S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education Articles

Has X Become Social Media’s Pro-Second Amendment Sanctuary?

Wed, 08 Jan 2025 17:35:23 GMT

Has X Become Social Media’s Pro-Second Amendment Sanctuary? The First Wave of Censorship...

Ammoland Inc. Posted on January 7, 2025 by Jose Nino

Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter on Oct 28, 2022, has given gun owners breathing room in what has appeared to be an un-ending wave of social media censorship.

For nearly a decade, pro-gun and other gun-related creators have been on the receiving end of arbitrary censorship campaigns on prominent social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube.

In the lead up to the 2016 presidential election, several gun companies and pro-Second Amendment proponents claimed Facebook was suppressing their content, effectively limiting their visibility.

“Content that would normally reach our nearly one million followers has steadily dropped to a fraction of what it once was, despite our page’s continual growth of new followers,” observed Rob Russo, the social media manager for Alien Gear Holsters at the time.

Pro-concealed carry website Concealed Nation experienced similar censorship attacks at the hands of Facebook during the 2016 presidential election cycle... Read more here https://www.ammoland.com/2025/01/has-x-become-social-medias-pro-second-amendment-sanctuary/

Throw Out the Party of Gun Prohibition

Sun, 28 Apr 2024 22:27:22 GMT

Throw Out the Party of Gun Prohibition by Don Smith

Their goal is to erase the right to “keep and bear arms.” There are many ways to defend the Second Amendment from this bunch, but the most effective is to vote against any member of the gun ban party at all levels: county or city council, state legislature and especially both houses of Congress.

Keep this in perspective: If anti-gun politicians are not in office, they cannot make their policies into law!

This should need no explanation, especially after New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s debacle last summer, when she grossly overstepped her constitutional authority in an attempt to prohibit lawful firearm carry in two counties. She exploited the tragic fatal shootings of three young people as an excuse to declare a “public health emergency” for which she wanted to suspend the Second Amendment. Yet none of the shooters involved in the murders of those children were licensed to carry. Fortunately, gun rights groups quickly took Grisham to court and a federal judge stopped her in her tracks.

Then we have our own governor who gave the middle finger to the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) by calling for a special legislative session and passing the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). This followed the successful NYSRPA v. Bruen decision. When asked by a reporter if she could show that law-abiding citizens were truly responsible for shootings, she claimed, “She didn’t need any data”. How is she “protecting NY citizens” if she removes our opportunity to defend ourselves, when law enforcement are minutes away? Criminals, by the nature of the name, will never obey her laws.

John Lott — founder and president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and author of the groundbreaking book More Guns, Less Crime pointed out that the action taken by Grisham in New Mexico would only affect law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits. He stated: “Every place in the world that has tried to either ban all guns or all handguns…every single time, murder rates have gone up…. We tried banning handguns in Chicago and Washington, DC, and what happened to murders? They went up.”

Let us not forget Gavin Newsom. His proposed 28th Amendment to the Constitution would — contrary to his claims otherwise — essentially nullify the Second Amendment. He knows this and he hopes you are all as stupid as the Californians who voted for him. The ultimate goal is to peddle this plan to all the other states. Meanwhile he and Grisham are doing nothing to protect us from the “invasion” of millions of foreign nationals crossing our southern border, many into their states.

Next is Joe Biden. Nearly three years ago, he admitted during a televised town hall forum broadcast by CNN he not only wants to ban so-called “assault weapons,” but also 9 mm pistols. This guy is relentless, and despite all of his gaffes, this is one thing about which he never seems confused. Recall, as Vice President, his goal was to “Go after the ammunition”.

Supreme Court Judge Thomas E. Moran of Monroe County in December 2023 held that NY CPLR article 63-A (“Red Flag” law / ERPO) “does not sufficiently protect a citizen’s rights and therefore is unconstitutional”. This law should never have been passed in 2019. Yet some at the federal level still seek such a law nationally.

House Democrats proposing a bill in 2022 to place a 1,000% tax on AR-15 rifles.Although the bill didn’t make any headway, that hasn’t stopped them from proposing the legislation for a second time. And it looks as though they are targeting supposed “high capacity” magazines as well. The tax would price regular, law abiding Americans out of the market. Specifically, a $500 AR-15 would immediately increase to $5,000, and a $2,000 rifle would become $20,000.

But it gets more devious than just placing a tax on AR-15 rifles. It appears they have also labeled most semiautomatic firearms as “assault weapons.” The same 1,000% tax would be imposed on any “semiautomatic assault weapon,” which last year’s bill defined as a semiautomatic rifle or pistol with a fixed magazine of 10 rounds or more or that have other various features. The bill was proposed after 100 Democrats expressed “disappointment” in House Speaker McCarthy for not moving on anti-gun legislation.

Democratic Assembly member Amy Paulin of Scarsdale says that although New York is one of the few states to require a background check on the purchase of ammunition itself, there is no corresponding law to prevent the straw purchase of ammunition, and she will introduce a bill to amend a section of the Penal Law to make straw purchases of ammunition a crime.

Paulin also says she will amend a bill she introduced in January aimed at making it more difficult for criminals to buy guns. She will redefine straw purchases and make it clear that the bill will apply to the purchase of ammunition as well. A federal firearms straw purchase law already exists.

The problem with such legislation was noted by Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, who pointed out that “None of their solutions fit the problem.”

Congresswoman Tenney’s Statement on the Election of Speaker Mike Johnson

(Past member) — Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:47:33 GMT

Congresswoman Tenney’s Statement on the Election of Speaker Mike Johnson

Washington, DC– Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-24) today made the following statement on the recent election of Speaker Mike Johnson (LA-04).

"Congratulations to my dear friend, Speaker Mike Johnson, on being elected Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Mike Johnson is an inspirational conservative who will restore faith in our government and bring strong, principled leadership to America.

"Speaker Johnson is committed to restoring transparency to Congress, reining in runaway spending, holding our adversaries accountable, and strengthening oversight of federal bureaucrats. Though 70% of appropriation priorities have already been passed in the House, the remaining appropriations bills will be considered expeditiously.

"Speaker Johnson's first action was to immediately open the People's House in order to bring a bipartisan resolution to the floor in support of the nation of Israel, our most important ally in the Middle East. He is immediately addressing issues critically important to the American people. This starts with direct action on the border crisis, prioritizing legislation to address runaway inflation due to far-left spending under Pelosi and Biden.

"Speaker Johnson will renew our commitment to backing our courageous officers in blue, empowering parents' rights against the hostile agenda imposed by the Biden Administration and its weaponized law enforcement agencies, unleash American energy production which will lead to greater freedom, prosperity, and security for all Americans.

"House Republicans understand this historic moment for America and are laser-focused on providing leadership, restoring transparency and responsible government, and achieving real results for the American people.”

Massachusetts Lawmakers Pass Sweeping Gun Bill Months After 6–3 Supreme Court Decision

(Past member) — Wed, 25 Oct 2023 04:52:38 GMT

By Jack Phillips THE EPICH TIMES

10/23/2023

Lawmakers in a Democrat-controlled state passed a major gun law, with the House speaker saying it came after the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling.

The Massachusetts state House of Representatives approved a sweeping gun law that aims at restricting more firearms and cracking down on AR-15-style rifles—after a unanimous coalition of police chiefs in the state publicly opposed it.

The measure, which passed in a 120–38 vote on Oct. 18, prohibits people from carrying firearms into other people's homes without their consent. It also would force major gun components to have serial numbers, which would be registered with the state of Massachusetts, while also expanding the state's "red flag" law that allows a judge to suspend the firearms license of someone who is considered a risk to harming others.

The legislation advanced in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling in 2022 that Americans have the Second Amendment-enshrined right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, according to Democrats in Massachusetts, a state that has long had stringent gun laws.

"The Supreme Court’s Bruen decision nullified existing components of our gun laws, threatening the safety of the Commonwealth’s residents. With the passage of this legislation, the House has once again displayed an unwavering commitment to ensuring that Massachusetts remains one of the safest states in the country," state House Speaker Ronald Mariano, a Democrat, said in a recent statement about the measure and the landmark high court decision.

The proposal would create new laws that bar firing guns at or near homes and outlaw carrying firearms while intoxicated. It would also prohibit carrying firearms in schools, polling places, and government buildings.

The bill expands the state’s ban on certain types of rifles, prohibiting new purchases of AR-15-style firearms. It would also ban someone from turning a legal firearm into an automatic weapon.

The proposal includes an enhanced system to track firearms used in crimes to help curb the flow of illegal guns into the state. It would also modernize the existing firearm registration system while increasing the availability of firearm data for academic and policy use, lawmakers said.

The state Senate has yet to release its version of a gun bill. It will be up to both Democrat-led chambers to hammer out a single bill to ship to Democrat Gov. Maura Healey’s desk for her signature before it can become law.

State Rep. Michael Day, the Democrat who authored the bill, claimed that "we are in the midst of a public health crisis and it is unrelenting" before blaming firearms.

"It's time for the House to once again act in this area and ask for your support on this bill," he said.

Republicans and gun rights groups say the law overreaches.

State Rep. Peter Durant, a Republican, said on the floor that he sees only "one goal" in the bill, which is to target law-abiding citizens who own firearms.

"When the listening tours were going on, when we were having the informational sessions, when this bill was being written, we were all told that the legal gun owner is not the not the target here. We're not going after them," Mr. Durant said, according to a local NBC affiliate station. "But it certainly seems to be that that's exactly what we're doing."

Another GOP state lawmaker, Rep. David Muradian, said that the "legislation is an egregious infringement on all lawful gun owners, and frankly, all residents of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts."

"I have had interactions with hundreds if not thousands of constituents within my district on this matter. The resounding question remains: What is the new proposal trying to solve?" he said.

A coalition of all the Bay State's police chiefs issued a statement saying the bill would affect only lawful gun owners.

“Although disappointed in this very predictable vote—in a proceeding where the House failed to follow their own rules—we applaud those Legislators who recognized that this bill makes no one safer. As we’ve said, the answer lies in the vigorous prosecution of criminals, who have no regard for gun laws, whether old or new. We look forward to addressing this matter with our Senate,” Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association director Mark Leahy told the Boston Herald.

Gun owners opposed to the bill have said that the measures outlined in the legislation do more to target gun owners than to reduce crime. “All of it goes against us, the lawful people. There’s nothing in there that goes after the criminals,” Jim Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners’ Action League, said, adding that the bill is merely an overreaction to the Supreme Court's decision last year.

The Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision last June, ruled that a state law in New York was unconstitutional because it unlawfully restricted an individual's right to carry a firearm in public.

The majority affirmed that such a right is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, adding that the states can enforce "shall-issue" permitting, meaning that applicants for concealed-carry licenses have to satisfy criteria. But their ruling stipulated that "may-issue" mandates that use arbitrary evaluations that are made by local officials are unconstitutional.

FED. JUDGE DECLARES CAL. SEMI-AUTO BAN UNCONSTITUTIONAL

(Past member) — Thu, 19 Oct 2023 19:19:10 GMT

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation is celebrating a victory in California as a U.S. District Court judge has declared the state’s decades-old ban on so-called “assault weapons” to be unconstitutional.

Federal Judge Roger T. Benitez’ ruling will almost certainly be appealed to the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco, but for the moment, SAF and its partners in the lawsuit known as Miller v. Bonta are celebrating a victory. SAF is joined in the case by the San Diego County Gun Owners Political Action Committee, California Gun Rights Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition and four private citizens, including James Miller, for whom the case is named. They are represented by attorneys George M. Lee at Seiler Epstein, LLP and John W. Dillon at the Dillon Law Group, APC.

In his 79-page decision, Judge Benitez writes, “Falling back on an old, recycled justification, the State says that its ban should stand because a person can have as many other rifles, shotguns, and pistols as one wants…Heller demolished that argument. The same argument – that a handgun ban might be justified because government- approved alternatives are available – was rejected in Heller and it is rejected here. Heller said quite clearly that it is no constitutional answer for government to say that it is permissible to ban some guns so long as other guns are allowed. This is not the way American Constitutional rights work. It is not permissible for a state to ban some books simply because there are other books to read, or to close synagogues because churches and mosques are open. In their normal configurations, the so-called “assault weapons” banned in California are modern firearms commonly-owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes across the nation. Under Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and Bruen, they may not be banned.”

“We’ve known all along the state ban could not hold up under constitutional scrutiny,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “and we were encouraged by last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the Bruen case, which rejected the notion of ‘interest balancing’ when it comes to Second Amendment challenges. Judge Benitez came down on the side of the Constitution and history.”

“Judge Benitez has once again affirmed what we have argued since the beginning of this case,” SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut stated. “California’s ban on so-called ‘assault weapons’ is, and always has been, unconstitutional. Despite the Supreme Court’s clear directive as to how these challenges are to be examined, the State of California did everything conceivable in an attempt to interject interest-balancing into the analysis. The Court, as required, ignored these attempts and correctly concluded that based on the text of the Second Amendment, as informed by this nation’s history and tradition, such arms are constitutionally protected. We are pleased with the Court’s decision and are proud to have vindicated the rights of millions of Californians.”

House Blocks Biden Effort to Stop Funding School Shooting Sports

(Past member) — Fri, 29 Sep 2023 04:47:45 GMT

Sep 27, 2023

BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is applauding the 424-1 House vote approving the Protecting Hunting Heritage and Education Act, thereby crushing the Biden administration’s effort to block federal funding for school shooting sports programs.

“Joe Biden’s attempt to stop funding for these important school programs was yet another demonstration of just how extreme this administration can be when it comes to guns and even hunting,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “These are programs that not only provide valuable and genuine safety training, but they also contribute to teaching the next generation about wildlife conservation while passing along an American tradition.

“However,” Gottlieb continued, “just because 208 Democrats voted for this measure does not forgive their past and future support for restrictive gun control legislation. Evidently, Democrats are beginning to realize the gun issue will not play well during the 2024 campaign, and that Biden’s attempt to cut off funding for school shooting sports could bring lots of angry sportsmen and women to the polls next November. They are trying to distance themselves from this extremely anti-gun-rights administration.”

Only one Democrat, Rep. Veronica Escobar of Texas, voted against the measure. Gottlieb predicted outdoorsmen and women in her district will remember when she seeks re-election next year.

“Joe Biden’s Department of Education deliberately misinterpreted the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in hopes of defunding the school shooting sports programs,” Gottlieb said, “probably hoping nobody would notice. Well, they got caught. The vote shows Democrats on Capitol Hill are trying to do some damage control, but it won’t be enough to make voters forget they have become the party of gun prohibition.

“Hunting is a small, but important part of the much larger Second Amendment movement,” he observed, “but the administration’s effort to withhold funds from this program shows how deeply the Biden White House resents anything even remotely connected to activities that may involve the lawful use of firearms. Our hat is off to Tennessee Congressman Mark Green for introducing this legislation and shepherding it through the House.”

The Epoch Times was given access to tens of thousands of hours of U.S. Capitol Police security video of Jan. 6, 2021.

(Past member) — Sat, 12 Aug 2023 20:30:29 GMT

https://lists.youmaker.com/links/YBDxzBnZQ0/jLsm7EC3t/2EyULSL87W/MRzL5eUPx

Biden Determined to Crush 2A, Bankrupt Firearms Industry

(Past member) — Tue, 11 Jul 2023 04:37:05 GMT

Concerned Committee for the Right to Keep & Bear Arms

(CCRKBA)

Jul 7, 2023

BELLEVUE, WA – President Joe Biden appears more determined than ever to make gun manufacturers vulnerable to frivolous lawsuits in the hopes of bankrupting the firearms industry, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

On July 4—a day when the president should be leading the nation in celebrating its 247th anniversary—Biden was instead capitalizing on violent crimes over the holiday weekend in an effort to push his gun prohibition agenda. In a statement from the White House, Biden declared, “It is within our power to once again ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, to require safe storage of guns, to end gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability, and to enact universal background checks.”

But CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb said Biden is once again trying to penalize tens of millions of law-abiding citizens and devastating an industry because he is incapable of doing anything meaningful about violent crime. He is trying to deflect public attention away from his policy failures, and his son’s legal problems with drugs and a serious gun law violation, by blaming gunmakers and honest gun owners for crimes they did not commit.

“Biden’s proposals amount to smoke and mirrors, and deflection away from his, and his party’s, monumental failures to prevent crime and hold criminals responsible,” Gottlieb stated. “He would have us believe that banning the most popular rifle in America, locking up guns and allowing expensive, but meritless, legal actions to financially devastate gun companies is the solution to America’s violent crime problems.

“He doesn’t dare admit that the thousands of laws already on the books—pushed through Congress and state legislatures by members of his own party—have failed miserably,” he continued. “He is continuing to scapegoat gunmakers and gun owners, and in the process he and his handlers are trying to destroy Second Amendment rights, which have been the backbone of liberty in this country for more than two centuries. And the only thing he has actually accomplished is to fuel more gun sales with his gun ban rhetoric.

“The thing Biden and his cronies have underestimated, and which makes them furious,” Gottlieb observed, “is the willingness of American gun owners to fight back. Rest assured, CCRKBA will not stand idly by while this administration tramples on the Constitution.”

RFK Jr Exposes Links Between Big Pharma Drugs and Mass Shootings

(Past member) — Thu, 08 Jun 2023 19:58:43 GMT

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has exposed the links between Big Pharma antidepressant drugs and mass shootings in America. Kennedy, a Democrat 2024 presidential candidate, pointed out that there’s a significant connection between SSRI antidepressant users and mass shootings.

RFK Jr. highlighted the links during a recent interview with Mark Steyn. As Kennedy notes, the Democrats and their allies in the corporate media often target guns following a mass shooting event, rather than the person pulling the trigger.

“With all of these shootings, nobody’s looking at the pharmaceutical contribution to that,” noted Kennedy, the nephew of President John F. Kennedy. “Anecdotally, it appears that almost every one of these shooters were on SSRIs or some other psychiatric drug.

“And this is only happening in America where all of these people are taking these psychiatric drugs. “We take four times as many [psychiatric drugs] as any other country in the West,” he stated.

“Prior to the introduction of Prozac, those shootings just were almost unknown, and now they’re an everyday affair.

“But NIH will not study that because it will offend the pharmaceutical industry.

“And it’s something that we ought to be studying.”

Congratulations, Tim Luety!

Mon, 05 Jun 2023 14:07:53 GMT

https://www.rochesterfirst.com/first-responders-spotlight/first-responders-spotlight-officer-recognized-for-efforts-during-armory-stampede/

Congratulations to Tim Luety on his recognition for his service to the Rochester community while serving with the Rochester Police Department! Tim grew up in Ontario, NY, Wayne County and is the son of Rich & Carol Luety. Both Tim and his brother serve as law enforcement officers. The Luety brothers' father, Rich, was well known around Ontario, NY for modeling community service with his involvement with the Ontario Fire Company.

Pistol Stabilizing Braces

(Past member) — Sat, 06 May 2023 23:05:14 GMT

Pistol Stabilizing Braces

johnrlott crimeresearch.org [mailto:johnrlott@crimeresearch.org]

The Biden administration’s newly released regulations regarding “pistol-stabilizing braces” will instantly turn tens of thousands of law-abiding Americans into felons and create a national rifle registry. Worse, the Biden administration and the media exaggerate the costs and ignore the benefits these braces produce for the disabled.

Stabilizing braces for pistols were originally designed to allow wounded and disabled veterans who may have lost the use of part of their hand to hold handguns. They are essentially a strap attached to the gun. Disabled individuals are often viewed as easy targets by criminals, and stabilizers make it easier to defend themselves. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) originally approved pistol braces during the Obama administration.

