SCOPE NY

Briefings  from SCOPE President, Tom Reynolds

  • 12/22/2021 3:45 PM | Anonymous

    July 4th, 1776 – Not for the Faint Hearted  by Tom Reynolds

    On July 4th 1776, the United States declared its independence from Great Britain.  It was not some academic effort - it had real world consequences.  One of the signers, Benjamin Rush, recalled the moment: “Do you recollect the pensive and awful silence which pervaded the house when we were called up, one after the other, to the table of the President of Congress, to subscribe what was believed by many at the time to be our own death warrants?”

    The British had recently put down an insurrection in Ireland and the sentence of the revolutionaries was: “You are to be drawn on hurdles to the place of execution, where you are to be hanged by the neck, but not until you are dead, for while you are still living your bodies are to be taken down, your bowels to be torn out and burned before your faces, your heads then cut off, and your bodies are to be divided into four quarters.”

    Of late, our forefathers have come under a lot of undeserved criticism.  All but forgotten is the immense personal courage that it took to sign the Declaration of Independence.    If the Revolutionary War had failed, perhaps the British would celebrate George Washington day in the same way they celebrate Guy Fawkes day; just another failed revolutionary. 

    As Americans, we have a lot to be thankful for at Christmas and those that risked their lives to gain us our freedom need to be thanked, not denigrated.

  • 12/17/2021 5:21 PM | Anonymous

    Why Do We Need More “Ghost Gun” Laws?!  by Tom Reynolds

    In 1988, The United States Undetectable Firearms Act made it illegal to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm that is not detectable by walk-through metal detection or any firearm with major components that do not generate an accurate image using standard airport imaging technology.  The law had a 10-year life.

    Then, in 1998, Congress renewed the law for five years.

    Then, in 2003, Congress re-authorized the ban for another ten years.  

    Then, in 2013, H.R. 3626 extended the act for another ten years.

    It seems pretty clear that what are derided as “Ghost Guns” are already illegal under federal law.

    A current lawsuit against the District of Columbia is a good example of the anti-2A’s confusion with all things involving guns: “District legislation in question is so poorly thought out and written that the City Council has managed to criminalize the possession of a vast array of popular, common handguns that it regularly allows residents to register, including the very handgun it issues to its police officers."

  • 12/08/2021 5:38 PM | Anonymous

    Speaker Trump  by Tom Reynolds

    Tuesday, we wrote to remind you about some of the interesting side issues surrounding Biden’s seemingly loss of mental acuity and the possibility of Kamala Harris ascending to the presidency.  For 2A supporters, neither is a good option. 

    But in SCOPE’s April 12th Email, we wrote:

    And just for fun – imagine that Donald Trump runs for Congress from Florida in 2022 and is elected.  Once elected, he runs for Speaker of the House in a Republican majority Congress and wins.  That would put Trump next in line after the Vice President or first in line if Harris moves to the Presidency.  Can you imagine…can you even begin to imagine…the left-wing media’s frenzy!”

    Trump as Speaker, a fun thought.  Then, on July 21st, this was written in by Rusty Weiss in the Political Insider:

    Representative Brendan Boyle (D-PA) introduced a bill that would only allow sitting House members to serve as Speaker after Donald Trump said the post would be ‘interesting’.”

    “Boyle, having seemingly resolved all other matters of concern for his constituents, moved on to legislation specifically targeting the former President.”

    “Though the role has never been filled by anyone outside the chamber, the Constitution does not specifically state that the Speaker must be a House member. Anyone chosen by the House can serve as Speaker.”

    Then, on December 8th, Weiss wrote again in The Political Insider:

    “Representative Matt Gaetz says he will move to nominate Donald Trump as the next Speaker should Republicans win back the House in 2022.”

    “Gaetz says he’s gone so far as to discuss the matter with the former President.”

    “When asked by a reporter if he’d like to see Trump as Speaker, Gaetz responded, “I would.”

    “Pressed further on if he’s discussed it with him he added, “I have.”

    The Florida congressman though said he likes to keep “conversations with the former president between the two of us.”

    Who knows how seriously President Trump will take this proposal and its effect on any plans he might have to run for President in 2024.  But it would be ground breaking for a non-House member and for and ex-president to becomes Speaker - and we all know how Trump likes being a ground breaker!   

