Virginians Stand Up for 2A  by Tom Reynolds

In their thirst for power, the Left eventually goes too far and real opposition emerges.  It’s happening in Virginia where Governor Abigail Spanberger and the legislature have created laws to ban so-called “assault firearms.” The new “assault firearms” ban laws go into effect on July 1st.

Virginia Commonwealth Attorneys are similar to District Attorneys in New York State.  They are elected by the residents of that jurisdiction to represent the Commonwealth of Virginia in criminal cases.   

There are 16 Commonwealth Attorneys Offices in Virginia and according to the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL), 10 of them have said that they will not prosecute violations of those laws because they are unconstitutional.*

Ryan Mehaffey, a Marine veteran and a Commonwealth Attorney sent a letter to Spotsylvania Sheriff Roger Harris, instructing him that the ban is “unconstitutional and cannot be lawfully enforced.”  Mehaffey says that both the U S and Virginia Constitutions protect citizens’ rights to possess standard infantry weapons.  “Our founders were careful to make sure, when they drafted our founding document, that the ultimate right of the people was preserved — the right to defend themselves and their community…So, the linchpin of the constitutional analysis is whether this instrument has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.”

Phillip Blevins, an Air Force veteran and a Commonwealth Attorney has also refused to enforce the ban.  Blevins says he took an oath to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia and enforcing the law would violate that oath.

Always willing to comment on unconstitutional laws, Professor Mark Smith, the Four Boxes Diner Host has added: “A prosecutor who indicts you for possessing or carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifles carries the constitutional burden of proving that the rifle is dangerous AND unusual under the Supreme Court’s Heller precedent. Yet, each of the nine U.S. Supreme Court justices have already said AR-15s are commonly-owned firearms. Thus, a prosecution arising from possessing an AR-15 should be dead on arrival — and many Virginia prosecutors apparently know it.”   (Emphasis added.)

In New York State, where Governor Hochul and the Democrat controlled legislature deliberatively ignore our Constitution and United States Supreme Court decisions, we hope our D A’s will also obey their oaths to the U S Constitution.

*  Per VCDL: Leslie Fleet (Appomattox), Matthew Bass (Clarke), John Lumpkins Jr. (Goochland), Phillip Blevins (Smyth), Dayna Bobbitt (Patrick), Rob Cerullo (Powhatan), Justin Griffith (Pulaski), Kyle Kilgore (Scott), Ryan Mehaffey (Spotsylvania), and John Bell (Warren).

Sex Change in the Revolutionary War?  by Tom Reynolds

Women weren’t permitted to serve in the military during the  Revolutionary War.  At least not openly. 

Deborah Sampson from Uxbridge, Massachusetts disguised herself as a man and fought under the alias of Robert Shurtliff, the name of her deceased brother.

She served in the light infantry company of the Fourth Massachusetts Regiment.  Deborah mustered into service in the spring of 1782 and saw action in Westchester County, New York, where she was wounded in her thigh and forehead. Not wanting her identity to be revealed during medical care she permitted physicians to treat her head wound and then slipped out of the field hospital unnoticed, where she extracted one of the bullets from her thigh with a penknife and sewing needle.  (Rambo would be proud) The other bullet was lodged too deep and could not be removed, so her leg never fully healed.

After serving for a year and a half, in 1783, she fell ill while in Philadelphia. She was taken to a hospital, where a high fever caused her to lose consciousness, ultimately leading to the discovery of her true identity.

After the Treaty of Paris, she was given an honorable discharge from the army by Henry Knox. Like other veterans of the Continental Army, she was continually petitioning the state and federal government for her service pension.

She later married and had three children settling down in Sharon, Massachusetts. To help make ends meet she often gave public lectures about her wartime service. By the time she died in 1827, she was collecting minimal pensions for her service from Massachusetts and the federal government. In her memory a statue stands today outside the public library, in Sharon, honoring her Revolutionary War service and sacrifices.

Not really transgender, but she was one tough cookie!  Can you imagine removing a bullet with a pen knife and a sewing needle; that had to hurt.

Mary Ludwig Hays, better known as Molly Pitcher earned fame at the Battle of Monmouth, in 1778.  Hays first brought soldiers water from a local well to quench their thirst on an extremely hot and humid day and then replaced her wounded husband at his artillery piece, firing at the oncoming British.