Putting aside that the ATF isn’t Congress and can’t make up new laws to redefine what a rifle is, their logic is baffling.

Take two otherwise identical guns, one with a pistol brace and one that never had a pistol brace: Even if the pistol brace is removed from the gun to which it was attached, it is still banned. Meanwhile, the gun that never had the brace attached could have one added, just as easily as the gun that previously had the pistol brace could have it reattached – but only the gun that once had a pistol brace attached to it is banned.

Of course, how the ATF is supposed to know whether you used to have the pistol brace attached to the gun is a mystery. Nor is it obvious why functionally identical foreign-made pistols should be treated differently than domestically manufactured ones.

This started after President Biden cited a crime in 2021 in Colorado – where a shooter used a pistol stabilizing brace when attacking shoppers in a grocery store – to call for classifying such brace-affixed pistols as machine guns. Ahmed Al Alwi murdered 10 people at close range in a Boulder, Colorado grocery store.

A previous shooting in 2019 by Connor Betts, in Dayton, Ohio, also involved a pistol brace. These are the only two such cases and, more importantly, neither of them had any difficulty holding their guns and all their shots were fired at a short distance. There is no evidence the brace made any difference in their ability to carry out the attacks. There has been no surge in crime by the disabled or others using these braces.

Gun control advocates make no attempt to provide evidence that these two attacks were any more lethal with stabilizing braces. The cost will be to the disabled Americans who will now have a harder time being able to defend themselves and their families.

Tenney Condemns CCIA

(Past member) — Tue, 17 Jan 2023 21:00:57 GMT

For Immediate Release:

January 17, 2023

Contact:

Meg Deneen 202-981-3500

meg.deneen@mail.house.gov

Tenney, Stefanik Reintroduce Resolution Condemning Hochul’s Concealed Carry Law As Unconstitutional

Washington, DC – Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-24) and Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (NY-21), reintroduced a resolution “Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) is unconstitutional,” today alongside Representatives Nick Langworthy (NY-23), and Darrell Issa (CA-48).

In response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which overturned the state’s previous unconstitutional concealed carry law, the CCIA was rammed through the state legislature and signed into law by Governor Hochul on July 1, 2022.

Following this, multiple court cases, such as Antonyuk v. Bruen and Antonyuk v.Nigrelli, were filed challenging the constitutionality of this law. These cases have been working their way through the judicial system, and most recently an emergency motion to vacate was filed with the Supreme Court. While this motion was denied, Justices Alito and Thomas noted that this motion can be refiled if the Second Circuit Court of Appeals does not explain their stay order or expedite consideration of the appeal.

“The ability to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution,” said Congresswoman Tenney. “New York State’s new concealed carry law is just another way that Kathy Hochul is working to limit New Yorker’s Constitutional rights and attack the Second Amendment. Last June, the Supreme Court repealed New York’s overly restrictive concealed carry laws, and instead of respecting the Court’s opinion, Governor Hochul chose to enact another unconstitutionally restrictive law. This resolution affirms our belief that New York’s latest law is unconstitutional and that state governments should support our Second Amendment rights, not undermine them.”

“Kathy Hochul’s gun grabbing law is unconstitutional and a direct attack on our Upstate rights and values," Congresswoman Stefanik said. "We know that Hochul passed this law declaring historical reenactors and lawful gun owners in the Adirondack Park felons in direct defiance after the United States Supreme Court struck down New York’s gun laws, but still she doubled down on her unconstitutional agenda. I am bringing the concerns of New York patriots to the highest levels, and, just as we did in the previous concealed carry issue, I am committed to bringing this all the way to the Supreme Court.”

“As I have said from Day One, the concealed carry law is Unconstitutional and does absolutely nothing to make New Yorkers safe. Albany’s obsession with constantly targeting law-abiding gun owners while allowing violent criminals to have free rein on our streets would be laughable if it wasn’t so deadly. I am proud to join with my colleagues in standing up against our dictatorial state government and will do everything in my power to protect New York’s Second Amendment rights,” said Congressman Nick Langworthy.

"New York's decision to flagrantly violate the Bill of Rights despite the Supreme Court's recent affirmation of the Second Amendment is appalling. Every American has the constitutionally guaranteed right to carry arms in self-defense across the state outside of their own homes. We commend Rep. Tenney for criticizing the anti-gun hysteria of New York politicians. GOA and GOF will keep fighting for our members in Antonyuk v. Nigrelli until the state admits defeat or is brought into line by the high court once again," said Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs for Gun Owners of America.

“We are a nation of laws. By passing the so-called Concealed Carry Improvement Act, Governor Hochul and the New York Legislatures have said that decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States do not apply in New York State. They have ‘thrown down the gauntlet’ to the United States Supreme Court. At a time when crime is sweeping through major cities, the Governor and the Legislature want to leave law abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals. How will these citizens protect themselves from armed criminals to whom the laws mean nothing? Governor Hochul and the New York Legislatures know that they aren’t held accountable for unconstitutional laws that they pass and that the law-abiding victims of these laws must spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to overturn those laws. We need “The People’s House” to step forward and protect the American people of New York State,” said Thomas Reynolds, President of New York State SCOPE.

Read the full text of the resolution here.

At Large SCOPE Directors

Tue, 13 Dec 2022 17:58:32 GMT

At Large SCOPE Directors

Each SCOPE County Chapter Chair is automatically a member of SCOPE’s State Board of Directors. There are also “At Large Board Directors” who are elected by the membership by written ballot. An At Large Director is equal in all respects to other board members.

This is an opportunity to “step up” in the fight to preserve our 2^nd Amendment rights and to participate in and help set the direction of SCOPE’s efforts.

The Board meets in person at the Members Meeting (in April) and the Annual Banquet (usually in September) and probably 1 other time in central New York. It meets by ZOOM 2 or 3 other times and occasionally by ZOOM as needed (usually on Saturdays.) Issues are sometimes discussed by E-Mails between board members in what are not official meetings but give guidance on issues to the Board’s Officers.

If you are interested, please send a notice of your candidacy and a biography, postmarked by January 1st to:

SCOPE

PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052
SUE.SCOPENY@gmail.com
________________________________________________________

Or E-Mail it to:
SUE.SCOPENY@gmail.com

The biography will be printed in the February edition of Firing Lines. (We’ll help you edit it, if you need help.)

Below are some excerpts from SCOPE’s by-laws which outline the position, qualifications and procedures.

At-large directors shall be elected through ballots mailed to the members in advance of the annual meeting of members. (The ballots will be included in the Firing Lines which comes out in early February.)

Ballots shall be returned from the members and postmarked no later than the specified required postmark date. That date shall be no fewer than 14 days prior to the date of the annual meeting of members. (The date of the Annual Meeting will also be announced in the February Firing Lines.)

The At-large Directors shall be elected to hold office for two-year terms

Directors may be elected to any number of consecutive terms.

Directors must be at least 18 years of age and must also have been a member in good standing for at least 2 years prior to their notice of candidacy. The State Board of Directors may waive the two year requirement.

To become an at-large candidate a member must give a notice of candidacy and a biography by January 1st to the election committee. The member will become a recognized candidate unless the election committee can show cause for ineligibility.

In order to be elected as an At-Large Director, a candidate must get at least 35 votes.

We Don’t Need Red Flag Laws

(Past member) — Mon, 07 Nov 2022 20:40:00 GMT

We don’t need Red Flag laws – we have the tools in place to help the mentally ill and protect people’s rights

by Dr. John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), which is a research and education organization dedicated to conducting academic quality research on the relationship between laws regulating the ownership or use of guns, crime, and public safety; educating the public on the results of such research; and supporting other organizations, projects, and initiatives that are organized and operated for similar purposes.

Everyone wants to stop dangerous people from getting guns. The hot new policy option before this committee is Red Flag laws, which take away the guns of people deemed dangerous to themselves or others. But there is a much more effective alternative already in place.

They are known as Baker Act statutes (Pennsylvania’s is called the “Mental Health Procedures Act”), and have been around since the early 1970s. They allow police, doctors and family members to have someone typically held in most states for a 72-hour mental health examination based upon a simple reasonableness test – little more than a guess or a hunch. The hold in Pennsylvania is up to 120 hours.

These laws focus on mental illness, and they require that the individual be evaluated by mental-health-care experts. If a person can’t afford a lawyer, a public defender is provided. While judges can involuntarily commit an individual they believe is a danger to themselves or others, there is a range of options they can take, with the threat that other options can be followed up with involuntary commitment. However, instead of using these laws, 17 states have now adopted Red Flag laws, with 13 states passing them since the shootings at the high school in Parkland, Fla.

While Red Flag laws are often discussed in terms of mental illness and they are frequently used in connection with concerns about suicide, only one state’s law even mentions mental illness and none of the states requires that a mental-health expert be involved in evaluating the person.

And, unlike Baker Act statutes, these new laws don’t offer safeguards, such as providing a public defender for individuals who can’t afford a lawyer or covering their legal costs. When faced with legal bills that can easily amount to $10,000 for a hearing, few think that owning a gun justifies these costs.

Under these laws, initial confiscations of firearms often require just a “reasonable suspicion,” which is little more than a guess or a hunch. Judges simply have a piece of paper in front of them with the complaint when they are first asked to take away a person’s guns. When hearings occur weeks or a month later, about a third of these initial orders are overturned, but the actual error rate is undoubtedly much higher.

During the first nine months after Florida passed its Red Flag law last year, judges granted more than 1,000 confiscation orders. In the three months after Maryland’s law went into effect, more than 300 people had their guns taken away. In one case, an Arundel County man was fatally shot in the struggle that ensued when police came to confiscate his weapons at 5 a.m. Connecticut and Indiana, which have had these laws in effect for the longest time, have seen significant increases in confiscation orders as time has gone by.

These laws let the government take firearms away from people arrested but not convicted of crimes. Even simple complaints without arrests have been enough. That is quite a change in people’s constitutional rights, and don’t be surprised if courts eventually strike down such provisions. Gun-control advocates have resisted making this change explicit in the laws, presumably out of fear that it would create problems in the courts. Also, courts frequently take into account other factors such as gender and age in predicting the chances someone will commit a crime or commit suicide.

When people really pose a clear danger to themselves or others, confine them to a mental-health facility. Guns are only one way they can do harm, and if they are intent on hurting others or themselves they can find a way.

Consider, also, the impact Red Flag laws can have on people who need and want help. Absent such laws, a person contemplating suicide might speak to a friend or family member and be dissuaded from that dire course of action. With the laws, they may fear that speaking out will result in a report to authorities – and their ability to defend themselves or loved ones would be restricted.

Take the case of a woman I know who saw her husband murdered in front of her by a stalker. Understandably, she was incredibly depressed, but still fearful for her safety. Under Red Flag laws, she wouldn’t talk to those closest to her about her feelings because she worried about losing her ability to protect herself. Even a well-meaning person might have gone to a judge to have this woman’s ability to defend herself taken away. She was even reticent to speak to a psychiatrist about her depression, but at least she would have an opportunity to explain her concerns with those people.

Police officers often experience depression on the job. Would we be better off if they worried that sharing their feelings might mean having their guns taken from them and the loss of their jobs?

Liberals understood this point during the AIDS crisis. They knew that the threat of quarantining would discourage infected people from seeking medical help. But they seem unaware that the threat of leaving people defenseless might engender similar concerns. . . .

The rest of the piece is available here.

Tenney’s Resolution Condemns CCIA

(Past member) — Fri, 14 Oct 2022 05:57:59 GMT

Congresswoman Tenney Introduces Resolution Condemning New York’s Concealed Carry Law As Unconstitutional

Utica, NY – Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-22) and Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (NY-21) today introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) is unconstitutional. The CCIA was rushed through the state legislature and signed by Governor Hochul on July 1, 2022, in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which overturned the state’s previous unconstitutional concealed carry law.

The resolution was also cosponsored by Representatives Darrell Issa (CA-50), Scott DesJarlais (TN-04), Doug Lamborn (CO-05), Jefferson Van Drew (NJ-02), Andy Harris (MD-01), Mary Miller (IL-15), and John Moolenaar (MI-04).

Last year, Congresswoman Tenney led 175 of her House Republican colleagues in an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in NYSRPA v. Bruen. The Court’s eventual ruling striking down New York’s arbitrary and unconstitutional Sullivan Law was the most significant victory for Second Amendment advocates since D.C. v. Heller.

However, the state legislature then stepped in to replace the Sullivan Law with an even more outrageous law, which, among other things, requires concealed carry permit applicants to turn over their personal social media accounts, mandates interviews with state officials, and broadly bans the concealed carry of weapons in a range of public and private locations. Last week, U.S. District Judge Glenn Suddaby blocked the state from enforcing several provisions, including bans on concealed carry in sensitive locations and requirements for applicants to turn over social media accounts. Since then, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has granted an interim stay of Judge Suddaby’s ruling in response to a motion for a stay pending appeal filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

“Despite the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, the Second Amendment remains under attack from far-left politicians in Albany,” said Congresswoman Tenney. “The NYSRPA v. Bruen decision upheld the right of Americans to conceal carry and rejected overreaching state laws infringing on our Second Amendment right. But Democrats in New York, led by Governor Kathy Hochul, ignored that court ruling and enacted a blatantly unconstitutional law. While legal challenges against this law work their way through the courts, I am honored to stand once again in support of New Yorkers’ right to keep and bear arms.”

“Kathy Hochul’s gun grabbing law is unconstitutional and a direct attack on our Upstate rights and values," said Congresswoman Stefanik. "We know that Hochul passed this law declaring historical reenactors and lawful gun owners in the Adirondack Park felons in direct defiance after the United States Supreme Court struck down New York’s gun laws, but still she doubled down on her unconstitutional agenda. I am bringing the concerns of New York patriots to the highest levels, and, just as we did in the concealed carry issue, I am committed to bringing this all the way to the Supreme Court.”

"New York's Attorney General, who is no friend of the Second Amendment, clearly isn't getting the message from the Bruen decision. Americans have a constitutionally guaranteed right to carry arms in self-defense across the state outside of their own homes. While New York is appealing our victory, Mayor Adams has just signed legislation that directly contradicts the Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and Judge Suddaby’s ruling from last week. We commend Rep. Tenney for criticizing the anti-gun hysteria of New York politicians. GOA and GOF will keep fighting for our members in Antonyuk v. Hochul until the state admits defeat or is brought into line by the high court once again," said Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs for Gun Owners of America.

“The provisions in New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) stand in direct opposition to the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen. Such blatant disregard for the highest court in the land cannot be allowed to stand. On behalf of our five million members and our tens of million of supporters across the country, we thank Rep. Claudia Tenney for defending the rights of law-abiding gun owners and offering this important resolution," said Jason Ouimet, Executive Director of NRA-ILA.

Similar resolutions have been passed by county legislatures throughout upstate New York since the law’s passage, including in Oswego, Wyoming, Orleans, and Niagara. Tenney’s resolution is supported by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the National Rifle Association - Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA).

The full text of the resolution is available here.

Motivation to Vote Nov. 8

(Past member) — Thu, 13 Oct 2022 17:16:46 GMT

Attorney General James Releases Statement on Court Decision to Temporarily Keep New York’s Concealed Carry Gun Laws

NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today released the following statement after an appellate judge granted an interim administrative stay on U.S. District Court Judge Glenn T. Suddaby’s decision in Antonyuk v. Hochul, meaning the full Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) will remain in effect:

“I am pleased that the full Concealed Carry Improvement Act will stay in effect and continue to protect communities as the appeals process moves forward. My office will continue our efforts to protect the safety of everyday New Yorkers and defend our common-sense gun laws.”

As a result of today’s decision, the full CCIA is in effect until a three-judge panel on the Second Circuit decides on the motion to stay. Earlier this week, Attorney General James filed a motion for a temporary pause on the district court’s decision to stop enforcement of some parts of the CCIA. Today, an administrative stay was granted, pausing the decision until a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit acts on the motion.

The CCIA was passed during an extraordinary session of the Legislature and enacted earlier this summer in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. The law strengthens requirements for concealed carry permits, prohibits guns in sensitive places, requires individuals with concealed carry permits to request a property owner’s consent to carry on their premises, enhances safe storage requirements, requires social media review ahead of certain gun purchases, and requires background checks on all ammunition purchases.

No more Brady Checks in Wayne County

Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:57:44 GMT

No more Brady Checks in Wayne County!
September 16, 2022 by News10NBC

whec.com/top-news/no-more-brady-checks-in-wayne-county

WAYNE COUNTY, N.Y. (WHEC) — There’s been a change in the pistol permit process in Wayne County, outside of the new state laws that took effect on Sept. 1 of this year.

Up until now, a background check would have to be completed, every five years, in order for a simple amendment to be applied to a pistol permit. Such amendments included name or address changes, and disposal of weapons. In Wayne County, one could not make a handgun purchase unless he/she had a current five-year background check on file.

Those background checks, also known as Brady Checks, required a comprehensive check of several systems to see if a permit holder had been involved in any activity that would initiate suspension or revocation proceedings of that permit. That process could take up to several weeks, dependent upon the number of new applications submitted to the Sheriff’s Office. Various political races also affected the amount of Brady Checks that were submitted. The Brady process, combined with the regular course of business, conducting backgrounds for new pistol permit applicants lengthened the time it would take for a new applicant to acquire a permit.

Brady Checks, enacted in 1993, mandated background checks on firearm purchases. With informational safeguards within the criminal justice system, to include the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, Sheriff Milby sought to streamline the redundancies of the system in Wayne County. After discussions with Wayne County Court Judges and the Wayne County Clerk, a decision was made to cease the process, effective immediately.

“Those amendments that were pending will no longer have to wait. County Clerk, Mike Jankowski will be sending those amendments out right away. All Brady checks on file have been grandfathered into this. To purchase a weapon on an existing permit, a NICS check will satisfy the process, and once the NICS check clears the purchase, you may file your amendment with the County Clerk,” said the Sheriff.

Sheriff Milby wishes to remind everyone that New York State still requires all Carry Concealed Permit Holders to recertify their permits every 3 years, which can be done online, and is not a background check process.

THE NATIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF HALTING NEW YORK STATE’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS OF 2ND AMENDMENT CIVIL RIGHTS

(Past member) — Wed, 31 Aug 2022 04:25:06 GMT

Indianapolis, IN – The National Police Association (NPA) filed an amicus brief in support of a Preliminary Injunction against New York state’s “Concealed Carry Improvement Act” (CCIA).

The lawsuit was filed by Ivan Antonyuk and Gun Owners of America.

In a quick response to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, the state of New York passed a comprehensive gun control law, CCIA, that will eviscerate 2nd Amendment civil rights in New York if enacted.

Contrary to the decision by SCOTUS the new law prohibits permitted concealed carry in most public places and creates scenarios where carrying concealed can be an unknowing violation of the law. Further, the new law replaces the subjective standard of having to prove a special need for 2ndAmendment rights, which was struck down by the court, with the subjective standard of having to prove possession of the moral character needed for 2nd Amendment rights. Moral as defined by who?

If allowed to go into place as law, the Second Amendment will be a legal fiction in the fourth most populous state in our union, even though the nation’s highest court just told us all, explicitly, that the Second Amendment is not a legal fiction but a full partner with the other “Bill of Rights” guarantees such as freedom of speech.

While firearms in the wrong hands are a serious concern for law enforcement, unconstitutionally keeping firearms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens seeking to provide for the safety of themselves and their loved ones is just as bad. While the National Police Association supports the police, it does not support a police state, where law-abiding citizens are at minimum prevented from self-defense and at maximum turned into criminals by way of vague and unconstitutional laws.