    Given Trump’s pro 2nd Amendment stances and the Democrat Party’s virulent anti 2nd Amendment efforts, pro 2A supporters should be enjoying any nervousness going on in Washington at the thought of Trump as Speaker of the House.  The conversation probably goes something like:

    Trump couldn’t be serious about this………could he????

  • 12/07/2021 7:33 PM | Anonymous

    Presidential Succession (Update)  by Tom Reynolds

    Last April 12th, SCOPE wrote about the problems the Democrats had – even then - with Biden’s apparent mental issues.  Politically, things have gotten worse with Biden’s and Harris’s (well deserved) plummeting approval ratings.  There are numerous articles being currently written about this issue, but the bottom line is that the Democrats don’t have any good political choices.  Below is a reprint of parts of the April 12th article, which explains the box that Democrats are in.  The issues raised in it are even more relevant, today.

    If Biden should step down or be removed in his first two years, it will be obvious that Democrat insiders knew, prior to the election, that he was failing and hid it from the voters.  That should cause a major negative reaction amongst voters, even amongst the usual Democrat supporters.  There would be legitimate questions: concerning the leader of the free world’s ability to lead; about the judgment of the man with his finger on the nuclear button; about the man tasked by the Constitution with defending it – and thus defending us – from all enemies foreign and domestic; was he incapable of doing his job; what unelected person was acting as President while pulling the strings from behind the curtain; who was really responsible for all the Executive Orders Biden signed?  The legitimate uproar would be overwhelming.  And it would be worse if Biden’s policies are failing at the time he steps down. 

    If Kamala Harris did succeed to the Presidency within the first two years of Biden’s term, the Vice President’s position would need to be filled.  She would nominate someone but that person must be approved by a majority of both houses of Congress. Here’s the monkey wrench in Democrat’s planning; currently, both Houses of Congress are Democrat controlled but the Senate is split exactly 50-50 with the Vice President’s vote being the deciding factor that gives Democrats their control.  If there is no Vice President, the Democrats have only a tie and must seduce at least one Republican vote in order to approve a Harris nominee for Vice President.  (And if one or more Democrats do not vote for the Harris’ nominee, that makes the situation more difficult.)  As a side issue, while the Vice Presidency is vacant, the Democrats do not have a tie breaking vote on any proposed legislation.  Oops!  

    This would force Harris to nominate someone very much less radical than the current President and Vice President.  Joe Manchin, the Senator from West Virginia, comes to mind but that would lose Democrats their majority in the Senate, at least until a replacement election was held, and maybe after the replacement election since West Virginia tends Republican.  

    This leaves Democrat insiders with the option of delaying Biden’s removal until two years have passed and after an off-year election in 2022, which causes them more problems, (besides putting their own political careers above the safety and security of the nation).  Historically, the President’s party loses seats in Congress during an off-year election.  If Democrats should lose one seat in the Senate, they lose their majority.  If Democrats lose about a half dozen seats in the House, they lose their majority.  Losing one or both houses of Congress is a real possibility and must weigh heavily on Democrats’ decision making. 

    If Kamala Harris should succeed to the Presidency after the 2022 election, she would nominate someone but, as previously stated, that person must be approved by a majority of both houses of Congress.  And if one or both of those houses has a Republican majority, a nomination would certainly have to be very much less radical than the current President and Vice President.  And depending on how firm the Republicans held, the person could be middle to right leaning.  

    But it gets worse for Democrats.

    When the Vice Presidency is vacant, the next person in line is the House Speaker and next after that comes the President Pro tempore of the Senate.  If either or both houses are under Republican control, they would be Republicans! If Republicans control the House, they might be very slow in approving any Harris’ nominee, in order to keep a Republican next in line.  And what if the Republicans decided that impeachment payback was in order at the same time that the Vice Presidency was vacant?

    Back to present day. 

    Many current articles are now writing about removing Harris from the Vice Presidency but none spell out how to do it:

    She “aint gonna” resign, that’s for sure. 

    She may be incompetent but that is not a basis for removal under the 25th Amendment.

    She could be impeached for her statements made about the riots in 2020.  If the Democrats are desperate enough to save their own skins, some might cross the aisle and vote for impeachment.  That would be good for the country but impeaching a semi-black woman might hurt their personal political support amongst those typically Democrat voters, so it’s not likely.

