HOME

 

 

President's Corner Jan/Feb. 2017

New Rule Uses Social Security Records to Block Second Amendment Rights

The NRA-ILA described the change as “arbitrary and capricious” and they’re not alone coming out against the policy. The National Association for Gun Rights, or NAGR, came out hard against the new rule.

“No excuse justifies stripping law-abiding Americans’ Second Amendment rights without due process and trial,” said NAGR president Dudley Brown. “The procedures set forth by the Social Security Administration are a gross violation of the Constitutional right to due process and separation of powers.”

“First they came for the gun rights of perfectly healthy military veterans who have served honorably. Now they’re coming for the rights of sound and healthy senior citizens and others least able to fight back against oppressive Federal bureaucrats” said Brown. “Congress and President Trump must put a stop to it.”

“Trump can reverse this anti-gun executive action immediately upon taking office on January 20.” Until this policy is repealed or corrected, beneficiaries affected by the new rule will have to petition to have their rights restored before they can continue to exercise their Second Amendment rights. How much this process will cost beneficiaries is not known. And what may be a “reasonable” expense to the SSA may be prohibitive for the people affected by this rule.

I want to again THANK all of you who helped stop the Suffolk County SAFE Firearms Storage Act from being enacted. To that extent we have received a letter from the Presiding Officer of the Suffolk County Legislature, Mr. Duwayne Gregory acknowledging that SAFE and our people were the main reason this bill was ultimately withdrawn from consideration.

On a personal note I want seek your help in my getting re-elected to the National Rifle Association Board of Directors. I have been on the Board for just over 20 years (and for many years on the Executive Committee) and I believe I still have what it takes to continue to be of value to the gun owing sportsmen of Long Island, New York State and to the USA. I believe I am not only well known by most of the legislators and public officials but that I am respected as being a strong and knowledgeable Advocate for our firearms rights. This year will be an especially tough fight because there are 37 candidates for 25 positions and only the top 25 vote getters will be elected. I would very much appreciate your help in circulating my name around and your vote. Thank You!

 

I hope you had a Merry Christmas and will

all have a Happy & Healthy New Year.

Nov 2015

Our Right to own and use Firearms is under attack once again

And my question to you is what are you doing about it?

 

Grassroots gun rights activists like you and I have helped over the years STOP Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other Senate Democrats' constant push for gun control. But now, with Obama threatening to pass gun control by any means necessary, including Executive Order, all bets are off. If these gun grabbers get their way, it would mean the end of the Second Amendment as we know it.

 

Can you believe their proposed restrictions include;

* Banning ALL private, person-to-person, firearms sales.

* Expanding federal gun registration through the National Instant Registration System (NICS), or as it is often called, the Brady Registration System.

* Indefinitely delaying purchases at gun stores by lifting the three day limit on NICS background checks, allowing bureaucratic incompetence or maliciousness to delay your purchases as long as they want.

* Expanding the definitions of citizens banned from owning firearms which might include Hillary's political and ideological enemies like you and me.

* Forcing gun manufactures out of business by making them liable for the actions of murderers and criminals.

* Permanently banning ALL semi-automatic rifles and many handguns.

 

You and I know that not one of these gun control measures will do a single thing to stop criminals from perpetrating their evil deeds. But they will cripple our ability to defend ourselves and our family from attack. That's why I need you to share this message with all of your friends and family, and encourage them to get involved NOW! In times like these, your support is absolutely critical to our ability to mobilize as many Second Amendment supporters as possible. Let's face it; with just a year left in office, Obama is trying to establish his legacy as the president who abolished the Second Amendment.

 

And with the volume of gun control proposals flowing out of the Senate, along with President Obama's threats to pass gun control by Executive Order, we can't let down our guard for a second. The truth is Americans simply aren't interested in more gun control! And if there's one thing I do know, it's that it’s going to take a tidal wave of grassroots support to defeat them.

