HR1808  by Tom Reynolds

Many gun owners don’t vote.  We have to change that and Democrats are trying to help us. 

A recent vote in Congress emphasizes the need to vote in order to elect legislators who will protect our 2^nd Amendment rights. The House of Representatives narrowly passed a sweeping Modern Sporting Rifle ban in a last-minute vote before the chamber left for its August recess.  The House passed  HR1808, which aims to regulate the Modern Sporting Rifle by banning the sale, manufacture, or transfer of a wide range of rifles commonly used by Americans.

Why does every vote count?

The vote was 217 to 213.  Two Republicans, Chris Jacobs and Brian Fitzpatrick voted for the ban.  (Jacobs recently dropped out of his reelection campaign in the 23^rd Congressional District due to blowback from SCOPE and other 2A defense organizations when he said he supported the ban.)  Had those two voted against the ban, there would have been a tie and since there is no tie breaking vote in the House, it would not have passed.

The bill, H.R. 1808, was sponsored by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), who believes stabilizing braces turn AR-pistols into an “automatic weapon.”

In a statement, President Biden applauded the decision.

If Republicans hold-the-line, the bill is unlikely to become law since it should NOT pass the Senate; it would need the support of 10 Republicans to pass. 

In addition, the Supreme Court established a “common use” test in which firearms are protected under the Second Amendment if they are commonly used for lawful self-defense. A bill such as HR1808, which targets commonly used firearms, would be unlikely to be found constitutional, even if it were passed into law.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) admitted during the hearing that the purpose of HR 1808 is to ban firearms in common use.  He should know about the Supreme Court’s “common use” principle, but the gun grabbing left does not care about things like the U.S. Constitution, as it gets in their way.     

The new federal Modern Sporting Rifle ban would ban nearly all ARs, AKs, AR pistols (and even many handguns and shotguns), making it illegal for a person to import, sell, manufacture, or transfer the following:

All semi-automatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of the following features:

a pistol grip;

a forward grip;

a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock;

a grenade launcher; 

barrel shroud;

a threaded barrel.

All semi-automatic rifles that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 15 rounds.

Bump stocks and any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle but not convert the rifle into a machinegun under NFA definitions.

All semi-automatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of the following features:

a threaded barrel;

a second pistol grip;

a barrel shroud;

a capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip;

a semi-automatic version of any automatic firearm.

All semi-automatic pistols that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 15 rounds.

All semi-automatic shotguns that have at least one of the following:

a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock;

a pistol grip;

a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds;

the ability to accept a detachable magazine;

a forward grip;

a grenade launcher;

or a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

This bill has a "grandfather" clause, allowing for the sale, transfer, or possession of restricted weapons and magazines lawfully possessed before the bill's passage.

The new bill is even more draconian than the original 1994 ban.  The Washington Post reported that Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed the 1994 ban “saved lives.” 

Perhaps, Pelosi should “trust the science” and read the Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) report…

The Washington Times quoted University of Pennsylvania professor Christopher Koper, author of that NIJ report: “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence…The ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.”  In other words, the ban could not be credited with any reduction in crime.

Concerning the 1994 ban, GQ magazine reported in 2016: “After every high-profile shooting, Democrats like Hillary Clinton call for a ban on ‘assault weapons’ the military-style rifles that have been dubbed the weapon of choice for mass shooters. There’s a problem with this popular liberal idea: banning these guns would not do much to save American lives. Only 3.6 percent of America’s gun murders are committed with any kind of rifle, according to FBI data. The majority of gun murders are committed with handguns.”

GQ added, “The Democrat staffers who wrote the now-expired 1994 federal assault weapon ban knew it was a largely symbolic policy.”

New York’s Senators will, undoubtably, vote for the bill.  But gun owners should make their displeasure known to them, especially to Chuck Schumer who is up for reelection this November.

The bill specifically lists hundreds of banned firearms.  Here is the link to read it: Text - H.R.1808 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Assault Weapons Ban of 2022 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

From NYS Web Site: Apply for a Firearms License

Link: _{Apply for a Firearms License (ny.gov)}

To be eligible to have a firearms license you:

• Must be a New York State resident
• Must be 21 years old
• Have no prior felony or serious offense convictions
• Be of good moral character
• Have a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm
• Be ready to open the business for which the license is being applied

To complete the State of New York Pistol/Revolver License Application (PPB3), you will need to provide:

• Personal information such as your:
• • Full Name
  • Date of Birth
  • Social Security Number
  • Address
  • Physical Description
  • Criminal History
  • Mental Health History
  • Character References
• You will also need to provide a form of identification

What was the United States Supreme Court’s ruling about New York State’s “concealed carry” law?

