SCOPE NY

Briefings

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 
  • 07/11/2020 10:09 PM | Anonymous

    Missouri couple who defended home have rifle seized during police search: report:   Authorities in St. Louis executed a search warrant Friday evening at the home of Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the couple who made headlines last month when they took up arms to defend their home from protesters.

    During the search, police seized the rifle that Mark McCloskey was shown holding during the June 28 incident, KSDK-TV of St. Louis reported, citing information from a source.

    The couple claimed the pistol that Patricia McCloskey held during the June confrontation was already in the possession of their attorney, the station reported.

    INVESTIGATION INTO ST. LOUIS COUPLE WHO DEFENDED THEIR HOME AGAINST PROTESTERS IS 'ABUSE OF POWER,' SAYS SEN. HAWLEY

    There was no immediate indication the McCloskeys were arrested or charged with a crime. The warrant applied only to a search for the guns, KSDK reported.

    On Monday, the McCloskeys appeared on Fox News’ “Hannity” and disclosed that protesters had returned to their neighborhood July 3 – but the couple was alerted in advance and hired a private security company to protect their residence.

    The previous night, “we started hiding valuables and securing the house,” Mark McCloskey told host Sean Hannity.

    Last week’s protest was loud but non-violent, the homeowner said.

    In the June incident, Patricia McCloskey said, the couple was startled just before dinnertime when “300 to 500 people” entered the gated community where they live.

    "[They said] that they were going to kill us," Patricia McCloskey told Hannity on Monday night. "They were going to come in there. They were going to burn down the house. They were going to be living in our house after I was dead, and they were pointing to different rooms and said, 'That’s going to be my bedroom and that’s going to be the living room and I’m going to be taking a shower in that room’.”"

    The couple said protesters also threatened to harm their dog, which was outside the home at the time.

    The protesters claimed they were passing the McCloskeys' home while heading toward the home of Mayor Lyda Krewson, to demonstrate there.

    Soon after the June incident, Kimberly Gardner, circuit attorney in St. Louis, announced that her office and the St. Louis Police Department would be conducting an investigation into the McCloskeys’ display of firearms.

    WHO IS KIMBERLY GARDNER, ST. LOUIS PROSECUTOR INVESTIGATING GUN-TOTING COUPLE?

    The couple’s attorney at the time, Albert Watkins, said in a statement that the couple did not arm themselves until after they began feeling threatened.

    "My clients didn't sit on their front stoop with guns. ... No firearms were on them at the time that they, were, as property owners standing in front of their home," Watkins said at the time. "It was not until they basically were in a position of seeing and observing violence, recklessness, lawbreaking, and knowing that the police were not going to be doing anything."

    Late Friday, KSDK reported that Watkins was no longer representing the couple and had been replaced by attorney Joel Schwartz, who confirmed a search warrant was issued at 8 p.m. Friday.

    Schwartz would not confirm if authorities took anything from the home and said he was unaware of the location of the couple's handgun, KSDK reported.

    The couple's new lawyer also said he hopes to meet with Gardner's office next week but said no appointment had yet been scheduled, according to KSDK.

  • 07/08/2020 6:17 PM | Anonymous

    “Should I buy a handgun or a shotgun for home defense?” is a question I often get from friends. These people often overlook AR-type rifles. Regardless, I often recommend an AR. Here’s why.