The CCIA is bad for safety; it is bad for public policy; it is bad for law enforcement; it is bad for the rule of law. Most importantly it is patently unconstitutional and the Plaintiff’s sought declaratory and injunctive relief should be granted in advance of the flawed act’s enactment date.

NPA spokesperson Sgt. Betsy Brantner Smith stated, “A number of studies suggest that objective concealed carry regimes, and not the subjective, arbitrary regime put in place by the CCIA—can both lower violent crime and reduce the number of officer fatalities in many jurisdictions.” For this reason, plus those articulated in the Plaintiffs, Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction, the NPA supports Plaintiffs’ effort to have this Court declare the CCIA unconstitutional under the text of the Second Amendment and the principles recently articulated in Bruen.

The National Police Association is represented by Robert S. Lafferrandre of Pierce Couch Hendrickson Baysinger & Green, L.L.P., of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The NPA’s amicus brief can be read here: https://nationalpolice.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Amicus-Curiae-Brief-of-National-Police-Association-in-ANTONYUK-GUN-OWNERS-OF-AMERICA-v-BRUEN.pdf

###

About The National Police Association

The National Police Association (NPA) is a 501(c)3 Educational/Advocacy non-profit organization. For additional information visit NationalPolice.org.

Wayne County Clerk's update on pistol permits

Fri, 08 Jul 2022 17:25:08 GMT

The Wayne County Clerk's office has recently updated information on their website for obtaining a pistol permit. Note that this information is located on the Clerk's home page of the Wayne County site, and not on the previous (and still accessible) web page for pistol permit information.

The new information can be found at:

https://web.co.wayne.ny.us/186/County-Clerk

The old page is still there and can be referenced at:

https://web.co.wayne.ny.us/191/Pistol-Permits

Background Checks Controversy and H.R. 8

(Past member) — Fri, 27 May 2022 01:34:31 GMT

The political scene has been replete for months, if not years, with continuous attacks on both sides of the aisle as to the need to reduce gun violence. The fact that federal laws are already strong on background checks and transfer guidelines has done little to diminish criticism.

Some states, including New York in 2019, have passed so-called “Red Flag” laws or Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO). The recent mass shooting in Buffalo occurred despite it. This leaves critics of guns little to focus on other than more gun control especially the inclusion of increased background checks. The House of Representatives passed in March 2021 H.R. 8. This bill established new background requirements for firearm transfers between private parties ( i.e. unlicensed individuals).

This article attempts to educate the reader as to the facts in the bill as well as it’s failures. As indicated “The bottom line is that the bill represents gun control measures that encroach on the freedoms of law-abiding citizens and do little to reduce gun violence.”

H. R. 8 – Facts and Failures

2.13.22

This morning, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee plan to markup H.R. 8, the ‘Bipartisan Background Checks Act.’ However, Democrats have shown little interest in incorporating conservative perspectives into their so-called ‘bipartisan’ bill. At a hearing on H.R. 8 last week, Democrats denied Whip Scalise the opportunity to testify as a member witness about his experience as a survivor of gun violence and his strong support for our Second Amendment rights.

Unfortunately, H.R. 8’s claim to bipartisanship isn’t the only sham part of the bill. The bottom line is that the bill represents gun control measures that encroach on the freedoms of law-abiding citizens and do little to reduce gun violence.

H.R. 8 shortfalls (courtesy of the House Judiciary Committee)

Current federal laws are already strong on background checks and transfer guidelines.

Federal law already prohibits:

Transferring a firearm to anyone known or believed to be prohibited from possessing firearms.

Individuals from from transferring a handgun across state lines to someone without a firearms license.

Anyone from acquiring firearms on behalf of another person who is prohibited from possessing firearms.

Anyone from providing a handgun to a juvenile.

Dealers from selling rifles or shotguns to individuals under the age of 18.

The vast majority of firearm transfers at gun shows are conducted by federal firearms licensees performing a NICS background check.

H.R. 8 would not have stopped any of these mass shootings:

Columbine High School, Columbine, CO – April 20, 1999
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA – April 16, 2007
Fort Hood, TX – November 5, 2009
Tuscon, AZ – January 8, 2011
Sandy Hook Elementary, Newtown, CT – December 14, 2012
Aurora, CO – July 20, 2012
Navy Yard, Washington, DC – September 16, 2013
Emanuel AME Church, Charleston, SC – June 17, 2015
San Bernardino, CA – December 2, 2015
Pulse Nightclub, Orlando, FL – June 12, 2016
Las Vegas, NV – October 1, 2017
First Baptist Church, Sutherland Springs, TX – November 5, 2017
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, FL – February 14, 2018

H.R. 8’s background check requirement on firearm transfers criminalizes the actions of honest, law-abiding citizens, including the following scenarios:

Tim is struggling with suicidal thoughts. He asks a close friend to safekeep his guns while he seeks help. Under H.R. 8, Tim potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.

Shannon is a victim of violent domestic abuse. Her ex-husband and abuser is being released from prison and Shannon fears for her life. Shannon’s neighbor, Scott, lends her a firearm for self-defense. Under H.R. 8, Scott potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.

Joe and Bill have been hunting together for 40 years. This year, Joe is sick and can’t make the trip, but Bill asks if he can borrow Joe’s deer rifle. Joe lends the rifle to Bill the weekend before the trip, but Bill can’t return it immediately once the trip is over. Under H.R. 8, Joe potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.

Ted’s uncle wants to go to the shooting range. Ted knows he’s allowed to transfer a firearm to an aunt or uncle, so he agrees to lend him his rifle. When Ted’s cousin shows up at the door on his way to meet Ted’s uncle at the shooting range, Ted gives him the rifle. Under H.R. 8, while aunts and uncles are exempted from transfer restrictions, cousins arbitrarily are not, and Ted now potentially faces up to one year in prison and/or a $100,000 fine.

Highlights from Whip. Scalise’s prepared, and undelivered, testimony:

“As someone who experienced gun violence, I do not want anyone else to go through that trauma. However, it is also important to me that we be honest with ourselves and the American people about what will — or won’t — actually prevent these tragedies.”

“The new gun control restrictions currently being considered by the Democratic majority in H.R. 8 would not have prevented my shooting.”

“Based on similar gun control measures in states like California, H.R. 8 would not deter a criminal from engaging in criminal activity, and it won’t decrease gun crime. Instead, it only succeeds in limiting the ways that law-abiding citizens could exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

“Every single month in America, law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits defend themselves and others against criminals who have guns.”

“Instead of making it harder for citizens to defend themselves until law enforcement arrives, Congress should consider legislation like H.R. 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act”

“I firmly believe we must never forget, nor minimize, the importance of the Second Amendment to our Constitution.”

“If our goal is to reduce gun violence, then we should focus on penalizing criminals, not law-abiding citizens.”

California Competes with New York on Closing Gun Manufacturers & Dealers

(Past member) — Sat, 23 Apr 2022 17:58:54 GMT

SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

California state lawmakers advanced a measure Tuesday that would make it easier to skirt a federal law in order to sue gun makers, legislation that opponents say is ultimately aimed at driving manufacturers out of business.

A different committee was poised to advance a bill targeting so-called ghost guns, while a third committee approved a bill requiring firearm dealers to install digital video surveillance systems.

They are among several bills that gained momentum from recent mass shootings, including what police now say was a gang battle that earlier this month killed six people and wounded 12 others just blocks from the state Capitol.

Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting of San Francisco said his legislation would make it easier to sue gun makers or dealers for liability in shootings that cause deaths or injuries. That could include those who sell ghost gun kits whose parts lack serial numbers.

Federal law blocks most of those types of lawsuits against the gun industry. But the U.S law does permit some types of liability lawsuits, including when gun makers break state or local laws regarding the sale and marketing of their products. Last year, New York approved a first-in-the-nation law declaring such violations a “public nuisance,” opening up gun makers to lawsuits, though the law has been challenged in court by manufacturers.

California already has some of the nation’s toughest firearm restrictions.

Among what legislative analysts count as 107 existing California gun laws is a 10-day waiting period, background checks for buying guns and ammunition, restrictions on types of guns including assault-style weapons, and a 10-bullet limit on ammunition magazines.

“We pride ourselves on having fairly strict gun control laws,” Ting said. “We have done better than other states, but still not good enough.”

Gun control advocates said they have previously been stymied by the federal law when it comes to punishing manufacturers or dealers who are irresponsible or negligent in selling or advertising firearms.

Ting’s bill would require firearm makers and dealers to “take reasonable precautions” under a “firearm industry standard of conduct” in making and selling their weapons. That can include things such as making sure buyers are taught how to safely store and use the weapon, he said.

They also would be barred from making or distributing guns that are “likely to create a substantial and unreasonable risk of harm to public health and safety” under the bill co-sponsored by the Brady Campaign and state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta.

Starting in July 2023, violators could be sued by the attorney general, city or county attorneys, or anyone who suffered harm. They also could be sued for alleged violations of other laws, including false advertising, unfair competition or deceptive acts or practices.

“We think it provides a really good opportunity to put the power back in the hands of individuals who are the individual victims of gun violence,” Ting said. “And really, what we hope is by holding this industry accountable that they will be much more thoughtful about how they sell their weapons.”

The National Rifle Assn. said the bill’s real intent is “to torment the firearms industry through costly litigation in the widest array of circumstances.”

The bill is written so broadly that “almost anyone could bring civil action against the firearm industry,” said the California Rifle and Pistol Assn. “It is an attack on the lawful commerce of firearms with an intent to limit the availability of firearms.”

Roy Griffith, the California group’s legislative director, said the proposal is “clearly in direct conflict with federal law.”

He equated it to allowing lawsuits against carmakers for drunk driving deaths.

“This industry gets protection that no other industry in the United States gets,” Ting responded. “Guns are not cars. The purpose of guns is to harm another individual.”

The Assembly Judiciary Committee advanced the bill on a 7-2 vote.

A different Assembly committee was poised to advance a bill aimed at ghost guns, which law enforcement agencies say have become more common in recent years. The U.S. Department of Justice reported nearly 20,000 were recovered nationwide last year, nearly double the number seized in 2020.

The move comes days after President Biden highlighted the Justice Department’s work to finalize new regulations to crack down on ghost guns, which are privately made firearms without serial numbers.

“Anyone with a credit card and skills to build Ikea furniture, and some spare time, can make the same gun that took the lives of two of my classmates and changed mine forever,” testified Mia Tretta, who was shot in Santa Clarita during a 2019 attack at Saugus High School, where she is now a junior. She also spoke at Biden’s announcement.

California law already requires anyone building a weapon to apply to the state Department of Justice for a serial number to be inscribed on the firearm.

Assemblyman Mike Gipson’s bill would instead block the sale of unfinished gun parts until they are regulated by the federal government. The measure would take effect Jan. 1 and give Californians who have weapons without serial numbers six months to register them and add the numbers.

Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said the emphasis on ghost guns is overblown.

“Privately made firearms have become an unfortunate scapegoat,” he said, citing statistics by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives showing they are used in less than 1% of homicides. “There is simply no evidence that they are the cause for the surge in violent crime.”

POLL SHOWS STRONG SUPPORT FOR 2A

(Past member) — Fri, 25 Mar 2022 03:46:29 GMT

NEW McLAUGHLIN POLL SHOWS STRONG SUPPORT FOR 2A AFTER UKRAINE INVASION

BELLEVUE, WA – A new survey by the nationally-recognized polling firm of McLaughlin & Associates shows strong public support for the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in the wake of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

The Second Amendment Foundation commissioned survey said 66.1 percent of the respondents agreed with the statement posed by the McLaughlin poll stating, “When you see what is going on with Vladimir Putin and Russia’s military invasion of the Ukraine, it is more important than ever for Americans to defend their 2nd Amendment Constitutional freedoms for law-abiding citizens to continue to have the right to own guns for their personal protection.” Only 25.7 percent disagree, and only 8.2 percent had no opinion. The survey may be read here.

“This should send a message to the Biden administration that Americans by a large majority fully understand the Second Amendment is about defending liberty and not about duck or deer hunting,” said Alan Gottlieb, SAF founder and executive vice president. “The new McLaughlin data shows how out-of-touch Biden and his fellow Democrats are about the right to keep and bear arms.”

“Unfortunately,” veteran pollster Jim McLaughlin observed, “Americans are seeing first hand through Vladimir Putin’s brutal, military invasion of the Ukraine the importance of our cherished Second Amendment rights. The brave Ukrainian citizens have been able to thwart Putin’s military aggression by arming themselves against the Russian invaders. Americans clearly associate the importance of their Second Amendment rights with maintaining a safe, free and democratic nation.”

Biden came into office 14 months ago with an ambitious gun control agenda that dramatically stalled after the Senate debacle regarding his nomination of former ATF agent-turned-gun-control-advocate David Chipman to head the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

SAF commissioned the McLaughlin survey, which was conducted among 1,000 likely voters across the country March 17-22. McLaughlin’s survey also revealed more people oppose bans on semi-automatic rifles and 9mm pistols than support them.

“After what we’ve seen on the nightly news from Ukraine, Americans are more protective of their constitutional rights than ever,” Gottlieb said.

BIDEN’S SPEECH CONTINUED WAR ON GUN OWNERS AND 2A

(Past member) — Thu, 03 Mar 2022 03:48:57 GMT

BELLEVUE, WA – While Joe Biden began his State of the Union speech properly condemning Russia’s undeclared war on Ukraine, he used his bully pulpit to continue his own lifelong war on gun owners and the Second Amendment, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

“Biden’s remarks about gun control and his already-discredited claim about gun manufacturers being immune from lawsuits simply reinforced his reputation as a career gun prohibitionist who never let facts get in the way of a flippant falsehood,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “His claim that bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ and original capacity magazines are ‘proven measures’ to reduce violent crime is demonstrably untrue. Just look at the FBI Uniform Crime Report.

“And we should note these are the same kinds of guns and magazines Ukrainian citizens are using to defend their freedom from a savage enemy bent on killing innocent civilians including women and children,” he stated.

“His declaration that gun manufacturing is the only industry in America that can’t be sued has been fully discredited,” Gottlieb continued. “It ranks right up there with Biden’s bogus claim that people couldn’t own cannons when the Second Amendment was written. Washington Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler gave Biden four ‘Pinocchios’ for repeating that tall tale, which is tantamount to calling the president a habitual liar.

“Perhaps Biden’s biggest fib of the night came when he said his proposals don’t infringe on the Second Amendment, and that they save lives,” he observed. “Crusading to disarm law-abiding citizens hasn’t saved a single life in this country. Banning commonly-owned firearms definitely violates the Constitution, and Biden knows it.

“Biden’s remark about deer and Kevlar vests was intended to perpetuate the myth that the Second Amendment is about hunting,” Gottlieb stated. “If he honestly believes the right to keep and bear arms is protected by the Constitution just so we can head to a duck blind, he needs remedial courses on U.S. history and constitutional law.

“There was a time in the distant past when people forgave Joe Biden for his gaffes and fabrications, but his crusade against gun owners and the firearms industry has clearly become an obsession for which he no longer gets a pass. He wants Nancy Pelosi and Capitol Hill Democrats to gut the Second Amendment, and by default, the entire Bill of Rights. That cannot be allowed.”

Wayne County Members Meeting Minutes, February 9, 2022

Fri, 11 Feb 2022 13:21:02 GMT

Wayne County Members Meeting Minutes
Marion American Legion Post 1430
4141 Witherden Rd. Marion, NY 14505
February 9, 2022

1. Sheriff Rob Milby opened the meeting at 7:05pm with the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. The secretary was absent due to covid concerns at his home and the January Minutes were unavailable.

3. Treasurer’s Report was given by treasurer Mark Coleman. One new member’s dues was sent to State SCOPE. A check in the amount of $125 was received as a donation to Wayne County SCOPE by the Williamson Conservation and Sportsmen’s Club.

4. It was announced that State SCOPE has extended the drawing date for a 243 Henry rifle to April 30 at the State members meeting. Treasurer Mark Coleman is in chargeof this fundraiser. All funds will remain with the individual chapters, so it is important for members to participate by selling as many tickets as possible. State SCOPE has donated the rifle. It was in last year’s State raffle, but the winner chose cash instead.

5. Chairman Don Smith gave a legislative report which initiated several questions and comments. The report included:
· NYSRPA v. Bruen
· Federal gun-control bills introduced this year
· State gun-control bills introduced this year
6. Wayne County Board of Supervisors Chairman Ken Miller presented an update on redistricting in New York State. It focused on:
· Our 24^th Congressional District and the possibly of a new Congressman in Chris Jacobs. John Katko is retiring.
· Our 54^th State Senate District with Senator Pam Helming.
· Our 130^th State Assembly District with Assemblyman Brian Manktelow.

7. Sheriff Rob Milby introduced his choice for undersheriff, Tammy Ryndock, with whom he has been associated for several years in the Wayne County Sheriff’s office.

8. Bob Brannan presented Milby and Ryndock with a plaque containing the “Policeman” speech given by the late Paul Harvey on talk radio nearly 40 years ago. Mr. Harvey's father inspired this speech as he was a police officer who was shot and killed while doing what police officers do every day.

9. The chairman announced election of officers will occur at the March 9 members meeting. A request was made for new Chapter Board and Committee members.

10. Vice-Chairman Dave Colburn encouraged members to visit our SCOPE website while answering questions and explaining different aspects of it.

11. The meeting was closed at 8:25pm. The next members meeting will be March 9.

DONATE HERE

Donate Here

More Guns, Less Crime

(Past member) — Sat, 22 Jan 2022 23:15:19 GMT

At Townhall: As Gun

Sales Soared, the

Number of Violent

Crimes Committed

with Guns

Plummeted

Jan 14, 2022 | op-ed

gun sales op-ed

Rachel Morgan and Alexandra Thompson, “Criminal Victimization, 2020,” Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, October 2021.

Dr. John Lott has a new piece at Townhall on the claims about increased gun sales causing an increase in violent crime.

With violent crime soaring over the last two years, Americans want a solution. Over and over, President Joe Biden and gun control advocates frame violent crime as a gun problem. Relying on public health researchers, articles such as this one in the Atlantic and in local news stories this week point to increasing gun sales as the cause. But reported gun crimes fell in 2020, so the writers ignore the obvious explanation for rising crime, that law enforcement isn’t being allowed to do its job.

Gun sales increased dramatically in 2020 before receding some in 2021. Background checks on gun sales soared from 12.4 million in 2019 to 20.3 million in 2020 and declining back to 17.6 million in 2021. Meanwhile, murder and aggravated assaults rose in 2020. In 2020, they increased double-digit rates (29% for murder and 12% for aggravated assaults).

To many, the connection seems obvious. Gun sales increased, and murder and aggravated assaults rose, though robberies fell.

But what the media ignores is that the number of violent gun crimes dropped dramatically in 2020. Last October, the US Department of Justice released a study showing victims reported 212,470 gun crimes to police in 2020, a drop of 27% from the 290,790 in 2019. The share of violent crimes committed with guns also fell – by over 30%.

Of course, victims don’t report all crimes to the police. To get a handle on that, the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey interviews about 100,000 Americans each year. That survey also finds that the estimated number of gun crimes also fell by 27%, from 481,950 to 350,460 and that the share of violent crimes involving guns was only 7.7%.

In 2020, there was a statistically insignificant few percentage point rise in the share of murder committed with guns, but the share of guns used in robberies and aggravated assaults has dropped dramatically.

All this is consistent with academic research by myself and others showing that when civilians carry guns criminals are less likely to carry them. If a criminal pulls out a gun against an armed victim, he is more likely to be shot.

