Log in

Briefings  from our SCOPE membership

  • 01/24/2023 12:24 PM | Anonymous

    Pistol Permit Recertification  by Tom Reynolds

    If you read our emails from SCOPE, you know that New York State has been changing the date on which Pistol Permits had to be recertified.  Permits that formerly had five (5) years to recertify have been changed to three (3) years.

    Apparently, a lot of people were as surprised as I was about the change in recertification dates.  SCOPE’s email was burning up after members got our warning and checked their recertification date.  They obviously believe that this was done “behind our backs”.

    Pistol Permit holders were surprised because they believed that if they recertified before September 1st, it would be 5 years to recertification.  Why did they believe that?  Because when they recertified, the response from the New York State Police (NYSP) had a 5 years renewal date.  That, very reasonably, led them to believe that they had 5 years.

    As of January 21st, there has not been, to my knowledge, any public statement by the NYSP that the 5 years recertification dates that licensees had been given were no longer valid and had been unilaterally changed to 3 years.

    If the government passed some subsequent law that changed any other license or permit, we would reasonably expect some kind of notification and public statement.  But it did not happen with firearms.  (Merely an oversight in a state that hates the 2nd Amendment?  Not many of us believe that!)

    I went back and checked the NYSP’s website for Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ).  They addressed several recertification FAQ’s but the one conspicuously missing was:  If I am currently scheduled for recertification in 5 years, will it be shortened to 3 years?  Somehow, NYSP didn’t think of that as worth mentioning, even later while they were actually doing it.  It is valid for people with a piece of paper issued by the NYSP which indicates a 5 years recertification date to believe they have those 5 years before recertification is due.     

    What angered many permit holders (and sowed their distrust) was that there was no notification to them that their recertification time had been shortened.  Apparently, many of them (like I did) kept track of their recertification date so they would continue to be law-abiding citizens and would not inadvertently break the law.  They / I had no reason to go back to the NYSP web site to see if anything changed since we had a piece of paper in our files telling us exactly when recertification was due. 

    Another big response has been people asking if this was intentionally misleading, to give the NYSP an excuse to confiscate firearms.  Will NYSP be notifying them in 3 years?  Only the NYSP can answer if it is cover for confiscation and if they will notify us. 

    On August 27th, I wrote an email about people recertifying early (before September 1, 2022) in order to avoid getting the shorter, 3 years, recertification period.  What I wrote at that time was. “What we don’t know is if NY will try to strike back at people who avoided the new law when they recertified early.”  

    Now we know.

    One other interesting point: check the actual pistol permit plastic cards we were issued.  No expiration date and no statement that it is a lifetime permit.  It was left open for abuse like this.     

    Since NYS laws are written in ‘legalese’, we depend on the government to issue instructions and forms that interpret laws and keep us as the law-abiding citizens we want to be.  For instance, before applying, does anyone read the actual wording of the law for obtaining or renewing a driver’s license?  We follow the government’s instructions and depend on the government to guide us and insure we comply according to the law.  (However, the NY government is trying to do away with the 2nd Amendment, so they believe they can leave a rather important part unsaid and make criminals of law-abiding gun owners?)

    We expect that the NYSP and Hochul will defend this by simply saying that the 3 years period is in the law. 

    But did the law apply to permits issued, recertified and documented before the law became effective?  There are, obviously, a lot of questions being frequently asked about that.  As stated earlier, the NYSP didn’t believe that should be a FAQ…or did they and they wanted to bury it.

    State Senator Thomas O’Mara has quickly introduced bill number S2176 into the NY Senate, as soon as SCOPE notified him of this.  That bill would require the NYSP to send renewal notices at least 90 days before expiration to holders of a license to carry or possess a pistol or revolver.

  • 01/23/2023 5:29 PM | Anonymous

    News You Can Use – Or Not  by Tom Reynolds

    It’s Monday - and not a Federal Holiday - which hasn’t happened much, lately. So, you’re back to work!  Start your week out with a laugh.  Or at least something to show you that the people trying to ban guns are just as rabid about other things.

    California legislators voted to phase out gasoline-powered car sales by 2035.

    Wyoming’s legislature is considering a resolution that calls for a phaseout of new electric vehicle sales by 2035.

