Is the Babylon Bee Satire or News?

The satire site “The Babylon Bee” reported on July 9th: “With…polls showing GOP candidates building sizeable leads, the Republican Party rushed to implement an emergency platform change after seeing how close they were to winning a landslide victory.”

“Struggles on the Democratic side of the ticket…led to Republicans gaining tremendous momentum in recent weeks, causing leaders to shift gears and push for changes to the GOP platform in hopes of avoiding any decisive wins in November.”  (Emphasis added.)

What is The Bee talking about?

“The Reload” reported:

“The Republican National Committee (RNC) Platform Committee voted 84-to-18 on Monday to adopt the new 2024 platform language…However, it also minimized the party’s emphasis on gun policy compared to its previous platform.”

The entire platform discusses gun rights just once, in a preamble statement about the party’s dedication to defending “our fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to keep and bear arms.” The final product omits any discussion of tangible gun policy ideas.”  (Emphasis added.)

The Democrats platform has not yet been announced but in 2020 it was:  “Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition, close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers, abusive partners, and some individuals convicted of assault or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal background check system.  Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing requirements for owning firearms and extreme risk protection order laws that allow courts to temporarily remove guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others.”

Given the Democrats actions (which speak louder than words) over the last 3 ½ years, it’s logical that they will promise more of the same in 2024.

Remember how the Republican leadership was able to short circuit a landslide Republican victory in 2022?  Are they at it again?

The ‘geniuses’ heading the National Republican Committee must be using the New York State Committee leaders as the advisors, since the NY leaders have been so successful.  (Sarcasm intended.)

 Are they afraid of offending the anti-gun left and it will not vote for them?  Here’s some news; the anti-gun Left is never going to vote Republican!  They are amongst the 30% who believe Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are doing a great job. 

Many potential Republican voters do not vote and, perhaps, one big reason is that they believe Republicans are not very rabid in supporting traditional, Republican / Conservative positions; like on the 2nd Amendment.  And if voters had any doubts, the National Republican Committee just proved the theory.

Perhaps the national leadership is walking softly so they do not offend those Democrats and Independents who might vote Republican.  Except, those Democrats and Independents may now be asking themselves -  if the Republican leadership cannot be trusted to fight for their own traditional values, why should Democrats and independents trust them?

On the positive side, the party platforms are more P R than substance and much of them rarely get followed.  (Although, the Democrats seem to mean their anti-gun rhetoric, which should alarm gun owners.)  But the National Republican Committee just gave a big P R victory to the Democrats.

Having vented our frustration at the Republicans, let’s add some perspective. 

Don’t forget that Democrats are equally able to make huge mistakes.  They were sure that bringing multiple court cases against Donald trump would sink his candidacy and give the Democrats an easy win.  How’s that working out?

The Democrats are the mortal enemies of our 2nd Amendment freedoms.  They will take away our gun rights through any possible method.  If they are in power after November, the 2nd Amendment will only last as long as the current Supreme Court membership lasts.  

There are many responsible Republicans who believe in our 2nd Amendment rights and will fight for them.  Unfortunately, the national leadership have some convoluted political agenda which works against their own grass roots.

Even though this is New York State, gun owners and any defenders of the 2nd Amendment need to contact their legislators, candidates and Republican County Chairpersons and give them an earful.  Let them know we are enraged by the national committee’s actions.

We should remember the example of Winston Churchill who was an ardent anti-communist but supported Stalin and the Soviet Union against Hitler in World War 2.  When asked about the hypocrisy of his position, he answered: “If Hitler invaded Hell I would have at least a few good words to say about Satan.” Like the candidate or not, sometimes the lesser evil is necessary to stop pure evil.

The Upcoming Presidential Election – Elections Matter  by John R. Elwood

     The upcoming 2024 American Presidential election carries unprecedented significance, potentially shaping the nation’s governance and trajectory for decades to come.  Liberal progressives, since Woodrow Wilson’s era, view this as a culmination of over a century’s efforts. In contrast, former President Trump, and the Republican party, championing the Make American Great Again (MAGA) movement, are fighting back.  But is it enough? Why is it the most important election in our lifetime? Inflation, immigration, crime, and national security are all important reasons, and all would seem to favor the Republicans. And don’t forget the Second Amendment?

     Inflation has surged during the Biden administration. But what exactly is inflation?  It is the rate at which prices rise over time. Across America, people from all economic backgrounds – whether upper, middle, or working class – have experienced increases in the cost of everything. 

     Over the past 40 years, successive presidential administrations have aimed to maintain inflation below 2 percent. At the conclusion of former President Trump’s term, inflation stood at 1.4 percent, the lowest in decades. However, in early 2022 during the Biden administration, inflation soared to 9.1 percent, a level not seen since 1981. And remember, future inflation rates, even if lower, now include that 9% in the base. 

     This increase can be attributed to two primary factors: escalating energy costs linked to the Green New Deal and substantial fiscal policy measures such as the 1.9 trillion-dollar American Rescue Plan and the 1.750 trillion-dollar Bipartisan Infrastructure Act. As a result, Americans have been experiencing the impact of inflation directly.  Grocery prices, for instance, surged by 21 percent since the beginning of 2021 under President Biden’s leadership, marking the highest inflation rate since the Great Depression, in Roosevelt’s era. 

     Gun owners have certainly noticed that ammo is not immune from these increases.

     In the area of illegal immigration, shortly after assuming office, President Joe Biden initiated a policy that resulted in a significant increase in illegal immigration at the southern border. According to the reports, the number of illegal immigrants entering the United States has doubled under his administration, totaling approximately ten million individuals (comprising 8.5 million encounters and 1.5 million individuals who evaded detection). This influx, as noted by Fox News, surpasses the population of 38 states.  Many of these illegal immigrants lack work visas and may find employment in the informal economy, including contract labor and potentially in illicit activities.  Moreover, the surge in ten million new illegal immigrants is expected to place considerable strain on social services such as healthcare, hospitals and school capacities, thus increasing taxes on American citizens. 