Margaret Corbin was severely wounded during the British assault on Fort Washington in November 1776 and left for dead alongside her husband, also an artilleryman, until she was attended by a physician. She lived, though her wounds left her permanently disabled. She was the first American female to receive a soldier’s lifetime pension after the war.

Women are the fastest growing demographic among modern day gun owners.  But obviously from above, they have a history of patriotism and understand the need to “keep and bear arms.”

Do You Vote?  Do You Carry?  by Tom Reynolds

John Lott’s Crime Prevention Research Center sponsored a survey of 1,000 voters to determine how many voters carry concealed handguns.* 

Of likely voters, 29.8% carry a permitted concealed handgun at least occasionally; 6.3% say they carry all the time and 6.9% say they carry most of the time and 16.6% say they carry occasionally or rarely.

It’s even higher in Constitutional Carry states, where a permit is not required; 34% report carrying concealed.

Blacks account for 11.0% of likely voters, but they represent 15.9% of those who carry all or most of the time.

Hispanics accounting for 11.0% of likely voters, but make up 18.8% of those who carry all or most of the time.

Whites make up 72.0% of likely voters but make up 62.6% of those who carry all or most of the time.

Asians account for 4.0% of likely voters but make up 2.0% of those who carry all or most of the time.

And here is the most surprising statistic: “…voters who identify as “very liberal” report carrying all or most of the time at the highest rate of any ideological group…”  Very conservative is the second-highest group.  (Emphasis added.) 

Perhaps, the rank-and-file ‘very liberals’ aren’t as anti-gun as is their leadership?  Which makes sense since the leadership primarily wants people disarmed so no one can effectively challenge their leadership, while the rank-and-file aren’t in leadership positions so they do not need that concern.

Awhile back, I wrote an email where I wondered how many people might be legally carrying concealed in Wal Mart, since there are always a lot of people there when I shop.  Lott gives some insight on this.

Assuming that 6.3% carry all the time and 6.9% carry most of the time, what is the probability that in a group of adults (voters and non-voters) that one person is legally carrying concealed?

Group of 10  54.5%

Group of 20  79.3%

Group of 50  98.0%

Wal Mart should post this last statistic on their doors to discourage any would-be terrorists.  Something like:

There is a 98% chance that someone inside is carrying a gun among the first 50 people in the store.  And there are almost always at least 100.  So, if you are a terrorist, ask yourself: do you feel lucky? 

* UPDATED: New Survey on the Rate that People Carry Concealed Handguns: Percent of Americans Carrying Increased from 24.3% in December 2024 to 29.8% in May 2026 - Crime Prevention Research Center

May 2026 SCOPE Activities

    May 2026 was a very busy month, but before we discuss those activities, I want to warn New York gun owners about a new development in the Second Amendment genre.  

    Normalcy bias is a psychological phenomenon where people believe that things will continue as they always have.  It leads people to underestimate the likelihood of disasters or significant changes.  This bias can result in inadequate preparation for emergencies or crises.  Normalcy bias can hinder effective response and recovery during significant events. 

    When discussing important constitutional issues with gun owners, it is common to hear comments such as, “That will never happen here,” or “I don’t own that type of rifle, so it doesn’t affect me.” Unfortunately, this mindset overlooks how restrictions imposed on one category of firearms can eventually expand to affect others.

    In what many gun owners view as an ongoing effort to mirror California’s restrictive firearm policies; New York residents are now finding that developments in other states can have implications beyond their own borders. One state that deserves close attention is Oregon.

    Oregon Initiative Petition 28, commonly referred to as the PEACE Act, would eliminate Oregon’s legal exemptions for activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, livestock farming, and pest control. Supporters of the measure have gathered enough signatures to place it on the November ballot.

Opponents argue that, if approved, the initiative would effectively prohibit hunting and fishing in Oregon by removing longstanding legal protections for those activities. As a result, gun owners, hunters, and anglers in New York should pay close attention to this proposal and remain vigilant against similar efforts that could emerge in their own state.

New York State Republican Women’s Conference – May 3-4 2026

    Bo Rabarski, Steve Leonard, and I attended the New York State Republican Women’s Conference on May 4, 2026, in Albany, New York. The event was a full-day conference featuring a number of distinguished speakers and candidates.