    What if more fossil fuel states and Red states passed similar legislation!  The left would simply say that Wyoming was being divisive, while California was worshipping at Greta’s Grail.

    Legal Insurrection’s Professor William Jacobson said that administrators and faculty who advocate for open borders do not want the words “illegal applied to people who cross the border - illegally.

    He believes word-banning neutralizes opposition in order to impose authoritarianism.  “They monitor your language, they get you to use language that only they approve, and once you’ve done that with somebody…that’s enormous control.”

    Note: ICE also banned use of “illegal alien” in 2021.

    SCOPE suggests as possibilities: Undocumented tourists?  Visiting drug dealers?  Biden’s blunderers?  Paperwork challenged? Freebie Foragers Mayorkas’ Mob.

    Let’s ban the words “Assault Weapon.”

    A libertarian higher education expert proposed measures to improve higher education funding by ultimately phasing out all aid programs because they inflate tuition

    What?  Government subsidies promote inflation?  If that’s so, the current general inflation would be caused, at least in part, by…government spending.  You know…things like green energy subsidies. 

    Cato Institute’s Neal McCluskey wrote that, “if [government agencies] are going to be the lenders, they should assess somebody’s ability to enroll in a program and succeed instead of giving out…loans regardless of whether they are going to succeed.”

    Repay a loan you voluntarily taken put? Do a cost / benefit analysis of your college degree?  That’s personal responsibility!  Be careful, if that gets around it will destroy the whole liberal movement.

    Last Will and Testament of a Gas-Stove Owner

    Bottom of Form

    My body is faint. Even now, reality spins as if demons had put Earth within the dryer — that gaseous beast — and set it to tumble low.

    We sent the children to our Amish friend, just in time; it’s too late for us, though. 

    If only we hadn’t renovated the kitchen. Joanna Gaines has killed us all with her painted shiplap and brass pot fillers installed above those . . . those stovetops.

    The blue flames — they were so comforting. We should have known they were will-o’-the-wisps in the bog, leading us to doom.

    For years we spent our days before that flickering, azure, Promethean shrine, not knowing, not caring to know. We now lie expired upon the suburban savannah, poisoned and stupefied. 

    Like the Israelites stricken by the serpents for their faithlessness, we are now punished for our sins of conveniently heating soup and centrally heating our homes. Where is Moses? Where is the snake upon the staff to heal us?

    Biden, forgive us, for we knew not what we did. 

    Saint Greta, pray for us.

    SCOPE wrote about this issue a few months ago* and it may have been fixed.  Or as fixed as anything ever is fixed in NY City.

    New York City officials have agreed to remove 441,083 ineligible voters from its voter rolls after a legal watchdog found the liberal-led government refused to clean up its list of voters as required by federal law.

    Judicial Watch, a non-profit public interest law firm, filed the lawsuit after an investigation found that in six years, out of 5.5 million voters, only 22 names had been removed for moving away, dying or otherwise becoming ineligible to vote.

    There is no word about how many of the 441,083 voted in recent elections.

    S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education - Seems reasonable. If you’re dead you shouldn’t vote. (

    And under the category of “they can’t get much dumber”…

    FOX News’ talking head Geraldo Rivera backed President Biden’s push for an “assault weapons” ban.

    On The Five, Rivera told its co-hosts that the AR-15 was a “machine gun” that people own in order to make them feel “macho.”  (I could make a lot of jokes about this but the only nice one is: What about women who own the AR 15?)

    A machine gun?  Really?  Where does Rivera get his information from: John Wick movies?

    Greg Gutfeld then asked Rivera, “What does ‘AR’ stand for?”

    Rivera responded, “Automatic rifle.”


    You can’t fix stupid!

  • 01/19/2023 9:17 PM | Anonymous

    Appeals to be Reheard  by Tom Reynolds

    New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) tried to work around the NYSRPA v Bruen decision of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).  This has resulted in numerous lawsuits to stop enforcement of various portions of CCIA since many view CCIA as a direct challenge to SCOTUS’ decision.

    Originally, the lawsuits challenging CCIA were generally successful at the trial court level but were appealed to the Appeals Court level where the trial courts’ decisions were generally overturned.

