Log in


  • 06/02/2021 1:12 PM | Anonymous

    Members!  Save the Date!  October 16, 2021

  • 05/29/2021 9:24 AM | Anonymous

    "America will never forget their sacrifices"

    On May 29, 2004, America dedicated the National World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C., which pays tribute to all Americans who served in history's most terrible war. Inscribed near a wall honoring those who gave their lives in World War II is a simple statement from Harry S. Truman: "Our debt to the heroic men and valiant women in the service of our country can never be repaid. They have earned our undying gratitude. America will never forget their sacrifices.

    At this time of year, when Americans kick off their summers with holiday weekend vacations and barbecues, it is good to pause and remember our countrymen who have answered the call to serve, especially those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

    Conflict: Revolutionary War (1775-1783)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 25,000

    Conflict: War of 1812 (1812-1815)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 20,000

    Conflict: Mexican War (1846-1848)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 13,300

    Conflict: Civil War (1861-1865)

    U.S. Military Deaths: Union 360,000 | Confederate 260,000

    Conflict: Spanish-American War (1898)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 2,500

    Conflict: World War I (1917-1918)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 116,500

    Conflict: World War II (1941-1945)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 405,400

    Conflict: Korean War (1950-1953)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 36,600

    Conflict: Vietnam War (1964-1973)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 58,200

    Conflict: Persian Gulf War (1990-1991)

    U.S. Military Deaths: 380

    Conflict: Afghanistan (2001- )

    U.S. Military Deaths: 1,000**

    Conflict: Iraq War (2003- )

    U.S. Military Deaths: 4,400**

    *Includes battlefield and other deaths, such as soldiers who died of disease. Because official records may be incomplete,

    especially prior to World War I, military death figures are estimates.

    **Approximate military deaths as of June 1, 2010.

  • 05/22/2021 8:50 PM | Anonymous

    Anti-Gun Mayor Says She's The Victim After Husband Busted On Drug, Gun Charges  bCam Edwards | May 21, 2021

    What’s an anti-gun mayor supposed to say when police raid her home and find illegally possessed firearms and illicit drugs inside? In the case of Rochester, New York mayor Lovely Warren, the answer is to claim that you’re the victim of a political investigation and an attempt to derail your re-election campaign.

    “I find the timing of yesterday’s events, three weeks before early voting  starts, to be highly suspicious,” Warren said, in her speech, which was posted by Rochester First.

    “There’s nothing implicating me in these charges today, because I’ve done nothing wrong. I haven’t spoken to Tim since his arrest, and I’m not standing here to defend him.”

    “Tim” is Timothy Granison, Warren’s husband and the alleged owner of an unregistered handgun discovered in the couple’s home earlier this week (a modern sporting rifle was found as well, though so far police haven’t said if was registered with the state as required under New York’s SAFE Act set of gun control laws). Warren’s correct in noting that she’s not currently facing charges in connection with the drug investigation, though the mayor is facing felony charges of her own in a case involving alleged violations of the state’s campaign financing laws.

    Still, it stretches credulity to believe that Warren would have had no idea of her husband’s alleged activity. If the mayor can’t even keep felons from keeping drugs and guns in her home (Granison was convicted of felony robbery in 1997, when he was 18), can she really be trusted to keep drug dealers and gun traffickers out of the city she manages?

    Rather than address that obvious question, Warren instead chose to pin the blame on the prosecutor in her first public comments after her husband’s arrest, accusing Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley of targeting her husband in an attempt to help Warren’s opponent in the mayoral race. Dooley, however, had already thrown cold water on that idea while announcing the arrest of Granison and six other accused drug dealers on Thursday.

    In her remarks to reporters, Doorley took pains to dismiss any suggestion that the raid on Warren’s home and the arrest of her husband were motivated by politics. She explained that Granison only became a suspect at some point into the seven-month probe.

    “I’m sure there are going to be people out there who think that this is politically motivated. It was not,” Doorley said. “Timothy Granison was not the original target of this wire investigation.

    “Approximately seven months I met with members of law enforcement, we had a target, we began to go up on phones, as we do with a wiretap investigations,” she went on. “During the course of the investigation, Timothy Granison became apparent to us as being a plyer in this narcotics ring, and it was at this point that we followed the evidence. Simple as that.”