• On June 23, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling struck down a more than 100 year old law that required an individual to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to be able to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm.
• According to the ruling, New York State’s existing law has been deemed unconstitutional because it gives too much discretion to the State and its licensing officers in determining “proper cause.”

So, is New York’s law overturned? Can I carry a concealed weapon without a permit?

• Nothing in the Supreme Court decision allows anyone to immediately legally carry a concealed firearm in New York State without obtaining the currently-required permits or licenses.  
• This also means you cannot legally carry a concealed firearm outside of your home in New York State if you only have a license to possess a gun in your home.  

What does this ruling mean for license or permit application processes?

• As of June 23, the application process to obtain a license or permit to carry a firearm in New York State is unchanged.
• Though it is ultimately State law that dictates how firearm licenses are issued, the State has designated the application processes to counties (or in some cases, cities).
• Those who want to change their permit status to get an “unrestricted conceal carry” permit must file an application with their designated local licensing authority.
• For example, in New York City, this would be the NYPD.

 What happens next?

• The U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the State of New York will be able to continue to require licenses for concealed firearms, so long as the license requirements clearly lay out who can carry, where they can (and cannot) carry, and the types of firearms residents might have access to.  The State can also restrict the carrying of firearms in sensitive locations and otherwise restrict the manner of carrying firearms.

  What actions is New York State taking in response to this ruling?

• It is Governor Hochul’s top priority to ensure that New Yorkers are safe and kept out of danger.
• Governor Hochul’s Administration is working closely with the State legislature, county and local leaders, as well as legal experts, to ensure that the State enacts laws and create rules that conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision while also ensuring that the ability to access or use firearms is restricted and carefully regulated.

How does New York State’s firearm licensing system currently work? What is likely to change?  

•  A firearm license is a State-regulated license, and nothing in the Bruen ruling suggests that the State does not have the authority to issue licenses or determine licensing requirements.
• In New York State, licenses are often issued by county licensing entities. It is possible that this process could change moving forward.
• Currently, an applicant must decide what type of license they would like to apply for.
• The most common types of firearm licenses are: (a) Carry concealed (b) Possess on Premises and (c) Possess/Carry During Employment. There is a possibility that these categories might change as a result of the Bruen ruling.
• At this time, the cost to obtain different licenses varies by county (or in some cases, city), as does the time it takes to obtain a license. At this time, the average processing time for license applications is six (6) months.
• Prior to June 23, 2022, in order to be eligible to have a firearms license, an individual in New York State must have demonstrated that they are:
• • A New York State resident;
  • at least 21 years old;
  • have no prior felony or serious offense convictions;
  • be of “good moral character,”; and
  • have a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm.

• As of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling, only the proper cause requirement to conceal carry is no longer applicable and ordinary citizens are deemed to have a self-defense basis for applying for a concealed carry permit. 

Gun Owners Own Trucks, Too

Many SCOPE members own trucks and most of us buy a truck for practical reasons, like towing and hauling.  So, I thought many of you would be interested in an article about electric trucks that Elizabeth Puckett wrote in Motorius on July 24^th, in which she explored an all-electric trucks’ usefulness for doing “truck things”.

YouTube channel “The Fast Lane Truck” set up a test. They hitched an empty car carrier to a new GMC Sierra Denali Ultimate Edition and another to a Ford F-150 all-electric Lightning to see how they handled towing a load over long distances.

The all-electric Ford truck started with an estimated range of 282 miles by the onboard computer.  When the trailer specs were added, 282 became 160 estimated miles.  A charging station 147 miles away was on the adjusted plan but battery depletion forced a diversion to a charging station at 102 miles.  But…the Lightning couldn’t make it…so the driver headed back to a nearer charging station, arriving with 9 percent charge left.

With the trailer specs included and its 24-gallon tank, the Sierra’s computer estimated 264 miles. The GMC did fine and when the Lightning turned around, the Sierra went back to the starting point - without stopping to refuel.

Another unadvertised issue with all-electric trucks: most public chargers are set up in a regular parking stall. Charging one with a trailer hitched is a problem.  The Ford Lightning had to park the truck and trailer across multiple charging station spots to plug in, making those in line behind it very unhappy.  Luckily, true believers in green energy would make any sacrifice for the Holy Grail of green energy, so I’m sure the air was not blue at the charging station.