    SCOPE has often said that the Socialist policies always fail.  Our problem is that the failure would take the rest of us down with it.  Twin international crises loom with China/Taiwan and Russia/Ukraine as well as always bothersome Iran and North Korea creating mischief. Then there continues to be the national problems with runaway inflation, a southern border open to criminals and Covid, a possible recession, and government overreach under Covid.  We need (the world needs) wisdom and strong leadership in the White House and that isn’t happening or likely to happen under the status quo.

  • 12/06/2021 3:28 PM | Anonymous

    In Case you Missed These from Steve Getman/Tom Reynolds

    Schuyler County’s SCOPE Chairman Steven Getman publishes a monthly Legal Update on our Facebook page.  Some issues that he covers are also covered in our emails or in Firing Lines but we want to be sure the others don’t get lost.  Below are some of the items that Steve covers and also the links, if you want to further explore the issues. 

    Gillibrand pushes for new legislation amid recent violence in Rochester

    In response to Rochester’s state of emergency, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand says she's working to address recent violence with new legislation. That includes banning assault weapons, enforcing a federal anti-gun trafficking law, ensuring reliable background checks and creating a data protection agency that has oversight over social media.

    "There's also enormous amounts of anger and division in our communities that is fueling violence,” Gillibrand said. “A lot of that is caused by disinformation, lies and by social media platforms that are unregulated."

    https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/rochester/politics/2021/11/21/gillibrand-pushes-fornew-legislation-amid-recent-violence-in-rochester

    Note from SCOPE: In one of her last acts as Rochester’s Mayor, Lovely Warren announced that Rochester was pairing with the anti-gun Brady Center to help prevent gun violence.  To validate this, she says “They did this in Chicago…”  The anti-gunners often say stupid things but using Chicago as an example of a successful gun program may be at the top of that list of stupid comments.  

    New York cracks down on ghost guns, but will new laws be effective in curbing violence?

    The trio of bills ban the sale and possession of ghost guns and requires gunsmiths to register and serialize firearms along with unfinished frames or receivers.

    Tom King, Executive Director of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, believes the legislation won’t be effective in curbing gun violence. “Firearms laws are only obeyed by the lawful citizens of the state. Criminals do not pay any attention to any laws that are passed,” said King. “They get ahold of guns all the time. There is a criminal network in the United States. Guns move along in this network,” added King.

    https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/new-york-cracks-down-on-ghost-guns-but-will-newlaws-be-effective-in-curbing-violence

    Note from SCOPE: King’s point needs repeating over and over.  The laws only affect law abiding people and do nothing to stop criminals who do not obey laws.

    The Amendment That Remade America

    The First? The Second? No, the 14th—the basis for every claim against a state government for violating individual rights. That amendment, among its other provisions, bars states from abridging “the privileges or immunities” of citizens or depriving any person of life, liberty or property “without due process of law.” It’s best known for guaranteeing to all persons “the equal protection of the laws.”

    The historical evidence is overwhelming that Second Amendment rights belong to individuals. But if there’s any doubt about that, raised by the existence of the Militia Clause of the Second Amendment, there’s no doubt whatsoever that the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause was aimed at the protection of the individual right—in this case the individual rights of the freed blacks to keep and carry their own weapons.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/fourteenth-amendment-states-civil-rights-federalismoriginalism-abortion-dobbs-jackson-11635535364?reflink=share_mobilewebshare

    Without False Claims About The Risk of Concealed Handgun Permit Holders, The Left Has Nothing

    Since 1976, 18 states eliminated “proper cause” requirements, and gun control advocates have consistently predicted disaster. But in state after state, concealed handgun permit holders have proved to be extremely law-abiding, and Right-to-Carry states have never even held a legislative hearing to consider moving back to “proper cause.”

    In Florida and Texas, permit holders are convicted of firearms-related violations at one-twelfth of the rate at which police officers. In the 19 states with comprehensive permit revocation data, the average revocation rate is one-tenth of one percent. Usually, permit revocations occur because someone moved or died or forgot to bring their permit while carrying.