    1. AR-type rifles simply shoot more accurately than handguns. If you have any doubts, simply run a quick experiment at your local outdoor range. Talk to gun owners of varying skill levels—from complete novices to experts—and ask them to volunteer for a fun course of fire. Set three IDPA silhouette targets, or something similar, at 10 yards from the shooter and about 2 yards apart. Tell them to shoot each target with two rounds, center mass, as accurately and fast as they are able. Use a shot timer and have them run the course with an AR-15, a handgun and a shotgun. No matter your sample size, almost all people will shoot the course more effectively (combination of time and accuracy) with the AR-type rifle.
    2. AR-type rifles can have a greater magazine capacity. Joe Biden and his gun-ban-supporting friends think they know exactly how many rounds of ammunition you will “need” if you are ever in a fight for your life. The truth is that no one knows this anymore confidently than they know how many gallons of water will be needed to douse the next house fire in the neighborhood. No survivor of a life-or-death fight has ever said, “I wish I had had less firepower!”
    3. These rifles give superior terminal performance. Rifles of appropriate caliber are much better fight-stoppers than handguns, and rival the effectiveness of shotguns in this department. Lawful lethal force is deployed by citizens when a violent threat must be immediately stopped before the bad guy takes a life. Long guns are simply better than handguns at quickly incapacitating violent threats.
    4. These rifles readily accept accoutrements. Almost all modern ARs come from the manufacturer equipped with handguards that allow the convenient attachment of accessories, like lights and lasers, that can be helpful—often essential—in self-defense scenarios. Lights, whether attached to a gun or not, are a must to positively identify a threat in low-light scenarios. Lasers can help with quick and easy target acquisition, and they can also be the reason an attacker turns and runs. Suppressors are also easy to attach to ARs, and they can make the difference for your hearing if you are ever forced to discharge a rifle inside a home.
    5. Finally, for decades there was an assumption that firing rifles in homes would present unacceptable risks to innocent parties on the other side of internal walls due to “over-penetration” issues. This is the reason many law-enforcement organizations used pistol-caliber submachine guns like the HK MP5 when going into homes in high-risk situations. But this over-penetration argument was based on a flawed assumption. The FBI decided to put this assumption to the test, and study this matter. It found that 5.56 NATO self-defense ammunition posed no greater risk of over-penetration than rounds fired from pistols and shotguns. While the myth remains, good people should not be deterred by it. Be safe and always assume all bullets will pass through all walls.

    If you have friends come to you asking about home defense options, make sure you do them the favor of having them consider an AR-style rifle. For many people, it’s a superior home-defense arm that should not be ignored.

  • 07/04/2020 12:43 PM | Anonymous
  • 07/02/2020 12:04 AM | Anonymous

    Always remember, give people something to vote for.  Here’s an excellent example from a young mother in Colorado. 

    https://www.westernjournal.com/conservative-mom-famously-confronted-beto-orourke-scores-massive-election-win/

  • 06/30/2020 2:07 AM | Anonymous

    Health care professionals misusing their patients’ trust to push a political agenda of gun control is called an ethical boundary violation

    You may encounter the question in your health plan’s standard health appraisal questionnaire. Even though it may not be of your doctor’s making (your doctor may very likely just be going along with the guidelines of his or her gun-hating medical organization such as the AAP or ACP), it’s still part of your permanent medical record. Or your doctor may have a personal prejudice against gun ownership, shaped by her training in medical school or residency. Either way, it is important for people to know some very important facts:

    Download the DRGO Resource Document “What to Do When Your Doctor Asks About Your Guns” here 

    Dr. Tim Wheeler

    —Timothy Wheeler, MD is the founder and former director of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, and a retired head and neck surgeon.

    All DRGO articles by Timothy Wheeler, MD.  


  • 06/27/2020 6:16 PM | Anonymous

    June 26, 2020 |  Cam Edwards  With gun sales soaring, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation reporting that as many as 2-million Americans have purchased their first gun in just the past six months, some folks are starting to think about the impact that these new Second Amendment enthusiasts could have on the November elections. Alan Gottlieb, the executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation, believes that the influx of new gun owners could signal a “sea change” in Second Amendment politics.

    “This new wave of gun owners could become a formidable force during this year’s election,” Gottlieb noted. “From now on, we expect millions of new gun owners to pay closer attention to candidates, and reject those who would trample on their Second Amendment rights. With legions of new gun owners ready to protect these newly-discovered rights, it could be a pretty scrappy election year with lots of surprises.”

    On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, we dig a little deeper into those new gun owners and how the might effect this year’s elections as well as the broader debate over gun ownership in this country.

    As much as I’d love to think that every new gun owner is going to turn into a single issue voter, we know that isn’t going to be the case. There will be plenty of left-leaning new gun owners who cast their votes for anti-gun Democrats in November, even if they now object to a candidate’s position on the Second Amendment. My hope is that these gun owners will not only come to understand the importance of voting to protect their right to keep and bear arms sooner rather than later, but that they’ll push Democrats to undo the damage done by gun control laws.