Speaking of trillion dollar hiccups in our green energy future:

Electric vehicles require twice as much copper as gas vehicles.  Solar and off shore wind need two times and five times more copper, per megawatt of installed capacity, than power generated using natural gas or coal.  (And green energy rarely works at capacity.)  Then there is the problem of rewiring homes, which requires…more copper wire.  That electrical transmission used to be called infrastructure before social programs became infrastructure.

So, what’s the problem?

CNBC - of all people – in a report by Pippa Stevens on July 16^th, said that a study done by S&P Global forecasts that copper demand will nearly double to 50 million metric tons by 2035. Unfortunately, S&P Global also forecasts that if production continues largely as is, there will be an annual supply shortfall of almost 10 million metric tons in 2035. A more optimistic scenario in which mines increase utilization and ramp up recycling, the copper market will still be in a deficit for most of the 2030s.  When demand exceeds supply, you may be familiar with current result: inflation.    

2022 to 2035 is 13 years.  A new copper mine takes 16 years, on average, to get off the ground, according to the International Energy Agency.  Oops.

While the ever-woke, green energy driven Biden administration has been doing everything it can to increase illegal immigration and increase inflation, China has been focusing on increasing its supply chain of copper.  The U.S.A….not so much.   Per S&P Global, domestic copper production “has gone down by almost half in the last quarter century”.  Oops, again.

In a study by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, 62% of Biden’s top 68 political appointees and staffers “who deal with economic policy, regulation, commerce, energy and finance have virtually no business experience.”  Only one out of eight Biden officials has what the authors deem “extensive business experience”.

But don’t worry, Joe Biden has Pete Buttigieg to go to for advice on copper supply chain problems.  Oops, Oops, Oops!

E P A  by Tom Reynolds

If one is a  Progressive, the Constitution is an impediment.  It must be neutered or ways must be found to evade the “problem” of Constitutional limitations on government power. 

Progressives want all power in the federal government, superseding any state power.  It’s easier to gain and keep control of one body (federal power) than fifty separate bodies of power.  This, of course, is exactly the opposite of the founding father’s intentions.

The Second Amendment forbids the government from infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The Fourteenth Amendment made it clear that the State governments were also forbidden.  New York and other progressive states ignored this limitation on their power, for years, and the courts tended to agree with them until the recent Supreme Court decision.

In the Progressive philosophy, limitations on government power are evil. They prevent the government (which is, of course, Progressives) from doing all the things Progressive theorists think need to be forced upon the poor, ill-educated, stupid, and superstitious common people – for their own good.  It’s the precise opposite of the founder’s thinking, Progressives believe common people cannot be trusted with any power in government, as that will only dilute Progressives’ power.

When Progressives can’t achieve power through the legislature or the courts, they resort to bureaucratic rulemaking – otherwise known as the Swamp.  But the Supreme Court recently threw a significant roadblock into that.

In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) curtailed the EPA’s power.

This decision should have a broad impact on other federal agencies – including the BATFE – which want to regulate personal behavior that the agency’s progressives disagree with, and run our lives through bureaucratic rules and regulations.  (But that darn Constitution keeps getting in their way.)

SCOTUS said that Congress alone has the authority to pass laws representing the will of the people. Lawmaking that is delegated to unaccountable bureaucracies, unconstitutionally moves the lawmaking power from the Legislative Branch to the Executive branch. 

“Agencies have only those powers given to them by Congress, and ‘enabling legislation’ is generally not an ‘open book to which the agency [may] add pages and change the plot line…The agency instead must point to ‘clear congressional authorization’ for the power it claims…A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.”

Justices Gorsuch and Alito wrote in their concurring opinion that regulations enacted by the Executive Branch run the risk of being overturned by each successive administration.

“The framers believed that the power to make new laws regulating private conduct was a grave one that could, if not properly checked, pose a serious threat to individual liberty…In a world like that, agencies could churn out new laws more or less at whim. Intrusions on liberty would not be difficult and rare, but easy and profuse…Stability would be lost, with vast numbers of laws changing with every new presidential administration. Rather than embody a wide social consensus and input from minority voices, laws would more often bear the support only of the party currently in power. Powerful special interests, which are sometimes ‘uniquely’ able to influence the agendas of administrative agencies, would flourish while others would be left to ever-shifting winds. Finally, little would remain to stop agencies from moving into areas where state authority has traditionally predominated.”

Gorsuch and Alito tool a direct shot at former President Obama’s attempt to create a tyrannical state where the Executive Branch is supreme.