Gun ownership didn’t fuel the increase in crime over the last couple of years. Rather, people worried about violent crime and decided to arm themselves for self-protection.

It’s not hard to find explanations for the increased violence. Many urban areas saw more than half of prison inmates released because of the pandemic, and the releases still continue. Nationwide, there are over 340,000 fewer inmates in jails and prisons in 2021 than in 2019. In many places, police budgets were cut and officers ordered to stand down. New York City cut its police budget by $1 billion.

Prosecutors in many major urban areas have refused to prosecute violent criminals. In October, two rival drug gangs got into a gunfight in Chicago during broad daylight. The fight, caught on video, left one shooter dead and two others wounded. Cook County District Attorney Kim Foxx declined to prosecute any of the gang members, initially explaining they were “mutual combatants.”

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, hardly a right-winger, lashed out at Foxx: “If the bad guys that are out there that are picking up guns and shooting without any regard for the sanctity of life do not believe that there’s accountability for them, the brazenness will not end. It will escalate, it will continue, and our communities will not be safe.”

Throw in bail reform and some places cutting criminal penalties, and you have a real mess. In Harris County, Texas, criminals released since 2018 on little or no bail (some of them previously charged with murder) have murdered 156 people. In Nevada, Democrat Gov. Steve Sisolak championed a measure gutting the state’s three-strikes law, where criminals convicted of their third felony faced additional prison time. He replaced it with a rule allowing for six or seven felonies before the perpetrator faces additional punishment.

Lightfoot is right. If you want to reduce crime, criminals must be afraid of being caught and punished.

It isn’t rocket science understanding why crime is increasing, and it isn’t the fault of gun owners. Many parts of the country are in dire need of basic law enforcement. But, given how poorly public health researchers have done with their recommendations over the last couple of years, you would hope people would be skeptical of their advice on guns.
John R. Lott, Jr., “As Gun Sales Soared, the Number of Violent Crimes Committed with Guns Plummeted,” Townhall, January 14, 2022.

(Visited 450 times, 282 visits today)

Search by Topic

ANNUAL REPORT ON NUMBER OF CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMITS Assault Weapons Ban CPRC research Pre CPRC research About the CPRC Background Checks Bloomberg's Groups Concealed Carry Statistics -- Annual Report

“Constitutional Carry” (An old topic brought to light again)

(Past member) — Thu, 30 Dec 2021 04:54:01 GMT

by Alan Korwin, Author

Gun Laws of America
January 27, 2010

Will "Freedom To Carry" replace "Right To Carry"?
It's moving that way in Texas and elsewhere.

With state legislative sessions starting nationwide, the right to bear arms is front and center in people's minds and some state legislatures. Arizona has quickly moved a Constitutional Carry bill through both House and Senate committees, with broad support from the public, state organizations and the NRA. We'll know if it is enacted probably by April.

The so-called "right-to-carry permit" requires government interference, paperwork, applications, approvals, taxes called "fees," mandatory classes, written tests, shooting tests, plastic-coated permission slips, fingerprinting, photographs, entries into criminal databases and expiration dates for your "rights." That has definitely moved the right to bear arms significantly ahead. Is it time to go further and reach "Freedom To Carry"?

So-called "right to carry," even with all its baggage, has served us well, insofar as it has destroyed the myth that if good people have guns they'll run around indiscriminately killing each other. It quenched the paranoia that possession of a gun turns you into a homicidal maniac. It put to death the lie that an armed public will look like Dodge City. It ended the nonsense that a concealed weapon will entice you to shoot fellow motorists at stop lights. It wiped out the silliness that innocent armed people in restaurants will shoot slow waiters. Arizona enacted so-called guns in bars (actually, discreetly carried arms in liquor-licensed restaurants with no drinking allowed) in 2009, and all the waiters are still breathing. Right-to-carry showed up the anti-rights gun haters and their compliant media co-conspirators as a pack of lying, deceitful, terrified, irrational, egregious, elitist, hoplophobic enemies of civil rights.

Under Freedom To Carry, sometimes called Vermont carry or Alaska-style carry, basically, the government stays out of your face as you exercise your fundamental human and civil right to own and carry property. Arms, by the way, are the only enumerated objects in the Constitution or Bill of Rights that you are guaranteed the right to possess.

Alaska enacted Freedom To Carry in 2003 and alls well. Texas enacted Freedom To Carry "light" in 2007 as the Motorist Protection Act: there is no government interference with discreetly having a gun anywhere in your premises or your vehicle (including any sort of motor home), and from your premises to your vehicle, an excellent start (you still need a license while out and about on foot, so they're taking it one step at a time, so to speak). Having a firearm, if you're doing nothing wrong, is not a crime. And should not be a crime. What a concept. A woman should be able to put a handgun in her handbag and go about her day without fear of arrest. Montana enacted Freedom To Carry in 1991 for 99.4% of the state (outside city limits).

Under the infringement of so-called "reciprocity" schemes (an odious feature of "right-to-carry" plans), your human and civil rights as an American have been reduced to a list of government-approved states for licensees only, when you leave your home state. The 98% of the public that refuses to jump through the hoops, be taxed, get on the criminal database and get "rights" papers is left out in the cold when they travel under the current "reciprocity" model. Enormous police effort that could be going directly toward reducing crime is instead being diverted into registering, regulating and tracking the innocent.

The biggest argument against government-free Constitutional Carry is that it does away with the required training for a carry license. Training is good, we all agree. But are too many trainers now lined up at this government-made trough to feed? Are they afraid they won't be able to make money like regular entrepreneurs, if government doesn't force people to attend their classes? Do they fit the classic definition of a cartel, a business created and protected by government mandates, with the threat of arrest for anyone who operates outside the constraints?

There is also a fear that if people bear arms without the enforced classes, the dumb idiots will kill people out of stupidity -- sort of like the argument the anti-rights people make about guns in general. That's false of course, since less than 2% of the public gets a license and hence the required class -- but half the public has guns. The 50% of the people who have guns without the king's permission slips seem to get along just fine without being forced to take a class under penalty of arrest.

Here however is the silver lining of Constitutional Carry. With your rights restored, and training provided on a voluntary basis, trainers will be free to offer classes to the general public the way General Mills sells cereal. Everyone should have some. You want some of this? You can expect a burst of advertising and promotion for gun-safety and marksmanship classes once everyone is freed from government constraints. Family classes, discount days, coupons, two-fers, novice-to-advanced programs -- all the exposure you'd expect for any consumer product will start to emerge, as competition (not mandates) drive the market.

The departure of government from the firearms-training market leaves a vacuum that can and should be filled by ambitious entrepreneurs who see the potential. When people's rights are restored, their undertsanding of the need for competent instruction will bloom, and savvy marketers will help them along.

Instead of focusing on a tiny fraction of the public who bows for the permission slip, and leaving everyone else in darkness, we can finally move to school-based education. No student should be able to graduate without a healthy understanding of firearms, their social utility, and a demonstrated ability to safely discharge a firearm at a target. Use the Arizona high-school marksmanship bill as a basis, it's a sizzler: https://www.gunlaws.com/HighSchoolMarksmanship.htm

It is so totally American, and replacing the current state of TV-fueled gun ignorance with enlightenment and understanding, accidents will drop, safety will improve, national readiness will skyrocket, and the fear that there won't be enough training opportunities will fall apart as the stale BS it is.

If you do one thing this season, push for Constitutional Carry in your state. Draft a bill. Introduce a bill. Use our approach in Arizona and seek to simply repeal the unconstitutional obnoxious offensive ban against your civil rights. You're an American. You can do this.

Call -- don't write -- your local gun-rights chapter, even if you're not a member, you fool. Tell them you would support Freedom To Carry in your state. Tell them you would join (or donate) if they draft a Constitutional Carry law. Get this ball rolling.

Challenge to NY’s Attempt to Hold Firearm Manufacturers Responsible

(Past member) — Sat, 18 Dec 2021 07:20:34 GMT

Members of the Firearm Industry Launch Battle to Have New York Statute Declared Unconstitutional.

NEWTOWN, Conn. — The National Shooting Sports Foundation^® (NSSF^®) and a group of fourteen firearm manufacturers, distributors, and retailers filed a lawsuit and moved for a preliminary injunction in federal court today challenging as unconstitutional a New York law designed to blame the industry for the criminal misuse or unlawful possession of firearms in New York no matter where they were purchased.

Specifically, New York’s “public nuisance” law would subject members of the firearm industry to civil lawsuits for the criminal misuse or unlawful possession of firearms in New York. The law would impose liability on industry members for firearms lawfully sold anywhere in the United States that end up being criminally misused or illegally possessed in New York thereby allegedly contributing to a “public nuisance” in the state. Today’s lawsuit challenges the New York law as preempted by the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). It also challenges the law as unconstitutionally vague in violation of the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The lawsuit further challenges the law as an impermissible attempt by New York State to regulate interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

New York is trying to use the threat of crushing liability to coerce out-of-state businesses to adopt sales practices and procedures not required by Congress or the law of the state where they operate. The Constitution reserves the power to regulate interstate commerce solely to Congress. This law interferes with the sovereignty of other states to make policy choices about how firearms should be sold in their state, subject only to the Second Amendment and federal law.

The challenged law permits lawsuits by victims of criminal acts and citizens claiming they have been harmed by an alleged public nuisance in New York. It also allows lawsuits by the State and any local government, like the City of New York. Both New York State and the City of New York were part of a wave of similar lawsuits filed over twenty years ago that led to Congress passing the bipartisan PLCAA in 2005.

The PLCAA codified a bedrock legal principle. Manufacturers and retailers are not responsible for the subsequent criminal misuse or illegal possession of their lawfully sold, non-defective products by remote third parties - criminals - over whom they have no control. Firearm industry members are not legally responsible for illegal shootings any more than a cookware manufacturer is responsible if a criminal misuses a sharp kitchen knife to stab someone.

“This law is not about making our communities safer but rather, as former Governor Andrew Cuomo once proclaimed, to impose on the firearm industry a ‘death by a thousand cuts.’ Today’s lawsuit will end this unconstitutional attack on the businesses, large and small, vital to Americans’ Second Amendment rights,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President for Government and Public Affairs and General Counsel. “Opening up members of the firearm industry to a torrent of baseless civil lawsuits is – as it was in the past – an effort to impose radical gun control policies by litigating the forceful bankruptcy of companies. New York’s baseless law ignores the fact that members of the firearm industry work cooperatively with federal, state, and local authorities for Real Solutions^® to help address crimes involving guns.”

Legal experts such as Professor Jonathan Turley have long defended the merits of the PLCAA pointing out that laws like the one recently passed in New York are “unsound attempts” to distort principles of liability. New York’s law allows the very type of novel tort law actions, including those by New York State and City of New York, struck down by courts two decades ago.

NSSF looks forward to working with the individual plaintiffs and other members of the firearm industry to fight this blatantly unconstitutional New York law and in doing so, uphold the foundations of tort law, fight government overreach, and protect the firearm businesses that lawfully operate and employ over 340,000 of Americans.

For more information on the PLCAA, see NSSF’s Fact Sheet.

NY Would Allow Citizens to Sue Gunmakers

(Past member) — Thu, 16 Dec 2021 05:26:18 GMT

New York Democrat Attorney General Letitia James on Tuesday praised California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom's recent move to allow residents to sue gunmakers, saying New York should follow his lead.

James said: “We need to follow his lead. And the reason why that is, is because gun manufacturers and gun distributors in this country are immunized. No liability whatsoever. They are the only industry that is protected in this country, and given the carnage, and given the fact that this is the anniversary of Sandy Hook, I am sick and tired of prayers and individuals whose hearts go out to all of those who have lost their lives,” she said. “We can do something about it.”

Sound familiar? It is eerily similar to the “red flag” legislation called for by President Biden and others nationwide. Actually New York passed its own such bill in 2019. It allows NY citizens to contact authorities and declare an acquaintance incapable of owning or possessing firearms.

Thus began a new assault on the rights of gun owners in the face of the ever progressive agenda of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s past regime making it more than well known that gun owners in New York State are not only unwanted, but they are on a list of targets and as he has said in the past if people don’t like his rules, then they are free to leave.

Fortunately Mr. Cuomo departed yet left us to still face a majority of like-minded legislators who are willing to continue his legacy. A major goal is for us to ‘win back’ the state senate by electing Republican candidates on whose vote we can depend. Recall that one of the most recent attempts (in 2020) was to pass a bill requiring that each time a gun owner wants to buy a gun, no matter what, they would have to seek out an approved mental health professional to have an evaluation performed. This bill did not reach a full legislative vote but it continues to have many legislative supporters. The question should be when do ALL elected officials get their mental health evaluation ?

Lawmakers in the Empire State last year approved what they call the toughest ban on so-called “Ghost Guns” in the country. The measure aims to create tough new statewide laws on firearms without serial numbers such as those commonly built by hobbyists in the comfort of their own home. It would also make the simple act of fitting together the component parts of a firearm a crime for anyone who is not a licensed gunsmith. The bill, like others, has been floating around Albany for almost a decade in one form or another but was consistently foiled while Republicans held narrow control of the senate.

These bills may seem harmless to many gun owners. They feel no pressure if it does not appear to affect them personally. The question to ask is when does such encroachment on our personal liberties stop? Certainly a requirement for a mental health evaluation should be the last straw for all of us. Yet it’s failure to become law this past year will lull many to sleep again.

A Closer Look at the NYSRPA’s “May Issue” Case before the Supreme Court

(Past member) — Wed, 17 Nov 2021 04:50:47 GMT

We have now heard the oral arguments in the case challenging New York’s draconian and subjective “may issue” carry laws, and while we’ve heard from dozens of attorneys on both sides of the argument, we haven’t heard much at all from the individual gun owners who are hoping to see the state’s carry regime declared unconstitutional. Until now, anyway.

Robert Nash, who’s one of two gun owners suing the state, has never before spoken to the press about his involvement in the case, but in an exclusive interview with Bearing Arms, the gun owner lays out the byzantine process of applying for a license and explains why he refused to accept a judge’s decision to deny him an unrestricted carry license and chose instead to take his case to court.

Nash says that in Rensselaer County, where he lives, the process of applying for a concealed carry license goes something like this: first you gather together all of your necessary paperwork, including proof of training and four character references from individuals who will testify to your suitability to carry a gun. Then you hand over all of your documentary evidence along with several hundred dollars and you wait. Other New York State counties follow a similar procedure.

For Nash, it took about five months before he found out he’d been granted a “restricted” license, which allows him to take his pistol with him only to hunt or target shoot. Carrying for self-defense, however, is still prohibited with a restricted license, and if you’re caught carrying without a permit it’s a felony charge and a mandatory prison term upon conviction. So after a few months with his restricted license, Nash applied to have those restrictions removed.

As Nash explains, under New York’s law county officials have broad discretion and leeway in terms of granting or denying licenses. In Rensselaer County, there are multiple judges assigned to decide the outcome of permit applications, and each of them may have very different views on the right to carry. According to Nash, there are several judges in the county who do issue unrestricted permits based on a general concern over personal safety, but there are also judges who rarely if ever find that an applicant has shown “good cause” or a “justifiable need” to carry a gun in self-defense. Guess who Nash ended up with?

“I submitted a letter to him [the judge assigned to Nash’s application] asking him to remove my restrictions based on local crime in the area,” Nash tells Bearing Arms. “There was a string of robberies which you’ll see in the case, and it was the robberies and just for self-defense that were the reasons I wanted those restrictions removed. And he said ‘no.’ Other judges in the county, I could have submitted the same letter and they would have said ‘yes” in a minute. Even for lesser reasons. I’ve had other people that I know just say they want to protect their wife and kids and they get approved. Same county. Different judge.”

This is a perfect example of the subjective nature of New York’s carry permitting laws. Not only do applicants have to demonstrate a justifiable need to carry a firearm in self-defense, it’s up to the issuing authorities to decide what that justifiable need looks like. You may be lucky enough to get a judge or a county sheriff who believes that the right to bear arms is indeed a constitutional right and approves all permits from those legal gun owners who meet the training qualifications and submits their proper paperwork, or you could end up getting a judge who doesn’t believe that anyone should be walking around with a lawfully carried gun on their person. Your ability to exercise your Second Amendment rights aren’t based on the Constitution in New York, but on the whims of those in a position of authority.

Nash’s denial didn’t sit well with him, and so a few months after his application had been rejected, he reached out to Tom King, the head of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association to let him know what had happened.

“He says ‘I know all about this, you’re not the only one, but I don’t know if we have a case yet. Let me talk to someone at the NRA.’ And he did, and he got back to me right away. And he said, ‘Look, I think we have a case. Here’s the roadmap they want to go with, but are you willing to stick your neck out over this? This is going to be a high-profile, your name’s going to be everywhere kind of thing.’ And without hesitation I said yes.”

So here we are several years later, with Nash, co-plaintiff Brandon Koch, and the New York State Rifle Association squaring off with the state of New York in the Supreme Court (the National Rifle Association is financially supporting the challenge, but is not a named party in the lawsuit). Nash says he’s not expecting the Supreme Court to overturn every carry licensing law in existence, but he is hoping that a majority of justices strike down the subjective “may issue” laws on the books in New York and a handful of other states.

“I just want to get New York’s law fixed. That was my goal from Day One. I don’t think that ‘proper cause’ should be in there at all, and I hope that the justices, when they’re reading New York State’s law and comparing it to the Second Amendment, I hope that they deem that this proper cause requirement violates the Second Amendment.”

Nash is far from alone in his wishes. There are tens of millions of Americans hoping the Court does the same, me included. I appreciate Robert Nash standing up for his own Second Amendment rights and the rights of every other law-abiding citizen, and I’m looking forward to checking in with him again in just a few weeks after the oral arguments in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen take place.

Oklahoma: A True Example

(Past member) — Mon, 01 Nov 2021 22:20:42 GMT

Oklahoma is the only state that neither Obama nor Biden won even one county in their elections. While everyone is focusing on Arizona's, Georgia, and Texas' new laws, look what Oklahoma has been doing!

Oklahoma recently passed a law in the state to incarcerate all illegal immigrants, and ship them back to where they came from unless they want to get a green card and become an American citizen. They all scattered. HB1804. This was against the advice of the Federal Government, and the ACLU, they said it would be a mistake.

Guess what? Oklahoma did it anyway. Recently Oklahoma passed a law to include DNA samples from any and all illegal's to the Oklahoma database, for criminal investigative purposes. Pelosi said it was unconstitutional SB 1102. Guess what? Oklahoma did it anyway. Several weeks ago, we passed a law, declaring Oklahoma as a Sovereign state, not under the Federal Government directives. Joining Texas, Montana and Utah as the only states to do so. More states are likely to follow: Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Carolina's, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, West Virginia, Mississippi and Florida. Save your confederate money, it appears the South is about to rise up once again. HJR1003.

The federal Government has made bold steps to take away our guns. Oklahoma, a week ago, passed a law confirming people in this state have the right to bear arms and transport them in their vehicles. I'm sure that was a setback for the criminals.

The Liberals didn't like it -- But.... Guess what? Oklahoma did it anyway. Just this month, the state has voted and passed a law that ALL drivers' license exams will be printed in English, and only English, and no other language. They have been called racist for doing this, but the fact is that ALL of the road signs are in English only. If you want to drive in Oklahoma, you must read and write English. Really simple. By the way, the Liberals don't like any of this either. Guess what? Oklahoma is doing it anyway. Guess what? The people I'm sending this to, will send it on. Well, at least the ones who love and believe in freedom will!