    Among the featured speakers were Saritha Komatireddy, a candidate for New York State Attorney General challenging Letitia James, and Joseph Hernandez, a candidate for New York State Comptroller running against Tom DiNapoli. Both candidates delivered informative presentations outlining their visions and priorities for New York State.

Following the conference, both Saritha Komatireddy and Joseph Hernandez were invited to speak at the 2026 SCOPE Banquet.

    The day’s events concluded with a dinner attended by approximately 350 guests. The featured speakers were Bruce Blakeman, a candidate for Governor of New York, and Lara Logan, an award-winning independent journalist.

    Both speakers delivered engaging remarks, but Lara Logan particularly energized the audience with a powerful speech emphasizing the importance of civic engagement and voter participation in the upcoming November election. Her message resonated strongly with attendees and provided a memorable conclusion to the conference.

Met with the New York State Assembly Leader Mr. Ed Ra – May 13, 2026

    On May 13, 2026, Jack Prendergast, Bo Rabarski, Jim Krywalski, Tom Reynolds, Dave Volt (a SCOPE member), and I met with Assembly Minority Leader Ed Ra and his staff in Albany, New York. The purpose of the meeting was to brief Mr. Ra and his team on SCOPE’s Top Ten Most Egregious Firearms Bills currently before the New York State Legislature.

    The timing of the briefing was particularly important. The period between the completion of the state budget process and the end of the legislative session on June 30 is often the most active and potentially concerning time for firearms legislation. Historically, this is when the Legislature has advanced gun control measures, sometimes with little notice and during late-night sessions.

    Several valuable outcomes emerged from the discussion. Mr. Ra committed to notifying SCOPE when any of the bills on SCOPE’s Top Ten list were scheduled for a vote. He also provided recommendations on Assembly members with whom SCOPE should engage regarding firearms-related legislation.

    The meeting was productive, informative, and lasted approximately one hour. It reinforced the importance of SCOPE maintaining a regular presence in Albany. An annual visit to brief both Senate and Assembly leadership on the most significant firearms legislation remains an essential part of SCOPE’s legislative outreach efforts.

SCOPE Board of Directors Meeting – May 14, 2026

    A SCOPE Board of Directors meeting was held on May 14, 2026, with all but three board members in attendance. Under normal circumstances, the Board meets quarterly in January, April, July, and October. However, in light of SCOPE’s Get Out the Vote Initiative (GOTVI), the Board voted to increase the frequency of its meetings and will convene monthly through the November election.

    The decision reflects the importance of maintaining close oversight and coordination of GOTVI activities during the election cycle, ensuring the organization remains focused on its voter engagement and outreach efforts.

    Two significant topics were discussed during the meeting.

    First, the Board approved an update to SCOPE’s mission statement. The new mission statement reads:

    "The mission of S.C.O.P.E., Inc. is to restore and protect the Second Amendment rights of New Yorkers."

    In support of this mission, the Board also adopted three core organizational pillars:

1) Educating policymakers and law-abiding citizens on the meaning, value, and importance of the Second Amendment.

2) Collaborating with like-minded organizations to oppose and prevent laws that infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms.

3) Mobilizing voters to elect leaders who will steadfastly defend the Second Amendment and uphold constitutional rights.

    The second major topic was a briefing on SCOPE’s Get Out the Vote Initiative (GOTVI) for the upcoming gubernatorial election. Steve Leonard, SCOPE’s newly appointed Marketing and Communications Director, provided a detailed overview of the campaign strategy. The initiative includes a comprehensive social media outreach effort, as well as the development and distribution of promotional materials to county chapters. These materials will be shared with local gun clubs, Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), sportsmen’s federations, conservation councils, and other allied organizations throughout the state to encourage voter participation and engagement.

Attended Chapter Meetings – May 18 and 19, 2026

    Jefferson/Lewis Chapter of SCOPE: I attended the Jefferson/Lewis County Chapter of SCOPE meeting on May 18 at the Watertown Sportsmen’s Club. Several important topics were discussed, including SCOPE’s Get Out the Vote Initiative (GOTVI) and efforts to increase voter participation among gun owners in the upcoming November election. Members also reviewed the responsibilities of individual county chapters in supporting the initiative.

    Additional discussion focused on SCOPE’s priorities and objectives for 2026–2027, as well as planning for the organization’s presence at Brownville Days, scheduled for May 29–31. Meeting participants reviewed logistical details and volunteer responsibilities for staffing and operating the SCOPE information/fund raising table during the event.