“When Congress seems slow to solve problems, it may be only natural that those in the Executive Branch might seek to take matters into their own hands…But the Constitution does not authorize agencies to use pen-and-phone regulations as substitutes for laws passed by the people’s representatives. In our Republic, ‘[i]t is the peculiar province of the legislature to prescribe general rules for the government of society.’”

Of course, the three progressive judges disagreed.  Justice Sotomayer once wrote that the people cannot always wait for Congress to act, in defense of Obama’s love of Executive Branch rule making with a “pen-and-phone”. 

Watch to see how BATFE’s new progressive director works to evade the Supreme Court’s decision.

Albany Emergencies and Corruption  by Tom Reynolds

Gov. Kathy Hochul’s emergency pandemic powers were renewed on July 14th through her own executive order, which extends the state disaster emergency through August 22nd, 2022.  This, despite COVID-19 cases and fatality levels dropping in a majority of the state.

One of the many benefits granted to the governor from her emergency powers is the ability to hand out taxpayer-backed contracts without having to go through the normal bidding process. That process, along with the contract review and approval by the state comptroller’s office, are important safeguards to protect against wasteful spending and corruption.  But, Hochul says it’s an emergency, so waste and corruption are no longer a concern.

Recently, Gov. Hochul used that lack of oversight to grant a no-bid contract to the family of Charlie Tebele, whose Digital Gadgets LLC has already pulled in $637 million selling at-home test kits. Also noteworthy is the Tebele’s family’s $300,000 donation to the governor’s election campaign*.

The governor is publicly going all-out to boost another donor, Vornado Realty head Steven Roth. He’s given nearly $70,000 to her campaign; his company is in line for $1.2 billion in tax breaks under her Penn Station redevelopment plan.**

The $850 million, taxpayer-funded deal to build a $1.4 billion stadium for the Buffalo Bills is a big win for the firm of Kathy Hochul’s husband.  Bill Hochul is senior vice president and general counsel for Delaware North, the major food concessionaire at the Buffalo Bills’ current Highmark Stadium.  Delaware North has operated concessions, premium dining and retail services at the NFL’s Buffalo Bills since 1992***.  So, the existing vendor, with a direct connection to the governor, will be bidding on operating the concessions at the taxpayer financed new stadium.  

From 1991 to 2016, Bill Hochul was an Assistant U.S. Attorney and then a U.S. Attorney.  After his wife became Lieutenant Governor, he resigned to become senior vice president, general counsel, and secretary to Delaware North.  Purely coincidence that when his wife moved into the NY executive offices he moved into the private sector where he and his wife could benefit from her connections?  His Wikipedia biography says he lectured frequently on corruption.  He should know!

Emergencies happen and when they do officials need to react quickly.  But this also sets up the government for abuse by those same officials, something our founders were very concerned about.  What geniuses gave the governor the power to unilaterally make herself an empress?  Any chance there will be an emergency session of the state legislature to rescind her powers?  Any chance Hell will freeze over?

Since his departure, we are finding out more and more about Andrew Cuomo’s use of his position to enrich himself and get reelected.  It appears that Kathy Hochul is intent on out Cuomoing Cuomo in just her two years in office.  Is she hurrying because she expects to only be in office for two years?   

*Albany Times-Union July 19, 2022

** New York Post July 20, 2022

*** Per Delaware North’s web site

Hochul’s Gun Control: Minorities and Women Hardest Hit  by Stephen M. Dallas

When the U.S. Supreme Court solidified individual gun rights in NYSRPA v Bruen, accidental Governor Kathy Hochul and fellow democrats responded with a law that purported to institute a “shall issue” standard for pistol permits (and semi-automatic rifles).  But it retains mandates that applicants must demonstrate "good moral character," turn over their social media posts and undergo days, if not months, of training, background checks and in-person interviews.  The law also specifies a long list of "sensitive locations" where gun possession is a felony punishable by up to four years in prison. Those restrictions will make it nearly impossible for many permit holders to actually exercise the rights recognized by the high court. 

While Hochul, no doubt, wants the public to think those restrictions will target “extremism” from “white supremacists,” in fact, these new laws will likely have a disparate—if not racist and sexist-- impact on disadvantaged groups, primarily minorities and women.

During the run-up to Bruen decision, many groups submitted amicus briefs in opposition to New York’s gun laws, including the National African American Gun Association, Pinks Pistols, the Independent Women’s Law Center, the Black Attorneys of Legal Aid and several other public defender organizations.

“Such laws invariably discriminate against the poor and minorities,” wrote the National African American Gun Association.