    Academics have published fifty-two peer-reviewed, empirical studies on concealed carry. Of these, 25 found that allowing people to carry reduces violent crime, and 15 found no significant effect. A minority (12) observed increases in violent crime. These 12, however, suffer from a systematic error to varying degrees: they tend to focus on the last 20 years and compare states that recently passed concealed carry laws with more lenient states that had sustained growth in permits over the past two decades. The finding that crime rose relatively in such states is consistent with permit holders reducing crime.

    https://townhall.com/columnists//johnrlottjr/2021/11/11/without-false-claims-about-therisk-of-concealed-handgun-permit-holders-the-left-n2598

    Note from SCOPE:  Some good sources of information on gun laws are:

    John Lott Jr.  https://crimeresearch.org/  

    David Kopel  https://davekopel.org/

    Allen Korwin  https://www.gunlaws.com/

  • 12/03/2021 7:02 PM | Anonymous

    Soros Strikes Locally  by Tom Reynolds

    SCOPE was often written about gun owners not being active in politics and, especially, not voting.  The left, on the other hand, loves politics! 

    No one epitomizes the radical left’s drive for power more than George Soros.  Researching what Soros funds is difficult as there are so many layers to the onion of organizations that he finances. A few examples are Indivisibles, the Sunrise Movement, the Tides Foundation, Tides Advocacy and Tides.  There is even an advocacy group they support in California called SCOPE, but it's nowhere related to what our mission is and could never be confused with what we do. https://scopela.org/

    Soros has made headlines funding big city radical District Attorneys and other radical groups.  Perhaps you don’t think of Sorors influence in local terms but you could not be more wrong.  SCOPE’s Oneida-Herkimer Chairman, Bohdan Rabarsky, has done some research on this in his area.  Here is some of what he found.

    Before Donald Trump was even inaugurated, there was an organization formed to counter his election, called Indivisible. This group now claims to have 6,000+ chapters throughout America.  The Indivisible groups can’t be dismissed. There’s probably a chapter near you - you just might not realize it.  They have a general website, https://indivisible.org/  and chapters usually have a Facebook page, with limited information unless you log in as a member.  It doesn’t allow you to comment or like - only share.

    Also in 2016, Congresswomen Claudia Tenney was elected for her 1st term.  She was a strong Trump supporter.  That fact drew the attention of the local chapter of Indivisible Mohawk Valley, which proceeded with a vicious campaign of protests and rallies against Trump and Tenney for almost every week, for 2 years. They held protests on the sidewalk in front of her Utica Congressional office every Friday. They held protests at Tenney’s satellite offices whenever she was at those offices. They wrote letters-to-the-editor that hit every newspaper in the 7 counties representing Tenney’s 22nd Congressional district. Indivisible was successful and Tenney lost her reelection bid.  (She was subsequently reelected in 2020 by a handful of votes.)

    The Indivisibles are very well organized and are very well funded. You have to peel back the layers, but sooner or later, you’ll connect the dots to many of George Soros’s organizations. The woman that runs the Indivisible Mohawk Valley chapter comes from South Dakota, relocated to Clinton, NY and she’s Indivisible’s only local paid organizer. The rest are volunteers.   Whenever indivisible has a rally or protest, BLM, Citizen NY and Sunrise Movement are also usually present.

    Give Indivisible’s members credit - they are dedicated to their cause.  So far, they’ve gotten their members elected to the Utica Common Council, Oneida County Board of Legislators and various town & village boards. They know how to organize and they think nothing of getting together on a Sunday afternoon at the town Community Center with 30 or 40 members in support of a candidate.

    Other groups that they’re involved with locally are The Working Families Party, Citizen’s Action of NY and the Sunrise Movement. They build up community support by having giveaways of diapers, formula, food, back packs, etc. They accept donations, but when added to Soros’ funding, they have “big bucks” that they can use build a political power when it comes time for voting.

    Another group to keep an eye on is called Sunrise Movement. They have 45-50 chapters in New York State, located in colleges & universities. We have one here at Hamilton College. They're made up of students and the group uses the various skills of the students to help promote their group. They hide behind the Green Movement, but like AOC's Green New Deal, they promote the entire radical left agenda.

    What do Indivisible and Sunrise also have in common? They're very much anti 2nd Amendment.

    The New Eastcoast Arms Collectors Associates owned by David Petronis had a gun show at the Clinton Arena, a municipal arena owned by the town of Kirkland, for many years. It was a huge success.  It never had a security problem so the town law enforcement liked it and the town made money off of it, as did the dealers and the promoter. Then in 2017 or 2018 Indivisible Mohawk Valley showed up at a town board meeting with 15-20 of its members holding signs. They also brought along the TV media that they notified and charged that minors could possibly get in to buy guns, the promoter lacked security and the Clinton Arena was too close to a school, (never mind the gun show was held in July when school was let out for the summer). They convinced the town board which told the promoter he would have to provide round the clock security and he would have to reimburse the town to the tune of $7,000-$8,000 for the 3-day event. Therefore, he cancelled the show and any future shows and now he only promotes his shows in private facilities, no more public funded facilities.