     With the increase of illegal immigrants into the United States, it is reasonable to think that incidents of crime will increase between illegal incidents and American citizens.  Might an increased need for personal protection be another reason to preserve and practice the 2nd Amendment?

     According to United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data, criminal incidents involving non-citizens such as assault, battery, robbery, theft, fraud, DUI, illegal drug possession, illegal entry and re-entry all saw increases from 2021-2022. Reports from cables news network Breitbart and Representative Troy Nehls, (R-Texas) suggested that Venezuela had released violent prisoners who then crossed into the US via the southern border.  Various news media outlets also highlighted instances where American citizens were victims of crimes like rape, murder, extortion, and carjacking committed by illegal immigrants.  Among those affected were U.S Representative Henry Cuellar, who was carjacked in Washington D.C., and a Secret Service agent who was robbed in southern California.  The U.S. Border Patrol noted 172 encounters in fiscal year 2023 with individuals listed on the federal government’s known or suspected terrorists list, a notable increase from 100 in 2022 and 16 in 2021.

     Besides significant domestic issues troubling the country, many experts believe the United States is closer to World War III than ever before. In 2014, in former Defense Secretary Robert Gates book entitled, “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War”, Secretary Robert Gates stated, “I think he (Joe Biden) has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

     President Biden ordered the complete retreat and withdrawal from Afghanistan on August 30, 2021, marking the end of the 2001-2021 war.  The withdrawal was the most embarrassing moment in U.S. miliary history, leaving thousands of Americans and Afghans supporting the war effort behind, and an estimated seven billion dollars’ worth of weapons and equipment including an estimated 48 million dollars’ worth of ammunition. Zelgai Sajad, the former Afghan consul general in New York stated, “The Taliban are feeling power to implement their barbaric rules on the people of Afghanistan.” 

     Many experts think President Biden’s disastrous retreat and withdrawal from Afghanistan emboldened closer coordination between the “new axis of evil” (Russia, China, Iran, North Korea), and the idea that the United States is the weakest it has been for decades and they believe now is the time to make world-wide changes. 

     On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine hoping for a quick victory. After a stubborn Ukrainian force blunted Russian efforts, Iran began supplying Russia with advanced drones while North Korea provided thousands of rounds of artillery and is projected to begin deploying troops to Belarus, a Russia ally. Russia continues to bombard Ukraine and take additional ground.

     For years, by providing funds and military advisors for their operations, Iran supported its proxy forces: Hamas in Gaza; Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthis in Yemen.  During the Trump years (2016-2020), due to U.S. sanctions, Iran did not have the funds to support Hamas’, Hezbollah’, or Houthis’ operations and the middle east remained relatively quiet. 

     In September 2023, President Biden handed over sixteen billion dollars to Iran. Shortly thereafter, Hamas launched an unprecedented and brutal attack against Israel on October 7, 2023, killing about 1, 200 Israelis and kidnapping approximately 250 hostages. Additionally, Hezbollah started bombarding Israel from the north.

     Our foreign enemies are emboldened and our country has been invaded by 10 million people of which we know very little.  More reasons why we need the protection of our 2nd Amendment rights.

What is Joe Biden doing about the Second Amendment?

     In September 2023, President Biden launched the inaugural White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, aimed at curbing firearm-related incidents. Vice-President Harris oversees the office, and it is led by Stefanie Feldman, a long-time aide of President Biden, and supported by gun violence advocates Greg Jackson and Rob Wilcox. President Biden’s comprehensive gun violence initiative includes:

• Prohibiting assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

• Mandating secure storage of firearms.

• Repealing immunity for gun manufacturers from liability.

     As gun owners in New York State, is this aligned with your preferences? What are former President Trump’s views on gun policy?

     The National Rifle Association (NRA) endorsed President Trump in both 2016, 2020, and recently in 2024. In 2016, President Trump pledged to eliminate gun-free zones in schools and military facilities.  His current gun policy proposal advocates for a nationwide right to carry concealed firearms.     

     The 2024 presidential election is arguably the most crucial of our lifetime. To all New York State gun owners, it is crucial that you participate and VOTE. Our Second Amendment rights hinge on YOUR vote! Your vote ensures that future generations – your sons, daughters, grandsons, and granddaughters – will enjoy the same gun rights we cherish today.

Please get out and VOTE!  YOUR VOTE DOES MATTER!

SAVE Act

On June 27th, SCOPE sent an email about non-citizens voting in elections and the SAVE Act to prevent that*. Tuesday, Constantin Belyayev added his expertise on it and similar issues**. Then, Breitbart had an article about the SAVE Act worth reading. (Below.) Can you guess who is opposing the idea of having to prove you are an American citizen in order to vote?

SCOPE is trying to wake up gun owners that their government is being taken away from them while they sit on the sidelines. Opening our borders to illegal immigrants wasn’t an act of charity; it was a cold and calculated political move to steal the election and America.

Per Breitbart

House Democrats are planning to fight the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, set to be voted on the week of July 15, which would require state election officials to request proof of American citizenship before handing voter registration forms to applicants.

The SAVE Act, which Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) has deemed critical to safeguarding the nation’s elections from foreign influence, would require state election officials to mandate voter registration applicants provide proof of American citizenship.

Such election officials would not be allowed to register applicants to vote in federal elections unless they have handed over proof of American citizenship, which can include a passport or birth certificate.