    While the outcome of Granison’s criminal case is unclear (he’s pleaded not guilty to the felony charges), one thing is certain: next Tuesday’s mayoral debate between Lovely Warren and challenger Malik Evans, a Rochester city council member, should be one for the ages. Thankfully, it’ll be streamed online, so even if you don’t live in the Rochester area you’ll be able to tune in for what will be some must-see TV.

  • 05/22/2021 1:31 PM | Anonymous

    Saying No to the Crown

    After the Revolutionary War, some Americans doubted that the newly freed colonies could govern themselves. In May 1782 George Washington received a letter from one of his officers, Colonel Lewis Nicola, proposing that the general use the army to make himself king of the United States.

    Washington’s response on May 22 was sharp:

    With a mixture of great surprise and astonishment I have read with attention the sentiments you have submitted to my perusal. Be assured sir, no occurrence in the course of the war has given me more painful sensations than your information of there being such ideas existing in the army as you have expressed, [which are] big with the greatest mischiefs that can befall my country. If I am not deceived in the knowledge of myself, you could not have found a person to whom your schemes are more disagreeable. . . . Let me conjure you then, if you have any regard for your country – concern for yourself or posterity – or respect for me, to banish these thoughts from your mind.

    Yet there were some who still wondered if General Washington would give up his power. He had the adoration of the people and command of the Continental Army. Washington erased doubts once and for all in late 1783 when he appeared before Congress, meeting in Annapolis, Maryland, to “surrender into their hands the trust committed to me” by resigning his commission.

    King George had said that if Washington voluntarily gave up power, then he truly would be the greatest man on earth. Oliver Cromwell hadn’t done it. Napoleon would not do it. But Washington did. He might have had a kingdom for the asking. He was not interested. He put his country first, not himself.

  • 05/17/2021 6:55 PM | Anonymous

    U.S. Supreme Court limits police power to enter homes with no warrant  Andrew Chung

    The United States Supreme Court Building's facade is seen in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 13, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly

    The United States Supreme Court Building's facade is seen in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 13, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to make it easier for police to enter a home without a warrant for reasons of health or public safety, throwing out a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a Rhode Island man after officers entered his home and confiscated his guns.

    The 9-0 ruling directed the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider Edward Caniglia's lawsuit accusing police of violating his constitutional rights by bringing him to a hospital for a mental health evaluation and taking away his guns without a warrant after a 2015 argument with his wife.

    Lower courts had ruled that police in the Rhode Island city of Cranston did not violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.

    The case centered on a legal doctrine that gives officers leeway to engage in "community caretaking" to ensure public safety. In its ruling, the Supreme Court, which has previously applied this doctrine to vehicles, said it does not apply to the home as well.

    "What is reasonable for vehicles is different from what is reasonable for homes," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court.

    In ruling against Caniglia, the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that even if his case did not involve an emergency, the police conduct was justified under the community caretaking doctrine.

    There has been heightened concern over police conduct, including how authorities deal with mentally ill people, in the wake of protests in many cities last year against racism and police brutality.

    President Joe Biden's administration backed police in the case. A Justice Department lawyer told the justices that officers should not be required to obtain warrants in situations in which people could be seriously harmed.

  • 05/13/2021 9:00 AM | Anonymous

    Where Are All The Guns?  by Frank Melloni - Thursday, April 29, 2021

    Where Are All The Guns?

    Where are all the guns? If you walk into any gun store these days, you are likely to hear this question uttered across the counter. With more than five million law-abiding citizens making their first purchase, it is no wonder that we are seeing a shortage of just about every type of firearm on the market. The follow-up questions, of course, are “Why's it taking so long to recover?” and “What is being done to replenish the market?” Curious myself, I reached out to some of the biggest manufacturers to find out what their new production approach was and maybe even get a little peek behind the curtain.

    Savage Arms

    Of all the manufacturers that I spoke with, Savage was the most optimistic. The only roadblock that they claim to be hitting is the lead times on certain products, namely the Asian-made optics for some of its complete firearm packages. While the focus during late 2020 was on the Axis and Axis II families, today production is up across the board without major shutdowns of any one product type.

    By implementing a third shift and ramping production up to seven days a week, the lines are running nonstop. The only interruption to speak of occurred during the middle of 2020 to reorganize and reconfigure the factory to meet CDC guidelines and provide a safer workplace. Our source over there signed off by saying, “In our production facilities, we have generated well over 100-percent growth in the last eight months.