 

Thanks to the news media and the fact that every time you turn on a TV or a Radio or read a newspaper the anti-gun hysteria is reaching a fever pitch because the media is pushing it so hard. Obama and his anti-gun allies are exploiting the blood of the victims of the Oregon Community College shooting to pursue their anti-constitutional agenda and they seem proud of it. They're eager to incite the mob against American gun owners people like you and me. Unless you and I act today and every day in the foreseeable future, I'm afraid we'll be staring at a gun control nightmare. If all this sounds like a recipe for disaster, it is. The anti-gunners' constant chant for more gun control is going to reach deafening levels in the days ahead.

 

Even though the situation in Oregon remained unclear because no investigation had even started, Obama and his supporters rushed to capitalize on the shootings, going so far as to say the victims should be politicized and he would proudly do it anytime there was a crime like this. He went on to call on the American people to "take on the gun lobby." He's talking about us.  We're the "so-called" gun lobby, you and I and the millions of members and supporters of the US Constitution including the Second Amendment.

 

I/we have warned any and all public officials for many years that "Gun Free Zone" signs do not protect anyone from violent madmen.  Like we saw in the Aurora movie theater, the Newtown, Connecticut elementary school, the Chattanooga military recruiting center, and the Lafayette movie theater, all these signs do is guarantee killers will never face anyone who can defend him or herself. Guns don't commit crimes, people do.  In fact, guns are used 2.5 MILLION times every year to deter or stop crimes.  Recently at a mall shooting in Portland, Oregon, the gunman took his own life after being confronted by a shopper carrying a concealed handgun. And there are literally hundreds of stories of shootings or other criminal acts being stopped by legally armed citizens over the past few decades. Gun Control DOES NOT WORK, PERIOD.  The anti-gun utopia of Mexico whose anti-gun laws are so harsh it has only one gun shop in the whole country is virtually owned by violent gangs who don't beg or even ask "permission" from government officials before they get their hands on guns. If you want to ensure our Second Amendment rights are protected in the future, then we must all get active and involved. All public officials need to hear from gun owners like you and me today! Being involved in the fight has never been more important.

 

Hers’s another area to be concerned about, the UN Small Arms Treaty.  This dangerous Hillary Clinton-backed treaty is nothing more than a massive GLOBAL gun control scheme designed to register then ban and then confiscate firearms from all law-abiding citizens. President Obama and another gun-grabber, Senator Diane Feinstein, are still pushing for a new ban on so-called "assault weapons," something that experts warn would be at the top of President Hillary Clinton's agenda if she were to win the White House. That is mandatory federal political "mental illness" screening to buy a firearm.  Should such a scheme pass, the federal government would be granted the new power to strip away the Second Amendment rights of any American at will just because they don't like your race, your religion or the political candidates you support. Also, sweeping ammo bans or bans on magazines holding just a handful of rounds would be banned.  With any one of these schemes, Congress could effectively outlaw many commonly owned rifles and/or handguns. Remember what Obama tried to do earlier this year when he proposed to ban common types of ammunition such as AR-15 .223 and even .22 caliber ammo.

If you want to know how we'll make the politicians understand the importance of these issues here is what we need to do. Every single one of them must be contacted and told by you, me and every friend you have that they will pay a heavy price with their political careers for voting in favor of any of these gun control schemes. They need to be shown just how important the Second Amendment is to all of us. Not next month. Not next week.  But NOW! There is no time to waste.

____________________________________

Oct. 2015

"You may not like guns.  That is your right. You may not believe in God.  That is your choice. But, if someone breaks into your home, the first two things you are going to do are... Call someone with a Gun and Pray they get there in time."