Hooray Oklahoma! A True Example for the rest of the United states!!!!

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

— Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

CDC LOOKS TO GET ACTIVE IN GUN CONTROL DEBATE

(Past member) — Mon, 06 Sep 2021 02:53:36 GMT

by Chris Eger of Guns.com

The new CDC director says it is "pedal to the metal" time when it comes to addressing guns as a "serious public health threat."

A political appointment of the Biden-Harris Administration – CDC directors are not confirmed by the U.S. Senate – Dr. Rochelle Walensky took the helm of the national public health agency in January. Now, in a recent interview with CNN, she went record as characterizing gun crime and accidents as an epidemic that should be tackled with the agency's help.

"Something has to be done about this," said Walensky. "Now is the time – it's pedal to the metal time."

Part of the pedal is allocating over $10 million in taxpayer dollars for a variety of missions including $2.2 million for tracking nonfatal gunshot wounds in 10 states over the next three years and another $7.8 million in grants spread across 16 research awards to study firearm-related injuries and crime.

"I swore to the President and to this country that I would protect your health. This is clearly one of those moments, one of those issues that is harming America's health," Walensky said.

Only eight months on the job, Walensky's CDC has already attempted to reach far past its traditional public health mandate by instituting a 60-day extension of a federal COVID-related ban on landlords evicting their tenants. That extension was quickly struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court as unconstitutional, with the high court pointing out that only Congress had the authority to extend the ban.

The CDC falls directly under the Department of Health and Human Services, a cabinet-level executive branch department headed by Xavier Becerra. While Becerra lacks any previous health care experience and was only confirmed by the Senate to his current position on a narrow 50-49 vote, he was the former attorney general of California and a long-term Democrat in Congress who championed gun control to include bans on "assault weapons." While the state's "top cop," he repeatedly ramped up regulation on guns, going so far as suing the ATF to force federal regulators to lower the boom on so-called "80-percent" lowers and kits.

The move from the CDC to become a player in gun politics comes as the Biden-Harris administration has promised to take a "whole-of-government approach” to a muscular domestic gun control policy. Public integrity groups are already pushing for full disclosure of a State Department ban on the import of guns and ammunition from Russia, a move ostensibly tied to sanctions over the poisoning of an anti-Putin advocate in 2020. At the same time, the Justice Department is currently weighing two far-reaching new rules on the way firearm frames and receivers are defined as well as the future legality of millions of pistol stabilizing braces.

Biden Admits Handgun Ban Comment

(Past member) — Sun, 15 Aug 2021 06:05:29 GMT

Friday, August 13th, 2021

BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is taking Joe Biden to task with a new 60-second TV message on several cable networks, and they’ve got the best help of all, the president’s own words of admission that he wants to ban 9mm handguns.

The new message includes a film clip of Biden saying he wants to ban 9mm pistols.

“Neither Joe Biden nor his White House handlers can sugar coat the president’s acknowledgement during a CNN Townhall program that he intends to ban some of the most popular pistols in the country,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “This was no Biden gaffe, for which he is famous. It was an admission, whether unintentional or completely candid, that his hope is to ban 9mm handguns owned and used by tens of millions of Americans, including thousands of police officers.”

Biden was responding to a question about gun control when he told his audience, “Whether it is a 9mm pistol, or a rifle, it is ridiculous. I am continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things.”

“Biden cannot walk that one back no matter how hard he tries,” Gottlieb said, “and we’re going to keep reminding America about what he said. This is not going to be swept under the rug as just another one of Joe Biden’s famous slips of the tongue.”

CCRKBA’s 60-second message will be broadcast on the following networks: AMC, FX, the Comedy Network, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Fox Business, One America News Network, Destination America, Bloomberg, BBC America, the Investigation Discovery Channel, American Heroes Channel, SYFY (Science Fiction), TLC (The Learning Channel), TruTV, DirecTV, The Weather Channel, HLN, Dish TV, CNBC, the Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel.

Viewers are asked to text “SAVE 2A” to 474747, and join the fight to save a right.

“When Joe Biden ran for the presidency,” Gottlieb recalled, “his gun control plan was already extreme, but now he’s exposed himself as a handgun prohibitionist. We’re going to energize every American gun owner possible to stop Biden’s radical agenda.”

Chipman aided Chinese Propaganda Scheme

(Past member) — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 03:39:47 GMT

Biden ATF Nominee Appeared on Chinese State TV to Discuss Sandy Hook Shooting

President Biden’s nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms appeared on Chinese state television in 2012 to discuss the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

Chipman appeared on China Global Television Network in December 2012 to discuss the Newtown, Ct., massacre in which 28 people were killed.

Note that Chipman’s interview furthered a propaganda strategy to distract from a stabbing attack that claimed the lives of 23 children in China’s Heinan Province the same day. Chinese media gave scant attention to the stabbing and instead focused on the Sandy Hook shooting, Reuters reported at the time.

Chipman’s interview on the Sandy Hook shooting is available on YouTube. The Trump administration required CGTN to register as a foreign agent in 2019, along with a host of other Chinese state media outlets.

Chipman’s disclosure of media appearances to the Senate includes a disclaimersaying there may be other appearances that he does not remember.

“I have done my best to identify all interviews given, including through a review of my personal files, and searches of publicly available electronic databases,” the disclaimer states. “Despite my searches, there may be other materials that I have been unable to identify, find, or remember.”

It is not clear when the Senate will vote to confirm Chipman as director of the ATF. Conservatives have criticized Chipman’s support for gun control measures, and with moderate Senator Susan Collins (R., Maine) opposing his confirmation, Chipman would likely be approved as ATF director along party lines.

“In recent years, Mr. Chipman has been an outspoken critic of the firearms industry and has made statements that demean law-abiding gun owners,” Collins said in June. “Although he has the right to express his views, I believe this history makes him an unusually divisive pick for this important position.”

Wayne County S.C.O.P.E. We encourage all members to VOTE on PRIMARY DAY - TUESDAY 6.22.21

Mon, 21 Jun 2021 13:56:02 GMT

Wayne County S.C.O.P.E. We encourage all members to VOTE on PRIMARY DAY - TUESDAY 6.22.21

Ratings of Wayne County Sheriff Candidates running in the Republican primary on Tuesday, June 22, 2021, have been completed. The ratings are:

Candidate Milby: A+ Candidate MacNeal: A

The Wayne County SCOPE Committee used the following as a rating basis:

Candidate shows strong evidence of protecting the rights of law-abiding citizens and:

⦁ Strongly supports the Second Amendment.

⦁ Strongly supports the right to due process.

⦁ Strongly supports the right to legally use firearms for self defense.

⦁ Strongly agrees that no government entity has the right to infringe on possession of firearms by law-abiding citizens.

⦁ Strongly supports the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Candidate shows strong evidence of opposition to gun control efforts such as:

⦁ The NY SAFE Act.

⦁ Extreme Risk Protection Orders ("Red Flag" laws).

⦁ Need for gun owners to purchase gun-owner or liability insurance.

⦁ Banning of semi-automatic firearms.

⦁ Micro-stamping capability of semi-automatic firearms.

⦁ Background checks to purchase ammunition.

⦁ Registration of long guns.

⦁ Mandatory storage of firearms within one's own home.

WC Sheriff candidates debate

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 12:36:27 GMT

The debate between the Wayne County candidates for sheriff has been removed from News 8, but can be viewed on YouTube at the link below:

https://youtu.be/3FgsNcOhTkI Primary election day is June 22nd.

June 22, 2021 Primary Election Day

Wed, 02 Jun 2021 12:58:12 GMT

Republican Primary Election to be held June 22, 2021

http://web.co.wayne.ny.us/index.php/wayne-county-board-of-elections/

Mark H. Alquist , Commissioner
John M. Zornow , Commissioner
Joyce A. Krebbeks, Deputy
Kelley M. Borrelli, Deputy

7376 State Route 31, Suite 1200
PO Box 636
Lyons, NY 14489
315-946-7400
315-946-7409 (Fax)
email: elections@co.wayne.ny.us

Office Hours 9 AM – 5 PM Monday – Friday
The Board of Elections Office is located in the Public Safety Building

PLEASE NOTE UPDATED 2021 Political Calendar March 8 updated

Republican Primary Election to be held June 22, 2021

Keeping Votes Confidential:

Your vote is protected through a system of mechanical and administrative safeguards. When a voting machine is opened, election officials have no way of knowing who voted for which candidate. The ballot stub number cannot be tracked, this number is not on the ballot itself. By law, we have to account for every ballot assigned to an election district. This makes it possible to keep an exact record of the number of votes cast on the machine.

New York State Voter Registration Form

ABSENTEE APPLICATION

- http://www.elections.ny.gov
- Disclaimer For WebSite

How Marijuana Legalization Might Affect YOU

(Past member) — Wed, 05 May 2021 03:35:34 GMT

Is there more to the legalization of Marijuana than you thought?

The federal government still does not recognize marijuana as a legal drug to consume, no matter what NY or any other state passes at their level. So how could this effect you?

When applying for a pistol permit or purchase of a gun you must disclose if you are a regular user of marijuana to the ATF. If you check yes, then that municipality or gun dealer has to deny your purchase based on federal guidelines according to Section 922 (g)(3) of title 18 of US Code. If you lie on this form you could face federal penalties up to 10 years in prison.

This also means your already licensed gun isn’t legal if you are a marijuana consumer. The ATF specifies that a marijuana consumer cannot legally own a gun. The federal government states that a user of a controlled substance may not own a gun or ammunition.

So is this simply a way in the backdoor to limit 2nd Amendment rights of New Yorkers? Could the ATF be knocking on your door to take away your firearms? I would put my money on yes.

This is not a debate on the legalization of marijuana, but a warning to show you how the state democrats can limit your Right to Bear Arms if you chose to partake in what is now legal in New York. Please pay attention to what is happening in Albany, what may appear as progressive government could actually be taking away your rights and freedoms.

—Assemblyman David DiPietro (R,C,I D-147)

NRA Takes Concealed Carry Case to the Supreme Court

(Past member) — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 03:16:11 GMT

If you’re interested in your right to keep and bear arms, and you want to carry concealed, then this is a case you will want to follow. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) has partnered with the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) to ask the Supreme Court to hear a challenge to New York’s restrictive process for issuing concealed carry licenses.

"As long as New York continues denying law-abiding gun owners their Second Amendment rights, the NRA will continue fighting to protect and expand those rights," said Jason Ouimet, executive director of NRA-ILA.

The case, NYSRPA v. Corlett, challenges New York's requirement for applicants to demonstrate "proper cause" to carry a firearm. While New York routinely employs this arbitrary standard to deny carry permits, the NRA argues that this right should be available to "all 'the people'" instead of a "subset of the people that can distinguish themselves from their fellow Americans” by showing proper cause.

The NRA is the leader in America’s right-to-carry movement having pioneered the effort on legislative and legal fronts since the 1980s. Today, due to its efforts, more than 40 states have what the NRA describes as "shall-issue" laws where states are required to give residents who apply and satisfy prerequisites their requested permits. The NRA is also the national leader in the "constitutional carry" movement where law-abiding residents in 16 states do not require a permit to carry a firearm. This is the second lawsuit the NRA and NYSRPA have brought to the High Court in as many years. The move is just the latest in NRA’s decades-long fight to protect and expand Americans’ right to carry.

“Eventually, these anti-freedom activists will understand that our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is fundamental, and it doesn’t vanish when we leave our homes. Until then, we will continue these battles wherever they arise," concluded Ouimet.

FOID Ruled Unconstitutional

(Past member) — Wed, 28 Apr 2021 04:16:58 GMT

ILL. JUDGE RULES FOID CARD REQUIREMENT UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR GUNS IN HOME

BELLEVUE, WA – An Illinois Circuit Court Judge in White County has ruled the requirement for possessing a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card to possess a gun in the home is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

The case is known as Illinois v. Vivian Claudine Brown. Her case is supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association. According to Brown’s attorney, David Sigale of Wheaton, Ill., this is the second time a judge has declared the FOID Card Act unconstitutional, dismissing the charges against Brown, who had a bolt-action rifle in her home, but did not possess an FOID card.

“The FOID Card requirement in order to exercise the constitutionally enumerated right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment clearly goes too far in this case,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. As White County Circuit Judge T. Scott Webb notes in his ruling, ‘It simply cannot be the case that a citizen must pay a fee in order to exercise a core individual Second Amendment right within their own home.’ For too long, Illinois has been treating this right like a regulated government privilege and that needs to stop.”

In his ruling, Judge Webb observed, “If the right to bear arms and self-defense are truly core rights, there should be no burden on the citizenry to enjoy those rights, especially within the confines and privacy of their own homes.”

This second ruling on FOID card constitutionality could clear a direct path back to the Illinois State Supreme Court, Gottlieb and attorney Sigale agree.

“The idea that an Illinois resident doesn’t enjoy Second Amendment rights until he or she pays a $10 fee for a FOID card is outrageous,” Gottlieb said. “Nowhere should such a mandate be allowed to stand.”

SAF, PARTNERS CHALLENGE NJ GUNLAWS WITH FEDERAL LAWSUIT

(Past member) — Tue, 23 Mar 2021 04:25:48 GMT

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the state’s restrictive gun laws, alleging in a 28-page complaint that “New Jersey laws…unconstitutionally restrict the acquisition of firearms.”

SAF is joined by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc., the New Jersey Second Amendment Society, the Coalition of New Jersey Firearms Owners, the Firearms Policy Coalition, Bob’s Little Sport Shop, Inc., and three private citizens. They are represented by attorneys David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson and Joseph O. Masterman at Cooper & Kirk, PLLC in Washington, D.C., Daniel L. Schmutter at Hartman & Winnicki, P.C. in Ridgewood, N.J. and David D. Jensen at David Jensen & Associates, Beacon, N.Y.

The lawsuit is known as Kendrick v. Grewal.

Named as defendants in the complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, are New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal, State Police Supt. Patrick J. Callahan, Bridgeton Police Chief Michael Giamari, Harrison Township Police Chief Ronald A. Cundey and Glassboro Police Chief John Polillo, in their official capacities.

“This legal action has been a long time coming, ever since Carol Bowne of Berlin Township was murdered in her own driveway in 2015 while waiting for her firearm permit to be processed,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The hoops one must go through and waits one must endure, plus the fees attached has resulted in a complicated process that delays approval far beyond what existing state law allows.

“As we note in our lawsuit,” he continued, “such restrictions on firearm acquisition are unconstitutional on their face. No Garden State resident should be subjected to this kind of bureaucratic harassment. The idea that a law-abiding citizen must first obtain government permission before exercising a constitutionally-enumerated fundamental right is simply hostile to the right to keep and bear arms.”

SAF and its partners are asking the court to declare the provisions of current New Jersey statutes requiring citizens to obtain an identification card or permit in order to acquire a firearm are unconstitutional. They want an injunction prohibiting the defendants from enforcing those provisions and any related laws or regulations.

ANTI GUN BUSINESSES !!!

(Past member) — Sat, 23 Jan 2021 04:18:38 GMT

Don’t Feed The Gun Prohibitionists!

Don’t Have Buyer’s Remorse!
Make the decision with your wallet to fight against firearm prohibition

Learn the facts, or you will get what you pay for...

The following companies and/or their decision makers have instituted anti-firearm corporate policy or have pressed lawmakers to enact further strict legislation.

https://www.ccrkba.org/

Once you open this site, in the left hand column under General interest scroll down to Anti Gun Businesses.

You may want to share this with others.

Biden will ‘Defeat The NRA’

(Past member) — Mon, 11 Jan 2021 06:32:47 GMT

January 10, 2021 Updated: January 10, 2021

President-elect Joe Biden on Jan. 8 promised to “defeat” the National Rifle Association while he’s in office.

Biden’s official Twitter account was responding to former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.), who was among 14 people wounded in a shooting rampage by Jared Lee Loughner in Tucson in 2011; six people died in the attack. Giffords had recounted how her life and community “changed forever.”

“But the attack did not break me—or the people I represented in Congress. We came together, turned pain into purpose, and found hope in each other,” she wrote, adding that she continues to work to “achieve a safer America.”

Biden responded, saying: “Your perseverance and immeasurable courage continue to inspire me and millions of others. I pledge to continue to work with you—and with survivors, families, and advocates across the country—to defeat the NRA and end our epidemic of gun violence.”

The NRA, which has more than 5 million members, seeks to protect and educate people about their Second Amendment rights.

While the association didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Biden’s post, its lobbying arm recently published an article that says Biden would “begin a concerted attack on the rights of American gun owners” after being inaugurated.

“We must be ready for the onslaught,” the post reads, adding that a Biden administration, if officials get their way, “will ban and confiscate the most-commonly-owned rifle in the United States” and “will arbitrarily limit the number of guns that can be bought per month,” among other measures.

Biden’s website says he has a plan to end “our gun violence epidemic” and boasts that he has taken on the NRA twice and won, referring to his help passing the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act in 1993 and in passing a 10-year ban on some weapons and magazines the following year.

“As president, Joe Biden will defeat the NRA again,” the site states.

Some of the proposals include banning the manufacture and sale of so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, restricting the number of guns one person may buy per month to one, and prohibiting people convicted of hate crimes from owning guns.

Paul believes his maintenance would provide a more professional website since all chapter sites would be consistent.

John Katko (R-NY) talks about his experiences growing up with firearms. IMG Congress.gov

Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:12:04 GMT

John Katko (R-NY) talks about his experiences growing up with firearms. AmmoLand.com Editor’s Note: We are pleased to post the latest of our occasional Q&A features with an elected official who supports hunting and the shooting sports. NSSF thanks Congressman John Katko (R), New York’s 24th District, for agreeing to talk with us.

Who introduced you to hunting/shooting sports and at what age?

My father introduced me to hunting and the shooting sports at a very young age. He started by stressing gun safety. My brother and I learned to shoot at first with a 1924 German-made bolt action single shot .22 caliber rifle. I have since taught my three boys to shoot with the same gun. After taking my first hunter safety course as a teenager, I began to use a shotgun and shot a lot of clay pigeons with it. Ever since, each year I have almost exclusively hunted deer.

Describe your most recent hunting/shooting sports activity? With whom?

Opening Day for deer season in Upstate New York is always the weekend before Thanksgiving. My oldest son Sean and I hunted this year on opening day, as we always do, on my in-law’s farm. We both got deer that morning. It is always a special time to go hunting with my son and to hang out at the family farmhouse. We met up with some locals whom we have hunted with for years in the afternoon and did a few drives and got another deer. It was a great time.

Describe your favorite shooting sport/hunting activity.

As you may have gathered, I love deer hunting! I have been doing it for 40 years. The best thing about it is the beautiful sounds of the woods. I always start and end my hunting day in my cherished tree stand sitting halfway up a ridge with a beautiful view of the woods and surrounding area. To hear the tranquil sounds of the breeze on the trees and the various animals running around, chipmunks, minks, fox and even some coyotes are awesome. Of course, the excitement of seeing a deer and deciding whether to take it is the ultimate hunting rush.

Which piece of pending legislation related to the firearm industry is particularly important to you and why?

Since coming to Congress, I have consistently heard from sports enthusiasts and firearm owners in Central New York about the patchwork of laws they have to navigate when traveling across state lines. With this in mind, I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to advance the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 38). Congress must continue working to provide certainty to law-abiding firearm owners and ensure the fair recognition of concealed carry permits across the country.

What do you see as the challenges and opportunities for hunters and shooting sports enthusiasts in the upcoming congressional session?

