You have No Place in NY if you oppose SAFE

[Midwest]

I forgot to mention the site where it says that there are 4 to 5 million gun owners in New York State. The site is called "thebatavian" and the link is below.


http://thebatavian.com/howard-owens...ners-toward-greater-political-awareness/38947

"With some four to five million gun owners in New York, he thinks there are enough votes among those who value the Second Amendment to sway any statewide election.

SCOPE is pursuing a multi-election strategy aimed at eventually getting the SAFE Act repealed.

This year, SCOPE is concentrating on county legislature elections with a goal of voting out some of the legislators across the state who voted against a resolution calling for the repeal of the SAFE Act."

 

[carbuncle]

I love upstate NY, but this foolishness has me looking to stay away. If I know the state is oenly hostile to me and my family, I see no reason to spend my money at Indian Lake or and of the businesses on the way there and back.

 

[undeRGRound]

"you don't need 10 bullets to kill a deer!!!"

When I heard this ******* screaming this, it made me think that old audio clips of Adolph Hitler sounded like a voice of reason compared to this POS "governor".
You guys need a recall election, and if that does not work, maybe a revolt. NY State is DOOMED unless something at least semi-radical is done. Recalls at a minimum, it seems. But many states are not far behind. I bet Mario (dad) is turning over in his grave.
Wow, simply WOW

 

[danez71]

NYC has 8+ million residents (not to mention the surrounding areas) who are largely anti-gun. So even if you could mobilize 100% of gun owners...they'd still lose and that's why NY sucks for gun owners and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Correct. There are places that the Pro 2A'ers are just plain out numbered.

In those places it's likely that progress will have to be made through court cases rather than voting.

Which is how Heller and McDonald came to be. There was a "victim" that chose to stand up and fight back rather than run away.

Those SCOTUS pro 2A decisions helped the whole country.

Because of 2 people (and their lawyers), who chose to fight to instead of run, IL and DC have turned the corner.

There is still a long ways to go but pro 2A history was made because of those two people who chose to stand up and fight for their rights instead of run.



IL had the most restrictive gun laws in the country. The SCOTUS acknowledge it.
They PROVED that NO state is a complete lost cause (..... unless you give up and run away.)

 

[Willie Sutton]

"There is still a long ways to go but pro 2A history was made because of those two people who chose to stand up and fight for their rights instead of run."


Really? Two people?

Their names were on a case fought for by lawyers. Those lawyers are paid for by who?

Here's who: They are paid for by people like me (who puts five figures a year or more into the SAF and the NRA/ILA), and by guys like joe-sixpack who sends in $50 to the SAF when he can.

Note that:

1: You can fight the fight without living there yourself.

2: You can live there yourself and not do a damned thing to help.

Which position has more value?



I don't need to live in NJ or run my business in NY to participate in their battles. I'm quite happy to retain more of what I earn (thus freeing me to donate more to litigation) while enjoying a better quality of life elsewhere.


Leaving does not mean quitting.



Willie

.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Stuff like this is going to absolutely kill Cuomo's chances for national office -- even his chances of getting the Democratic nomination. Either he's stupid, politically, or he's very smart, figuring he's consolidating his position in New York politics. I tend to think it's the latter. After all, Hillary Clinton is the runaway favorite to win the nomination. She's officially a New York resident, and the Constitution says that electors cannot vote for two candidates from the same state, so a Cuomo VP bid is precluded.

No offense here, but if you truly believe this, then you evidently don't have a very good grasp of politics and the election process.

Take a good, long, hard look at the electoral votes each state has, then take note of which are of a particularly liberal bent and the electoral votes they command. It takes 270 electoral votes for a presidential candidate to be elected. CA has 55, NY has 29 and IL has 20. Those three states alone, liberal bastions all, total 104 electoral votes. Add in a few other states that historically also vote liberal, then toss in just a few other key states and suddenly it's not so uncertain at all that Cuomo couldn't be elected if he won the DNC bid for candidacy.

The point I'm making here is NEVER to make such an assumption, and most especially NEVER make it with respect to such a politically powerful and wealthy politician. The moment you do, you're very likely to find you've fatally underestimated events.

In any election, it ain't over until the fat lady sings and all the chad is counted.

 

[goon]

Correct. There are places that the Pro 2A'ers are just plain out numbered.

In those places it's likely that progress will have to be made through court cases rather than voting.

Which is how Heller and McDonald came to be. There was a "victim" that chose to stand up and fight back rather than run away.

Those SCOTUS pro 2A decisions helped the whole country.