    The Chautauqua County Chapter of SCOPE held its monthly meeting on May 19, 2026. Tom Reynolds and I attended the meeting, which was led by Chapter Coordinator Will Conta.

    A number of candidates seeking elected office addressed the membership and outlined their qualifications, priorities, and reasons they believed they deserved the chapter’s support in the upcoming election.

    At the conclusion of the candidate presentations, I provided an update on SCOPE’s Get Out the Vote Initiative (GOTVI) and discussed the organization’s priorities and objectives for 2026–2027. The presentation emphasized the importance of voter engagement among Second Amendment supporters and highlighted SCOPE’s strategic efforts to protect and advance the rights of New York gun owners. 

Meeting with the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) President Tom King – Thursday May 28, 2026

    On May 28, 2026, Jack Prendergast and I traveled to Waterloo, New York, to meet with Tom King for an initial planning session. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss and coordinate efforts aimed at increasing voter participation among gun owners in the upcoming November election.

    The meeting was productive and lasted approximately two hours. Participants exchanged ideas, reviewed potential strategies, and identified the GOTVI as an area of collaboration. As a result of the discussion, a follow-up meeting was scheduled for June to further develop and refine the initiative.

Brownville Field Days – 29-31 May, 2026

    Brownville Field Days is a three-day festival with carnival rides, vendors, a car show, and crafts.  The Jefferson/Lewis County Chapter of SCOPE set up an informational table distributing SCOPE’s Top Ten Most Egregious Firearms Legislation list, U.S. Constitutions, and voting registration forms.  Additionally, funds were raised with a gun raffle.  Bruce Kingsley’s SWAMP BUGGY was outfitted with U.S. flags and SCOPE banners and was a hit in the Brownville Field Days parade.  SCOPE members walked alongside the SWAMP BUGGY handing out small American flags to the kids.  It was a good three-day event beginning the fund-raising season for the chapter. 

Conclusion

    Summer is traditionally a busy time for SCOPE chapters, as it marks the height of the fundraising season. This year, however, chapter activities will be even more demanding due to the implementation of SCOPE’s Get Out the Vote (GOTV) Initiative.

    As the details of the GOTV Initiative continue to take shape, county chapters should begin developing plans for distributing GOTV materials to local gun clubs, Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), sportsmen’s organizations, and conservation councils. Our objective is clear: to encourage gun owners who do not regularly participate in elections to vote in this year’s gubernatorial election. Expanding voter participation among Second Amendment supporters will be critical to the success of our efforts.

    Thank you for everything you do to support and defend the Second Amendment. During my visits to chapters across the state, I consistently encourage each member to recruit one new member each year. I ask that you continue striving toward that goal. Growing our membership strengthens our voice, expands our influence, and enhances our ability to protect the rights we all value.

    Thank you for your continued dedication and support.   

John Elwood
SCOPE President

Spencer Pratt  by Tom Reynolds

Spencer Pratt’s is a Republican campaigning to be the Mayor of Los Angeles.

In an interview with CNN, Elex Michaelson asked Pratt; “Why are you a Republican?”

Pratt replied, “Well, you want to break some news here?”.

“Sure.”

Pratt answered; “…Everyone’s gonna freak out. When I was a hated reality star, I got so many death threats. I had so much security and police, and what did they tell me to do? Get a gun. This is real, I know people don’t like guns, but LA was dangerous if you’re hated. So, I got a gun. My wife got a gun. And then we needed CCWs. The only people that supported a CCW was the Republican.”

He added; “That was what I aligned with my safety, my personal safety, my family’s safety.  I know people don’t like guns, but when people are threatening your life and your own security is telling you, you need to have home protection, trained too.”

I have no idea who Pratt is or what his reality show was but he got it right on self-defense.

And speaking of the Los Angeles Mayor…

The current L A Mayor, Karen Bass, is running for re-election.  In an interview with the same Elex Michaelson, Bass was asked, “So, when you talked to Jake Tapper in 2023, you said that your goal was to end street homelessness in LA by 2026. It’s now 2026 and we haven’t ended it. How are you so off?”