    As radical left policies fail on a nationwide basis, many in the media are predicting a “Red Wave” in the 2022 elections.  So, gun owners can just sit back and ignore politics, as they have done before, and the Red Wave will just happen.  Wrong!  As Bohdan has shown, Soros and company are active and well-funded. They’re not conceding anything and Soros has the money to fund their efforts. Nancy Pelosi controls the House by 5 votes.  Tenney won in 2020 by 109 votes; do you think that Indivisibles and Sunrise in Oneida-Herkimer might be energized to take back that seat?

    We need to reach out to those gun owners who won’t get active.  Who won’t vote.  We have the potential power and 2022 seems to provide the opportunity to take back control of our country from Biden, Pelosi and Schumer.  SCOPE will be doing its best but we can do more and better with your help in your chapters and at the state level.  If you think 2021 has been bad, keep Pelosi and Schumer in power until 2024 and see how really bad it can get.  It’s time to get involved.

  • 11/29/2021 2:47 PM | Anonymous

    Thoughts on Rittenhouse Trial  by Tom Reynolds

    The left is very critical of gun ownership, but they don’t seem to know even the simplest, most basic things about guns.  Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial filled the news the past few days, but there are some things that haven’t generally been discussed, possibly because the leftist media doesn’t know - or even suspect – and more likely wants to ignore them. 

    Rittenhouse’s main sin in the eyes of the left - now that he has been acquitted - was that he carried an AR15, the infamous “Assault Weapon”.  A question for all you gun owners: if you were unarmed, would you attack someone holding an AR 15?  Of course not!  You could get killed!  No one in the media has brought up that Rittenhouse’s attackers must have had a death wish.  (Actually, one of the persons killed had just been discharged from a hospital after a suicide attempt.)

    But wait, one of those killed did hit Rittenhouse with a skateboard.  How smart is it to bring a skateboard to a gun fight?

    The third guy shot, Gaige Grosskreutz, was armed with a handgun.  Another question: would you go up against an AR15 while you were only armed with a handgun?  I’ll bet “Lefty” Grosskreutz has some newfound insight into that question.

    One guy jumped over Rittenhouse while trying to kick him.  Kyle took a shot at the jumper while stretched out over him, and missed.  Had he not missed, that wound would have been interesting.     

    Unarmed, would you bravely take on someone holding and AR15 to save others?  Perhaps.  But that rationale “doesn’t hold much water” in this case.  How much protection did the crowd need from someone running away from them?  If the crowd was really worried about their own safety, they could have just stopped chasing the guy armed with an AR15.

    The media accuses Rittenhouse of being a vigilante.  Do vigilantes run away from the people they want to kill?

    Then there is the prosecuting D.A. who pointed the AR15 at the jury with his finger on the trigger.  Picture yourself sitting in the jury box when he pointed the gun at you:  what would you have done?  What would you have had to say to the D.A.?  Obviously, he was a graduate of the Alec Baldwin school of gun safety.

    The media questions why Rittenhouse had to travel 19 miles to get from his house to Kenosha but doesn’t ask why Grosskreutz traveled 42 miles to get to Kenosha.

    When all else fails, the Left charges racism and that Kyle is a white supremacist.  You might reasonably respond, “But Rittenhouse and the three people he shot were all white”?  Not to be outflanked, the Left says it is the judicial system that is racist.  (Democrat Representative Cori Bush, a Black Lives Matter activist claimed, with no evidence, that the judge, jury and defendant were all white supremacists.) 

    But Bush and that same Left ignores the virtually simultaneous trial of Andrew Coffey IV, a black man who was acquitted of murder and attempted murder by reason of self-defense.  Coffey shot at sheriffs during a drug raid on Coffey’s house during which Coffey’s girlfriend was killed.  (The raid was based on “drug complaints and sales” and police found crack cocaine and marijuana, so there is no issue of a mistaken raid.)  Coffey is a four (4) time convicted felon and it was illegal for him to possess the .45 caliber handgun he used.  He was convicted on the charge of a felon possessing a firearm.  (Wow, that was a tough decision!) 