    The Appeals Court decisions were then appealed to SCOTUS which declined to hear the appeals now but sent them back to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals to be reheard.*  SCOTUS believed that the Appeals Court had not furnished an adequate explanation of why they had overturned the trial courts’ very well thought out and well-documented decisions against the CCIA.

    The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals announced it would hear arguments “in tandem” on four lawsuits challenging several provisions of CCIA on March 20.  Those four lawsuits are:

    Ivan Antonyuk, et al v. Steven A. Nigrelli (This lawsuit was to stop NYS from enforcing major areas of the CCIA)

    Jimmie Hardaway, Jr., et al v. Steven A. Nigrelli  (This lawsuit was to stop NYS from enforcing the CCIA’s firearm ban covering places  of worship and religious observation.) 

    Brett Christian, Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., Second Amendment Foundation, Inc v. Steven A. Nigrelli, (This lawsuit is to stop NYS from enforcing CCIA’s firearm ban on private property unless the owner affirmatively allows it.)  

    Nadine Gazzola, et al. v. Kathleen Hochul, et al. (This lawsuit is to stop NYS from enforcing the Federal Firearm Licensee portions of the CCIA.)

    This only covers four of the many lawsuits already filed against CCIA.

    Until March 20, almost all of the CCIA is in effect almost everywhere. 

    We should not expect an immediate decision.  And whatever the decision, it will probably be appealed back to the Supreme Court, which has the option of hearing or not hearing the appeal.  This might take a long time to finish.

    Or it might not.

    If the 2nd Circuit’s new decision keeps the CCIA in place and enforceable until SCOTUS decides on an appeal, we can hope that SCOTUS would hear the appeal on an expedited basis since CCIA flies directly in-the-face of the NYSRPA v Bruen decision.  It is hard to imagine SCOTUS not hearing an appeal if CCIA is left in place

    If the new 2nd Circuit decision strikes down the CCIA, in whole or in part, New York would probably appeal to SCOTUS but SCOTUS might choose to not hear the appeal and just leave it in place.  If it does hear the appeal, it might not be in a hurry to do so.

    We should take heart in the Caetano v Massachusetts decision in which every court level in Massachusetts ruled against Caetano while ignoring SCOTUS’ precedent.  SCOTUS had no difficulty in overturning Massachusetts and basically saying to Massachusetts, “Can’t you guys read?”   

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York.  It exercises federal jurisdiction in six districts with each district having multiple seats on the court:

    *Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said in a letter attached to the order that CCIA "presents novel and serious questions under both the First and the Second Amendments." The pair also made clear that the court's denial was in no way "expressing any views on the merits" of the challenges brought by firearms proponents; instead, it was to "reflect respect for the 2nd Circuit’s procedures in managing its own docket."

  • 01/17/2023 10:49 AM | Anonymous

    Pistol Permit Recertification Changed  by Tom Reynolds

    While you were sleeping, Kathy Hochul and the NY State Police were busy.

    This weekend, I was warned by a SCOPE member that NY State has been changing the date on which Pistol Permits had to be recertified.  Permits that had five (5) years to recertify have been changed to three (3) years.

    I checked mine and it was true!

    I have a piece of paper that I copied off of the State Police web site, when I recertified, that says my recertification date is August 2027.

    Being warned, I went to that same web site.   I now have a piece of paper, copied off of the same State Police web site, that says my recertification is now due on August 2025.

    What happened to those two years?

    We don’t know.

    Others have confirmed this has happened to them.

    Obviously, we are checking on the latest sleight-of-hand by the Hochul regime.

    We will be keeping members informed through e mails.

    Link to check your recertification date:

    NYS Pistol Permit Recertification

  • 01/13/2023 1:29 PM | Anonymous

    Antonyuk v Nigrelli 1/11/2023  by Tom Reynolds

    The case of Antonyuk v Nigrelli is probably the most far- reaching of many cases in opposition to Governor Hochul’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). 

    Initially, the District Court judge issued a stay in enforcement (stopped enforcement) of that act. 

    This Stay was overturned by the 2nd Circuit Appeals Court which allowed the CCIA to be enforced while the case is being decided.  However, the 2nd Circuit did not give an adequate explanation of its decision

    The STAY was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS.)