Bass answered; “We haven’t ended it. Basically, when I said that, it was at the beginning of my term. I am very committed to achieving that goal. I didn’t anticipate some of the bureaucratic barriers that I would experience, but I am prepared to take those on now.”

The Bureaucracy is to blame!

Perhaps, Bass can identify with what Donald Trump faced with the Swamp when he took over as President and why he ‘cleaned house’ (especially in the ATF.)

Oh yeah, Bass’ handling of the wildfires and subsequent rebuilding has not been described as terrific, either.  And I believe bureaucracy is being blamed for that, too.

Question: which political party is pro bureaucracy and believes that government, through bureaucracies, can make better personal decisions than the citizens themselves?  Hint:  Karen Bass belongs to it.

The youngest are the next victims of gun control!  by Bohdan Rabarsky

The days of a youngster finding a Daisy BB gun under the Christmas tree may soon be fading if Democrat law makers in Albany have their way. Senator Rachel May sponsored Senate bill S9215 and Assemblywoman Gabriella Romero sponsored Assembly bill A10701, both of which would prohibit anyone under 18 years of age from purchasing what they refer to as “imitation weapons;” a BB gun, air rifle, pellet gun. The barrels would have to be brightly colored and plugged so they wouldn’t be able to fire a projectile.

The manufacturer of the Daisy BB gun was established in 1882 as the Plymouth Iron Windmill Company.  In 1888, it started building BB caliber air rifles.  Since its introduction in the spring of 1940, their Red Ryder BB Gun has been featured in TV shows and movies.  After over 140 unmolested years, the BB gun is in danger.

To this day, youngsters have been brought up asking for BB guns and Dads have been teaching their children how to use them, educate them on their safety and teaching them marksmanship while shooting at tin cans.

Until now, the anti-gun left has not had any luck at banning guns in New York State by amending, removing or circumventing the 2nd Amendment.  But, none of the guns listed in these bills are covered by the 2nd Amendment as the left is not coming for the guns, they’re aiming at the underlying gun culture. The left’s best alternative to radical gun control is to bring up a generation of youth that has no personal and emotional connection to firearms.  A generation that did not have a BB gun passed down from their father or have a family tradition of shooting BBs in their backyard.

And even scarier to the left is that girls are breaking the male stereotype and entering the gun culture, creating even more potential defenders of the 2nd Amendment.             

The left hopes that this new generation will vote away their rights without a fight because they have no connection to that backyard firearm and no connection to the 2nd Amendment.

The BB gun isn’t just a toy to amuse children, it’s the gateway to start a young child’s love of shooting. It’s where the 2nd Amendment Right gets its foundation, becomes personal, and teaches a young person how to defend that right.  Without that foundation, they will be the first generation that’ll never know SCOPE (Shooters Committee on Political Education), the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America or the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association.

Let the legislators in Albany know how much you oppose S9215 and A10701.

NYS Assembly

NYS Senate

Drawings Are Dangerous and Unusual Arms?  by Tom Reynolds

Scope wrote about a proposed NY State law to ban BB guns.*  David Codrea wrote in Ammoland about another issue which is even dumber; the liberal left that has taken over the public-school systems have declared war on gun images.  Not just real guns but any image of a gun sends shivers down whatever spines the liberal left still have left.  Here are some examples, which Codrea highlights, that would be amusing if not so stupid:  

 A fourth-grade boy, playing with LEGOs, faced suspension over the two-inch toy gun carried by a policeman LEGO figure; a toy gun carried by a doll.  Doubling down on stupidity, Margie Feinberg, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education said that there is a no-tolerance policy for toy guns in schools.

A high school senior in Connecticut was suspended and arrested after posting a photo of an airsoft gun** on Snapchat.

In Ohio, a middle school student received a 10-day suspension for “liking” a photo of an airsoft gun on Instagram.

A 16-year-old student in Alabama was expelled from school after she was caught with a toy water gun.

A 12-year-old autistic boy was arrested last week for pointing an imaginary rifle at his art teacher.

In the notorious Pop Tart gun case, a seven-year-old boy in Maryland bit a pastry in the shape of a gun - and had his suspension upheld by a judge.

A three-year-old deaf boy in Nebraska, named Hunter, was forbidden to use sign language for his name because the ASL sign for Hunter slightly resembled the ASL sign for a gun.  It also resembled a finger gun that children might make during a game of cops and robbers.