In addition to advocating for sensible legislation to protect the rights of sportsmen and sportswomen, I believe Congress has a responsibility to encourage conservation and preserve the American outdoors for future generations of sportsmen and sportswomen. I was proud to support the introduction and enactment of the Great American Outdoors Act, which will significantly increase the availability of federal resources for conservation projects in my district and across the country. For sports enthusiasts, it is critical that lawmakers work with federal agencies to fully implement the Great American Outdoors Act and continue to prioritize other federal conservation programs such as the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE Vote!!!

Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:07:42 GMT

List of General Election 2020 Candidates for Wayne County

Thu, 29 Oct 2020 00:42:39 GMT

Below is the link to a Pdf file listing the candidates for the 2020 general election. Download a copy at the following link: 2020WayneCountyCandidates.pdf

Gun Storage Challenge Revived

(Past member) — Fri, 23 Oct 2020 04:17:38 GMT

WA Appeals Court Ruling Revives SAF-NRA Challenge to Seattle Gun Law

Ammoland Inc. Posted on October 21, 2020 by Dave Workman

A Washington Appeals Court has ruled unanimously that a SAF-NRA challenge to a Seattle gun storage ordinance may go to trial, reversing an earlier dismissal of the case by a trial judge. (Dave Workman photo)

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Washington State’s 35-year-old firearms preemption law got a boost Monday with a unanimous state Appeals Court ruling that reversed and remanded a legal challenge against a so-called “safe storage” regulation adopted by the City of Seattle more than two years ago, essentially in defiance of the statute.

Buried in an early report from KIRO was the confirmation that the city has been receiving pro bono legal help while plaintiffs—the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association—have had no such assistance.

Seattle adopted the storage ordinance in July 2018 and was quickly challenged by SAF and NRA and two Seattle residents, Omar Abdul Alim and Michael Thyng. That October, King County Superior Court Judge Barbara Linde tossed the case on the grounds that plaintiffs lacked standing. She did not rule on whether the storage requirement violated the preemption statute.

At the time, as reported by KIRO7 Eyewitness News, Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes declared, “It seems the NRA jumped the gun in filing their lawsuit against this eminently reasonable legislation meant to protect children and the vulnerable.”

But is the legislation reasonable, and is it even legal under the preemption statute? Now the courts will have a chance to make that determination.

Under the ordinance, which took effect in January 2019, gun owners could be fined up to $500 if they didn’t lock up their guns, and up to $1,000 if that gun fell into the hands of a juvenile or some other “unauthorized” person, including someone “at risk,” as reported by KING News at the time. The fine could go to $10,000 if the gun was used to injure or kill another person, or be used in a crime. SAF and NRA said this mandate clearly violates the preemption law,which was originally passed in 1983 and amended and strengthened in 1985. It has not been amended since 1994.

Here’s what the law says:

“The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.”

But SAF and NRA attorneys Eric Lindberg and Steve Fogg with Corr, Cronin in Seattle appealed. Two years later, a three-judge State Court of Appeals panel led by Acting Chief Judge Beth Andrus ruled unanimously that the plaintiffs did have standing, and that the trial court erred.

An elated Alan Gottlieb, SAF founder and executive vice president, said in a prepared statement, “Now we will have a trial on the merits of the case, which I believe we will win eventually.”

But Gottlieb noted the length of time it took for this decision to come down.

“A lot of our cases in Washington state have been stalled and have taken a long time to actually get resolved,” he said, “and it’s because they really don’t want to rule in our favor but they know eventually they’re going to have to.”

SAF and NRA also sued the City of Edmonds, located north of Seattle, for essentially the same thing and won that case in the trial court. This Appeals Court victory could discourage any further action in the Edmonds case.

It’s no secret Washington State has become a petri dish for gun control experimentation. Everytown for Gun Safety, the billionaire-backed gun prohibition group based in New York, has been involved in the Seattle case. It’s been theorized that this was a test to see how strong state preemption laws might be, since Washington’s statute has served as a model for similar laws in other states.

“Rogue city governments, especially ones that let rioters seize neighborhoods and destroy public and private property, cannot be allowed to skate around state firearms laws,” Gottlieb said, taking a swipe at Seattle’s recent history. “Seattle is not a special fiefdom inside Washington State, where officials can make up their own rules, especially when they directly affect the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.”

He called the city’s effort to erode the preemption law “cavalier.”

Joining Judge Andrus in the unanimous ruling were Judges Stephen Dwyer and Marlin Appelwick. In the ruling, Judge Andrus observed, “The challengers here make an adequate showing that their rights will be or have been adversely affected by the City ordinance. They allege they follow a certain firearm storage practice, the ordinance requires them to alter this practice or risk being in violation of the law, and Alim would have to purchase a gun locker to come into compliance. The facts alleged show an adversarial relationship sufficient to eliminate the risk that a ruling on the merits of their preemption challenge would be an advisory opinion only. We see no basis under the UDJA to require a person to confess to a violation of an ordinance and risk exposure to significant civil infractions before being able to challenge the validity of that ordinance under state law.”

Dan Nolte, with the Seattle City Attorney’s office, told KIRO his office is “reviewing the decision and will confer with our pro bono legal counsel on our potential next steps.”

SAF and NRA will wait to see what those “next steps” might be. The city could appeal this ruling to the state Supreme Court, or opt to take the case to trial on remand.

In the meantime, this amounts to a victory for Washington’s beleaguered gun owners and more fuel for what has been an ongoing effort for decades by anti-gun city officials who want to repeal the preemption statute so they may return to an era of patchwork local laws that confused gun owners and often conflicted with one another.

That’s why the state legislature exercised its authority and took such power away from local governments in the first place. The idea was so good, preemption is now on the books in at least 40 other states in various forms.

WAYNE COUNTY SCOPE MEMBERS MEETING "CANDIDATES NIGHT" SEPTEMBER 9, 2020

Fri, 04 Sep 2020 23:48:35 GMT

Wayne County SCOPE will hold its next meeting on Wednesday, September 9 @ 7 PM at the Marion American Legion. Members are asked to wear masks and practice social distancing. The Legion will be open and also the bar.

This meeting will be devoted to a vetting of potential federal and state candidates for office. Candidates have been invited to attend this meeting. Questions will be posed and members will have an opportunity to ask their own questions and respond to candidates' answers. This opportunity only occurs every two years. I hope many of you can attend and participate in the election process.

Senator Pam Helming has also been invited to speak. She is chairman of the senate committee seeking candidates to replace a number of retiring state Republican senators.

Please plan to wear a mask while moving around the room or building. The bar will be open and hopefully members will partake since the Legion does not charge us for use of the facility. No mask is needed while seated at your table. A maximum of 4 per table is allowed in order to properly social distance. Your cooperation is appreciated by the Legion's leadership.

Please continue to visit the state and chapter websites for updated information both in Wayne County and around the state. Here are the links. Note that you can access our Wayne County page directly from the state site under “Chapters" on the navigation bar.

S COPENY2A.ORG OR WWW.WAYNECOUNTYSCOPE.ORG

THE CHICAGO GUN MYTH

(Past member) — Thu, 30 Jul 2020 02:03:35 GMT

David HarsanyiJuly 27, 2020 4:12 PM

Politicians blame out-of-state sellers, but the real problem lies at home.

The tragically incompetent mayor of Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, appeared on CNN’s State of the Union this weekend to deflect attention from the horror show unfolding in her city by blaming interlopers for its spiking murder rate: “We are being inundated with guns from states that have virtually no gun control, no background checks, no ban on assault weapons — that is hurting cities like Chicago.”

Although these accusations have leveled by Chicago politicians for decades now, they are a myth.

For one thing, there is no state in the nation with “virtually no gun control” or “no background checks.” Every time anyone in the United States purchases a gun from a federal firearms licensee (FFL) — a gun store, a gun show, it doesn’t matter — the seller runs a background check on the buyer through the NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) database. In some cases, the FFL checks to see if the buyer has passed a background check via a state-issued concealed-carry permit. In states that allow individual private sales, it is illegal to knowingly sell to anyone who you believe is obtaining a firearm for criminal purposes.

Those who cross state lines to buy guns undergo the same background check, and the sale is processed by an FFL in the buyer’s home state. The exact same laws apply to all online sales.

The vast majority of Americans obtain their guns in this manner, and they rarely commit crimes. Around 7 percent of criminals in prison bought weapons using their real names. Fewer than 1 percent obtained them at gun shows. As the Heritage Foundation’s Amy Swearer points out, there have been around 18 million concealed-carry permit holders over the past 15 years, and they have committed 801 firearm-related homicides over that span, or somewhere around 0.7 percent of all firearm-related murders. Concealed-carry holders not only are more law-abiding than the general population as a group; they are more law-abiding than law enforcement.

Studies of those imprisoned on firearms charges show that most often they obtain their weapons by stealing them or buying them in black markets. A smaller percentage get them from family members or friends.

On top of all this, federal law requires every FFL license holder to report the purchase of two or more handguns by the same person with a week to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. This is one of the reasons straw purchasers — people with a clean record who buy for criminals — spread their operations to other states. This is not unique to Illinois or Chicago. It has nothing to do with strict or lenient laws. It has mostly to do with cities and states failing to prosecute straw purchases.

Lightfoot claims that 60 percent of the guns used in Chicago murders are bought from out of state. I assume she is relying on 2017’s suspect “gun trace report,” which looked at guns confiscated in criminal acts from 2013 and 2016. Even if we trusted the city’s data, most guns used in Illinois crimes are bought in-state. If gun laws in Illinois — which earns a grade of “A-“ from the pro-gun-control Gifford Law Center, tied for second highest in the country after New Jersey — are more effective than gun laws in Missouri, Wisconsin, or Indiana, why is it that FFL dealers in suburban Cook County are the origin point for a third of the crime guns recovered in Chicago, and home to “seven of the top ten source dealers”? According to the trace study, 11.2 percent of all crime guns recovered in Chicago could be tracked to just two gun shops.

The only reason, it seems, criminals take the drive to Indiana is because local gun shops are tapped out. There is a tremendous demand for weapons in Chicago. That’s not Mississippi’s fault. And Lightfoot’s contention only proves that criminals in her city can get their hands on guns rather easily, while most law-abiding citizens have no way to defend themselves.

Lightfoot may also be surprised to learn that California borders on states with liberal gun laws, such as Arizona, Nevada, and Oregon. Yet no big city in California has quite the murder and criminality of Chicago. New York borders on states with liberal gun laws, such as Vermont, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire. Yet NYC’s murder rate is only fraction of Chicago’s. Texas gets an “F” from Gifford Law Center, yet Houston and Dallas have murder rates that are half of that in Chicago. The rates in Austin and El Paso are tiny when compared to Chicago.

Then, of course, the “assault-weapons bans” that Lightfoot brings up have absolutely no bearing on Chicago’s murder rate, even if such prohibitions actually worked. There were 864 murders in the state of Illinois in 2018 (the last year for which the FBI has full stats). Of homicides where the type of weapon is reported by law enforcement, 592 were perpetrated using handguns, 14 with rifles, and four with shotguns. Over 100 murders were committed using knives, other cutting instruments, hands, feet, and other types of weapons. And of the 14 “rifles” used, it’s almost surely the case that not all of them were “assault weapons.” Among the illegal guns recovered by Chicago law enforcement in 2018, 12,220 were handguns of some kind and 1,769 were rifles and shotguns.

In the states in Illinois’s neighborhood with no bans on “assault weapons,” the number of murders committed with a “rifle” is correspondingly small — ten in Indiana, eight in Tennessee, six in Kentucky, four in Wisconsin, and three in Mississippi.

It’s also worth pointing out that gun homicides dropped sharply in most cities after the national “assault weapons” expired in 2004, even though the AR-15 would correspondingly become one of the most popular weapons in the country. The AR-15 is an excellent home-defense weapon, but long guns aren’t conducive to criminality, despite what we see in movies. Tragically, AR-15s are often favored by psychotic mass shooters, but rarely by the murderers who plague Lightfoot’s city.

It keeps getting worse. Nearly 400 people have already been murdered in Chicago this year, around 100 more than in the entire year of 2019. On the night of May 29, 25 people were murdered and another 85 wounded by gunfire, more than any day in 60 years. And yet the mayor is appearing on TV to blame Mississippi and Texas. It is far more likely that black-market guns find their way to Chicago because the place has been a poorly run criminal mecca for decades.

How Big Tech Is Censoring Gun Rights

(Past member) — Mon, 20 Jul 2020 16:52:17 GMT

By: José Niño

In 2020, gun owners have many enemies.

It’s no secret that government entities pose threats to those of us who exercise our Second Amendment rights. Just taking a look at the bills filed in your state legislature can give you an idea of the lengths anti-gunners will go to strip us of our civil liberties.

In the Trump era, there have seen some interesting changes in the way the gun control crowd has changed their strategy. Having been largely shut out of power in D.C., gun control organizations have logically shifted their energy to lower levels of government, such as state legislatures and city councils.

Seasoned political operatives understand the importance of building political power bases at all levels of governments. This kind of work is what leads to major victories further down the line. But the forces of gun control have not just limited their efforts to traditional political activism. They are now operating outside of the conventional realm of politics by using corporate America to advance anti-gun causes.

Big Tech has been at the vanguard of this privatized form of persecution levied at Second Amendment supporters. Just look at Karl Kasarda, who ran the YouTube channel InRange TV. Fox News reported his channel “was wiped without warning in early 2018.” Kasarda pulled no punches when he talked about Big Tech’s suffocating control over political discourse:

"The issue of oligarchical control over the Internet and all the impact over the ability to use it for free speech is going to only get worse.”

Kasarda referred to the "big five" — Google, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube — as the main actors behind the recent wave of digital censorship directed towards the Second Amendment community and similar right-wing groups.

"It is unclear what the rules are," Kasarda said. "Specifically, with YouTube, they pretty much enforce whatever they feel based on their bias of the day. Regardless of your personal belief, firearms and their accessories are legal in the United States. So why are we seeing continuing restrictions and challenges towards content about something demonstrably legal yet not against that which is clearly illegal?"

Starting in 2018, after the Parkland mass shooting, YouTube began to ban videos that "promote or link to websites selling firearms and accessories.” In addition, it prohibited instructional on how to build firearms.

"Content intended to sell firearms, instruct viewers on how to make firearms, ammunition, and certain accessories, or instruct viewers on how to install those accessories is not allowed on YouTube," the company’s policy stated. "YouTube shouldn't be used as a platform to sell firearms or accessories noted below. YouTube also doesn't allow live streams that show someone holding, handling, or transporting a firearm."

Google classifies firearms content as "non-family safe," and Twitter has boasted about its prohibition of "the promotion of weapons and weapon accessories globally."

Facebook, which is the parent company of Instagram, also bans the "sale or trade of firearms, ammunition, and explosives between private individuals."

Due to the arbitrary nature of Facebook policies, there has been a noticeable chilling effect that has affected firearms companies big and small.

Tom Taylor, chief marketing officer and executive vice president of commercial sales for SIG Sauer, believes the social media censorship of firearms companies is getting way out of hand.

"Instagram and Facebook, Google and YouTube, Twitter, Yahoo – or virtually any mainstream search engine – is not allowing firearm manufacturers to advertise or promote via paid activities,” Taylor said. “No sponsored or paid posts are allowed. These platforms are built to be optimized by paid advertising so, the firearm industry is almost completely dependent on organic reach and grassroots efforts.”

Taylor revealed that the situation is only getting worse as these companies find more avenues to manipulate social media algorithms to censor gun-related content.

"Many companies attempt to use hashtags that are unrelated to restricted categories/topics or work with non-firearm specific partners," Taylor explained. "Even then, if it is used at a high enough rate, a company may be warned, flagged, and/or blocked, that is shadowbanned."

The threats gun owners face in 2020 are unconventional. With Big Tech jumping on the anti-gun craze, gun grabbers have plenty of ways to attack our freedoms.

Although private enterprise has America great, it can be used to advance political causes that are detrimental to our liberties. But not all hope is lost. Gun owners can flex their economic muscles by boycotting businesses that participate in the anti-gun-frenzy. Similarly, firearms organizations and business will have to adapt and turn to snail mail, email marketing, and other forms of promotion that are not as reliant on traditional social media platforms.

It’s tough, but that’s the way things are in 2020 gun politics.

José Niño is a Venezuelan American freelance writer based in Austin, Texas. Sign up for his mailing list here. Contact him via Facebook, Twitter, or email him at joseinpolitics@gmail.com. Get his e-book, The 10 Myths of Gun Control, here.

ORGC PATRIOT 3-GUN MATCH !

(Past member) — Wed, 01 Jul 2020 04:30:00 GMT

ORGC PATRIOT 3-GUN MATCH !

Stage set-up help is needed on Friday, July 3 be- ginning at 9 a.m. to be ready for the match. Addi- tional help prior to the actual match is needed on Saturday, July 4 at 9 a.m. Anyone can help with set up!

THE MATCH—One day only - Saturday July 4, 2020

Match starts: July 4, 2020 @ 10:00 AM ·

Match ends: July 4, 2020 @ 5:00 PM

Location: Ontario Rod & Gun Club, 2523 Trimble Road, Ontario NY

Price: $40

3-Gun Match, with the following divisions:

Unlimited /4, Practical 308, Practical, Factory, Heavy, Practical PCC

Patriot 3 Gun Match will consist of 5 stages and will be governed by 3 Gun Nation (3GN) rules. The round count for the match will be around 200 rounds in total. Stages will be designed with a maximum round count of 55 rounds. The match will feature: a Texas star, an MGM spinner, swingers, drop turners and plate rack.

Squads will be kept to 10.
Lost brass match.
Max distance for rifle 100yds.
No steel core ammo (tip must not attract magnet). No fixed magazine rifles.
Long guns must have safety flags at all times. Match is rain or shine

Match Director : Keith Bourgeois

REGISTRATION: https://clubs.practiscore.com/orgc- 2020-patriot-3-gun-match/register

Questions? Email Keith Bourgeois

keith@teamrangelog.com

Browse the rules and membership information about 3- Gun Nation at: http://3gunnation.com

Submit photos of the match for The Scatter Sheet to frankielamarca@gmail.com

Senator Helming is asking for Election Inspectors

(Past member) — Thu, 11 Jun 2020 02:41:26 GMT

Dear Friend,

I hope this email finds you and your family well. I am contacting you about an important issue facing our local counties. With elections approaching on June 23rd, there is an urgent need for Election Inspectors. Election Inspectors help make our elections run safely and smoothly and it is important that our election locations are properly staffed. To be an Election inspector, you must be a registered Democrat or Republican voter in the county. You will be paid $200 to work the day of the Primary (June 23rd) and the General (November 3rd) in addition to $25 to attend a training. I have included links to each of our counties Board Of Election websites if you are interested in signing up.

Wayne County residents:

https://web.co.wayne.ny.us/index.php/wayne-county-board-of-elections/election-inspectors/

Phone:315-946-7400

ONE PARTY DOMINATION

(Past member) — Sat, 16 May 2020 20:20:23 GMT

In a state dominated by one party from a small geographic area of the state, a divided legislature is important to rein the extreme notions of the dominant party. Last year, both houses of the state legislature were dominated by one party for the first time in many years. We saw the results of a Senate controlled by those who were focused on ‘gun control’.

Previously, most gun control legislation –( but not all, remember the “Safe” Act )- “died” in the Senate which was controlled by Republicans. However, under one party control last year, we saw seven ‘gun control’ bills passed and, of course, signed by Cuomo.

The most egregious was the so-called “Red Flag” law or ERPO (Extreme Risk Protection Ordinance). This bill affects more than just the Second Amendment. Other Constitutional and civil rights such as Due Process were impacted as ERPO ignored the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments.