 

 

Third Time's the Charm: Federal Appeals Court Voids Provisions

of D.C. Gun Control in Heller III

 

Dick Anthony Heller, the lead plaintiff in the historic 2008 Supreme Court case that invalidated D.C.’s handgun ban, has once again successfully challenged D.C.’s oppressive gun control regime. Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling in the NRA-supported case of Heller v. District of Columbia (Heller III), bringing further relief to the beleaguered law-abiding gun owners of the nation’s capital. While the court did not totally invalidate D.C.’s onerous registration regime, today’s ruling is an important step in bringing gun ownership within reach to more of D.C.’s upstanding residents.

 

Following the Supreme Court’s rebuke in the original Heller case, an unrepentant D.C. Council immediately set out to make the lawful keeping and bearing of arms in the District as expensive, time-consuming, and difficult as possible. Intrepid reporter Emily Miller chronicled her own experience negotiating D.C.’s firearm registration process between 2011 and 2012 in a series of reports for the Washington Times that later formed the basis for a book. At the time, registration involved a 17-step process, $465 in fees (not including the price of the gun), five hours of mandatory training that had to be completed outside the District, and multiple trips to D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) headquarters during business hours.

 

Thanks to a combination of political advocacy, media exposé, and litigation, the hurdles and expense of D.C.’s firearm registration process have been whittled down over the years. Nevertheless, the District has consistently remained one of the most difficult places in the U.S. to acquire a firearm lawfully. The plaintiffs in Heller III challenged numerous aspects of the remaining law, including its application to long guns; the requirement for applicants to appear at police headquarters to be fingerprinted, photographed, and to submit their registration paperwork; the requirement that registrants bring their firearms into police headquarters; the expiration of the registration after three years; various fees; the mandatory training requirements; the requirement of passing a test on D.C. law; and a prohibition on the same person registering more than one handgun during any 30-day period.

 

District officials attempted to justify these requirements on the basis of “protecting police officers” and “promoting public safety.” Significantly, the court of appeals found that “the District has not offered substantial evidence from which one could draw a reasonable conclusion that the challenged requirements will protect police officers ….”

Citing the testimony the of one of the District’s own witnesses, the court noted that police are trained to account for the possible presence of dangerous weapons in any situation where they might encounter a crime in progress, a domestic dispute, or any other potentially violent environment. This is so, the expert acknowledged, even when responding to calls at locations without registered weapons. In any event, the evidence in the case revealed that MPD officers very rarely even bother to check the firearm registry when responding to a call, conducting an investigation, or executing a search warrant.

 

The court also determined that several of the challenged registration requirements did not promote public safety, including the requirement that applicants bring the firearms they wish to register to MPD headquarters; the three-year expiration and re-registration requirement; the required test of legal knowledge; and the limitation of registering one handgun per person during any 30 day period. Accordingly, it held that all of these requirements offended the Second Amendment and are unenforceable.

The court rejected the premise that limiting the number of firearms lawfully present in a home is a valid argument for gun control, even if it could reduce the harm that could be caused by firearms generally. “Accepting that as true,” the court wrote, “it does not justify restricting an individual’s undoubted constitutional right to keep arms (plural) in his or her home, whether for self-defense or hunting or just collecting, because, taken to its logical conclusion, that reasoning would justify a total ban on firearms kept in the home.” This may be one of the most significant aspects of the decision, as discouraging lawful gun ownership has been the cornerstone of D.C.’s approach to gun control.

 

While these developments will bring substantial benefits to those who wish to lawfully own guns in D.C., the court still upheld the balance of the registration procedure. If history is any guide, moreover, the District may seek further review of the court’s decision, or it may simply enact other impediments to firearm ownership, which will require further court testing at taxpayer expense. Thus, while pro-gun advocates should cheer the court’s ruling, it also merely underscores the ongoing necessity of the D.C. Second Amendment Enforcement Act, which would comprehensively reform D.C.’s gun control laws and prohibit future abuses by the D.C. Council.

 

For those of you who did not attend the SAFE Firearms Civil Rights Conference this past Sunday missed a most memorable meeting and I am not just talking about our speakers. They were great and very informative and you should have been there to hear them and in addition to that we also had prizes worth more than $8,000.00 dollars.