If you think banning drawings of guns is over-the-edge, in some cases schools are only reflecting the idiocy of progressive parents.  Growing Up in Santa Cruz (California) shows what “progressive” mothers have to say:

Gina Grajewski, a Santa Cruz parent, agrees that no guns should be drawn in the classroom under any circumstance. “No guns at school. No drawings. Period. No gun play. Period. No guns. Period.”

Santa Cruz parent Kathy Vega, also wants no gun pictures in schools. “I agree with the rules of not drawing guns or weapons at school…If anything, we should try to educate our children not to touch guns in hopes that they will make that decision if they happen to be in a situation where they have access to one.”  (only predators would have the same qualms about guns…)

Of course, kids make decisions based on what is new, exciting and enticing; like guns with which they have no experience.  The unintended consequence of this ‘mandated ignorance’ will be that kids will have no clue about basic rules of gun safety. If children encounter an unattended firearm, tragedy will be the likely result.

One-way kids learn is by observation and kids have learned about guns in movies and on TV.  For instance, it’s easy to disarm a person pointing a gun at you and most shots only end up as “flesh wounds,” which hardly impact the victim. (Sarcasm intended.)

And the liberal lunacy is not confined to guns.  In Wisconsin, a 7 year-old boy was arrested for sexual harassment because he used the wrong pronoun!

* S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education - They’re Coming After Your (BB) Gun by Tom Reynolds

** Air soft guns look like real guns but fire plastic pellets or bb’s by compressed gas or air.

Less Pay to Play  by Tom Reynolds

SCOPE has often written about big government taking, at both the state and federal level, the position about passing unconstitutional laws: If you don’t like it, sue me - if you can afford thousands of dollars to spend on legal costs.

To counter this, in a boost for 2nd Amendment defenders, Trump’s DOJ’ started a 2nd Amendment Section of the Civil Rights Division; a gun rights-focused section.  One of its focuses will be fighting a variety of state and local courts on gun issues, particularly difficulties around concealed carry permits.  The federal government can now finance law suits that private citizens previously had to finance.*

The idea of, if you don’t like it, sue me, just took another body blow.

Private citizen Donald Trump had filed litigation against the federal government, seeking compensation for various wrongs (allegedly) committed against him, mostly during the Biden presidency.  There is an announced tentative settlement in the case.  Trump is reportedly dropping his $10 billion lawsuit against the I R S in exchange for the creation of a $1.7 billion fund to compensate those who claim they were wrongfully targeted by the Biden administration.  The settlement is expected to be agreed upon soon and the final terms will not be set until they are officially announced. 

Perhaps FFL’s and other 2A people that were victimized by Biden (or whoever was in charge in the White House) can take advantage of this to stay in the fight for 2A rights.          

As you might expect about all things Donald Trump, the New York Times is having a “cow.”  They call it an “unusual plan” and “a political slush fund.”

Apparently, the NY Times is in such dire financial straits that its editors cannot afford a dictionary.  Unusual is defined as: uncommon; extraordinary; abnormal; rare.

One example, of many, the NY Times missed.  After the 2008/09 recession, the Obama administration brought a series of cases blaming the recession on big banks. All the banks settled, many for billions of dollars.  In one settlement, the Bank of America allocated $7 billion to slush funds doled out to delinquent debtors and to left-wing advocacy groups friendly to the administration and Democrat Party.

Sounds like this sort of thing is common, ordinary, usual and not rare.  As the Manhattan Contrarian wrote: The only thing unusual is the use of this strategy by a Republican President. It took him a while, but it looks like he finally figured out that two can play this game.

“Two can play this game” or as is often said, whatever the Democrat Party is accusing you of doing, they are already doing themselves.

The NY Times could be classified as a Democrat propaganda arm.  (I love using “arm” in connection with the NY Times; does the 2nd Amendment cover their work for the Democrat Party?)

It’s too bad that tax dollars have to be used to defend taxpayers against the government.  But this case is not - as in the Obama example – being used to push a government policy but, instead, to defend against a government policy. 

* S.C.O.P.E. Shooters Committee On Political Education - DOJ’s 2nd Amendment Section

You be the Jury  by Tom Reynolds

On TV, the crime story usually ends with no doubt as to who committed the crime.  In real life, it’s circumstantial evidence that convicts a criminal. 