    As I wrote yesterday, it’s time to decriminalize the 2A as part of criminal justice reform efforts, and left-leaning gun owners may be able to make these arguments to Democrats who would ignore the same thing if it came out of the mouth of a conservative gun owner. One day before long the idea of gun licensing and discretionary carry laws may be just as unpopular on the Left as the national anthem or Abraham Lincoln seem to be at the moment.

    Having said that, Gottlieb is right that some of these new gun owners will be voting to protect their newly exercised right to keep and bear arms. For instance, at the moment there are tens of thousands of Illinois residents who’ve been waiting for months for the state to issue their Firearms Owned ID card so they can legally purchase a firearm. Many of these would-be gun owners may still be so ticked off by the process that they vote in favor of candidates in November who want to scrap the FOID system entirely.

    New gun owners in California who’ve now been exposed to the absurdities of the state’s gun control regime could also have an impact on some races, though Biden will still win the state handily. In swing districts, however, new gun owners could help tilt races for the state Assembly and state Senate. I don’t think California’s legislature is going to flip to being a pro-2A body, but if the gun vote does turn out in large numbers in November we might be able to at least remove the veto-proof anti-gun supermajority in the state.

    In other words, I think the influx of new gun owners could very well play a key role in deciding some elections, but increased political activism by the nearly 100-million Americans who’ve owned firearms for years could have an even bigger impact. Regardless of when you became a gun owner, it’s critically important that you vote like your rights depend on it this fall, because they absolutely do. Increased gun ownership on the Left may help defuse or undo gun control legislation over the long-term, but in the near future, Democrat control of Congress and the White House would lead to a gutting of the right to keep and bear arms for all of us.

  • 06/27/2020 1:50 PM | Anonymous

    June 25th, 2020 | CCRKBA  BELLEVUE, WA – The recent gun-buying surge that began with the COVID-19 pandemic panic and continued through the civil unrest and riots following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody has created millions of new gun owners who will now eagerly protect their right to protect themselves and their loved ones, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms predicts.

    “Look at all of the new people who suddenly decided to exercise their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms,” observed CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “We’ve witnessed something that is nothing short of a sea change, and in some cases might approach the level of epiphany, about gun ownership. We’ve heard anecdotal reports from all over the country about people flocking to gun shops who had never before owned a firearm. Now that they are gun owners, we expect them to be very protective of their rights.”

    March, April and May saw record numbers of background checks, according to FBI data and information from industry sources. June data should be out within days, and CCRKBA expects the trend to continue.

    “As we’ve said before,” Gottlieb recalled, “we welcome all of these new gun owners to the firearms community. We know many of them are minorities, especially Black and female citizens from literally all age groups, and they will find gun owners have a big tent with lots of room for newcomers. They can take advantage of training opportunities, meet new friends who share more interests than they might have suspected, and gain a new understanding of our efforts to protect the one fundamental right that actually protects all of the other rights.

    “We’re not surprised to hear about new first-time gun buyers who have discovered how much enjoyment they get out of shooting,” he added. “We’ve seen this with generations of new gun owners who may never have had any previous experience with firearms. Many of them discover a sense of empowerment that allows them, maybe for the first time, to understand they can take care of themselves, and that they are responsible for their own safety.

    “This new wave of gun owners could become a formidable force during this year’s election,” Gottlieb noted. “From now on, we expect millions of new gun owners to pay closer attention to candidates, and reject those who would trample on their Second Amendment rights. With legions of new gun owners ready to protect these newly-discovered rights, it could be a pretty scrappy election year with lots of surprises.”

  • 06/25/2020 10:51 PM | Anonymous

    June 24, 2020 | Cam Edwards  California’s law requiring background checks on every purchase of ammunition has been a gigantic clusterfark since it took effect back in 2018. Since then, tens of thousands of Californians have been denied the ability to purchase ammunition because of problems with the government’s database of gun owners, while others have had to wait through lengthy delays to simply purchase a box or two of ammunition.

    Back in April, a federal judge issued a stay on enforcement of the law, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals quickly overruled the lower court, and the law remains in effect for the time being, though the case (known as Rhode vs. Becerra) is still actively being litigated. On Monday, a coalition of 16 attorneys general, all of them Democrats, filed a friend of the court brief arguing that the California law is constitutional and urged the court to permanently vacate the district court’s injunction.