 

But the most memorable item was the presentation of an Award of a Certificate of Special Congressional Recognition by Congressman Lee Zeldin to the Sportsmen’s Association for Firearms Education in recognition of outstanding and invaluable service to the community. In addition we were presented with an American Flag and a Certificate of Authenticity that this flag was flown over the United States Capitol.

_________________

Sept. 2015

August 29th marks the 10-year anniversary of when Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, La. The memory of the devastation wrought by the storm and the resulting chaos is a human tragedy of such a vast scale that it endures to this day; and will well beyond. Further, the measures taken to disarm law-abiding firearm owners in Katrina’s wake should serve as a testament to why gun owners guard our right to bear arms so vigilantly.

The disorder of the storm’s aftermath and the inability of local law enforcement to contain it brought into stark realization the importance of the right to keep and bear arms in order to provide for the defense of oneself, loved ones, and community. Stories of looting and violence abounded. A police chief described post-Katrina New Orleans by stating, "it was like Mogadishu.” Despite their inability to cope with the resulting mayhem, several days after the storm passed New Orleans officials ordered the confiscation of lawfully-owned firearms from city residents. In a September 8, 2005 article, the New York Times described the scene, stating, “Local police officers began confiscating weapons from civilians in preparation for a forced evacuation of the last holdouts still living here… Police officers and federal law enforcement agents scoured the city carrying assault rifles seeking residents who have holed up to avoid forcible eviction.”

As reported by the Washington Post, New Orleans Superintendent P. Edwin Compass made clear, "No one will be able to be armed,” and, “Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns."
City authorities were selective with their order, discriminating against the most vulnerable. The Times noted that the city’s order “apparently does not apply to the hundreds of security guards whom businesses and some wealthy individuals have hired to protect their property. Mr. Compass said that he was aware of the private guards but that the police had no plans to make them give up their weapons.” In 2005 Ray Nagin served as the mayor of New Orleans. Nagin would go on to become a member of Michael Bloomberg’s Mayor’s Against Illegal Guns, and later federal inmate No. 32751-034, following 2014 convictions for fraud and bribery.

In the years that followed, New Orleans officials were unrepentant. In a 2006 interview with local radio station WWL, New Orleans Superintendent Warren Riley said, “During a circumstance like that, we cannot allow people to walk the street carrying guns…as law enforcement officers we will confiscate the weapon if a person is walking down the street and they may be arrested.” The NRA immediately denounced the confiscations as unlawful under state law and unconstitutional, and set to work rectifying New Orleans’ abuse of power and ensuring that no American would be faced with confiscation under a similar scenario.

The NRA promptly filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana against New Orleans in order to halt the city’s confiscation efforts. On September 23, Judge Jay Zainey granted a temporary restraining order barring New Orleans and the surrounding communities from further confiscations, and required that the seized guns be returned. NRA also successfully worked to lift a ban on firearm possession for those living in Federal Emergency Management Agency housing as a result of the storm.

The city dragged its feet in returning confiscated firearms to their lawful owners. However, NRA persisted until 2008, when NRA and New Orleans came to a settlement in which the city agreed to carry out an acceptable procedure for returning the firearms. The agreement allowed owners to get back their guns without documented proof of ownership, which many residents were understandably unable to provide.

Post-Katrina efforts did not stop at the Louisiana border. NRA prompted mayors and police chiefs across America to sign a pledge stating that they will, “never forcibly disarm the law-abiding citizens” of their city. Further, NRA worked to limit the power of state and local governments to regulate firearms in times of emergency, by advocating for emergency powers reform legislation throughout the country. Currently, over half of the states have some form of emergency powers provision protecting gun owners from government abuse during a crisis. In 2006, moreover, President George W. Bush signed into law the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, which contained an NRA-backed amendment sponsored by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.). The amendment prohibits persons acting under color of federal law, receiving federal funds, or acting at the direction of a federal employee from seizing or authorizing the seizure of lawfully-possessed firearms or imposing or enforcing certain restrictions on firearms during a state of emergency.