Similarly, the Black Attorneys of Legal Aid quoted gun policy scholar David Kopel, who described New York’s original permitting law as a response to "concerns about …the huge number of immigrants, and race riots in which some blacks defended themselves with firearms." The brief notes that the law was enacted after "years of hysteria over violence that the media and the establishment attributed to racial and ethnic minorities—particularly black people and Italian immigrants."

The public defenders said the restrictions inspired by such concerns continued to have a "brutal" impact on minority groups to the present day.  They calculated that it costs hundreds of dollars (now possibly thousands) to get a gun permit in New York, plus a great deal of time that is disproportionately difficult for the working poor to find.

Echoing the need for equality in self-defense, the Independent Women’s Law Center filed a brief touting a popular conservative refrain: Guns are the “great equalizer” between men and women.

“Women are often at a self-defense disadvantage. Having firearms allows them to be able to protect themselves from situations in which they might be in danger,” said Erin Morrow Hawley, a senior legal fellow with the Center.

In a violent confrontation, guns reverse the balance of power. Armed with a gun, a woman may even have the advantage over a violent attacker. An armed woman does not need superior strength or the proximity of a hand-to-hand struggle. She can protect herself or others who are vulnerable to an assailant.  With multiple rounds of ammunition, at her disposal, she has a chance even against multiple attackers.

John Lott, a law professor at the University of Chicago, has conducted research suggesting that "murder rates decline when either sex carries more guns, but the effect is especially pronounced when women are considered separately."

In other words, reducing choice for gun owners disproportionately punishes minorities and women.  

As the Supreme Court pointed out in Bruen, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the right of the people to keep and bear arms for self-defense.   Therefore, while the Court noted that some burdens on the Second Amendment may be constitutionally acceptable, the Court also said that “because any permitting scheme can be put toward abusive ends, we do not rule out constitutional challenges to shall-issue regimes where, for example, lengthy wait times in processing license applications or exorbitant fees deny ordinary citizens their right to public carry.” 

Hochul’s new burdens would seem to be such a denial of “ordinary citizens their right to public carry.”     That denial may, for the above reasons, hit minorities and women the hardest.

In response to Hochul’s new gun control laws, State Sen. Andrew J. Lanza, R-Staten Island, pointed out that the laws are likely to impede the ability of individuals in minority communities, including New York City, to obtain a permit. For the required training, Lanza noted, the "nearest place may be 100 miles away" from Manhattan.

The new requirements may also prove especially difficult for working women and stay at home caregivers.  According to the National Women’s Law Center, 2.2 million women left the labor force between February and October of 2020, due to family needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Bipartisan Policy Center found that women were twice as likely as men to say they left work for caregiving responsibilities due to childcare provider or school closures.

Despite these responsibilities, they are now expected to leave their children and jobs to attend 16 hours of in-person training and an in-person interview which may only be available at a great distance from their homes.

As Elie Mystal, justice correspondent for the progressive “Nation” magazine conceded, “gating access to (a constitutional right) behind a $400 fee and an enormous time sink is not something we do for other constitutional principles.”

According to Lanza, Hochul “thinks it's okay to tell New Yorkers that the constitution does not apply to you, that you're not worthy of being able to protect your life.... When the governor tells the people of the state of New York that they are now more safe because of this legislation, the truth is they will be less safe."

If Hochul’s gun control laws tell New Yorkers they are not worthy of being able to defend themselves and if gun control hurts minorities and women the hardest, it stands to reason that Hochul has told these groups they are, in the minds of her and her fellow democrats, second-class citizens. 

New Yorkers should reject the Governor’s racism and sexism and restore these rights to all.

New - New York Laws  by Tom Reynolds

In three 2nd Amendment cases (D.C. v Heller, McDonald v Chicago, NYSRPA v Bruen) the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has repeatedly stated that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is self-defense. 

In her abyss of wisdom, unelected Governor Kathy Hochul disagreed with SCOTUS and the constitutionally protected right of self-defense, so she called an emergency session of the NY legislature to pass quickly-developed, poorly thought-out laws under a “Finding of Necessity” - which is only supposed to be used for true emergencies. 

Actually, these laws are only poorly thought out if you believe their purpose was to protect NY citizens.  If you believe their purpose was to destroy the 2nd Amendment, then they were smart...UNconstitutional…but smart. 