Because of 2 people (and their lawyers), who chose to fight to instead of run, IL and DC have turned the corner.

There is still a long ways to go but pro 2A history was made because of those two people who chose to stand up and fight for their rights instead of run.



IL had the most restrictive gun laws in the country. The SCOTUS acknowledge it.
They PROVED that NO state is a complete lost cause (..... unless you give up and run away.)

OK, but what fights have come out of NY?
What court cases are there for us to support?
And what have they been doing since 1911 when the Sullivan Act was passed?
Why isn't anyone challenging the permit system the way restrictions were challenged and beaten in IL?


What is going on in NY that makes it worth it for the ladies and gents who are there to stay and suffer and fight the good fight?
And aside from just holding on the little bit they still have, what are they actively doing there to win real rights back?

 

[JRH6856]

How many practicing Catholics are there in New York? Cuomo pretty much showed them the door as well.

 

[Midwest]

I don't need to live in NJ or run my business in NY to participate in their battles. I'm quite happy to retain more of what I earn (thus freeing me to donate more to litigation) while enjoying a better quality of life elsewhere.

Leaving does not mean quitting.

Willie

I agree 100% and I believe my proposal to start a separate pro-gun organization just solely to raise money for pro-gun candidates in only anti-gun states,... is a valid proposal. Whereas someone in Alaska, Idaho, Texas or wherever can contribute $1 or two for a pro-gun candidate in an anti-gun state.

We have what? 100 million gun owners in this country?

If all the gun owners in this country just contributed $2 each per year.

We would have 200 million dollars PER YEAR to go DIRECTLY for the election of pro-gun candidates in anti-gun areas and states.

That is $800,000,000 every four years for one purpose, to elect pro-gun candidates in anti-gun states, not even Bloomberg and Soros could match that.

 

[JRH6856]

We have what? 100 million gun owners in this country?

The problem is, most of those gun owners are not single issue voters and for many, the pro-gun candidates are often as much a blithering idiot on other issues than may be just as important to the voters as the anti candidate is on guns.

 

[itsa pain]

"Running and trying to hurt a states economy is a plan that has proven to fail."

Leaving NY and immediately improving my own bottom line as a businessman while offering my employees a lower cost and higher quality of living is a winner for everyone within my own organization, and that's the only group with which I have a social contract. NY lost my tax revenue, which is their problem and one I could not care less about. Hurting them was not my intent, and if I do, or do not, is completely irrelevent to my decision making process. It's a byproduct of being true to my contract with myself. The fact is that they DID lose my revenue. If that means nothing becauise it's just noise lost in the signal, again I could care not a whit.

I'm a businessman, not a philanthropy. I make rational business decisions, not social statements. I need to live within the framework of the timing of my own lifespan, not to the timing of some nebulous long term social goal. Leaving was an enormous and immediate improvement in every possible way.


"All I'm saying is that the "vote with your feet" mentality has been proven to be NOT effective or affective to make any meaningful difference."

To whom?

You? Or some general sense of "us"?

Because in the end the only person you are resonsible for is you.

Moving from where you are a CRIMINAL for enjoying your RIGHTS into a place where your rights are respected and you are no longer a criminal is a meaningful difference for the person who counts: You.




Willie

.

Your ideas where you just look out for yourself and the heck with everyone else is why NY and other states are in a mess and why there is no 22 ammo and there are a million other reasons why just looking out for yourself has failed

 

[Midwest]

$2 a year per gun owner. No membership required, Nothing to join. The money is going for one purpose and one purpose only. To help elect pro-gun candidates in anti-gun states and areas only.

If gun owners aren't willing to spend $2 a year in hopes of changing the political landscape in anti-gun states where they do not reside in order to help their fellow gun owners then we will at some point lose our rights. What happens in NJ, NY or California...doesn't stay there. It tends to propagate to other states, or to the whole country like I mentioned with Lautenberg, Hughes, Dodd and others.

Politicians from NJ that you had no chance of voting against, affected your rights in Alaska, Arizona, Floria and Maine as well as the rest of the country. We will at some point end up like the UK and Australia, where maybe the government will put all guns except some single shot, shot guns under the NFA.

What happens in anti-gun states and areas will eventually affect those who live in so called "free states". Look what happened in Colorado, surely anti-gun legislation wouldn't happen in a free state like Colorado...well it did. Is your state next?


If had we done this sooner, maybe we would not be having these threads like this today. If we had done this sooner, maybe we would be having threads about pro-gun legislation passing in NY, NJ, CA, MD and other states. When was the last time you heard about pro-gun legislation passing in those states?