Having gone through such a horrific ordeal, in the years after Katrina New Orleans residents exhibited a greater appreciation for their right to bear arms. The number of Right-to-Carry permit holders in the city doubled from 2004 to 2006. As we remember the terrible devastation of Katrina, gun owners should further commit themselves to ensuring that Americans are never again deprived of the ability to defend themselves in their hour of need. A decade later, Wayne LaPierre’s words following Katrina are still as relevant as ever, “The lesson of New Orleans is that citizens must be able to rely on their own ability to survive. The answer once and for all to politicians who say Americans don’t need the Second Amendment, government will protect you, the answer forever more is New Orleans.”

___________________________________________

Mar 2013

Why So Many Police Chiefs Favor Gun Control When Most Sheriffs Don't
  
When it comes to various politicians and others who speak against gun ownership (which includes the 2nd Amendment and Constitution) many politicians will claim and state police chiefs support the anti-gun movement. These politicians may have Police Chiefs and their officers appear with them as props or spokesmen in news conferences. So the logical question to ask is why are these top cops so seemingly against firearm ownership?
 
It’s because Chiefs are at the beck and call of their political bosses, mayors and city councils. It has been said the Police Chiefs get their opinion on firearm ownership when it is issued to them when they are hired.  

When big city politicians are against gun ownership like Chicago, Washington D.C, San Francisco, and New York for example and the chief doesn't agree with his bosses he can and probably will be fired or demoted by the mayor or possibly by a simple majority of the City Council. In most towns over 50,000 population Police Chiefs generally get paid between $70,000 and $140,000 a year plus benefits and retirement. Large city chiefs get well over $200,000 plus benefits, retirement and every once in a while you run into a chief earning well over $300,000.00 plus benefits. They want to hang onto that "chief" position, title and income.
 
This is why you see chiefs and their officers in the background when privileged officials posture against citizen firearm ownership and the Constitution by definition. Sure some chiefs may believe in citizen gun control and may be willing as a backdrop for self-serving politicians especially if they were appointed by those in power at the time. So whenever a mayor, senator, representative or president wants a show of "top cops" showing support, a message is delivered to the particular city where the top officials are anti-2nd Amendment requesting top cops as props. The Police Chiefs and officers are obediently delivered for props or advised to get their resume updated.
 
Sheriffs are by and large a completely different breed. They are elected by the people with a larger proportional number of citizens than city officials. The sheriff does not have to please a few city council members, a goofy mayor or even a governor. Sheriffs represent the beliefs and values of the majority of the area of his or her citizens who directly voted them into office. Yes, there will be sheriffs who do not want guns in the hands of citizens, but nothing like the number of Police Chiefs who have a near immediate career ending gun held to their heads by anti-Constitution politicians or the chief culture.  
 
And most sheriffs take their Oath supporting the Constitution very seriously. And while they currently follow and enforce Constitutional applicable federal, state and county laws they reserve the power invested in their oath and position as elected officers of their county to resist or not to enforce Constitutional infringing law if or when that might come. If that were to occur, the state police and/or federal government may be ordered to step into that particular sheriff's county to enforce those particular unconstitutional laws. The ramifications of those legal incursions might be very interesting to watch, especially, we were told, if that particular sheriff is actively supported by the citizens of that county.    
 
The bottom line is city, state and even some federal chiefs will almost always bend to the will of their political masters, after all those who have the gold makes the rules.  Then this might be something to bring up in various press conferences with officers in the background. 