New York’s legislature and its governor declared war on self-defense and the U.S. Constitution.  Do Hochul and her Democrat counterparts care that much of the laws passed violate the three SCOTUS decisions referenced?  They will care only if it costs them victory in the next election.  That is the only action to punish Hochul and her friends that believers in the U.S. Constitution have available.  Sue the Democrat leadership or Hochul and New York State defends them on the taxpayers’ dime.  If Hochul and company lose, NY State pays the damages and Hochul and company continue in office.

Since they are effectively immunized from any retaliation except by the vote, Hochul and company are free to fight to neuter-the-2nd-Amendment .  They are attacking on many fronts under their newly passed laws.

Make the financial cost of a gun too expensive for most people:

The new laws require 16 hours of training including 2 hours of live fire with proficiency standards.  Estimates vary but figure on $400 for the training plus ammunition.  Already a concealed carry permit holder?  You will also have to complete this course. 

Most will probably have to take time off from work to fulfill these bureaucratic’ requirements. 

The requirements to be a trainer have yet to be established but - let’s go out on a limb and say that - NRA instructors need not apply.

“No person shall store or otherwise leave a rifle, shotgun, or firearm out of his or her immediate possession or control inside a vehicle without first removing the ammunition from and securely locking such rifle, shotgun, or firearm in an appropriate safe storage depository out of sight from outside of the vehicle.”

If you leave your gun in your car, it must be in a safe storage container and out of sight.  Costs start at $150 and go up.

You must use a "safe storage depository" with a key, keypad, or some other locking mechanism. Retrieve the gun in a timely fashion in an emergency?  Not likely.

Keep the stored gun out of sight?  What if the gun is a rifle or shotgun?  Not so easy and maybe impossible.

Microstamping will be required, even though it is ineffective and easily defeated by criminals.  But it will add to the cost of the gun

Note: there are numerous other proposed laws to add to the cost of owning a firearm such as an $800 yearly liability insurance premium and a 1,000% tax on firearm sales!  So much for self-defense being practiced by the poor.

Make the licensing process so bureaucratic that applicants will not try:

Licensing now requires an in-person interview with the licensing officer.  Who is the licensing officer?  Sheriff?  Judge?  Licensing clerk?  NY State Trooper?  Whoever it is, expect that they will work nights and weekends to make things easy for the applicant.  (Sarcasm intended.)  

“Four (4) character references who can attest to the applicant's good moral character and that such applicant has not engaged in any acts, or made any statements that suggest they are likely to engage in conduct that would result in harm to themselves or others.” 

Who will be willing to attest (not saying “to the best of their knowledge”) about every act or statement you may have made?  And if you should happen to commit a crime at some later date, can these people be sued by the victim?

Recertify every 3 years instead of the current 5 years.

A list of all social media accounts for the last three years and “…such other information requested by the licensing officer that is reasonably necessary”.  An anti-2A interviewer would never dream of jumping into an opening like “…such other information” in order to legally harass you.  (Sarcasm again intended.)

A misdemeanor driving while intoxicated conviction within the last 5 years may not cost you your driver’s license but it will cost you your firearms permit.  Apparently, Hochul believes it is better to run over people than shoot them.

A license is now required to purchase or take possession of a semi-automatic rifle and you must be 21 years of age.  However, if you are not 21, you can still vote, have an abortion and decide to change your gender.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Drive retailers out of business so fewer legal places exists to buy a firearm in NY while driving up prices in gun stores that remain open:

“…firearms, rifles and shotguns shall be secured, other than during business hours, in a locked fireproof safe or vault on the dealer's business premises or in a secured and locked area on the dealer's business premises.”

The dealer must remove dozens of firearms from display and store them in some secure area every night and then put them back on display in the morning.  (Will this encourage retailers to stay open 24/7/365 as a cheaper alternative?)

“…ammunition shall be stored separately from firearms, rifles and shotguns and out of reach of customers.” 

Another separate nightly secured storage area for ammo?  During store hours, add another clerk to wait on customers who formerly waited on themselves.

“The dealer's business premises shall be secured by a security alarm system that is installed and maintained by a security alarm operator properly licensed pursuant to article six-D of this chapter.” 

Add several thousand per year extra costs for this but…a windfall profit for security system operators.  (Is it possible there was some greasing-of-palms to get this included?  Nah.  Never in New York.  [Sarcasm intended again.])

And after the firearms dealers invest thousands to meet these requirements, NYS will now start inspecting their paperwork along with BATFE.  Dealers can lose their license over a minor paperwork error or a clerk’s unintended mistake.  Thousands of dollars and a business at risk over a minor paperwork error.