“Noncitizen voting is a threat to election integrity,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) wrote in a policy brief on the SAVE Act:

Congress must pass the SAVE Act to close the loopholes that have allowed noncitizen voting, to enhance election security, to reduce the risk of foreign election interference, and to restore Americans’ confidence in U.S. elections. [Emphasis added]

House Democrats, though, are preparing a major fight over the issue, according to Axios.

House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA) is demanding Democrats vote against the SAVE Act, putting pressure on those who represent swing districts that voted for former President Donald Trump and face tough reelection bids.

A YouGov poll published in July 2022 found that 65 percent of Americans support requiring proof of citizenship to vote in elections — including 48 percent of Democrats, 62 percent of swing voters, and 88 percent of Republicans.

Fewer than 25 percent of Americans oppose requiring proof of citizenship to vote.

*S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education - Non-Citizen Voting (scopeny2a.org)

**S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education - Illegal Aliens vs Citizens (scopeny2a.org)

Illegal Aliens vs Citizens  by Constantin Belyayev

This article is prompted by a recent (27 June 2024) S.C.O.P.E. mailing entitled “Non-Citizen Voting”. Based on my 20-plus years of immigration enforcement experience I thought I would throw in my 2 cents.

First, a little bit of background. I joined the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in 1996 as a criminal investigator / special agent. My first duty post was in New York City, a common first stop. Shortly thereafter I transferred to an INS office located within the New York State Department of Correctional Services (NYSDOCS), where our mission was to identify and remove incarcerated criminal aliens, legally or illegally present in the U.S. In 1999 I transferred to the Albany, NY, field office, where I remained until my retirement in 2018.

When I first started, INS itself was an agency within the Department of Justice (DOJ). In 2003, right after the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency’s functions were merged with those of U.S. Customs, formerly of the U.S. Treasury, and transferred to the new department. The new combined agency became the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (BICE) first, and then simply Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as we all know it today. (Word on the street was that the FBI could not suffer any other “bureau” to exist…)

During my career with INS and then with ICE, I was primarily tasked with enforcing criminal and civil statutes dealing with aliens and nationality. In the latter part of my career, I concentrated on cases involving Identity and Benefit Fraud, which concerned various schemes to obtain immigration benefits in the U.S. through fraudulent means.

The subject of non-citizen voting necessarily leads to far too many other collateral issues that could be addressed. To keep it brief and to the point I shall limit my comments to a just a few.

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is part of Title 8 of the United States Code (USC), a set of laws which deals with aliens and nationality. The INA contains civil provisions describing prohibited conduct with respect to U.S. immigration laws. Civil provisions of the INA allow for deportation (removal) of aliens who have violated U.S. immigration laws based on a multitude of grounds. They also allow for fines against aliens and U.S. citizens such as employers hiring aliens without work authorization. Criminal provisions of Title 8 and Title 18 (General Crimes) allow for criminal prosecution of aliens and those aiding and abetting them to violate U.S. laws.

With respect to non-citizen voting, several civil INA statutes come to mind immediately:

INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) – Willful Misrepresentation of a Material Fact (making some type of false claim)

INA 212(a)(6)(C)(ii) or INA 237(a)(3)(D) – False Claim to U.S. Citizenship

INA 212(a)(10)(D) or INA 237(a)(6) – Aliens who Voted Unlawfully

Bear in mind that an alien does not have to be illegally present in the U.S. to be deported (removed) under the above statutes. According to Federal law, only U.S. citizens may vote. And thus, we proceed to the next section involving criminal statutes.

18 USC 911, False Claim to U.S. Citizenship, a felony. The law applies to documented provable oral and written false claims of U.S. citizenship. Even falsely marking a check box on a form stating "U.S. Citizen" could make one chargeable under this law. It is a “bread-and-butter” statute commonly used in immigration enforcement. My colleagues and I used this statute successfully on many occasions. It goes hand in hand with unlawful voting by aliens since to vote, an alien must swear or affirm that he or she is a U.S. citizen. We have seen, in recent times, numerous attempts by local and state governments to “bend the rules” so that non-citizens could vote, but the Federal statutes are quite clear:

18 USC 611, Voting by Aliens, a felony, specifically proscribes voting by aliens in any Federal election.

18 USC 1015, Naturalization, Citizenship, or Alien Registry, specifically subsection (f) makes it unlawful for any alien to vote in any Federal, state, or local election by falsely claiming U.S. citizenship. A violation of this statute is also a felony.

8 USC 1324, Bringing in and Harboring Certain Aliens. Any and every individual or entity, whether governmental or private, whether acting in their official capacity or privately, is subject to this statute. 8 USC 1324 says, in sum and substance, that it is unlawful to conceal, harbor, shield from detection any illegal alien, or to induce any alien to illegally enter into or reside in the U.S. Of course, there are court precedents and case law upon which prosecutors must rely in undertaking any case, and individual exceptions such as law enforcement bringing in informants or witnesses. Also, there is nothing to prevent U.S. Congress from creating a mechanism for aliens to obtain legal status. But if appropriately applied, many members of the current Federal Administration and New York State government could technically be chargeable under this statute. Failure to process incoming aliens for court hearings, clandestine night-time flights bearing aliens into the interior, unsolicited bus runs upstate from New York City, sanctuary policies of any governmental entity, and any similar conduct all qualify for potential evidence of 8 USC 1324.

Of course, the bigger issue under the current Administration is that U.S. Attorneys who are answerable to DOJ would be understandably reluctant to prosecute these and other similar crimes. It is stating the obvious that the Administration wants as many aliens to enter the U.S. as possible in hopes they would vote for the Democratic establishment. Consequently, the next U.S. Attorney who sticks his or her neck out in this manner may just wind up in Alaska prosecuting Innuits for illegal whale poaching or some such thing. Remember, a federal statute (or any other statute) is only as good as the Executive Branch employee who is willing (or allowed) to enforce it.