    On Wednesday, SCOTUS refused to overturn the Appeals Court ON THE STAY.  However, there are conditions to that decision: The 2nd Circuit Appeals Court must “provide an explanation for its stay order or expedite consideration of the appeal.”

    Therefore, unfortunately, the CCIA is still in force while the case against it proceeds.

    While we had hoped that enforcement would be stayed, we are still optimistic that CCIA will eventually be declared unconstitutional.

    Below is the statement of JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS joins, respecting the denial of the application to vacate stay.

    “The New York law at issue in this application presents novel and serious questions under both the First and the Second Amendments. The District Court found, in a thorough opinion, that the applicants were likely to succeed on a number of their claims, and it issued a preliminary injunction as to twelve provisions of the challenged law. “

    “With one exception, the Second Circuit issued a stay of the injunction in full, and in doing so did not provide any explanation for its ruling…In parallel cases presenting related issues, the Second Circuit has likewise issued unreasoned summary stay orders, but in those cases it has ordered expedited briefing. “

    “I understand the Court’s denial today to reflect respect for the Second Circuit’s procedures in managing its own docket, rather than expressing any view on the merits of the case. Applicants should not be deterred by today’s order from again seeking relief if the Second Circuit does not, within a reasonable time, provide an explanation for its stay order or expedite consideration of the appeal.”

    As usual, the judicial system is very bureaucratic in the way cases are handled, which adds to the expense of non-government participants.  The government uses bottomless pockets of taxpayer dollars.  The above decision does not reflect on the merits of the case.

  • 01/13/2023 10:35 AM | Anonymous

    Short answers against Gun Control and how to defend the  Second Amendment with short, crisp answers: (This is a link to a video by Massad Ayoob entitled)

  • 01/12/2023 1:58 PM | Anonymous

    Winter is Coming  by Tom m Reynolds

    Winter is coming” was a much-used phrase from Game Of Thrones.  It’s here, as I am sure you know – especially those of you in western NY.

    Here’s something to warm your anger this winter.  It is indirectly 2nd Amendment related (which I’ll explain at the end).  You may be interested in some of the tax increases that will affect your heating bill and were included in the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act”. Think your household energy bills are high now? Just wait until these three major energy taxes hit your wallet.

    The organization Americans for Tax Reform, (ATR) which opposes all tax hikes as a matter of principle, posted some interesting information.

    On Jan. 1, 2023 the following tax hikes took effect:

    $6.5 Billion Natural Gas Tax Which Will Increase Household Energy Bills       

    This is a tax on American oil and gas development’s methane emissions which will drive up the cost of household energy bills. The Congressional Budget Office estimates this natural gas tax will increase taxes by $6.5 billion.

    A letter to Congress from the American Gas Association warned that the methane tax would amount to a 17% increase on an average family’s natural gas bill.

    $12 Billion Crude Oil Tax Which Will Increase Household Costs

    A 16.4 cents-per-barrel tax on crude oil and imported petroleum products will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher gas prices.

    If that isn’t bad enough, it’s been pegged to inflation (and you know what that is doing.)  As inflation increases, so will the tax. (Now you know why the Biden administration isn’t exactly “rabid” about fighting inflation by controlling expenses.)

    The non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates the provision will raise $12 billion in taxes.

    $1.2 Billion Coal Tax Which Will Increase Household Energy Bills

    This tax hike more than doubles the current excise taxes on coal production:

    The tax rate on coal from subsurface mining would increase from $0.50 per ton to $1.10 per ton

    The tax rate on coal from surface mining would increase from $0.25 per ton to $0.55 per ton.

    JCT estimates that this will raise $1.2 billion in taxes that will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher electricity bills.

    These taxes were included in the bill despite retail prices for energy hitting all-time highs in the United States.

    The so-called Inflation Reduction Act does provide huge benefits to the renewable energy industry.  Unfortunately, most of us don’t get our heat and electricity from renewable energy.  Perhaps Biden and Congress are not aware that most of our electricity is currently generated by natural gas, oil and coal, the three things on which they are increasing taxes?

    These tax hikes violate President Biden’s tax pledge not to raise taxes on any American making less than $400,000 per year.  His administration has repeatedly echoed that “promise”.

    On June 21 of last year, Biden’s Press Secretary Jen Psaki stated: “The President’s pledge was not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $400,000 a year. 