“The Gun Writer” reports that in the years before the Biden-Harris administration took over the White House, the ATF usually revoked an average of 40 Federal Firearm Licenses per year. But, in the 18 months since Joe Biden declared war on “rogue gun dealers,” the ATF has revoked 273 FFLs.

Free speech used to include the right to be silent.

Per NYS: A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in a restricted location when such person possesses a firearm, rifle, or shotgun and enters into or remains on or in private property where such person knows or reasonably should know that the owner or lessee of such property has not permitted such possession by clear and conspicuous signage indicating that the carrying of firearms, rifles, or shotguns on their property is permitted or has otherwise given express consent.

All private property in New York is now a gun free zone.  Private property owners must now affirmatively declare firearms are welcome in order to NOT be a gun free zone.  Firearm possession on that private property is a class E felony.  The NYSRPA decision specifically addressed this and Hochul and company just spit in SCOTUS’ eye and dared them to do something.  

This put non gun retailers in the middle of something not of their choosing, when they only want to sell their product. If a retailer posts a pro-2A sign, they may anger the anti-2A element.  Not post a sign, and gun owners may be angry. 

The Gun Clubs will now have to post a sign that guns are welcome or members have committed a crime by bringing a gun to the gun club.

Also included is a long list of areas that are specifically labelled gun free zones.  For instance, the NY City subway system is filled with crime, including violent assaults.  But everyone, including the elderly and women, will just have to take the beating and then testify later in court - if they dare and are still alive

Have any of these geniuses in Albany noted that shootings happen in gun free zones?

You are a felon and don’t know it:

An old business saying is, “Don’t think of it as a problem, think of it as an opportunity.” 

Violate most of these new laws and you become a criminal, probably a class E felon. The “opportunity” to become a felon might discourage one from getting a firearm, since there are now so many “opportunities”.

Violence  by Tom Reynolds

For their 2021 book, The Violence Project: How to Stop a Mass Shooting Epidemic, Jillian Peterson and James Densley constructed a database of every mass shooting in the United States since 1966. They found a pattern among perpetrators.  It’s interesting to see some of their findings as they give insight into what drives these murderers - and it’s not access to a gun. 

POLITICO talked to Peterson and Densely about mass shooters. (It should be noted that Politico is a left leaning organization.  We ignored some comments that had a blatant leftist agenda as we could not tell if that was the authors’ bias or Politico’s bias.  However, the author’s psychological findings are worth reviewing since gun control advocates ignore them in favor of banning guns.)

Peterson: Mass shootings are socially contagious and when one really big one happens and gets a lot of media attention, we tend to see others follow.

You had an 18-year-old commit a horrific mass shooting. His name is everywhere…That shooter was able to get our attention. So, if you have another 18-year-old who is on the edge and watching everything, that could be enough to embolden him to follow. We have seen this happen before.

Peterson: There’s this really consistent pathway. Early childhood trauma seems to be the foundation, whether violence in the home, sexual assault, parental suicides, extreme bullying. Then you see the build toward hopelessness, despair, isolation, self-loathing, oftentimes rejection from peers. That turns into a really identifiable crisis point where they’re acting differently. Sometimes they have previous suicide attempts.

What’s different from traditional suicide is that the self-hate turns against a group. They start asking themselves, “Whose fault is this?” Is it a racial group or women or a religious group, or is it my classmates? The hate turns outward. There’s also this quest for fame and notoriety.

People aren’t used to thinking that this kind of thing could be real because the people who do mass shootings are evil, psychopathic monsters and this is a kid in my class. Three days earlier, that school shooter was somebody’s son, grandson, neighbor, colleague or classmate. We have to recognize them as the troubled human being earlier if we want to intervene before they become the monster.

What is the pathway to violence for these people, where does this come from?

Politico: In your book, you say that in an ideal world, 500,000 psychologists would be employed in schools around the country. If you assume a modest salary of $70,000 a year, that amounts to over $35 billion in funding. Are you seeing any national or state-level political momentum for even a sliver of these kind of mental health resources?

Densley: Every time these tragedies happen, you always ask yourself, “Is this the one that’s going to finally move the needle?” The Republican narrative is that we’re not going to touch guns because this is all about mental health. Well then, we need to ask the follow-up question of what’s the plan to fix that mental health problem. Nobody’s saying, “Let’s fund this, let’s do it, we’ll get the votes.” That’s the political piece that’s missing here. Too often in politics it becomes an either-or proposition. Gun control or mental health. 