New York State has gone to great lengths to keep illegal aliens from being detected and dealt with according to law. Here are a few examples:

New York Driver’s License Access and Privacy Act, S. 1747B, commonly known as the Green Light Law, was signed by Governor Cuomo on 17 June 2019 and took effect in New York on 16 December 2019. It allowed illegal aliens to obtain “standard” drivers licenses (not Federally-accepted documents for travel under the REAL ID Act). Moreover, it took away the ability of immigration officials to access New York State motor vehicle records and instituted a requirement that a judicial warrant or subpoena be served for any such requests.

As if this was not enough, this law was yet further amended as part of the 2020 New York State budget, signed by Governor Cuomo on 3 April 2020. The amended version made it a Class E felony for any official of the New York Department of Motor Vehicles (NYSDMV) to provide any DMV records to any agency “that primarily enforces immigration law” (S. 7508B, Part YYY, Section 1, Subdivision 12 (a) and (b)). Some of the other provisions involve informing the individual whose record is being requested and certifying that the record would not be used for immigration enforcement purposes. Effectively, today an ICE agent may no longer conduct a simple license plate check in New York.

New York Protect Our Courts Act, A. 2176A, was signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo 15 December 2020. This law prevents immigration officials from entering any court in New York State in order to effect a civil arrest of an alien without a warrant or for a matter unrelated to the instant court proceeding. By way of explanation, a warrant is not initially required to effect the arrest of an alien on civil (not criminal) grounds of deportability or removability.

New York For All Act, S. 987 / A. 5686, last introduced in 2023. While, thankfully, this measure has not yet passed after being introduced on multiple occasions since 2019, it shows the lengths to which New York State officials are willing to go in order to unlawfully shield the illegal alien population from Federal enforcement efforts. This act would effectively end all cooperation between any New York State employee and any Federal agency which enforces immigration laws with virtually no exceptions.

Sanctuary city and state laws, while not specific to New York, already prevent cooperation between state and Federal law enforcement. A sanctuary state, by its very definition, violates 8 USC 1324 in that it harbors, conceals, and shields from detection illegal aliens. I wouldn’t bet on any U.S. Attorney taking such a case any time soon, however…

Yes, NY State (and the current Federal Administration) have taken great steps to encourage aliens to vote. And while it is still unlawful to do so under Federal law, "workarounds" persist. The affidavit attached to the NY State Voter Registration form is one such clever “workaround”. It does not require the applicant to blatantly lie by claiming some legal status and the ability to vote through U.S. citizenship. It merely allows the applicant to attest to the fact that he/she does not have a Social Security Number. The State does the rest.

Criminal behavior abounds in NY. Good luck getting anyone charged... unless, of course, you happen to possess a scary-looking black rifle legal in most other states. Or those that have been sitting on the sidelines on election day will finally decide to vote.

Talking Points for the Lawsuit Banning Body in Armor in NY State Brought Forth the by Plaintiff Armored Republic Holdings LLC

• Armored Republic Holdings LLC (Arizona Company) v s Walter Mosley (NY State Secretary of State, Steven James, Superintendent of the New York State Police, Anne Donnelly, Nassau County District Attorney, and Melinda Katz, Queens County District Attorney.
• The lawsuit is a Second Amendment challenge to the State of New York’s statutes and regulations banning the sale, purchase, acquisition, and transfer of body armor to persons who are not in certain “eligible professions”.
• The lawsuit is based on the Second and Fourteenth amendments.
• The right to keep and bear arms includes/refers to the right to WEAR, BEAR, or CARRY upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket for the purpose of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.
• Body armor is included in the term “arms”
• The Challenged Regulations infringe on the rights of New York citizens to keep and bear body armor by prohibiting all, but a select few from lawfully acquiring body armor.
• Under the Bruen decision, the defendants must meet their burden by showing that the Challenged Regulations are consistent with America’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.  This is a burden the defendants cannot meet.
   
• Bruen struck down NY’s “Proper Cause” licensing regime for the carry of firearms under which an applicant could only obtain a license to carry a firearm “only if he demonstrated a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general public. 
• The Challenged Regulations in this case, are worse than the “special need” regime invalidated in Bruen.  Unlike in Bruen when an individualized determination was made for each applicant as a person, the Challenged Regulations bar ANYONE from acquiring body armor unless they are employed in an eligible profession.
• The inherent right for self-defense is central to the Second Amendment right (Heller).  Like the D.C. handgun ban was struck down, NY’s body armor ban amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that is overwhelming chosen by the American society for that lawful purpose.   
• The Bruen decision described both weapons and armor as “ARMS”.
• History of the Use Body Armor:
• • 1181 – King Henry II of England proclaim every free layman to have a shirt of mail, a helmet of some sort, and a lance.
  • 1285 – Statute of Winchester – commanded every man have in his house a chainmail shirt, a haubergeon, and a helmet of iron.
  • 1328 – Statute of Northampton – demonstrated not only that armor was within the meaning of “arms” but also that armor was possessed by all classes and professions of persons.
  • 1511 – King Henry VIII reissued the Statue of Winchester
  • 1606 – King James I granted a charter to the Virginia Company for the creation of a settlement.  Among the rights granted was the right to acquire “Armour” and all other things useful for their defense.
  • 1680 – New York forbad the sale of any amor or weapons to the Indians.
  • 1756 - Maryland statute prohibited Roman Catholics from possessing armor.
  • 1783 – Connecticut statue made it a capital crime to commit robbery while being armed with any dangerous armour or weapons.
  • No law in American history leading up to the ratification of the Second Amendment n 1791 prohibited the acquisition of body armor by persons based on their profession or restricted the lawful acquisition of armor to select professions.
  • Body armor was in common use.  NY, NC, RI, and VA required citizens to keep various kinds of armor for use in the cavalry as late as 1798; used in the French and Indian War and the Revolutionary War.
  • 1860s – bullet proof vests were purchasable by the general public, used in the Civil War
  • NO LAWS EXIST IN AMERICAN HISTORY THAT PROHIBIT LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS FROM ACQUIRING BODY ARMOR OR RESTRICTING THE ABILITY TO ACQUIRE BODY ARMOR TO SELECT PROFESSIONS, UNTIL JULY 2022 WHEN NEW YORK STATE ENACTED THE CHALLENGED REGULATIONS.