If Bloomberg can raise money, or spend his own money to push his anti-gun organization... MAIG . Then surely 100 million gun owners can raise money to push pro-gun candidates (and pro-gun legislation) in anti-gun areas.

If we don't start some kind of national organization to raise money solely to help elect pro-gun candidates in anti-gun areas. Then what is the answer?

 

[goon]

The problem is, most of those gun owners are not single issue voters and for many, the pro-gun candidates are often as much a blithering idiot on other issues than may be just as important to the voters as the anti candidate is on guns.

True.

One mistake the RKBA community has made was not seeking allies on both the right and the left.

 

[Hokkmike]

What disturbs me almost as much as his words is the fact that the big stream media have not and will not pick up on this and cover it.

 

[JRH6856]

What disturbs me almost as much as his words is the fact that the big stream media have not and will not pick up on this and cover it.

“‘Dog bites man’-that is not news, ‘Man bites dog’-that is news.”

Politicians make fools of themselves everyday. That is not news.

 

[danez71]

"There is still a long ways to go but pro 2A history was made because of those two people who chose to stand up and fight for their rights instead of run."

Really? Two people?

Their names were on a case fought for by lawyers.
...
...
....

Leaving does not mean quitting.


Willie

Did you not read this that I said?

Because of 2 people (and their lawyers), who chose to fight to instead of run, IL and DC have turned the corner.

In order for there to be a case to get to SCOTUS, there has to be a victim; some ones Right that was denied. If everyone had left (as many here promote) there would not have been a victim and therefore no SCOTUS case.

Don't trivialize those 2 people. They had to sacrifice a lot beyond just living there. If you have ever listen to people that have been a party in a SCOTUS case you'd realize they had to dedicate a significant part of their life and $$ to be part of the loooong drawn out process of a SCOTUS case.


Now lets take this to an extreme. If all of the pro 2A people in CA, NY, NJ, HI, MD, CT, IL, etc etc all left and the states continued to pass more restrictive laws unchallenged..... then suddenly we have national news stating that "A wave of anti gun laws are sweeping the nation unchallenged... marking a new age of safety for our children."

OK, but what fights have come out of NY? What court cases are there for us to support?
And what have they been doing since 1911 when the Sullivan Act was passed?
Why isn't anyone challenging the permit system the way restrictions were challenged and beaten in IL?


What is going on in NY that makes it worth it for the ladies and gents who are there to stay and suffer and fight the good fight?
And aside from just holding on the little bit they still have, what are they actively doing there to win real rights back?

Wow... a lot of questions. Did you try look for your self or did you just assume there want anything good and I'd be stumped?

It only took me about 10 seconds of googling to find the 2 links below that essentially address everyone of your questions.

Recently won in the NY Court of Appeals:
http://www.nraila.org/legal/articles/2014/rights-of-part-time-new-york-residents-affirmed.aspx


This small victory is further being pursued:
http://www.nraila.org/legal/article...act-ensures-appellate-action-will-follow.aspx



People can throw all the mud they want to try to prove their misguided, but well intended, point of view on this. But the FACTS are (and I'll reiterate):

*Retreating from a Constitutional Rights issue has never been proven to work.
*Boycotting or otherwise trying to hurt a states economy in effort to gain/restore Constitutional Rights has never worked.

I've asked many times here on THR for examples contrary to the above and no one has even been able to cite 1 example.


On the other hand.
*Voting has proven to work.
*Court cases, which necessitate a victim, have been proven to work.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

Okaaaay there's no place for me in NY, I'm really good with that.

 

[3GunEric]

How many practicing Catholics are there in New York? Cuomo pretty much showed them the door as well.

The vast majority of Catholics voted for Obama - twice. Cuomo is probably one as well. I was raised Catholic but their left-wing politics is just too much to bear.

 

[goon]

Wow... a lot of questions. Did you try look for your self or did you just assume there want anything good and I'd be stumped?

It only took me about 10 seconds of googling to find the 2 links below that essentially address everyone of your questions.

I didn't search for myself... Mostly because NY has never been on my radar as a worthwhile state to live in. The SAFE act makes this even more true. Nothing short of a SCOTUS ruling that erases SAFE, the 10 round magazine limit, and everything else including the Sullivan Act would ever entice me to live there.