    A black, convicted felon, claims self-defense for using an illegal firearm to shoot at a sheriff’s deputy, who was serving a legal warrant, and the “racist” judicial system finds him innocent.  Cori Bush and the media find nothing worth commenting on there.  But according to Bush and the media, a white shooting three other whites is racism and white supremacy.       

    Rittenhouse’s verdict says that we have the right to protect ourselves from mob violence.  Coffey’s verdict says that we have the right to protect ourselves from government violence.

    How did the media describe the three people shot by Rittenhouse?

    Anthony Huber was “a happy and laid-back guy…a really sweet person…always had a smile on his face.”  The leftist media usually omitted any reference to his also having convictions for strangulation and suffocation and false imprisonment in a domestic abuse case. 

    Gaige Grosskreutz was variously described as a part of a social justice group, a volunteer medic at Black Lives Matter protests and a senior at Northland College.  Not mentioned is that he has a record of criminal arrests going back to 2010, a juvenile record that is sealed and other charges currently pending. There was never a mention of Grosskreutz carrying a concealed firearm without a valid concealed carry permit, to which he testified had expired.

    At the time of the incident, Joseph Rosenbaum was pending charges in Wisconsin for domestic abuse and jumping bail. He was convicted in Arizona in 2002 for child molestation charges, for which he was sentenced to 14 years in prison.  Mercifully, the media couldn’t find anything nice to say about him but, in many cases, they couldn’t find anything bad worth telling the public about, either.

    None of them were accused by the media (and Joe Biden) of being racists and white supremacists even though there was as much evidence proving they were racists and white supremacists as there was proving Kyle Rittenhouse was a racist and white supremacist.

  • 11/23/2021 10:44 AM | Anonymous

    Hidden Agendas  by Tom Reynolds

    NY City radical lefties (but I repeat myself) are removing a statue of Thomas Jefferson from city hall.  It’s not hard to figure out why the left hates Jefferson.  He wrote: “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

    Jefferson was also the primary author of the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, which said: “…all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion…”  Since the left believes the only religion is their politics, they are greatly offended by Jefferson’s beliefs.

    Jefferson also wrote: "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."  I wonder how Jefferson would react to the FBI investigating parents as domestic terrorists if they speak out at school board meetings.  (By-the-way, the FBI is not investigating New York City-based Black Lives Matter leader Hawk Newsome  who met with Mayor-elect Eric Adams and afterwards vowed "riots," "fire," and "bloodshed" if Adams does not meet BLM’s demands.)

    Oh yeah, and then there is the issue of Jefferson being the primary author of the Declaration of Independence, which established the United States of America.  Nothing is more offensive to a radical leftist’s sensibilities than the USA.

    Of course, none of the leftists think they are radical.  They think believing in the U.S. Constitution is radical. They’re right!  It puts the people and not the government in charge.

    The left also wants to remove Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill.  What might be their hidden agendas there? 

    Jackson was the last president to pay off the national debt; when he left office, the national debt was $0. Jackson also said: “I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic.  Since the current national debt is over $28 Trillion.  Jackson’s example is not one the left wants to see honored.

    The social media giants can’t be happy about this Jackson quote: “Unless you…check the spirit of monopoly and thirst for exclusive privileges you will in the end find that... the control over your dearest interests has passed into the hands of these corporations.

    Jackson was also against higher taxation, which put him in opposition to one of the Holy Grails of current leftists.  “Every diminution of the public burdens arising from taxation gives to individual enterprise increased power…”   

    Nancy Pelosi led the effort to disenfranchise Jackson from the $20.  Could Jackson have anticipated her and her House when he said: I weep for the liberty of my country when I see…that corruption has been imputed to many members of the House of Representatives, and the rights of the people have been bartered for promises of office”.

    The left is never a fan of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.  Might his statement on New York’s restrictive gun laws have contributed to their being triggered?  There is the right to self-defense for celebrities and state judges and retired police officers, but pretty much not for the ordinary kind of people who have a real, felt need to carry a gun to protect themselves.(The left feels the same way about firearms as they do about wealth.  It’s okay for them but not for us.) 

    William Barr was an enemy of the left for two reasons: he was Donald Trump’s Attorney General and in 2019 he said "…the so-called progressives treat politics as their religion. Their holy mission is to use the coercive power of the State to remake man and society in their own image, according to an abstract ideal of perfection. Whatever means they use are therefore justified because, by definition, they are a virtuous people pursing a deific end”.  Jefferson, Jackson and Alito would certainly agree with Barr.