We at SAFE have decided to try get in tune with the 20th century by creating a SAFE Twitter account and a SAFE Facebook account. We have also found another person to take care of and maintain our SAFE web-site. For those of you who may not remember our web-master had a long time sickness that culminated in his passing away late last year. If successful these will be 2 additional ways of our communicating to our members when things happen in between monthly newsletters. One of our members who has a great deal of experience with these modes of communication has graciously volunteered his time to not only create these accounts but to maintain them as best as he can. It is my understanding that anyone in SAFE can sign up for a free account in either or both. Here are the links; Follow Us On Twitter: https://twitter.com/NYsafe
Facebook:http://www.facebook.com/pages/NY-Safe/439063692808892?ref=hl
SAFE web-site is; www.nysafe.org

We will either be just leaving on our Albany bus trip to the State Legislature or just returning from it when you get this newsletter so there will be no report on how things went until we get back. We will probably be making that report at our next regular meeting on March 4th, and so this is another meeting you should not miss.

Just a couple of quick thoughts on the recently passed "gun ban law":

A person steals guns, (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW),
shoots and kills his own mother (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW),
brings guns onto school property (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW),
breaks into the school (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW),
discharges the weapons within city limits (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW),
murders 26 people (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW),
and commits suicide (WHICH IS ALREADY AGAINST THE LAW).

And there are people in this country and this state that somehow think passing ANOTHER GUN LAW banning guns from law abiding people would protect us from someone like this. If you haven't noticed, people like this are not concerned about breaking laws they only care about fulfilling their own twisted agenda.

The only people that a gun ban law would impact are LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, which will only serve to cripple their ability to protect themselves and/or their families. The above is not attributed because the forum in which I found it did not have an attribution. I have no idea who wrote it. I'm not sure the professional gun banners care about any of the above; I suspect the last paragraph is what they really want anyway, that is removing our ability to defend ourselves.

 

Feb 2013

NRA Executive Vice-President School Security Ideas Are Valid!

Right after the Dec. 14 Newtown, Conn., massacre, the New York Daily News had a very politicized front page headline declaring "Blood On Your Hands," accompanied by a depiction of the US Capitol drenched in red. Then the News on Saturday ran the headline "Craziest Man on Earth" with an unflattering photo of National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and the NRA logo. It said, "vile NRA nut blames everyone and everything except the guns."

But the LaPierre's remarks were a lot more sober than most of the statements coming from commentators and politicians, who just hours after 20 kids were slaughtered in Newtown, CT were falling all over themselves to gain an ideological advantage. The NRA chief asked the most sensible question anyone has asked: "How do we protect our children right now, starting today, in a way that we know works, asked LaPierre?" And LaPierre couldn't be more right when he points out that "Politicians pass laws for gun-free school zones. They issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them. And in so doing, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are their safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk."

LaPierre pointed out that banks, airports, office buildings, power plants, courthouses, stadiums, the US President, and members of Congress are all protected by armed security. "Yet when it comes to the most beloved, innocent and vulnerable members of the American family our children and we as a society leave them utterly defenseless, and the monsters and predators of this world know it and exploit it." As it turns out, this wasn’t a new idea, President Bill Clinton proposed the same idea back in April 2000. In fact he implemented it, too, only to see Barack Obama cut the funding for it. In the meantime, federal gun prosecutions are down 40% to the lowest levels in a decade, as LaPierre points out. Hollywood and the video game industry have seen to it that "a child growing up in America witnesses 16,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18."

On a Meet the Press Show the host, I don’t remember his name, mocked LaPierre's armed guard proposal for schools. This host admitted that his kids attend Sidwell Friends School in Georgetown which is the same one the Obama girls attend and which is an exclusive school whose security staff numbers 11. Disarming the American peoples’ school while arming your children’s is not a plan to protect our school children.