    On February 26 of last year, Biden’s Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg stated: “The President’s made a commitment that this administration will not raise taxes on people making less than $400,000 a year.”

    Energy cost increases are a regressive tax that hits the lowest income sectors of the economy the hardest.  You know…those making less than $400,000 per year.

    We are passing this information on because it is almost invisible on the internet. Try searching the web for “Energy Taxes in the Inflation Reduction Act.”  There are pages after pages of articles on the tax breaks for renewable energy.  Tax increases…not so much. 

    No matter how you feel about the so-called Climate Change agenda, you deserve the full story of related costs and benefits.  (I believe that is the purpose of one of those pesky amendments in the Bill of Rights.)

    How does this tie into 2A gun rights?  This is the same “closet censorship” we see on the 2nd Amendment and gun rights; for instance, try finding web articles on defensive use of guns. 

    When the only information you get omits very important facts, it’s easy to be misinformed.  Most Americans and probably many gun owners don’t have the facts on defensive uses of guns.  By a not so amazing coincidence, it is the same people doing the censoring on these tax increases that censor positive 2A articles. 

    Stay warm!

  • 01/11/2023 2:00 PM | Anonymous

    The Shoe Changes Feet  by Tom Reynolds

    Politicians of all parties seem to have difficulty envisioning long term consequences; they set in motion actions against opponents that can end up biting them back.

    No one but Joe Biden has ever called Joe Biden smart – even though CNN reports that the University of Pennsylvania had been paying him $900,000 per year as an Honorary Professor to teach zero classes.  (And you wonder why college tuitions are so high?)

     I was going to say that only makes him smarter than those who are paying him but – on second thought - it is also a legal way for a college to buy influence with (a term for legally bribe) a public official.  Maybe Penn’s administrators were not so dumb after all, since Biden has been trying desperately to forgive student’s college loans caused by high college tuitions.

    On Monday, January 9th 2023, the Washington Post reported that roughly 10 classified documents were found in Biden’s office in Washington supplied by Penn. These classified documents were discovered on November 2, 2022.

    So, Biden kept classified documents in an office he has been reported as using between 2017 and 2019 - after he left the Vice Presidency.  (This sounds familiar?  Where have we heard something similar?  Isn’t the Biden administration making something big about a similar story?)

    This was – finally - publicly reported on January 9, 2023.  Anything important happen between November 2nd and January 9th?  Perhaps, on November 8, 2022?  Could an immediate announcement after November 2nd have influenced the events of November 8th? 

    And about two weeks later, Attorney General Garland appointed a special prosecutor to oversee a criminal investigation into whether Trump broke the law by having classified records stashed in his Mar-a-Lago estate.

    Let the media’s excuse making begin…

    NBC and MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Alene argued, "Big differences between this & Trump's Mar-a-Lago situation: they were found in an office setting, not in Biden's home...It's apples to oranges."  (Doesn’t Trump have both a home and an office in Mar-a-Lago?)

    She is right that some of it is “apples to oranges”.  Mar- a-Lago is protected by the United States Secret Service and Biden’s office was not.  (Ever see the movie Paul Blart: Mall Cop?)

    And a President can declassify documents while a Vice President cannot.  

    Yep.  Definitely “apples to oranges”, but not in the way Arlene makes it out to be.

    Per the Washington Post: “The case will likely draw comparisons to Mar-a-Lago but appears quite different. Officials have said the Trump investigation concerns not just the possible mishandling of classified documents, but possible obstruction of justice or destruction of records.” 

    Don’t you have to have a crime in order to obstruct justice?  If having secret documents isn’t a crime for Biden, why is it a crime for Trump?  And does the Washington Post know, at this time, that Biden did not destroy evidence.  WP – your biases are showing!

    CBS News made sure to say that a source familiar with the situation told them that the documents did not contain nuclear secrets. Previously, Biden said about Trump, “How that could possibly happen? How one – anyone could be that irresponsible?”. “And I thought what data was in there that may compromise sources and methods? By that I mean names of people who helped or, et cetera. … totally irresponsible.” 