The 2020 legislative session in Albany has seen many more gun control bills introduced. There are eight bills of particular concern that have been introduced into both legislative houses. (Find these on SCOPE’s web site www.scopeny2A.org under NYS Legislation.)

Besides the above bills, there are other issues of concern. In particular, a bill passed which gave the governor expanded “emergency powers” in a time of public ‘distress’. Though New York law already allows Cuomo to suspend provisions of any state or local statute that would delay coping with a declared disaster, the new measure goes further, broadening the definition of disaster to something that is “impending.” Guess who determines if Cuomo’s emergency power is necessary? The temporary powers last for a year and are renewable.

Assembly member Richard Gottfried, the longtime chair of his chamber’s health committee, had this to say: “I’m scared or concerned because I don’t know what the governor has in mind.” State Senator Julia Salazar, a Brooklyn Democrat, voted against the bill and made this statement: “It’s a reckless expansion of executive power.” Salazar and one other Democratic Senator voted against the bill. Only two Republican State Senators voted against the bill: Senator Pam Helming (54th District) and Senator George Borrello (57th District). Several Republican Senators are retiring this year. Why did they not vote against the bill? Especially those from Upstate NY! This is bi-partisanship at its worst.

Cuomo did not offer a detailed explanation of his push to expand his emergency powers, telling reporters that “these are uncharted territories” and that “government has to respond.” This should be as troubling to you as it is to me.

The Senate Republican retirements will require a massive effort by the State GOP party and party Chairman Nick Langworthy to find Republican replacements. Without a divided legislature after the November election, the anti-gunners will have the opportunity in 2021 to control state redistricting. We may not see a divided legislature for at least a decade.

Due Process Protections are Side-stepped

(Past member) — Thu, 14 May 2020 11:00:00 GMT

Gun control advocates see gun crime as an opportunity to advance their agenda, even in situations where a gun control failure allows the crime to occur. Their attempt to hijack the Parkland high school shooting for their own purposes is a perfect illustration of this.

The response to the Parkland murders was spontaneous. Florida and several other states rushed to pass unconstitutional legislation called Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) also commonly known as ‘Red Flag’ Laws. These are believed to prevent such future horrific events yet “red flags” already existed in Parkland and were ignored by both the school system and the Sheriff’s department. The young killer was ‘flagged’ many times but suffered no consequences. Both agencies were intent on protecting their reputations. The federal government was not free of responsibility either.

A similar law took effect in New York on August 24, 2019. These ‘Red Flag’ Laws are intended as a way to keep “dangerous” people from possessing firearms. Your family members, ex-family members, school personnel and law enforcement are empowered to make an unproven accusation resulting in a court order stripping an individual of both their firearms and their Constitutional rights.

New York’s and other state’s ERPO laws fail to safeguard not only the 2^nd amendment but also the 5^th and 14^th amendments. Both guarantee in our nation’s Bill of Rights: “That no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law”.

Due process protections are side-stepped, and the standard of evidence required to remove an individual’s personal property is greatly minimized. The person who is the object of the complaint receives no notification nor do they have an opportunity to refute a possible false accusation.

You are considered guilty until proven innocent and only by hiring a lawyer and expending time and a great deal of money can the accusation and confiscation possibly be reversed. There is no requirement for the accuser to sign an affidavit nor any penalty for false accusations.

No one wants a repeat of Parkland, Virginia Beach, El Paso, Dayton, or Odessa. However, removing the gun does not remove the threat. It may only change the means. Legislation that trades constitutional protections for the hope of future security is truly a red flag that should concern us all. Gun owners may not be the only ones impacted by the next unconstitutional law. Elected officials took an oath of office to protect the Constitution, not revoke its guaranteed rights.

Laura Sepka,

Vice Chair

Wayne County SCOPE

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

WE need to go back to work!

Mon, 11 May 2020 02:12:49 GMT

Brian Manktelow NY State Assembly 130th district
UPDATE: media outlets are now reporting that the Governors Office is Backtracking and saying those who hit their benchmarks on May 15 can begin the reopening process. For those who haven’t, the PAUSE has been extended until June 7”, Richard Azzopardi, spokesperson for the Governor. This may make a difference for some in UPSTATE NY. Speaking with other officials in my District we are are still on tract as of today to start the reopening, starting with Phase 1.

WE need to go back to work!

The Speaker of the Assembly needs to call us back immediately to END Gov. Cuomo’s expanded emergency powers and RESTORE the traditional authorities given to the Legislature so we have a say in the Future of OUR state.

We demand action NOW! Upstate matters and we will not give up this fight nor will I as Assemblyman for our 130th District.

Helming, Local Leaders And Sportsmen Call For Reopening Of Sportsmen's Clubs

Wed, 06 May 2020 00:21:05 GMT

May 04, 2020, Pamela Helming
New York State Senator Pam Helming today joined local leaders to call for the reopening of area sportsmen's clubs. Recently, Governor Cuomo authorized the reopening of marinas and golf courses. However, other recreational opportunities that can be done with social distancing, such as clubs that offer target, skeet, trap and sporting clays shooting have not been reopened. Many of the opportunities these clubs provide can be done with even greater social distancing than golf or boating.

“This is a common sense issue. Everyone, including our local sportsmen's clubs are putting public health first. Many of the activities these clubs offer, including target shooting and sporting clays courses allow for even greater social distancing than launching a boat from a marina or playing a round of golf. Area clubs are committed to protecting public health and allowing them to partially reopen would provide an important opportunity for parents and grandparents home with children to pass the traditions of the shooting sports and teach the next generation safe firearms handling practices. This is an important issue that our local elected officials are engaged with and I am proud to stand side by side with them in supporting our sportsmen and women,” said Senator Pam Helming.

“Reopening shooting sports clubs is another step in a return to safe, recreational activities. As various facets of public life prepare to reopen, it is important to proceed in such a way that the public feels re-assured that the activities can be engaged in safely, responsibly and in adherence to recommendations and guidelines established by our Public Health Officials. Engaging in Shooting Sports is an activity enjoyed by so many of our residents and is a great way to safely participate in outdoor activity, learn and perfect skills and enjoy some leisure time and fresh air while still abiding by social distancing mandates,” said Canandaigua Town Supervisor Cathy Menikotz.

“As concerned citizens of New York, we all look forward to being as fairly treated as equal to the golfer, boater/fishermen, and all outdoor enthusiasts and having the State of New York and the Governor thoughtfully restore our ability to participate in our chosen sports activities and practice our Constitutional rights. As we open our outdoor shooting ranges and course facilities, we would assure those concerned that we would comply with all social distancing and hygiene requirements to help bring this state and national pandemic to its’ eventual conclusion,” said Daniel T. Pitler, President Canandaigua Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.

“As is often the case, we find ourselves with more questions than answers dealing with our new reality as we cope with the world's current pandemic. The main question that we, as NYers have is "When can we get back to our normal lives?". Whatever that new normal may look like, there are bound to be some changes and we understand that. We as a sportsman's organization, like other businesses, cannot stay on "lockdown" for an indeterminate time. In an effort to move forward, we ask that our organizations be afforded the same opportunity as other recreational businesses have been given, to open our ranges back up to our membership and guests. In doing so, proper person to person distancing, as well as adherence to suggested health guidelines would be a priority, and very much attainable. I believe I speak for many men and women, including our high school team members, who safely engage in our sport year after year. The 2nd Amendment is held in high regard by many upstate NYers, and we eagerly look forward to using our facilities, as intended, in a safe and healthy manner,” said Rick Bills, Hol-Field Rod and Gun Club

“On behalf of Ontario Rod and Gun Club Officers, Board of Directors, and our four hundred (400) members, we request to fully reopen our club to sport shooting, training classes and events. We will follow the guidelines and social distancing.as advised by health professionals,” said Steve Verdi, Chairman of the Board, Ontario Rod & Gun Club.

“The Shooting Sports are activities that are enjoyed by all types of people. Young and old, male and female, athletes and non athletes. Enjoying the outdoor shooting sports whether competing or just plinking is a very healthy way to escape the current stress and anxiety that the COVID pandemic is creating. Concentrating on the “bird” when breaking clays or zeroing in on the bullseye takes strict attention and concentration along with safe gun handling practices to truly be successful. These outdoor activities are one of the safer, if not the safest, social distancing sports out there. Let’s reopen these Sportsmen’s Clubs and get our children, parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles out of their homes in a safe environment enjoying the shooting sports once again,” said Jeff Gallahan, Manchester Town Supervisor.

“People are looking for safe recreational activities in this period of social distancing. To allow golf courses and marinas to open with proper distancing, but not shooting clubs like the Canandaigua Sportsmen’s club is just ludicrous. This seems like a political decision, rather than a practical one and once again shows our governors disdain for the second amendment and proves he is out of touch with our part of NYS,” said Jared Simpson, Canandaigua Town Councilman.

Below is the link to the online New York State Hunter Safety course. Thanks to Senator Helming for providing this for us!

Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:36:52 GMT

https://www.hunter-ed.com/newyork/

Dear Friend.
I hope this email finds you and your family safe and healthy. Due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has announced that it is offering for a limited time, an online hunter safety certification course.
This online course will be available from April 15th to June 30th and can be taken by anyone 11 years or older and licenses may be purchased by anyone over the age of 12. The cost of the course is $19.95. The link to the website is https://www.hunter-ed.com/newyork/.
This new online opportunity will help parents and grandparents pass on safe hunting practices and maintain the tradition of outdoor recreation within their family and around our region and our state.
As your State Senator, I take great pride in defending our Second Amendment rights and the rights of our sportsmen and sportswomen. Please do not hesitate to contact me whenever I can be of assistance with regards to your New York State government.

Best,
Pam
State Senator, 54th District

Albany Office:
517 Legislative Office Bldg
Albany, NY 12247
518-455-2366

District Office:
425 Exchange St
Geneva, NY 14456
315-568-9816

UPDATE: ORGC response to NYS restrictions (Updated)

Fri, 17 Apr 2020 02:20:32 GMT

UPDATE: ORGC response to NYS restrictions.
Most modifications have been in effect since the beginning of the NYS PAUSE. There are some additional modifications. PLEASE READ!
EVENT CHANGES
ALL club sanctioned events are CANCELLED until the NYS PAUSE is lifted. This includes:

All Training Classes
Youth Programs; NYSHSCTL & ORGC Youth
All Shooting Matches; Tuesday Night Trap, Tuesday USPSA, Monthly USPSA, Rifle
All Club meetings
Clubhouse is CLOSED to all non-essential members

RANGE USE CHANGES - Effective Saturday April 18, 2020
Ranges will remain open to members ONLY:

Range use for MEMBERS ONLY – NO GUESTS!
Hours: Monday to Saturday 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. gate locks
Sunday 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. gate locks
You must wear a mask in public spaces per NY requirement.
Gloves are recommended.
Follow the social distancing rules from CDC - 6 feet away from others
Use and touch ONLY your own gear
You MUST clean up the area you use (remove and discard your personal targets, put away target stands and club targets, pick up your brass) to prevent the possible spread of the virus to others

Our decisions were based on information we obtained from the DHS. All members are required to follow the direction given for range use. If these rule modifications are ignored, we will be forced to shut down the range COMPLETELY until the pause is lifted by NYS.
MEMBERSHIP CHANGES

Club dues must be paid by April 30, 2020 to avoid deactivating your FOB.

$25.00 for FOB reactivation fee after April 30, 2020
$25.00 for FOB reactivation if you let your membership lapse for one year or more.
Effective immediately:
- You will need to retake orientation for any membership lapse over a year. No charge for the orientation.
- $10.00 FOB replacement fee.
The ORGC Rule Book will be out some time this summer. Because Safety is our number one concern, all members will be required to take a Range Safety refresher course at no charge before 2021.

Mail your dues to 2523 Trimble Road Ontario, NY 14519. Dues info can be found in the February issue of The Scatter Sheet, OR you can drop your dues in our secure mailbox at the club.
Be sure to have your full name and a CURRENT WORKING EMAIL ADDRESS in the envelope in the event we need to respond.

Please contact Membership Director, Pete Sundquist, if you have MEMBERSHIP questions. sundquistp2032@gmail.com
We look forward to the pause being lifted as we get back to normal this year. If you have questions, please call Steve Verdi, 585-739-3195.

Thank you for your cooperation while we work through this unprecedented event.
Ken Paul, ORGC President
Steve Verdi, Board Chairman
(Frankie LaMarca per direction of Steve Verdi)

https://mailchi.mp/90b513c3936a/attention-orgc-responds-to-nys-covid-19-restrictions?e=fa7b5b6d31

Virginia Gov. Signs Slew Of Gun Control Bills Into Law While Nobody Can Protest

Fri, 17 Apr 2020 01:50:46 GMT

Virginia Gov. Signs Slew Of Gun Control Bills Into Law While Nobody Can Protest

While working for the government, I was stationed in VA for two years and loved the state and her people. I almost turned down my next assignment to stay there. Boy am I glad I didn’t because I’d be moving. These liberals need to write a book and title it: How to ruin a state in one term.

Virginia's ignorant, tyrannical government has spoken. But 91 out of 95 total counties also have declared their positions. It'll be interesting to watch coonman join the battle against far flung armed subordinates who seem determined to defy unconstitutional laws. At the end, they’ll learn it's not the business of government.

Governor blackface will need to order his local and state police to bully millions of peaceable, lawful citizens. His government will need to issue millions of warrants. Police will need to mobilize hundreds of SWAT teams. Each confiscation will need to be planned. Groups will need to be transported to homes, cabins and storage sites. They'll need to penetrate fences, cut locks, break down doors and search rooms. They'll need to be prepared for armed resistance.

Red flag states include a small band of ignorant, tyrannical governors shoving the U.S. to the brink of catastrophe. Red flag laws were created to transfer authority from licensed psychiatrists to unqualified persons more obedient to democrats, e.g., local judges and nosy neighbors.

Criminal prosecution of accusers for malice or lying makes good press but it's very difficult to prosecute and virtually impossible to prove. Due process requires reports from two psychiatrists, one from each side, legal representation, arraignment, indictment and trial by jury. Public defenders offer little comfort.

Nobody wants criminals to have firearms but to be taken seriously, if the accused is a danger to himself (not against the law) or others, he should be legally arrested. In other words, take the man but leave the arms. Every state allows for the involuntary detention of dangerous individuals for psychiatric evaluation. The difference is red flag laws only confiscate arms, the obvious objective.

I've often wondered how the police, teacher, classmate or aunt would know the rightful owners of which firearms. Seems law enforcement would risk serious lawsuits if they err on that point. Currently, that point is being litigated in Lori Rodriguez v. City of San Jose. Also submitted for Supreme Court review are Pena v. Cid, Mance v. Barr, and Culp v. Madigan. However, the major cost of these laws is the loss of trust between peaceable, lawful citizens and their elected officials.

One look at Virginia reveals why armed citizens are becoming more important with every election cycle. Federal Firearms Licensees must be allowed to stay open during national emergencies because arms purchases must undergo a background check and cannot be delivered or mail ordered. A government with the power to oppress commerce in arms is very dangerous and must be rejected.

https://defensemaven.io/bluelivesmatter/news/virginia-gov-signs-slew-of-gun-control-bills-into-law-while-nobody-can-protest-rMCsTvOEs0iVK5qjWC9XHA

Albany's Dead-Of-Night Coronavirus Vote Gives Cuomo Sweeping New Emergency Powers

Fri, 17 Apr 2020 01:44:15 GMT

Albany's Dead-Of-Night Coronavirus Vote Gives Cuomo Sweeping New Emergency Powers

Health Commissioner Howard Zucker and Governor Andrew Cuomo speak at a COVID-19 briefing in Albany on Wednesday. Mike Groll / Governor's Office

In the wee hours of Tuesday morning, the state legislature approved $40 million in emergency funding to help contain the COVID-19 outbreak in New York. Buried within the legislation is a provision that has alarmed progressive lawmakers and advocates: an extraordinary, broad, and little-understood expansion of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s emergency powers.

“I’m scared or concerned because I don’t know what the governor has in mind,” said Assemblymember Richard Gottfried, the longtime chair of his chamber’s health committee.

With the support of both legislative leaders, the emergency funding bill overwhelmingly passed the Democrat-controlled Assembly and State Senate. Andrea Stewart-Cousins, the Senate Majority Leader, and Carl Heastie, the Speaker of the State Assembly, pushed for its passage, overriding the concerns of the health committee chairs in both chambers.

Cuomo did not offer a detailed explanation of his push to expand his emergency powers, telling reporters that “these are uncharted territories” and that “government has to respond.”

The whole process was rushed, in typical Albany fashion. Word came Monday afternoon that legislation would be coming to the floor from the governor’s office, Gottfried said. The state’s health commissioner, Howard Zucker, had met with Assembly Democrats for a briefing, making no mention of the need of additional emergency powers.

The Assembly and Senate hardly debated the bill. It passed both houses after midnight, with little time to read it or seek outside counsel. The Senate approved the measure 53-4, while the Assembly voted 120 to 12 in favor.

Though New York law already allows Cuomo to suspend provisions of any state or local statute that would delay in coping with a declared disaster, the new measure goes further, broadening the definition of disaster from a “past occurrence” to something that is “impending.”

The new law specifically added “disease outbreak” to a list of triggering events alongside “epidemic,” and gives Cuomo new power to issue directives “necessary to cope with” a broad list of potential disasters, from tornados to cyberattacks to volcanic eruptions.

The definition of disasters is general enough that critics fear Cuomo, a governor who already enjoys aggressively wielding executive power, can abuse the new law in a wide array of circumstances to override existing law.

“It’s a reckless expansion of executive power,” said State Senator Julia Salazar, a Brooklyn Democrat who voted against the bill.

In a statement, the New York Civil Liberties Union compared the new law to anti-terrorism provisions passed after 9/11 that were never used to prosecute terrorism. “We should not repeat the mistakes of 20 years ago. While the legislature should move expeditiously to fund and support the necessary public health response, nothing requires them to expand executive power without adequate consideration for the need or the potential consequences,” the NYCLU said.

Part of the challenge of understanding the expansion is the lack of specificity in the bill language. Since the governor already has expansive emergency powers, adding more could theoretically justify all kinds of maneuvers, like the declaration of martial law, unilateral travel restrictions, and mass quarantines.

The limits are largely unknown.

Assemblymember Yuh-Line Niou, a Manhattan Democrat, said Cuomo’s expansion of emergency powers deeply concerned her as an Asian-American legislator.

“One of my mentors was born inside an internment camp,” Niou said in an emotional Instagram video, referring to the unlawful detention of Japanese-American citizens during World War II. “I have an innate fear of what would happen if we allow our government to be able to weaponize fear and to be able to make a directive and have the power to order private citizens to do something without any checks and balances.”

As far as Gottfried understands, Cuomo’s new emergency powers would allow the governor to override the due process the people who are quarantined are entitled to under existing law, like a person being required to see a judge after being arrested for violating an order.

“Those are valuable safeguards,” Gottfried said. “As best as I can tell, the new law does away with them if the governor chooses to.”

The law has a sunset provision and the legislature will have to renew it in a year. It’s unclear if Cuomo would push for a renewal. The governor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“We don’t fully understand the implications of the new powers versus the old ones,” said John Kaehny, the executive director of the good government group Reinvent Albany. “We have not had time to analyze its full scope.”