• Statistics for Modern Body Armor Use Today
• • Nearly 99.4% of police forces nationwide use some form of body armor when on duty.
  • Currently there are millions of body armor products in use among American private citizens for civilian purposes. The overwhelming majority of body armor products are used for lawful purposes such as law enforcement and civilian purposes. 
  • The FBI also found that 70% of mass-shootings are committed using handguns, but handguns are not banned, yet they are used far more than body armor. 

• What about the issue of whether an arm is “in common use”/
• • Common use is met when at least tens of thousands of an item are in use (Avitabile v Beach) or (Maloney v Singas).
  • The ban on stun gunswas reversed in Massachusetts because hundreds of thousands of tasers and stun guns have been sold to private citizens (Caetano v Massachusetts).
  • There are far more body armor products in use among Americans today.

The Challenged Regulations

• On June 6, 20233 Governor Hochul signed into law restrictions on the purchase, sale, exchange, and transfer of bullet-proof vests for citizens outside of people in selected professions.

• On July 1, 2022, Governor Hochul signed legislation that expanded the scope of these restrictions from applying only to body vests to applying more broadly to all “body armor; went into effect on July 6, 2022.

• The Challenged Regulations definition of body armor found in N.Y. Penal 270.20(2) defines “body armor” as any product that is personal protective body covering intended to protect against gunfire, regardless of whether such product is to be worn alone or is sold as a complement to another product or garment”.

• Select professions include Police officers, Peace officers, Persons in the Military or NY National Guard.  Additional Professions added include in the Challenged Regulations:
• • Armored car guard
  • Security guard
  • Firefighter
  • Emergency medical technician
  • Paramedic
  • Ambulance driver
  • Firearms dealer
  • Retailer/salesperson
  • Private investigator
  • Building safety inspector
  • Code enforcement officer
  • Firearms instructor
  • Professional journalist
  • Newscaster
  • Nuclear safety officer
  • Process server
  • Animal control officer
  • Federal firearms dealer
  • Range safety officer
  • Forensic science technician, ballistic examiner
  • School building administrator and school district administrator

• The first offense is a Class A misdemeanor, every subsequent offense is a Class E felony.

• The following categories are not “professions” within the meaning of the Challenged Regulations and are not eligible to acquire body armor and are also categorically ineligible for recognition as a class of persons possible of being designated as an “eligible profession”:
• • Member of the People within the meaning of the Second Amendment:
  • Law-Abiding American Citizen;
  • Taxpayer;
  • Stay-at-home parent;
  • Retired person;
  • Person whose professional career is inactive for reasons other than retirement;
  • Disabled person unable to maintain employment in a profession;
  • Purchaser of Body  Armor Products; And
  • Prospective purchaser of Body Armor Products

Summary of the Unconstitutionality of the Challenged Regulations

• The provisions of the Challenged Regulations that prohibit the acquisition of body armor by persons not engaged or employed in an eligible profession violate the Second Amendment because they prevent law-abiding American citizens from acquiring, and prevent the sale of arms based on their profession, a prohibition for which there is no historical analogue in this Nation’s traditions of arms regulations.

• The provisions of the Challenged Regulations that establish criteria and processes for determining “eligible professions” that may acquire body armor violate the Second Amendment because they expressly exclude from eligibility entire classes of persons from being able to acquire body armor or even to apply for eligibility, a prohibition for which there is no historical analogue in this Nation’s tradition of arms regulation.

• The provisions in the Challenged Regulations that require an in-person transfer of body armor violate the Second Amendment because they have the effect of eliminating the ability of law-abiding, responsible citizens to acquire body armor. 

• Federal law and the law of some states outlaws the possession of body armor by violent felons but provides exemptions for such felons who need body armor for their profession.  But the Challenged Regulations treat everyone as a violent felon and allow only certain privileged professions to acquire body armor based on the Secretary of State’s determination that those professions have a special need for it.  Like New York’s carry license regime that was invalidated in Bruen, the Challenged Regulations permit New Yorkers to acquire arms “only after demonstrating to government officials some special need.”  Therefore, like the regulations that were struck down in Bruen, the Challenged Regulations “violate” the Fourteenth Amendment in that they prevent law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

His lips moved

The usual suspects, the main stream / legacy media were full of headlines about Trump lying during the debate.  Actually, much of their reporting ranged from inaccurate to misleading.

So, what about Joe Biden.  Not much was reported about his “misstatements.”  Let’s put that story straight.

How can you tell Joe Biden is lying?  His lips are moving!

Doubt that?  Here are a few highlights from last week’s debate.

• Biden said "we find ourselves in a situation where when [Trump] was president, he was separating babies from their mothers, put them in cages, making sure that the families were separated."

• Biden claimed that Border Patrol endorsed him and his “position” on immigration.

• Biden claimed that then resident Donald Trump called neo-Nazis and white supremacists who attended the ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, "very fine people."