I applied that same theory to testing the impact that gun owners might have on gubernatorial elections in New York State.  I used the last 3 NYS Governor’s elections to test if the pro-gun Republican could have won if gun owners turned out to vote under various scenarios.  There are knowns and there are unknowns so we fill the gaps with circumstantial evidence.  I don’t want to bury you in statistics so I’ll explain as simply as possible.

We know Democrat governor candidates were anti-gun and the Republican governor candidates were pro-gun. 

We know what New York State’s population was and how many people were at least 18 years old and, thus, potentially eligible to vote.

We know how many people were registered active voters in NYS.

We know how many votes were cast in the last three governor’s elections and what percentage of active registered voters actually voted.

We know how many votes the Republican candidate got and by how much they lost the election.

If we mix knowns and unknowns together in possible scenarios, we can get a better idea of whether gun owners voting makes a difference.    

These are the estimates of unknowns that I used: 

Estimates of NYS gun owners range between 5 million to 3 million and, by law, they must be 18 or older, so they could potentially vote.  I ran 5 scenarios using between 5 million and 3 million in each of the three elections.

67% of those eligible to vote in NYS are active registered voters. All scenarios projected what would have happened if 67% of the gun owners who are eligible to vote would be registered to vote.*

I ran five scenarios where the Republican got between 60% and 80% of the gun owners votes in each election. **

I ran five scenarios with gun owners making up from 50% to 30% of the Republican candidate’s actual votes in each election.***

I ran five voter participation scenarios where between 50% and 30% of gun owners who are registered to vote actually voted.**** 

What were the results when the above are mixed together?  Of 25 possible scenarios in each election:

In 2022, the pro Republican won 20 times and came close 1 other time.

In 2018, The Republican won 2 times and came close 2 other times.

In 2014, the Republican won 21 times and came close 2 other times.

There’s an 80% chance that the Republican, pro-gun candidate would have won two of the last three elections - if gun owners had turned out to vote.

*We know that about 67% of those eligible to vote in NYS are active registered voters.  There are 5 million to 3 million gun owners and if 67% of them registered to vote that would be 3.35 million to 2 million voters.  

** I assumed that gun owners are more likely to vote Republican – for reasons beyond just gun ownership - but no one knows what percentage of the gun owners’ votes actually go to Republicans. Less than 60% won’t make a difference and more than 80% seems too high.

*** We know how many votes the Republican candidate got and it doesn’t seem possible that more than half of them were from gun owners. 

**** The voter participation rates in the last 4 governor’s elections were 49% (2022) 53% (2018) 36% (2014) 44% (2010).  I once saw a study that said between 50% and 30% of hunters vote. 

When is a right not a right?  by Ron Havlen

I am taking the online NYS driver’s courses offered to help reduce car insurance expenses. During this course, I’ve come upon a section about assuming an inherent right to drive. This section really struck me.

I’m going to be careful to avoid using the direct wording in this section to avoid any copyright infringements. 

This section deals with people who believe they have an inherent right to drive.  It states that if driving were a right, people couldn’t be required to show they have the skill, ability and knowledge to operate a car safely. If driving were a right, people couldn’t be required to take any tests or show skill levels before getting a license to drive. If driving were a right, anyone could drive a car, regardless of skill.

NYS corrects that assumption and goes on to say that driving in NYS is a privilege, not a right. And because it’s a privilege, drivers are subject to a number of penalties including the loss of driving privileges. And that licenses are not available just because you reach a certain age; it is an earned privilege.

Hmm. “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

It surely seems to me that, according to that sentence in the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, that owning and using arms is a recognized right of ‘we the people.’

New York is certainly applying the term of privilege to firearms ownership, and trampling all over the rights of the people.

Do we agree that firearms owners should get training and practice in using their arms? Of course. But does that mean that New York State should mandate such training to its own self-serving standards?  I answer strongly no to the current and proposed requirements because these requirements are designed not for safety and skill, but rather to create barriers - both physical and financial - to ‘we the people’ being able to own their own arms.

Privileges give the state power while rights give the citizens power.  New York State surely understands the difference between a right and a privilege when it gives the state more power, as in issuing drivers’ licenses.  As to guns, New York State wouldn’t recognize the difference between a right and a privilege if it was smacked in the face. 

The question is, do we the people recognize that difference and are we willing to do something in defense of that right?