    If you live in Illinois, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, or Washington you should know that your attorney general has given the green light for your state legislature to implement California-style ammunition control if they want.

    First, the amici States object to the district court’s conclusion that the Second Amendment constrained California’s ability to enact the ammunition regulations at issue here. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the Second Amendment allows States to address the harmful effects of gun violence through new regulations. And California’s ammunition regulations—which are similar to numerous laws across the country—are an appropriate exercise of that prerogative.

    Second, the amici States disagree with the district court’s apparent view that California’s interests in public safety and crime prevention cannot be substantiated by the types of evidence presented here. On the contrary, it is settled that States may support their interests in public safety and crime prevention with a wide range of evidence, including social science studies and legislative findings.

    First off, there’s no other state in the country that requires background checks on ammunition sales, though the requirement was part of the SAFE Act signed into law in New York in 2013. The New York State Police never figured out how to actually conduct the background checks, however, and in 2015 Gov. Andrew Cuomo suspended the requirement due to the failure of his administration to find a way to implement the law.

    The AG’s brief ignores New York’s failure and tries instead to point to laws in several states that they claim bear a strong resemblance to the law being challenged in California.

    Relevant here, a number of States have also extended background checks or similar requirements to ammunition sales within their jurisdictions. Indeed, four States in addition to California require some form of background check to purchase ammunition. Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey currently require that individuals possess a license or firearms identification card—which requires passing a background check—before purchasing ammunition.

    The District of Columbia also imposes restrictions on ammunition sales; District residents may only purchase ammunition if they are listed as a registered owner of a firearm of the same caliber or gauge as the ammunition they seek to purchase. D.C. Code Ann. §§ 7-2505.02(d), 7-2506.01. Nonresidents seeking to purchase ammunition must demonstrate that they lawfully possess a firearm of the same caliber or gauge. Id. § 7-2505.02(d). And like California, the District also requires all ammunition sales to be conducted in-person.

    None of the states mentioned by the AG’s require background checks to be performed before every ammunition purchase, and none of them prohibit ammunition purchased out-of-state from being brought back home by legal gun owners. In fact, if that’s the law in Washington, D.C., no gun owner in the city would be able to purchase ammunition, because there are zero gun stores in the District. It’s laughable that the anti-gun attorneys general are citing a law that is utterly unenforceable in their quest to have California’s ammunition background check law declared constitutional.

    If you’re a Second Amendment legal nerd, be sure to read the entire brief. And if you live in one of these 16 states with AG’s backing California’s asinine infringement on the right to keep and bear arms, you better contact your lawmakers now and urge them to reject any attempt to impose California-style ammunition purchase restrictions, even if your attorney general has given the go-ahead.

  • 06/25/2020 10:32 PM | Anonymous

    Jun 25, 2020 | Vernon Freeman Jr.  GOOCHLAND, Va. -- A Goochland Circuit Court judge denied a challenge from gun rights groups Thursday to block the one-handgun-a-month law from going into effect on July 1.

    The group challenged the constitutionality of the newly reinstated law arguing it violates Virginians' right to “keep and bear arms.”

    Judge Timothy K. Sanner found that the gun lobby was unlikely to succeed in convincing the court that the law was unconstitutional.

    The lawsuit was filed by Gun Owners of America, Inc. (GOA), Gun Owners Foundation, Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL), Brothers N Arms, Inc., and citizen Valerie Trojan.

    “I am really pleased that the judge agreed with me today and rejected the gun lobby’s attempt to block the one-handgun-a-month law. Currently, Virginia is one of the easiest states in the country for gun traffickers to purchase large numbers of firearms to resell on the street, and we can’t allow that to continue,” said Attorney General Herring. “Virginia had a one-handgun-a-month law in effect for nearly twenty years that was extremely successful in keeping firearms out of our communities and out of the hands of dangerous individuals.

    A one-handgun-a-month law was first implemented in Virginia in 1993, before being repealed in 2012.

    The new law was one of several gun bills that passed the Democratic-controlled General Assembly this winter.

    The new one-handgun-a-month law is scheduled to take effect July 1, 2020.