    Lots of reasons and excuses are given why the left-wing media lied about Kyle Rittenhouse.  But the real reason was that he showed the world why someone would need an AR15 with 30 rounds.

    On the other hand, our forefathers had never kept a hidden agenda about their motives.  In his book, The Indispensables, Patrick O’Donnell writes of an interview with Captain Levi Preston, a Revolutionary War veteran.  It sheds light on why Americans fought and what it means to be an American.

    Was it about the Stamp Act?

    Preston: ‘I never saw one of those stamps.’

    Was it about the Tea Tax?

    Preston: ‘I never drank a drop of that stuff; the boys threw it all overboard.’

    Preston: ‘What we meant in going for those red-coats was this: we always had governed ourselves and we always meant to.

    Remember that, as Americans: “we always had governed ourselves and we always meant to.  Words to chill the heart of every leftist politician.

    Words to give us another reason to be thankful on Thursday.

    Happy Thanksgiving!

  • 11/18/2021 8:26 PM | Anonymous

    The Soviet Union is Alive at Cornell and in Washington D.C.  by Tom Reynolds

    Indisputably, Joe Biden has surrounded himself with some of the worst people of any administration in American history.  If you doubt it, start with his choice for Vice President.  Then go to his nomination of David Chipman to head BATFE.  His appointments are all meant to push his failed far left agenda, which includes eliminating all firearms from civilian possession.  That his programs have been failures doesn’t stop him from now doubling down.  And if he can’t destroy the 2nd Amendment directly, he’ll do it indirectly.

    If you thought David Chipman was bad, Biden’s nomination for Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova, is worse than Chipman.  She was born in the Soviet Union, got her college degree from Moscow University and now teaches in Cornell University’s Law School.  If you knew nothing else about her, that alone should scare you.  Not the Soviet Union part – the Cornell University part.

    Well, yes, the Soviet Union part should scare you, too.  Can there be any remaining doubt that Joe Biden’s Democrat Party is now a Socialist Party?

    The Comptroller of the Currency’s job (from its web page) is: “Ensuring a safe and sound banking system for all Americans”.  Why is this nomination important to gun owners?  Stick with me while we peel back the layers of the onion and you start crying.

    She wrote a law review article which gives a strong indication of what she thinks is a “safe and sound banking system”.  She writes that she would like to see all bank deposits forcibly transferred to the Federal Reserve. This would wipe out most American banks because they are dependent upon deposits. Per Breitbart, “Community banks, which are most dependent on deposit funding, would be vaporized. Wall Street's biggest firms…would simply dissolve their bank arms”.

    The Fed would become the main source of credit in the United States. The average citizen would have no other source of credit for mortgages, car loans and credit card purchases, other than the Fed.  Centralized power; government control of credit. 

    How would this affect the 2nd Amendment?  Under Omarova's scheme, the Fed would make credit decisions based on whether bureaucrats decided the loans served a "public purpose."  Conform to the left’s agenda or risk being found lacking when it comes to having a “public purpose”. Guess how the bureaucrats in the Washington swamp will feel about credit for gun manufacturers and gun owners?   

    Shutting off sources of credit has already been tried as a way to attack the gun industry.  In March, Citibank announced a company-wide policy impacting small businesses, clients, and credit card partners nationwide.  It required them to not sell firearms unless they met the bank’s conditions and prohibiting them from selling bump stocks and high-capacity magazines.  In April, Bank of America announced that it will no longer finance companies that manufacture “military-style firearms for civilian use.”  Thankfully, the state of Louisiana made these banks back down by excluding them from underwriting Louisiana state bonds (a very lucrative business for these banks).  But these prior efforts will be like a .22 as compared to Omarova’s .50 caliber industry killer. 

    The world runs on credit.  Many people buy guns and ammo using their personal credit cards.  Almost every corporation – including gun and ammo manufacturers - need credit to exist.  And you may have noticed the USA has borrowed $28 Trillion.  The Federal Reserve will become the world’s biggest source of credit.  And the world’s biggest source of denying credit.

    Remember how the Biden administration has been punishing those that resist getting Covid vaccinations?  No jab, no job.  Think about the Biden administration having control of all credit.  For example, gun makers, fossil fuel companies and right-of-center websites would likely be denied credit as not serving the “public purpose” and, therefore, undeserving of credit.  Lost jobs mean nothing to the left in their pursuit of absolute power.      

