “In 2020, 17 million Americans bought 40 million guns and in 2021 we’re on track to add another 20 million. If historical trends hold, the buyers will be overwhelmingly white…”.  But, The Guardian  (and numerous other sources) report, “…approximately half of all new gun owners were female and nearly half were people of color.”  I know he’s a journalist and not a mathematician, but 3rd grade math indicates that nearly half being people of color doesn’t leave an overwhelming number to be white.    Whatever Freedman believes are “historical trends” certainly didn’t hold true.  So much for journalistic research.  But gun grabbing liberals never let inconvenient facts get in their way.

    Freedman then warns how, “America's massive and mostly Republican gun-rights movement…raises the threat of armed, large-scale attacks around the 2024 presidential election—attacks that could make the January 6 insurrection look like a toothless stunt by comparison”.  January 6th wasn’t toothless by comparison to anything- it was toothless standing on its own!  Or did Freeman miss that not one protester fired a shot or not one has been charged with insurrection or that Biden was confirmed and inaugurated as president?

    Then he wonders if the 2024 election might bring, “…protesters and counter-protesters into the street…plunging the country into chaos”.  He also writes, “Nearly a third of Republicans agree that ‘true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.’" Does he mean protesting and resorting to violence like Black Lives Matter and Antifa did in their “mostly peaceful protests”?  I may have missed it, but did Freedman write, in comparable terms, about those protests? I’m going to go out not very far on a limb and guess – not.

    He also predicts that any violence over 2024 election results could only come from Republicans and, then, only if Trump loses a close race.  He dismisses any worry about violent Democrat protests by writing, “If Democratic protests include any violence, as was the case with several Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 in mostly isolated instances…”  Mostly isolated instances!  Can you begin to imagine how much damage would have been done if the “mostly peaceful protests” had included more than only “isolated instances” of violence?

    Freedman throws out a scare tactic when he states that the Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen could lead “to the overthrow of the U.S. government”, because people will be allowed to carry guns “anywhere”, including while protesting in D.C.  Can you imagine – can you just image – Americans exercising their 2nd Amendment rights in support of their 1st Amendment rights?  A liberal’s worst nightmare!  Call out the National Guard and fence off the Capitol before that trend catches on!

    Freedman continues in a similar way throughout the article but he does stumble upon one reasonable theory.  The vast majority of guns belong to Republicans and if the radical left pushes the country into a civil war, "One side has about 8 trillion bullets... Wonder who would win?"

    Newsweek certainly can be compared to the brain dead for publishing this article.

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