    It seems that Biden was not accusing Trump of having “nuclear secrets”, either.  So, if Trump did not have “nuclear secrets” but is guilty, why is CBS taking Biden off-the-hook because he did not have “nuclear secrets”.  Sounds like they both were innocent of having “nuclear secrets” but if Trump is guilty of having “other secrets” then isn’t Biden guilty, too.

    As for Biden doing this by accident, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said, “Here’s an individual (who) spent his last 40 years in office.

    McCarthy forgets that some people have 40 years experience while others have one year’s experience 40 times.

    Expect this story to make headlines in the left-leaning media about as long as Hunter Biden’s laptop-from-hell was in the headlines.

    As GOP Rep. James Comer of Kentucky best summed it up, “How ironic.”

  • 01/09/2023 12:23 PM | Anonymous

    BATFE Funding  by Tom Reynolds

    The $1.7 billion Omnibus bill, that was just passed, included special funding for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. (BATFE formerly ATF.)  $2 billion has been allocated to help the BATFE move on various forms of gun control.

    • Encourage VA medical centers to confiscate Firearms owned by veterans;
    • Keep notes on the exact location of veteran’s firearms through their “gun storage maps” program.

    The National Disposal Branch (NDB) is a branch of the BATFE and was created to destroy guns confiscated or used as crime evidence.  (Average, 23,000 each year.)

    Part of the funding was to help the NDB follow the requirements with respect to its handling of the guns  scheduled to be destroyed.  Will money overcome bureaucratic complacency or is it rewarding incompetence? 

    For example:

    BATFE instructs firearms dealers (FFL’s) on how to avoid the theft of firearms.  But a former NDB Security Guard used the NDB’s stored firearms to create his own business. (Who said entrepreneurship was dead?)  He was stealing firearms from the facility where he worked and reselling them, after falsely certifying them as destroyed.  It wasn’t difficult because the NDB was not doing what it told FFL’s to do.  (Do as I say – not as I do?)

    Liberals (gun grabbers by another name) have criticized drug laws as discouraging illegal drug users from seeking help.  Showing their usual lack of consistency, those same liberals don’t seem to care as much about veterans.  The Omnibus bill includes funding for the Veteran’s Administration to:

    Ammoland reports that the primary use of the $2 billion will be $700 million to encourage states to pass Red Flag Laws.  (Remember when liberals believed in civil rights?  You know, those pesky amendments in the Bill of Rights that are now part of the United States Constitution.)

    Ammoland also reports that some funding is for programs designed to discourage women from exercising their Second Amendment right.  (Can you imagine a government funded program to discourage people from exercising their 1st amendment right to free speech?  Hmm…actually I can.)

    Running directly afoul of the goal of the Omnibus Bill, SCOPE is promoting an organization called Armed Women of America.  We’ve added their link to the front page of our web site and there is more about them on the Steuben County Chapter’s web page.

  • 01/04/2023 10:43 AM | Anonymous

    GOA Lawsuits

    On Monday SCOPE updated you about the Antonyuk vs Nigrelli law suit and on Tuesday about the Gazzola vs Hochul law suit. 

    Today, we are going to do something very unusual.

    SCOPE does not make frequent or overt calls for contributions - as many other organizations do.  It’s not that SCOPE doesn’t need the money – we do.  In the past, our members have been generous without being asked.

    Today, we are asking you to make contributions to GOA-NY towards the costs of these lawsuits. Not many organizations will ask people to donate to someone else.  But we all have the same goal and if they can achieve it, it's a victory for all of us. 

    These lawsuits are very important in our fight against the unconstitutional 2A efforts of Kathy Hochul and the NY legislature’s gun grabbers.  As you know, the court system is our main – and perhaps currently our only – way in NY to stop these unconstitutional abominations.

    You can send a check (include a comment “GOA”) and we will pass the money on. 
    Mail to:

    PO Box 165
    East Aurora, NY 14052

    Or, donate on line through our web site:  Be sure and enter “GOA” in the comment section.


    The fastest way is to donate directly to GOA-NY

    Gun Owners of America – New York – Molon Labe

    Under “Note” please add SCOPE so GOA knows it is coming from a SCOPE member.

    You can also send a check to:

    PO Box 25532,
    Rochester, NY 14625

    Please add the comment “SCOPE” so GOA
    knows it is coming from a SCOPE member.


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