Kaehny compared the new expansion of emergency powers to another that is quietly up for renewal Thursday: Cuomo’s declaration of emergency over the subway system. The 2017 declaration, made when the subway system was breaking down at an alarming rate, allowed the MTA to bypass environmental and anti-corruption safeguards when seeking new contracts to do work. Under the emergency declaration, the MTA is currently allowed to bypass the competitive bidding process entirely and oversight from the state comptroller’s office.

The improving subway service hasn’t led to the removal of the emergency declaration.

Gottfried, who has served in the legislature since the 1970s, said he was perplexed because no governor had ever asked him to expand emergency powers during previous crises, whether it was the AIDS epidemic of the 1980’s, the response to Hurricane Sandy, or the 2014 Ebola outbreak.

“The governor and health commissioner never asked for anything like that, never said their hands were tied.”

Gov. Cuomo sued for stopping sales of guns to civilians during COVID-19 pandemic

Fri, 03 Apr 2020 02:54:54 GMT

Gov. Cuomo sued for stopping sales of guns
to civilians during COVID-19 pandemic

by Matt Mulcahy Wednesday, April 1st 2020

Gov. Cuomo sued for stopping sales of guns to civilians during COVID-19 pandemic (File Photo).

OAKDALE, N.Y. — Two men looking to purchase guns to defend their homes are suing New York Governor Andrew Cuomo over his executive order that declares which businesses are essential during the COVID-19 pandemic. Firearms company Dark Storm Industries is also a party in the lawsuit making the complaint to Federal Court stating they can no longer sell weapons or ammunition to ordinary citizens in New York.

Both Brian Doherty and Kevin Schmucker reside in Suffolk County. They each began transactions to purchase long guns before the Governor issued an Executive Order mandating which businesses would be declared essential services during the pandemic. Gun retailers were excluded from being declared essential. Dark Storm Industries applied for an exception.

They received a response from New York State’s Empire State Development Corporation that said: “your business has been designated as essential solely with respect to work directly related to police and/or national defense matters are exempt from the current restriction.” Dark Storm sought further clarification. According to its legal claim, they replied to the ESD in an email asking, “So to be clear we may continue to conduct business with law enforcement and military but not civilians?” ESD responded, “Yes that is correct as advised by counsel.”

ADVERTISING

On its website, Dark Storm cites unprecedented demand during this time. They say they are sold out of rifles, shotguns, and ammunition. They also state they are closed to the public but are able to service police, military, and security.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare this Executive Order as unconstitutional. They are asking for an injunction to allow them to remain in business.

New York State has not yet responded to the suit filed in the United States District Court in the Northern District of New York. A court date has been set for June.

Link to the article

LA Sheriff Forced To Reverse Gun store Closure Order After Federal Government Gets Involved

Fri, 03 Apr 2020 02:51:21 GMT

LA Sheriff Forced To Reverse Gun store Closure
Order After Federal Government Gets Involved

Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva speaks at a news conference on Jan. 27, 2020, in Calabasas, California. (Josh Lefkowitz / Getty Images)

By Jack Davis
Published March 31, 2020 at 8:04am

Facing a lawsuit over his controversial decision to shutter gun stores amid the coronavirus pandemic, Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva has now changed his mind, citing a federal ruling that gun stores are considered “essential.”

Last week, the sheriff insisted gun stores had to be closed

“Gun shops, strip clubs, night clubs are non-essential businesses. We are trying to get them to close their doors,” he said, according to the Los Angeles Times.

“If they don’t close their doors, they will be cited.”

But Monday night, that changed.

“On March 28, 2020, the United States Department of Homeland Security issued an Advisory Memorandum in regard to Essential Critical Infrastructure Workers during COVID-19 response. Although explicitly advisory in nature, nonetheless the federal memorandum is persuasive given its national scope,” Villanueva said in a statement posted to Twitter.

The guidance he was referring to said that “[w]orkers supporting the operation of firearm or ammunition product manufacturers, retailers, importers, distributors, and shooting ranges” are considered part of the “essential critical infrastructure workforce,” according to Fox News.

“Included in the list of essential critical infrastructure workers are workers supporting the operation of firearm or ammunition product manufacturers, retailers, importers, distributors, and shooting ranges,” Villanueva said.

“Based on this further input by the federal government, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department will not order or recommend closure of businesses that sell or repair firearms or sell ammunition,” the statement added.

However, he said the department “will investigate reports of improper health practices such as poor sanitation or failure to maintain social distancing at all businesses; and forward detailed reports of unlawful health conditions to the District Attorney for their review and consideration.”

“Regardless of whether a business sells groceries, gasoline, firearms, or any other product or service, we encourage them to abide by all health and safety measures in place,” Villanueva concluded.

Link to the article

What good are constitutional rights if they are violated when Americans get sick?

Sat, 28 Mar 2020 03:35:07 GMT

What good are constitutional rights if they are violated when Americans get sick?

By Andrew P. Napolitano

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

One of my Fox colleagues recently sent me an email attachment of a painting of the framers signing the Constitution of the United States. Except in this version, George Washington — who presided at the Constitutional Convention — looks at James Madison — who was the scrivener at the Convention — and says, “None of this counts if people get sick, right?”

In these days of state governors issuing daily decrees purporting to criminalize the exercise of our personal freedoms, the words put into Washington’s mouth are only mildly amusing. Had Washington actually asked such a question, Madison, of all people, would likely have responded: “No. This document protects our natural rights at all times and under all circumstances.”

It is easy, 233 years later, to offer that hypothetical response, particularly since the Supreme Court has done so already when, as readers of this column will recall, Abraham Lincoln suspended the constitutionally guaranteed writ of habeas corpus — the right to be brought before a judge upon arrest — only to be rebuked by the Supreme Court.

The famous line above by Benjamin Franklin, though uttered in a 1755 dispute between the Pennsylvania legislature and the state’s governor over taxes, nevertheless provokes a truism.

Namely, that since our rights come from our humanity, not from the government, foolish people can only sacrifice their own freedoms, not the freedoms of others.

Thus, freedom can only be taken away when the government proves fault at a jury trial. This protection is called procedural due process, and it, too, is guaranteed in the Constitution.

Of what value is a constitutional guarantee if it can be violated when people get sick? If it can, it is not a guarantee; it is a fraud. Stated differently, a constitutional guarantee is only as valuable and reliable as is the fidelity to the Constitution of those in whose hands we have reposed it for safekeeping.

Because the folks in government, with very few exceptions, suffer from what St. Augustine called libido dominandi — the lust to dominate — when they are confronted with the age-old clash of personal liberty versus government force, they will nearly always come down on the side of force.

How do they get away with this? By scaring the daylights out of us. I never thought I’d see this in my lifetime, though our ancestors saw this in every generation. In America today, we have a government of fear. Machiavelli offered that men obey better when they fear you than when they love you. Sadly, he was right, and the government in America knows this.

But Madison knew this as well when he wrote the Constitution. And he knew it four years later when he wrote the Bill of Rights. He intentionally employed language to warn those who lust to dominate that, however they employ governmental powers, the Constitution is “the Supreme Law of the Land” and all government behavior in America is subject to it.

Even if the legislature of the State of New York ordered, as my friend Gov. Andrew Cuomo — who as the governor, cannot write laws that incur criminal punishment — has ordered, it would be invalid as prohibited by the Constitution.

This is not a novel or an arcane argument. This is fundamental American law. Yet, it is being violated right before our eyes by the very human beings we have elected to uphold it. And each of them — every governor interfering with the freedom to make one’s own choices — has taken an express oath to comply with the Constitution.

You want to bring the family to visit grandma? You want to engage in a mutually beneficial, totally voluntary commercial transaction? You want to go to work? You want to celebrate Mass? These are all now prohibited in one-third of the United States.

I tried and failed to find Mass last Sunday. When did the Catholic Church become an agent of the state? How about an outdoor Mass?

What is the nature of freedom? It is an unassailable natural claim against all others, including the government. Stated differently, it is your unconditional right to think as you wish, to say what you think, to publish what you say, to associate with whomever wishes to be with you no matter their number, to worship or not, to defend yourself, to own and use property as you see fit, to travel where you wish, to purchase from a willing seller, to be left alone. And to do all this without a government permission slip.

What is the nature of government? It is the negation of freedom. It is a monopoly of force in a designated geographic area. When elected officials fear that their base is slipping, they will feel the need to do something — anything — that will let them claim to be enhancing safety. Trampling liberty works for that odious purpose. Hence a decree commanding obedience, promising safety and threatening punishment.

These decrees — issued by those who have no legal authority to issue them, enforced by cops who hate what they are being made to do, destructive of the freedoms that our forbearers shed oceans of blood to preserve and crushing economic prosperity by violating the laws of supply and demand — should all be rejected by an outraged populace, and challenged in court.

These challenges are best filed in federal courts, where those who have trampled our liberties will get no special quarter. I can tell you from my prior life as a judge that most state governors fear nothing more than an intellectually honest, personally courageous, constitutionally faithful federal judge.

Fight fear with fear.

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is a regular contributor to The Washington Times. He is the author of nine books on the U.S. Constitution.

washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/25/what-good-are-constitutional-rights-if-they-are-vi/

Senator Urges Cuomo To Open Gun Shops

Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:42:45 GMT

Republican state Sen. Robert Ortt in a letter this week to Gov. Andrew Cuomo urged him to open gun and sportsmen stores in New York amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Keeping them closed, Ortt argued in the letter, deprives New Yorkers of their Second Amendment rights. He pointed to neighboring Pennsylvania, which has allowed gun stores to operate on a limited hours basis.

"While taking proper public health precautions is necessary and appropriate, the Constitution is not nullified in the face of a pandemic, and the Second Amendment’s value still remains," Ortt wrote in the letter. "New Yorkers still deserve the right to protect themselves, and allowing gun shops to operate would help New Yorkers exercise that right."

Non-essential workers have been ordered to stay home in New York and businesses that do not fall under the category have closed their physical locations.

Food stores, pharmacies and health care centers can remain open.

This is the first full week of the New York "pause" to prevent the spread of the virus.

Innocent Red Flag Victim: The Average Person Does Not Understand How Dangerous These Laws Are Mar 18, 2020 By: José Niño

Wed, 25 Mar 2020 23:56:18 GMT

INNOCENT RED FLAG VICTIM: THE AVERAGE PERSON DOES NOT UNDERSTAND HOW DANGEROUS THESE LAWS ARE Mar 18, 2020 By: José Niño

A Florida man was recently subjected to the horrors of Florida’s draconian red flag gun confiscation law.

Reason Magazine’s Jacob Sullum recounted this incident, which involved the use of Florida’s red flag gun confiscation policy, which Republican Governor Rick Scott signed it into law following the outrage from the Parkland shooting in 2018.

Kevin Morgan was initially the victim of this unconstitutional gun grab. Morgan’s estranged wife, Joanie, believed he “was depressed, suicidal, and obsessed with the apocalypse.” She went on to say that he was stockpiling ammunition, food, gold, and guns in preparation for the end times. She even asserted that Morgan was talking about “seeing, hearing, and wrestling with demons.”

But it didn’t stop there. According to the estranged wife, Morgan had performed a ritual where he rubbed “oils” on their children and their house walls. Further, she alleged that her husband was abusing prescription drugs for chronic pain and openly talked about dismembering his previous wife and threatened to do the same if she ever got on his bad side.

Based on these claims, Joanie Morgan was able to obtain a temporary domestic violence projection injunction, an involuntary psychiatric evaluation under the Florida Mental Health Act (a.k.a. the Baker Act), and a temporary "risk protection order" under Florida’s current red flag law. The final protection order authorizes the removal of firearms from a person when he is considered a threat to himself or others. In Florida’s case, police and prosecutors are the only parties allowed to submit red flag petitions, but they are not always careful about investigating the allegations by people who may have a grudge. Disgruntled people – spouses, exes, roommates – can make flimsy accusations.

Rachel Montgomery, a detective with the Citrus County Sheriff's Office, was the law enforcement official who filed a red flag petition against Morgan. Circuit Judge Peter Brigham then issued the ex parte risk protection order on September 18, 2018, six months after Florida's red flag law went into effect. All three of these were ex parte orders. In other words, Morgan did not have a chance to defend himself against the allegations levied against him.

Montgomery said that she had responded to a complaint from Joanie Morgan claiming her partner had breached the temporary domestic violence protection injunction by going back to the house in Citrus Springs to pick up clothing, medications, "several firearms," and his Ford Mustang. Montgomery briefly summarized the assertions Joanie Morgan made in her various petitions against Kevin Morgan. She asserted that Morgan “has had a decline in mental stability over the last four months" and “displayed erratic [sic] behaviors to include making threats to dismember a former paramour and threats to kill his entire family while yielding [sic] a vial containing a paralytic agent." She continued by noting that "the respondent has purchased several firearms and ammunition during this time period."

These claims did not add up, however, after Montgomery continued to dig deeper into the case. She discovered there was no basis for the accusation that Kevin Morgan disobeyed the injunction by visiting the house.

"I determined that it wasn't him that had gone to the house," she said. "It was actually a pool maintenance worker that had been by the house." Regarding the domestic violence injunction, "…the firearms had been transferred prior to his risk protection order,” which meant that there were no guns for Morgan to get from the house.

Even with the Baker Act petition in, psychiatrist and mental health professionals determined that Kevin Morgan was in stable mental shape and did not require involuntary treatment after he was taken to a mental health facility back in September 2018. At a hearing to determine if Kevin Morgan’s protective orders should be extended, Joannie Morgan’s testimony was emotional, but lacking in evidence. This led to Montgomery admitting that he did not meet the law’s evidentiary standard for confiscating his firearms and committing him to an institution. The judge ended up concurring and threw out the orders.

After this entire ordeal, Morgan offered his thoughts. The sheriff's office "jumped into a civil action without completing a proper investigation," Morgan said. "I don't think the average person understands just how dangerous these laws are. Hopefully, if my story can get out, folks will see how easily (red flag laws) can be used against someone for revenge or to get an upper hand in (a custody dispute). I want people to know how these laws can be used improperly, in the hope that some reforms will take place. We need protection for falsely accused individuals and stiff punishment for those who abuse the system."

This case demonstrates why America is a nation of laws and has safeguards to protect the accused from false allegations. Without these measures in place, individuals could see their civil liberties eviscerated by people with an axe to grind or public officials with no desire to comply with laws. In a nation ruled by men, you can bet that gun rights will never be secure.

http://www.gunpowdermagazine.com/innocent-red-flag-victim-the-average-person-does-not-understand-how-dangerous-these-laws-are/

Regarding Congressional Bill 5717, Contact John Katko

Wed, 25 Mar 2020 23:34:45 GMT

Wayne SCOPE members: please visit the website of Rep. John Katko and leave the message below. The full text of the bill is available at this URL:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5717/text?r=1&s=1
You can send Congressman Katko an email from the following URL:
https://katko.house.gov/contact
HR 5717 is a bill that would set up a national firearms registry, require a federal license to purchase guns or ammunition, expand gun free zones, outlaw just about every semiautomatic rifle, add a 30% tax to guns and a 50% tax on ammo, and many other ridiculous provisions designed to kill the Second Amendment.

I’m opposed to this bill and ask that you oppose it also.

S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education Articles

Has X Become Social Media’s Pro-Second Amendment Sanctuary?

Throw Out the Party of Gun Prohibition

Congresswoman Tenney’s Statement on the Election of Speaker Mike Johnson

Congresswoman Tenney’s Statement on the Election of Speaker Mike Johnson

Massachusetts Lawmakers Pass Sweeping Gun Bill Months After 6–3 Supreme Court Decision

FED. JUDGE DECLARES CAL. SEMI-AUTO BAN UNCONSTITUTIONAL

House Blocks Biden Effort to Stop Funding School Shooting Sports

The Epoch Times was given access to tens of thousands of hours of U.S. Capitol Police security video of Jan. 6, 2021.

Biden Determined to Crush 2A, Bankrupt Firearms Industry

RFK Jr Exposes Links Between Big Pharma Drugs and Mass Shootings

Congratulations, Tim Luety!

Pistol Stabilizing Braces

Tenney Condemns CCIA

Tenney, Stefanik Reintroduce Resolution Condemning Hochul’s Concealed Carry Law As Unconstitutional

At Large SCOPE Directors

We Don’t Need Red Flag Laws

Tenney’s Resolution Condemns CCIA

Motivation to Vote Nov. 8

Attorney General James Releases Statement on Court Decision to Temporarily Keep New York’s Concealed Carry Gun Laws

No more Brady Checks in Wayne County

THE NATIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF HALTING NEW YORK STATE’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS OF 2ND AMENDMENT CIVIL RIGHTS

Wayne County Clerk's update on pistol permits

Background Checks Controversy and H.R. 8

California Competes with New York on Closing Gun Manufacturers & Dealers

POLL SHOWS STRONG SUPPORT FOR 2A

BIDEN’S SPEECH CONTINUED WAR ON GUN OWNERS AND 2A

Wayne County Members Meeting Minutes, February 9, 2022

More Guns, Less Crime

At Townhall: As Gun

Sales Soared, the

Number of Violent

Crimes Committed

with Guns

Plummeted

Share this:

johnrlott

0 Comments

Search by Topic

“Constitutional Carry” (An old topic brought to light again)

Challenge to NY’s Attempt to Hold Firearm Manufacturers Responsible

NY Would Allow Citizens to Sue Gunmakers

A Closer Look at the NYSRPA’s “May Issue” Case before the Supreme Court

Oklahoma: A True Example

CDC LOOKS TO GET ACTIVE IN GUN CONTROL DEBATE

Biden Admits Handgun Ban Comment

Chipman aided Chinese Propaganda Scheme

Biden ATF Nominee Appeared on Chinese State TV to Discuss Sandy Hook Shooting

Wayne County S.C.O.P.E. We encourage all members to VOTE on PRIMARY DAY - TUESDAY 6.22.21

WC Sheriff candidates debate

June 22, 2021 Primary Election Day

Republican Primary Election to be held June 22, 2021

Republican Primary Election to be held June 22, 2021

Primary Election 2021 Official Notice

Polling Sites Primary

PE21 SHERIFF ONLY SAMPLE BALLOT Towns of Arcadia, Butler, Galen, Huron, Macedon, Ontario, Palmyra, Rose, Savannah, Sodus, Walworth, Williamson, Wolcott

PE21 MARION SAMPLE BALLOT

PE21 LYONS SAMPLE BALLOT

New York State Voter Registration Form

ABSENTEE APPLICATION

How Marijuana Legalization Might Affect YOU

Is there more to the legalization of Marijuana than you thought?

NRA Takes Concealed Carry Case to the Supreme Court

FOID Ruled Unconstitutional

SAF, PARTNERS CHALLENGE NJ GUNLAWS WITH FEDERAL LAWSUIT

ANTI GUN BUSINESSES !!!

Don’t Feed The Gun Prohibitionists!

Don’t Have Buyer’s Remorse! Make the decision with your wallet to fight against firearm prohibition

Biden will ‘Defeat The NRA’

John Katko (R-NY) talks about his experiences growing up with firearms. IMG Congress.gov

PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE Vote!!!

List of General Election 2020 Candidates for Wayne County

Gun Storage Challenge Revived

WA Appeals Court Ruling Revives SAF-NRA Challenge to Seattle Gun Law

WAYNE COUNTY SCOPE MEMBERS MEETING "CANDIDATES NIGHT" SEPTEMBER 9, 2020

THE CHICAGO GUN MYTH

David HarsanyiJuly 27, 2020 4:12 PM

How Big Tech Is Censoring Gun Rights

ORGC PATRIOT 3-GUN MATCH !

Senator Helming is asking for Election Inspectors

Don’t Have Buyer’s Remorse!
Make the decision with your wallet to fight against firearm prohibition