 

These “gun free zones” turn out to have been a horrible public policy failure. All such mass murders have happened in pretended gun free zones that in fact obviously weren’t. The people who would never commit a crime are the ones who follow the rules, creating a killing field of defenseless victims to magnetically attract those predators and crazies for whom the rules mean nothing at all, but who appreciate a free fire zone where nobody can fight back. Some perspective may be helpful. There is much talk about banning “assault rifles.” The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report states that 323 people were killed in the US in 2011 by rifles of all types. In the same period, the CDC reports that 400 people died from falling out of bed. Motor vehicles and water are orders of magnitude more dangerous to children than school shootings. Guns save lives, lots of lives. Florida State University Professor Gary Kleck estimates that Americans use firearms lawfully about 2.5 million times each year to make predators go away. Shots are only fired in about 8 percent of those cases. An American is about 6,000 times more likely to use a firearm legally to protect herself than to be injured with a firearm.

People who advocate firearm restrictions say we need to have a national debate about guns. Well, we’ve been having that debate for about three decades. What the gun control advocates really mean is that they’d like to win this debate, for once. In the past three decades, about 35 states have enacted mandatory issue concealed weapon permit laws. Opponents in every state predicted such laws would result in shootouts on every street corner, with rivers of blood running in the streets. Of course, that prophesy never came true. What did happen was that national crime statistics and victimization have trended steadily downward over that same period while record firearm sales in the US have skyrocketed.

The last theme I’ve seen emerging is one that allows willing and responsible teachers and other school staff to be armed. More than one parent has said that if a teacher is not responsible enough to safely possess and use a firearm, that teacher is not responsible enough to be a teacher in the first place. The ugly truth is that sometimes people just snap and do horrific things. When that happens and the assailant has a gun, intended victims will call and pray for somebody else with a gun to come save them. No matter how much they wish, police can seldom get there quickly enough to save the victims. Only the people present can do that, and only someone with training and a gun is likely to be able to stop a madman with a gun. Remember it takes a GOOD person with a gun to stop a BAD person with a gun.

Finally, I’m sure millions of law abiding gun owners join me in wishing we could have been magically transported to Sandy Hook Elementary School on that fateful day, with our guns, so we could have stopped the killer and saved those children. We’d gladly have taken the personal risk of killing the assailant, and putting up with the legal system for violating the dangerous no guns policy just to be able to save those precious kids.

An interesting letter in the Australian Shooter Magazine recently:

"If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers. The firearm death rate in Washington, DC (Where all the Idiots who run this Country live and work) is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period. That means you are about 25 per cent more likely to be shot and killed in the U.S. capital, which has the strictest gun control laws in the US than you are in Iraq." And these unaccountable idiots who run this Country want more gun control laws!

 

Jan 2013

The Sportsmen’s Association for Firearms Education (SAFE) sends out our heartfelt sympathies to the families of the victims, and the entire community of Newtown, CT in the wake of the school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. It is impossible to comprehend the full scope of this tragedy, and the lasting damage to the families. You will remain in our thoughts and prayers throughout this ordeal and beyond.

We, as law abiding gun owners are just as incensed and frustrated and we abhor the senseless and violent acts that harm our fellow human beings, especially innocent children. There have been many statements condemning firearms and lawful gun owners as a result of this tragedy. This was an act of an individual with deranged behavior, not that of decent and law abiding people that own guns and respect life.

From my perspective this is a here we go again situation. Once again we see the results of a gun free school zone law. I wonder what the outcome would have been had one or two teachers been carrying a concealed firearm? Instead legislators have provided a playing field that favors criminals that never obey the law to begin with, and take advantage of the gun free school zone laws, knowing that only law abiding citizens will obey these stupid laws. Once again, our legislators have blood on their hands for legislating that people who legitimately carry concealed firearms and are responsible people who could have made a difference are not allowed to. Well done legislators at all levels of government for once again failing to provide what the people really need, the ability to defend themselves and their families.

Many laws were broken during this sad event. I believe the perpetrator fully intended to die during the commission of his attack, and thus had no regard for the consequences of his actions. Had there been more laws in place, the outcome would have been no different. As has been noted time and time again, prohibitive laws only restrict the law abiding.