SCOPE: It’s interesting that Densley singles out Republicans about not funding mental health issues when it’s Democrats who immediately single out the problem as guns and give lip service to mental health, since the Democrats real goal is no guns and is not increased mental health.  As evidence, consider Kathy Hochul’s much taunted recent gun laws which do not deal with mental health issues.

Politico: I was struck by a detail in your book about one of the perpetrators you investigated. Minutes before he opened fire, you report that he called a behavior health facility. Is there always some form of reaching out or communication of intent before it happens?

Peterson: You don’t see it as often with older shooters who often go into their workplaces. But for young shooters, it’s almost every case. We have to view this “leakage” as a cry for help. If you’re saying, “I want to shoot the school tomorrow,” you are also saying, “I don’t care if I live or die.” You’re also saying, “I’m completely hopeless,” and you’re putting it out there for people to see because part of you wants to be stopped.

We have to listen because pushing people out intensifies their grievance and makes them angrier. The Parkland shooter had just been expelled from school and then came back. This is not a problem we can punish our way out of.

SCOPE: Perhaps we can’t punish our way out but there has to be personal responsibility for bad acts.  Most people, not just the kind of people described earlier, will see a lack of being held responsible for bad acts as a green light.

KAMALA QUOTES  by Tom Reynolds

Some quotes from the person only “one heartbeat from the presidency”.  Remember these quotes the next time someone calls for Joe Biden’s impeachment and remember which political party brought you both Joe and Kamala.

“I think that, to be very honest with you, I do believe that we should have rightly believed what we certainly believe, that certain issues are just settled.”

“The significance of the passage of time, right?  The significance of the passage of time, so when you think about it there is great significance to the passage of time.  There is such great significance to the passage of time.”

“For Jamaica, one of the issues that has been presented as an issue that is economic in the way its impact has been the pandemic…We will assist Jamaica in Covid recovery by assisting in terms of the recovery efforts in Jamaica that have been essential.”

“Space is exciting.  It spurs the imaginations and forces us to ask big questions.  Space, it affects us all, and it connects us all.”

“When we talk about children of the community, they are a children of the community.”

“We will work together and continue to work together to address these issues, to tackle these challenges, and to work together as we continue to work, operating from the new norms, rules and agreements that we will convene to work together on, to galvanize global action…and I know we will work on this together.”

“Despite the odds and obstacles, we push to move forward, that we are guided by what we see, that can be, unburdened by what has been.”

“I think there can be no higher priority than what we have been clear is our highest priority.”

“We got to take this stuff seriously, as seriously as you are because you have been forced to have to take it seriously.”

“Despite all the odds and obstacles, we push to move forward, that we are guided by what we see, that can be unburdened by what has been.”

Of course, there is future Obama VP Joe Biden’s quote about then Senator Barack Obama: “I mean, you’ve got the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean.  That’s a storybook, man.” 

At least Biden did not later describe his future VP as “articulate and bright and clean”.  Articulate would really have been a stretch.

Lawsuits Everywhere  by Tom Reynolds

For too long, conservatives, in general, and gun owners, in particular, have been put on the defensive by the never-ending attacks from the left. Der Fuhreress, Kathy Hochul, attempted to continue this trend with the latest gun control laws in which she tries to out Cuomo Cuomo.  (Note that Cuomo passed the SAFE Act using a Writ of Necessity to bypass measured debate and Hochul’s laws were passed in the same way.) 

Fortunately, some gun owners are going on the offensive and New York will now be buried in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of those laws.  Let’s hope this will keep New York’s anti 2nd Amendment Attorney General Letitia James busy defending those laws instead of dreaming up new attacks on gun owners.  Of course, James is working on the taxpayer’s dime so money is not an issue for her.

Note that this suit was filed in federal court to bypass Cuomo appointed judges in New York State courts.  The Southern District of NY is not the most liberal court in the USA but it’s “up there”, so appeals will probably happen, no matter who prevails in that court.

Below is a link to an article which explains the background very well.

The link also includes the actual lawsuit.  It’s worth reading the “Allegations of Fact” to discover how difficult, time consuming and expensive it is to get a pistol permit in New York City.  (It’s almost as if the city does not want you to have a permit!)

The only down side to these lawsuits – other than they are necessary – is that gun owners who might have gotten motivated to – let’s say do something like – VOTE, will once again go inactive and let someone else do all the work.  We can’t let that happen or the anti 2A’s will once again win in November and double down on their attacks. 

We are hearing that even more lawsuits are coming.  

N.Y. Gov. Hochul Sued Over Requirement to Hand Over Social Media Accounts to Apply for Gun License – Professional Troublemaker ® (professional-troublemaker.com)