    Partners and suppliers are also working to keep up with demand. With our Stevens pump shotgun partner, [Savage] reconfigured and expanded their production capacity to produce even more of their security-style shotguns, a best seller for 2020. Last spring, we sold about four months of regular inventory of these in just three days.”

    Kimber America

    Defensive handguns have grabbed a major share of the market. With vacations on hold, many buyers used those extra funds to buy a high-end pistol. When we think of high-end pistols, Kimber America comes to mind and we got a few minutes of their time for an update. Like most other companies, Kimber is increasing production.

    However, instead of just adding shifts, the company is expanding its second location in Troy, Al. To get more products out, more than 200 new employees were hired to span not only the production lines, but the engineering side of the company as well. This will ensure that we continue to see new designs for 2021 and the years to come.

    While Kimber offers quite a larger variety of handguns, our contact has informed us that the high-performance models such as the Rapide and Super Jägare have garnered the most interest and they are doing all they can to get more of those out to dealers. The next highest demand goes to the concealed carry handguns from the Micro 9 category, these are getting a bump in production as well.

    Taurus USA

    The pandemic also reduced many folks' available funds, particularly for a first gun. Not having a ton of cash on hand doesn’t mean that you can’t get a quality firearm, and those looking to maximize their value often turn to Taurus USA. If you only have $300 and want to get every dollars’ worth, it’s hard to do better than one of its defensive pistols.

    Taurus exclaimed that models like the G3 and G3c have been highly sought after since early 2020 and continue to generate sharp demand at the time of this writing. Production has been ramped up to full capacity with zero downtime in both the company's US and Brazilian factories. Research and development for new products has not been affected, as the engineers are still hard at work creating designs like the new TX-22 Competition pistol, which is sure to be a hit as most folks are doing all they can to save their center-fire ammunition.


    I wrapped my investigation up by tapping one of the best-rounded companies in the industry, Ruger. From single-action revolvers to AR-15s, this company has arguably the most extensive lineup of any firearms manufacturer. I reached out to see if they planned on keeping all of these items available in the upcoming years and, to my surprise, our contact answered in the affirmative.

    Ruger’s policy is NOT to stop the production of any one product to help meet the demand of another. Instead, the company has hired extra personnel and paid overtime to ensure that each line produces as many guns as possible. At the time of our interview, they relayed that every single product is selling out, so it doesn’t make sense to change things up.

    The only factory changes were those done to increase social distancing and meet CDC guidelines. As for roadblocks, the only one they had to speak to was personnel. Ruger has hired and is continuing to hire workers for nearly every position, so if you are looking to break into the firearm industry, now just might be the time to touch-up your resume.

    Overall, none of the companies were willing to gamble on when things might “return to normal,” largely because demand is unprecedented and therefore unpredictable. Any estimate would be based on demand going back to a reasonable level, and unfortunately, the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic is keeping the pressure on.

    We all must remain patient and optimistic that our favorite firearms will be available soon enough at our local gun shops. In the meantime, with gun-control measures being discussed in Washington, we should remain as active as possible to ensure that we will still be able to own them when they return to the shelves.

  • 04/28/2021 11:05 PM | Anonymous

    Armed Shoplifter Stopped By Concealed Carrier and a Good Samaritan  by Luke McCoy

    A Beech Grove Walmart was the scene of a resisting shoplifter being fired at by a licensed gun owner and then stopped by a Good Samaritan while fleeing.

    Armed Shoplifter Stopped By Concealed Carrier and a Good Samaritan

    The shoplifter, who went on to draw and point a gun at the store’s security guard after escaping arrest. As the suspect was pointing a gun at the security guard, a licensed gun owner saw what was taking place and fired at him. None of the shots hit the suspect and as he fled through the parking lot, another Good Samaritan tackled him. The resisting shoplifter and the store’s loss prevention officer were treated for minor injuries. The security officer, who is also a park ranger, suffered no injuries.

    Walmart does not permit open carry, so it is safe to assume the licensed gun owner was carrying concealed. Samone Burris, an Indianapolis Metro Police officer, thanked the licensed gun owner as well as the parking lot civilian for helping stop the suspect.


    The bravery of all things should of course be honored to both heroes at the scene.

    In regards to self-defense, one should always be wary of basic firearm safety: know your target and who/what is beyond the said target. It is not exactly known the measure of how much the licensed gun holder missed his mark(s) on the suspect. Although the gun-wielding suspect posed a potential risk to others after not being immediately disarmed, thankfully the shots were enough to deter the suspect, along with the Good Samaritan.