  • 06/22/2020 7:07 PM | Anonymous

    June 21, 2020 |  Cam Edwards  At least 22 people have been shot in New York City this weekend, including a man who was gunned down at point blank range as he was washing his car in Brooklyn on Saturday afternoon, and the rapid rise in violent crime isn’t limited only to the state’s biggest city. In Syracuse, 9 people were shot on Saturday evening at what’s being described as a “celebration” in the city.

    The party in a parking lot behind WCNY Studios near the intersection of Wyoming Street and Marcellus was attended by hundreds according to Syracuse Police Chief Kenton Buckner.

    All nine victims were sent to the hospital with various injuries although the most seriously hurt was also the youngest: a 17-year-old male.

    Syracuse Police report, when officers arrived, that people were running away and yelling.

    Buckner said the incident was first called in as a stolen car complaint, and when officers arrived people said there was a person shooting. Buckner said his officers did not hear gunfire while they were at the scene.

    In the state capitol of Albany, Chief Eric Hawkins and Mayor Kathy Sheehan held a press conference on Friday to implore the public to cooperate with law enforcement as they try to cope with a staggering increase in violent crime.

    According to Hawkins, they have seen three times as many shots-fired incidents in 2020 than they did at this point in 2019.

    Hawkins said the pandemic lead to a decrease in community policing and restricted the department’s ability to address issues that arose. Now with the area opening back up, Hawkins is seeking help from the community to stifle the violence.

    “We are working together in a united front to address this issue,” Hawkins said. “We are arresting people, we are taking guns off the street, but yet this problem is persisting. We need more. We need more than just innovatice police strategies, we need more than just more cops. We need our community to help.”

    Other city leaders at the Friday press conference said the community knows who the shooters are, and pleaded with people not to wait until they are personally impacted by gun violence.

    Keep in mind that New York has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, thanks in large part to the SAFE Act signed into law by Gov. Andrew Cuomo in 2013. So-called assault weapons are banned, ammunition magazines with more than seven rounds of ammunition are illegal, and possession of a firearm without a license is a felony crime. Cuomo has claimed that the law “stops criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from buying a gun,” but clearly criminals are paying as much attention to the state’s gun control laws as they are the laws on the books prohibiting aggravated assault and homicide.

    In New York City, officials are still doubling down on the idea that more gun control and fewer police officers on the streets will lead to less shootings.

    “We are going to put more and more resources into the Cure Violence movement and the Crisis Management System, which has proven to be extraordinarily effective in stopping gun violence before it happens and mediating conflicts,” Mayor Bill de Blasio has said.

    The mayor has increased the Cure Violence budget by $10 million for more staff and sites, especially those with high gun violence in areas including Jamaica, Canarsie, and Crown Heights.

    “During the month of May, we are seeing an increase of 25 percent in homicides in the last few days, so it is concerning – we are deploying our Cure Violence particularly in retaliation shootings,” said Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams.

    While the City Council is proposing $1 billion in cuts to the police department, Adams is backing that decision.

    “If we put money on the front end, we won’t be dealing with the crisis on the back end, that is how we have been policing in the city,” he said.

    According to the city’s website, the Cure Violence program:

    “employs ‘violence interrupters’ and outreach workers from the community who have themselves experienced violence and also have strong relationships with young adults, community leaders, and service providers. Violence interrupters stop conflicts before they happen, and outreach workers re-direct the highest-risk youth away from life on the streets. Outreach workers implement a detailed risk reduction plan that links youth with needed services. These connections result in the cooling of violence hot spots, in addition to positive outcomes for those who participate in the intervention.”

    I don’t have a problem with Cure Violence’s strategy in theory, as long as it’s working. Unfortunately, at the moment, the “violence interruptors” don’t seem to be actually interrupting the violence at all.

    During the month of May, overall crime decreased compared to the same period last year.

    But the NYPD says murders in the city increase by 79%.

    Shootings went up 64%, while burglaries rose 34%.

    While anti-gun politicians like Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo wring their hands and twiddle their thumbs, New York’s violent criminals are having a field day, and law-abiding New Yorkers should be asking themselves this simple question: who exactly is safer thanks to the SAFE Act and the state’s gun control regime?


<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 

A 2nd Amendment Defense Organization, defending the rights of New York State gun owners to keep and bear arms!

PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052

SCOPE is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization.

[ Site Developed By A2Z Enhanced Digital Solutions ]

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software