• Biden claimed Trump called veterans “losers and suckers.”

• Biden claimed Trump added the most new debt in a single presidential term.

• Biden claimed that when he took office, the economy was "flat on its back" at 15% unemployment.

• Biden falsely said he is the first president in the past decade to not witness American troops’ deaths overseas.

After the 2020 debates, the LA Times (the most leftist paper on the left coast) corrected the statements blaming Trump for the cages: “The Obama administration did build the cages. The facility…was built with chain-link fencing by the Obama administration in 2014 in a warehouse in Nogales, Ariz.”

Question: Who was the Vice President under Obama when the cages were built?

The National Border Patrol Union reiterated their stance in a short statement posted to X, formerly Twitter: “To be clear, we never have and never will endorse Biden.”

Snopes, (which is no fan of Donald Trump or the Conservatives), fact checked this recently, after letting the lie go unchallenged for seven years:

Reporter: “The neo-Nazis started this thing. They showed up in Charlottesville.”

Trump: “Excuse me, they didn't put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides…I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? 

The “losers and suckers” comments were first mentioned in an article on September 3, 2020 from The Atlantic (which is another far left rag.)  Since it was reported two months before the election, consider the source and timing.  

Under Trump, the national debt went from $19.6 to $26.9 trillion, an increase of $7.3 trillion.  (Take out $3 trillion for the Covid extraordinary expenditures and it would have risen by $4.3 trillion under Trump.)

Under Biden, in 3 years and 7 months, the national debt went from $26.9 to $34.6 trillion.  An increase of $7.7 trillion. 

By the way, none of the covid spending under Biden was necessary. Before Biden took office, in the third quarter of 2020, the economy grew at a 34.8 percent annual rate. In the fourth quarter, it grew 4.2 percent. But because Biden had campaigned on the lie of an economy in ruins, his administration could not allow the economy to continue to recover on its own. That would have amounted to an acknowledgement that Trump's policies had worked. So, another huge round of stimulus became a political necessity and brought about inflation.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment was at 6% in January 2021. 

January 6th was the subject of more “misinformation.”

Jake Tapper asked, "those voters who believed that you violated your constitutional oath through your actions and inaction on January 6, 2021, and worried that you'll do it again," President Biden argued that the former president "encouraged" the January 6th attack.  Biden also criticized Trump for inaction on January 6th.

Trump actually said in his speech, "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

Trump advisor Kash Patel was in a January 3rd meeting where he claims Trump gave his approval for defense officials to communicate to Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that they were authorized to deploy the National Guard to the District and the U.S. Capitol building amid threats of violence that day. Patel previously told DailyMail.com that the Capitol Police and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser both denied the offer for an armed National Guard presence.  (Trump says Bowser denied the offer in writing.)

In a video shot by Pelosi's daughter, Alexandria, while the pair were escaping from the Capitol on January 6, 2021, the former speaker can be seen saying 'Why weren't the National Guard there to begin with?' 'They clearly didn't know, and I take responsibility for not having them just prepared for more,' Pelosi said to her chief of staff Terri McCullough.

Trump attackers point out that the President is in charge of the National guard but Patel and Trump say he had approved their use and only Pelosi needed to agree – which she did not.

Thirteen service members died during the botched U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan on August 26, 2021.

GUN OWNERS - GET OUT AND VOTE

    In 2022, Governor Hochul clinched victory in the New York State Governor race with a meager margin of 327,000 votes over Lee Zeldin, in an election that saw only approximately 1.8 million out of an estimated 5-million-gun owners in the state casting their ballots.  With New York State boasting a population nearing 20 million, the influence of gun owners in shaping policies such as gun laws becomes evident.  Had more gun owners turned out to vote, the landscape of gun legislation, such as the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA), would not be as restrictive today, underscoring the potential impact of increased voter participation among gun owners.  Why don’t more gun owners vote in New York State? 

    Gun owners cite several primary reasons for abstaining from voting: lack of interest, dissatisfaction with candidates, voters are too busy, or a belief their votes are inconsequential.  The latter concerns are particularly troubling and impactful.  It is projected that a mere 20% increase in voter turnout among New York State gun owners in 2022 could have altered the outcome of the gubernatorial election, resulting in Lee Zeldin assuming office and the CCIA not signed into law.  New York State gun owners MUST get out and vote in the 2024 election.

    America stands on the brink for many reasons.  President Biden’s economic policy has the economy faltering, evidenced by a meager 1.3 percent growth in last quarter’s gross domestic product.  Job creation is predominantly in the government sector or going to illegal immigrants, exacerbating wage stagnation amid rising inflation.  The southern border remains porous, with an estimated 7.6 million illegal immigrants entering since President Biden took office, contributing to escalating crime nationwide.  Gun control constitutes a pivotal aspect of President Biden’s agenda.    

    President Biden seeks to implement stringent gun control measures, including bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, universal background checks, and lifting immunity for gun manufacturers.  When will New York State gun owners decide enough is enough and mobilize to vote?  What is former President Trump’s platform on guns?

    The National Rifle Association (NRA) endorsed Donald Trump on May 20, 2016, and most recently on May 19, 2024.  Former President Trump stated, gun owners need to show up and vote; that gun owners have not participated enough in past elections.  Former President Trump praised the NRA as the “backbone” of the country, claiming the Second Amendment is “under siege” under President Biden.  Former President Trump in his speech to the NRA vowed to protect gun owner’s rights stating, “we need it for safety because the bad guys aren’t giving up their guns and claiming Biden “is coming for your guns.” It comes down to informed citizens voting to realize the country and polices they want. 