    There is a danger beyond just that to the 2nd Amendment.  One source would make almost every credit decision.  Any mistakes would become universal errors spread throughout the economy. Think 2008, but everything fails all at once because there's just one big bank run by government bureaucrats.  Doubt it?  Read up on the Community Reinvestment Act.

    The Federal Reserve was established to be independent of politics. Do you believe the political branches of government would be content to let control of the economy be dominated by Federal Reserve presidents?

    SCOPE usually asks gun owners to write their legislators in opposition to proposed gun laws.  But the nomination of Saule Omarova to be the Comptroller of the Currency deserves your attention.  We defeated Chipman and this is a chance to demonstrate that Biden cannot continue to nominate these radical socialists to destroy America and, with it, the 2nd Amendment.

  • 11/16/2021 6:29 PM | Anonymous

    STRAIGHT TALK – Our Second Amendment Rights & Freedoms  by Richard Rossi

    Some facts that will never see daylight in our National News Media or Social Network sites.

    United States Court of Appeals – Fourth Circuit district.

    Ruled that 18-to-20-year old’s have the same Second Amendment rights to purchase handguns as older Americans do. Judge Julie Richardson wrote; “when do Constitutional rights vest? Our nation’s most cherished constitutional rights vest no later than 18. And the 2nd Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms is no different
    Despite the anti-gun advocates claim that violence will rise with gun sales. The study by the Journal of Injury Epidemiology, could not find a link existed. “Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributed to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.”
    This year America has added five additional (Iowa, Montana, Tennessee, Texas and Utah) states to the list of states that have Constitutional Carry laws.  Actual 5 new states in one year is quite a remarkable feat. What caused the number of “permitless” carry states to jump by nearly ‘one-third in a single year? It is and was the Democratic majority in Congress and Joe Biden in the White House pushing their agenda and anti-gun schemes to strip Americans of their Second Amendment Rights.
    Our country has added 8.3 million new gun owners even in this plague ridden 2020. According to the NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation), another 3.2 million decided to exercise their 2nd Amendment right for the first time in 2021.  This data was derived from a nationwide survey of firearms retailers conducted by the NSSF.  Responses indicated 33.2% of customers, or 3,247,351, purchased a firearm for the very first time in that six-month period.
    Even though many studies have proven that “Gun Buybacks” don’t reduce violent crime or suicides, Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley recently decided to make up some facts of her own when promoting a local “buyback“.  She stated: “In fact, data suggests that buybacks have led to a drop in firearm suicide rates of almost 80 percent.”   Of course, Dudley’s claim is false.   In a recent National Bureau of Economics study, it concluded, “We find no evidence that Gun Buyback Programs reduce suicides or homicides where a firearm was involved.”  Anti-gunners are willing to make up facts when it could help their cause and no one holds them responsible in our News Media.
    Whose life is worth saving, anyway?  Some politicians just don’t get it, and gun-ban-loving U.S. Representative Cori Bush, D-Missouri, is at the top of the list. Not only is she anti-Second Amendment but she is also for ‘DEFUNDING POLICE”.  However, she has no problem what-so-ever in having an armed detail of bodyguards following her around.  She ranted on CNN “You would rather me die?” when she was called-out for her stance. How ironic that her life is worth more than your or your family members.  The average Law-abiding citizen does not have the luxury of hiring a bodyguard detail to keep them safe. She can’t fathom our need to protect ourselves as provided by our Second Amendment.

    Federal Court Overturns Draconian Under 21 Handgun Ban – Personal Defense World

    Study: High Gun Sales Didn’t Cause Rise in Violence.|

    Anti-Gun Researchers Find Rising Violence NOT Linked to High Gun Sales – Personal Defense World

    Record Year for Constitutional Carry.

    Constitutional Carry Bills Moving Forward in Numerous States – Personal Defense World

    Meteoric Rise of NEW Gun Owners Continues.

    Gun Sales Figures Continue to Outpace Pre-Covid Numbers – Personal Defense World

    Anti-Gunners Keep Spreading Lies

    Gun Buybacks: Anti-Gun Policy That Continues to Misfire – Personal Defense World

    Guns For My Bodyguards, But None For You!

    The Ugly Truth About Gun Control: Why Your Life Isn’t Worth Saving – Personal Defense World

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