    All things considered, the public presence of a licensed CCW holder should not be overlooked. One can only imagine what could’ve happened had the suspect not been deterred by an armed citizen.

  • 04/26/2021 7:57 PM | Anonymous

    Supreme Court to take up right to carry gun for self-defense

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear an appeal to expand gun rights in the United States in a New York case over the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.

    The case marks the court’s first foray into gun rights since Justice Amy Coney Barrett came on board in October, making a 6-3 conservative majority.

    The justices said Monday they will review a lower-court ruling that upheld New York’s restrictive gun permit law. The court’s decision to take on the case follows mass shootings in recent weeks in Indiana, Georgia, Colorado and California and comes amid congressional efforts to tighten gun laws. President Joe Biden also has announced several executive actions to combat what he called an “epidemic and an international embarrassment” of gun violence in America.

    The case is especially significant during the coronavirus pandemic, said Eric Tirschwell, the legal director of Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group backed by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “Gun violence has only worsened during the pandemic, and a ruling that opened the door to weakening our gun laws could make it even harder for cities and states to grapple with this public health crisis,” Tirschwell said.

    The court had turned down review of the issue in June, before Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.

    New York is among eight states that limit who has the right to carry a weapon in public. The others are: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

    In the rest of the country, gun owners have little trouble legally carrying their weapons when they go out.

    Paul Clement, representing challengers to New York’s permit law, said the court should use the case to settle the issue once and for all. “Thus, the nation is split, with the Second Amendment alive and well in the vast middle of the nation, and those same rights disregarded near the coasts,” Clement wrote on behalf of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and two New York residents.

    Calling on the court to reject the appeal, the state said its law promotes public safety and crime reduction and neither bans people from carrying guns nor allows everyone to do so.

    Federal courts have largely upheld the permit limits. Last month an 11-judge panel of the federal appeals court in San Francisco rejected a challenge to Hawaii’s permit regulations in an opinion written by a conservative judge, Jay Bybee.

    “Our review of more than 700 years of English and American legal history reveals a strong theme: government has the power to regulate arms in the public square,” Bybee wrote in a 7-4 decision for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    The issue of carrying a gun for self-defense has been seen for several years as the next major step for gun rights at the Supreme Court, following decisions in 2008 and 2010 that established a nationwide right to keep a gun at home for self-defense.

    In June, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, complained that rather than take on the constitutional issue, “the Court simply looks the other way.”

    But Barrett has a more expansive view of gun rights than Ginsburg. She wrote a dissent in 2019, when she was a judge on the federal appeals court in Chicago, that argued that a conviction for a nonviolent felony — in this case, mail fraud — shouldn’t automatically disqualify someone from owning a gun.

    She said that her colleagues in the majority were treating the Second Amendment as a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.”

    North country Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R. - 21st District) issued the following statement:

    “My strong and consistent record of standing up for the Second Amendment Rights of my constituents in the North Country has proudly earned me an A+ rating from the NRA, the highest of any member of the New York Delegation. I cannot overstate the importance of the Supreme Court’s consideration of this case for law-abiding gun owners in New York State, especially as Governor Cuomo, President Biden, and Democrats across the country continue to impose strict, unconstitutional gun control measures. The Constitution is clear – the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I am hopeful the Supreme Court will rule in favor of that constitutional truth and protect the right of law-abiding New Yorkers and Americans to defend themselves, regardless of where they are.”

    Governor Andrew Cuomo released this statement:

    “In light of the Supreme Court’s announcement this morning that they will take up New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett in the next term, it’s worth remembering that New York’s nation-leading gun violence prevention laws, including the SAFE Act we passed after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary, haven’t stopped anyone with a legal right to buy, possess, or use a gun from doing so - but they have made us the safest big state in the country.

    “This NRA-backed case is a massive threat to that security. Imagine someone carrying a gun through Times Square, onto the subway, or to a tailgate outside of a Bills game - the NRA’s goal here is to shift the onus onto regular New Yorkers, police officers, security guards, and first responders to determine whether an armed individual poses a threat or is simply carrying for self-defense. The streets of New York are not the O.K. Corral, and the NRA’s dream of a society where everyone is terrified of each other and armed to the teeth is abhorrent to our values.