    Elizabeth Willing Powel, who is considered one of the well-connected social figures of Colonial and early Republic Philadelphia, was a close friend of both George and Martha Washington.  Upon completion of the Constitution of the United States, Elizabeth Powel ask Benjamin Franklin, "what have we got a republic or a monarchy," to which Benjamin Franklin replied, “A republic if you can keep it’” The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely DEPENDENT upon the active, educated, and informed involvement of the people.

    New York State gun owners MUST get out and vote in the 2024 Presidential election and local Congressional political races.   Take 10 friends with you to vote.  If you must, pick them up and drive them to the polling center.  The United States is on the brink of losing it as a republic, and if gun owners don’t vote in greater numbers than in the past, our sons, daughters, grandsons, and granddaughters will not have the same Second Amendment rights you and I do today!  GET OUT AND VOTE!  The country and our state are depending on YOU!  Become a PATRIOT and VOTE!

DONATE HERE

Non-Citizen Voting

There is no question that our national borders are open to illegal entry.  One big reason for the open-door policy seems to be that Biden and the Democrats want illegals to eventually be able to vote (for Democrats.) 

Eventually may be now.

The below comes directly from the New York State Voter Registration Form:

To register you must be a US citizen.

Are you a citizen of the U.S.?    Yes      No

Verifying your identity:

We’ll try to check your identity before Election Day, through the DMV number (driver’s license number or non-driver ID number), or the last four digits of your social security number, which you’ll fill in below.

If you do not have a DMV or social security number, you may use a valid photo ID, a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or some other government document that shows your name and address. You may include a copy of one of those types of ID with this form— be sure to tape the sides of the form closed. If we are unable to verify your identity before Election Day, you will be asked for ID when you vote for the first time

No Social Security Number?  No problem. Just fill out this affidavit that says you have never been issued a Social Security Number.  (See link below.)

nss1a.pdf (ny.gov)

In New York State, all you have to do is say you are a citizen but not show any evidence that you are a citizen, only show that you live in NY State.  There are multiple ways to prove you live in NYS and they do not involve proving citizenship.  NY State also gives out driver’s licenses to illegal aliens without any proof of citizenship.

Are you an illegal alien worried that applying for a driver’s license will get you reported to ICE?  No problem.  Per NY State’s “Documented” web site:

Will my information be shared with the federal government? 

No. The law restricts access by immigration enforcement agencies unless it is required by a judicial order.

Basically, if you are a United States citizen living in New York State and do not want your vote cancelled by that of a non-citizen…you are screwed.

The Federalist offers more information:

Currently, Arizona is the only state that has some mechanism in place besides the honor system to keep foreign nationals from registering to vote. The state requires potential voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in state elections. But thanks to federal government interference, individuals who cannot prove their citizenship for state registration can still register as federal-only voters.

Thus, in Arizona, you must provide proof you are a citizen to vote in Arizona elections but you don’t need that proof to vote in federal elections!

The Federalist does offer some hope.

To find foreign nationals on their voter rolls, states can use two little-known federal statutes to verify whether a registered voter is an American citizen through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), according to America First Legal (AFL).

If requested, AFL contends, DHS is required to provide such information.

AFL first points to 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c), which requires the former Immigration and Naturalization Service — which was replaced by the DHS — to “respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information.”

AFL also points to 8 U.S.C. § 1644, which states: Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no State or local government entity may be prohibited, or in any way restricted, from sending to or receiving from the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an alien in the United States.

Accordingly, States and localities should submit requests to DHS to verify the citizenship or immigration status of registered voters on voter rolls where there are any reliable indicators that a voter may not be a U.S. citizen.

In summary, current law makes it illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, but it does NOT require states to obtain documentary proof of U.S. citizenship before an individual registers to vote.  So, illegal aliens voting in federal elections is illegal, but the federally-mandated registration process is a sieve and doesn’t prevent it.

There are two things we need to do right now, this year:

1-    Be sure our local election board is aware of 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) and 8 U.S.C. § 1644 and utilizes them to weed out illegal voters.  (Of course, there is zero chance that NY City will do this.) 

2-    Motivating gun owners, who want to preserve the 2nd Amendment protections, to vote in this election is vital in order to offset what must certainly be expected is a flood of illegals voting for Democrats (a party that is unquestionably anti 2nd Amendment.)

Republicans have introduced the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act which would amend the National Voter Registration Act to clarify that states must require proof of citizenship when registering individuals to vote in federal elections.  That bill has no chance of becoming law with Biden as President and the Senate in Democrat hands but with a change in 2025 in administrations and the legislature, it could be enacted. 

You will be voting for more than just the 2nd Amendment in this election.  You will be voting to protect your vote in future elections.  We lose this one and we can expect even more laws that negate our votes.   

DONATE HERE

Trust the Science

You have probably heard some form of this theory of gun ownership, that men who are more dissatisfied with the size of their penises would be more likely to personally own guns.”

What you already knew - but the Left can’t believe - has now been researched and proven. 

In a paper published in the Journal of Men’s Health entitled: Size Matters? Penis Dissatisfaction and Gun Ownership in America . (1)

The study showed that those more satisfied with penis size are more likely to own guns.  And not just a gun but multiple guns and also to own “military-style” rifles!

And like most things that the Left is accusing us of, they themselves are doing...

Per the study: “We find that men who are more dissatisfied with the size of their penises are less likely to personally own guns. “(Emphasis added)

So, the Left was maligning us that we were compensating for small penises by owning guns while it’s the Left that is actually compensating for small penises by NOT owning guns!  (Instead of owning guns, they compensate by lusting after political power?)