Sorry to say this, but even the "victory" with the SAFE Act, doesn't that only give them back the ability to load legally owned 10 round magazines with 10 rounds? The NRA-ILA notes that the ruling is still pretty harsh on our beloved self-loading rifles.
Winning back the ability to not be prosecuted for loading a neutered magazine to its neutered capacity...
I guess I can see how some people could call that a victory. Maybe.
But from what I'm reading, the law isn't being objected to for violating the RKBA, it's being objected to because it's a horribly thought-out and poorly written law. A better written law imposing the same restrictions would apparently hold up.

And on the rights of part-time NY residents, I find myself asking "what rights?"
I can't understand why anyone would even want to be a part-time NY resident in the first place.

People can throw all the mud they want to try to prove their misguided, but well intended, point of view on this. But the FACTS are (and I'll reiterate):

*Retreating from a Constitutional Rights issue has never been proven to work.
*Boycotting or otherwise trying to hurt a states economy in effort to gain/restore Constitutional Rights has never worked.

I've asked many times here on THR for examples contrary to the above and no one has even been able to cite 1 example.


On the other hand.
*Voting has proven to work.
*Court cases, which necessitate a victim, have been proven to work.

Do you live in NY?

Voting isn't going to work there. It's the proverbial vote with one sheep and a dozen wolves voting about what's for dinner. In NY, you are going to get eaten. And your governor is going to enjoy every bite. I've got some choice names for the man that will be edited out if I post them on THR, but the fact remains, a bunch of morons elected him and he's set his sights on people like us. Except I'm out of his reach... I'll never live in his state. But you... maybe you are in his reach. He'd be happy to stick an "extremist" like you in a cage.
Forgive me, but I can't imagine why anyone would want to endure that.

And as you say, court cases require a victim to even get started.
A victim who has no guarantee that he's got even the slightest chance of winning. And the victims in NY shouldn't have ever been made into victims in the first place.
And God forbid they ever find one of you with one of those illegal 30 round AR magazines. Then you'll find out what it really means to be victimized by your government... the same one that your tax dollars fund.

 

[barnbwt]

"Sorry to say this, but even the "victory" with the SAFE Act, doesn't that only give them back the ability to load legally owned 10 round magazines with 10 rounds?"

If after all these years, NY(C) has finally hit the bottom of the black hole --and it's been a long, long way down so far-- and ends up being forced to recognize the human and American rights of their under-represented citizens, this is progress of a monumental scale. You have to hit rock bottom before you recover, darkest before the dawn, and all manner of other clichés, but they're right. Think about it this way; that court victory means we won't have to worry about that particular assault on our rights (or even a sub-max magazine capacity limitation, by extension) for the foreseeable future.

Us: 1, them:100yrs. It takes more than a day to clear the Apple Isle of snakes. Just so long as we keep scoring

TCB

 

[Baba Louie]

What ever happened to "jury nullification"? Could that still be a valid tool in this S.A.F.E. Act regard?

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Jury nullification requires the jury to essentially agree that the law is stupid and the person on trial shouldn't be convicted under it, even if they believe the person is guilty.

Figure the odds of getting an entire jury to agree on this, even if they understood it.


EDIT:

An interesting read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification#Judicial_opinion

 

[SleazyRider]

Okaaaay there's no place for me in NY, I'm really good with that.

Nor I. Problem is … I live here!

 

[goon]

Think about it this way; that court victory means we won't have to worry about that particular assault on our rights (or even a sub-max magazine capacity limitation, by extension) for the foreseeable future.

I could be off on this because I'm not a lawyer. Legalese isn't my native tongue...
but from what I'm getting from the ruling, the law isn't being set aside because the magazine capacity restriction is judged as an infringement, but because the law essentially set up law-abiding citizens to break it by allowing the ownership of 10 round magazines but setting the limit at seven rounds. (I guess the argument that "the temptation was just too strong to resist" is valid in NY courts.)
Still, that doesn't preclude an outright ban on any magazine over 7 rounds. If they can outright ban a 30 round magazine, why not do the same thing with a 10 round magazine?

Seven round magazines exist for a great many guns, 10 round magazines could be altered to only hold seven easily enough, and 5 round magazines are readily available for most rifles. I have the sinking feeling that even if this is overturned for good, New Yorkers will just find themselves facing a more well-crafted law that's just as bad.
As you note, it's been a long time since NY has felt freedom. I fear that the population of that state has gone so long without it that they no longer even realize what they don't have.
Ain't no judicial remedy for that.

 

[JRH6856]

I fear that the population of that state has gone so long without it that they no longer even realize what they don't have.

Or care to have it returned to them or retained by anyone else. I have worked with quite a few in NYC who certainly feel this way.

Ain't no judicial remedy for that.

Doubled