    “While we have to respect the role of the courts, we don’t have to play along with the NRA’s strategy of using them to roll back strong gun safety laws passed by individual states, turning the lowest common denominator into the law of the land. We can keep all Americans safe through federal action. Changing the law to require a background check on all gun sales, ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, implement Red Flag orders, and close the Charleston loophole is overwhelmingly popular, constitutional, and effective. We’ve proven as much in New York State, and with President Biden in the White House, Congress now has an opportunity to do the same. I urge them to take it.”

  • 04/26/2021 11:39 AM | Anonymous

    Court to take up major gun-rights case  by Amy Howeon Apr 26, 2021 at 10:50 am

    Over a decade after it ruled that the Second Amendment protects the right to have a handgun in the home for self-defense, the Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether the Constitution also protects the right to carry a gun outside the home. The justices’ announcement that they will take up a challenge to a New York law that requires anyone who wants to carry a gun in the state to show a good reason for doing so sets the stage for a major ruling on gun rights in the court’s 2021-22 term.

    The law at issue in the case, New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett, is similar to gun-control measures in other states. To receive an unrestricted license to carry a concealed firearm outside the home, a person must show “proper cause” – meaning a special need for self-protection. Two men challenged the law after New York rejected their concealed-carry applications, and they are backed by a gun-rights advocacy group. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit upheld the law, prompting the challengers to appeal to the Supreme Court.

    After considering the case at three conferences, the justices agreed to weigh in. They instructed the parties to brief a slightly narrower question than the challengers had asked them to decide, limiting the issue to whether the state’s denial of the individuals’ applications to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense violated the Second Amendment. But the case nonetheless has the potential to be a landmark ruling. It will be argued in the fall, with a decision expected sometime next year.

    The announcement came just one day short of one year after the court’s ruling in a different challenge brought by the same gun-rights group. That case involved New York City’s ban on the transport of licensed handguns outside the city. Because the city had repealed the ban before the case reached the Supreme Court, a majority of the court agreed with the city that the challengers’ original claims were moot – that is, no longer a live controversy. In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed that the case should return to the lower court, but he also indicated that he shared the concern – expressed by Justice Samuel Alito in his dissenting opinion – that the lower courts “may not be properly applying” the Supreme Court’s most recent gun-rights rulings, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago. Therefore, Kavanaugh urged the court to “address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari” then pending before the justices, several of which involved the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense.

    Shortly after issuing that decision, the court distributed for consideration at its May 1, 2020, conference 10 gun rights cases that they had put on hold while the New York City case was pending. The justices considered those cases at six consecutive conferences before finally denying review in all 10 of them in June.

    Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the court’s decision not to take up at least one of the 10 cases. In an opinion that was joined in part by Kavanaugh, Thomas argued that the Supreme Court would likely grant review if a law required someone to show a good reason before exercising her right to free speech or to seek an abortion. However, Thomas continued, the Supreme Court had opted to “simply look[] the other way” when “faced with a petition challenging just such a restriction on citizens’ Second Amendment rights.”

    There is no way to know why the justices turned down the petitions for review last year. Commentators speculated that some conservative justices may not have been confident that Chief Justice John Roberts would provide a fifth vote to expand gun rights. However, since then Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was replaced by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, whose vote as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit suggests that she might take a broader approach to the Second Amendment.

  • 04/21/2021 6:55 PM | Anonymous

    2021 SCOPE Member Meeting

    At SCOPE’s Members’ Meeting on May 8th, State Senator Tom O'Mara will be speaking.  Mr. O'Mara represents New York’s 58th Senate District which encompasses all of Chemung, Schuyler, Yates and Steuben Counties and part of Tompkins County.

    As previously announced, Congressman and Governor candidate Lee Zeldin will also be speaking. 

    Other potential speakers will be announced when confirmed.

    Our 2021 Annual SCOPE Member Meeting will be held on
    Saturday, May 8th @ 10:00 AM

    Montour Falls Moose Lodge
    2096 State Route 14  Montour Falls, NY 14865

    The meeting is open to all SCOPE members in good standing.
    You must RSVP

    Lunch will be provided
    *COVID Restrictions require masks inside the Lodge*


    Please mail your RSVP: Postmarked NO later than April 24th: TO
    S.C.O.P.E. Member Meeting
    P.O. Box 165
    East Aurora, NY 14052

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 Design & Development By Motorhead Digital }

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software