Why waste one’s time researching something silly like this?  That’s what’s even more fun.  The research was funded by Change the Ref which is an anti-gun organization.   From their website: “CHANGE THE REF RAISES AWARENESS ABOUT MASS SHOOTINGS and works to reduce the influence of the NRA and gun manufacturers through strategic interventions and by using art as a form of communication.”  I don’t have to wonder what they were hoping would be the conclusion.

Actually, there was an earlier study, too.

In a 2021 paper entitled “Sexual Dysfunction and Gun Ownership in America: When Hard Data Meet a Limp Theory”(2) they concluded that:

“This study, we showed that men experiencing SD (Sexual Dysfunction) are no more likely to own guns than men without SD. Our findings are important because they contribute to our understanding of factors associated with gun ownership by challenging the belief that phallic symbolism and masculinity somehow drive men experiencing SD to purchase guns. Our findings also remind us of the perils of gun culture rhetoric, which is often characterized by misinformation and political propaganda.”

The Left may try to invalidate these studies as the studies constantly use the term “Male” in the traditional sense of those that have a penis.  Which would seem to be a necessary part of studying penis dissatisfaction.  But, to the Left, a penis is not necessary to be Male.    

And statistics show that ‘real’ women are increasingly buying guns.  I wonder what the left’s theory is on that?

Notes:

• (1)Authored by Terrence D. Hill PhD, Liwen Zeng, PhD, Christopher G. Ellison, PhD, Benjamin Dowd-Arrow, PhD

• (2)   Authored by Terrence D. Hill, PhD, Benjamin Dowd-Arrow, PhD, Christopher G. Ellison, PhD, Ginny Garcia-Alexander, PhD, John P. Bartkowski, PhD, and Amy M. Burdette, PhD 
  
  _____________________________________________________

The Apocalypse is Upon Us

First there were safe spaces to shoot up on drugs or where “progressive” cities would actually furnish syringes.   

Then, there was San Francisco which has implemented a free alcohol program for homeless alcoholics as part of a Managed Alcohol Program.  Nurses provide clients with enough alcohol to meet their addiction needs while keeping them at a safe level of intoxication. (You can’t make this stuff up.)

3,000 miles away, per Maine Wire on June 13^th, Maine’s taxpayer-funded “harm reduction” specialists call it “boofing” or “booty dumping,” but those are just pleasant euphemisms referring to the practice of sticking heroin, fentanyl, or meth up your butt.

Maine Access Points, a taxpayer-funded nonprofit based in Bangor, as well as the city of Portland’s city-run needle distribution center are both offering extensive how-to guides and — even anal injection kits — to help drug users squirt narcotics into their anuses.

In Portland, the “Portland Public Health Boofing Kit” comes with a needleless syringe and an informational flyer explaining the proper technique for putting drugs up your butt.

Apparently, Portland believes that, if you are going to intentionally leave your border open to drug smuggling, the government should at least provide instructions on how to use the illegal drugs.

New Laws

The New York State war on the 2nd Amendment continues.  As SCOPE has often pointed out, since NY can’t get 2A repealed, NY State is trying to drive gun shops out of business. 

The following bill was passed and has been sent to Kathy Hochul for a signature.

A2882/S6649 requires gun shops to put a warning sign on their buildings. The warning sign would state: “Access to a weapon or firearm in the home significantly increases the risk of suicide, death during domestic disputes, and/or unintentional deaths to children, household members and others. If you or a loved one is experiencing distress and/or depression, call the national suicide prevention lifeline at 988.”

Firearms are now like cigarettes and alcohol, except the latter two aren’t constitutionally protected rights.

The law will be enforced by your local police: “The Provisions Of This Subdivision Shall Be Enforced Within Each Municipality By The Applicable Local Police Force, Including Town, City And Village Police Departments Which Officers Are Authorized To Issue Appearance Tickets. Appearance Tickets Shall Be Served Personally.”

Hey, it’s not like there is a lot of crime happening out there to keep them otherwise occupied.

The penalties for failure to comply: “A Violation Punishable By Imprisonment Of Not More Than Fifteen Days Or By A Fine Of Not More Than One Thousand Dollars, Or Both. Each Day That A Violation Continues Shall Be Deemed A Separate Offense.”  (Emphasis added.)

New York is an expert at pyramiding crimes as seen in the Trump trial in NY City.

This will also put business licenses in jeopardy

And don’t cross your local police, they have a get out of jail free card!

“No Licensing Officer, Local Government, Or Any Employee Thereof Shall Be Liable To Any Person By Reason Of Any Injury Or Damage Resulting From The Failure Of “Any Gunsmith Or Firearms Dealer To Comply With This Subdivision Or In Consequence Of Any Act Or Omission In Connection With The Implementation Or Enforcement Of This Subdivision.”

The police will have absolute discretion in performing their duty here and immunity from tortious conduct that may arise from their performance, even intentional misconduct. 

Here’s another one waiting for Hochul’s signature.

A9862/S8479 allow financial institutions to assign merchant category codes (MCC’s) to retailers who sell firearms and ammunition, thus allowing these financial institutions to potentially track and/or halt purchases from these retailers. 

A9862 & S8479 will require issuers of credit and debit cards to use specific MCC’s for firearms and ammunition merchants.

This legislation will allow financial institutions to distinguish firearm retailers from other general or sporting-goods retailers, as well as allow for the potential creation of a list or registry of privately owned firearms in New York.

In addition, it sets the stage for New York State to pressure retailers, wholesalers, financers and others to withhold firearm related services as the credit card company will have a list of them, based on MCC’s. The state already tried that and was slapped down by the Supreme Court in NRA v Vullo.*  But NY State has never let the Supreme Court stand in the way of NY’s lawless pursuit of neutering the 2nd Amendment.

*S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education - NRA v Vullo (scopeny2a.org)