It is worth noting that on the same day we suffered this attack on our children, a similar attack occurred at a primary school in China, a nation not known as a bastion of freedom. Lacking access to firearms, the criminal used a knife to injure some twenty children. I urge all legislators and public officials to resist the emotional rush to action, in favor of analytical reflection on recent events, current laws, and the founding documents of this country, to which you have a sworn obligation to defend.

Unfortunately it is the media who is pushing for a gun control solution by constantly giving the anti-gun fanatics the microphone while avoiding all of the millions of good honest and law abiding citizens. I have long said that when you try to reason with the anti-gun fanatics the anger they show is so extreme that if a gun was between you and them they would grab the gun and shoot you. Take a gander at the following article on www.pistolpackingpreacher.com and read the comments carefully. Then ask yourself who is really the violence prone, law abiding gun owners or the advocates of gun-control? Then ask yourself who is actually spewing out the hate speech? This is a sad time and Americans are understandably seeking answers, as to why. However, to second-guess an ongoing criminal investigation by suggesting that additional gun laws or restrictions on lawful citizens might have made a difference is not only a rush to judgment, but is irresponsible.

The first recorded school murders in the U.S. took place in 1764 near Greencastle, PA. Four Lenape Indian warriors killed the schoolmaster and at least 9 children. School murders have occurred periodically for a very long time in the U.S. and in many other countries around the world. Motives are sometimes political, racial, or religious, but are most often personal issues harbored by a criminally insane perpetrator. How can we prevent these troubled people from committing these unbelievably heinous acts? The first response from many is that we must limit access to guns, for they are the most common tool used in these crimes. It is easy to say, and many want to believe, that simply removing guns from the hands of private citizens would solve the problem once and for all. Not really!

If we could wave a magic wand and make every firearm not in the possession of the authorities disappear instantly, would those obsessed with mass murder be stopped in their tracks? Or would they pursue different methods to the same end, such as bombs, like the ones Andrew Kehoe used to kill 38 in the Bath, Mi. school disaster, or knives, like a jilted teenage boy in China used in the summer of 2012 to kill nine people, or an automobile, like Pricilla Ford used to kill 6 and injure 26 in Reno, or arson, like Julio Gonzalez used to kill 87 in New York in 1990? Any number of other strategies could be utilized by someone bent on mass killing. Clearly, the possibilities are endless, and circumstances favorable to the creation of deadly scenarios are common. It is a fallacy to think that even a total removal of all privately held firearms would eliminate opportunities for deranged persons to commit mass murder. On the other hand, such a removal would preclude any law-abiding citizen from using a firearm for self-defense, or the defense of others, as was done recently in Early, TX, where a citizen used his revolver to save the life of a police officer. This leaves disarmed citizens at the mercy of criminals, who by definition ignore gun laws just as they do any other law they find inconvenient. Based on the experience of jurisdictions where guns have been banned, it’s certain that we would see a net increase in the number of victims, not a reduction.

Since we know that schools are magnets for homicidal sociopaths and terrorists, we must recognize that our children must be safeguarded the way we guard everything else we value highly. We employ armed security at banks, malls, factories, even parking lots. This is the only option we have that can make a positive difference. We should seriously consider proposals like the 2006 legislation Rep. Frank Lasee introduced in Wisconsin to arm teachers. “To make our schools safe for our students to learn, all options should be on the table,” he said. “Israel and Thailand have well-trained teachers carrying weapons and keeping their children safe from harm. It can work in Wisconsin.” Whether it’s armed teachers and administrators, or police officers assigned to school duty, it’s time to install effective security measures at all our schools, including strict controls on access to the premises, that can’t be defeated by simply breaking a window as was done at Sandy Hook, and most importantly, on-site personnel prepared to fight to defend our kids if need be.

 

Dec 2012

Looks like gun owners may be in for an "interesting" four years. With the elections over now, gun owners are heading into what could be troubled waters. I don't have a crystal ball, so were we are headed I can't say for certain. However, based on the Obama Administration's past performance and President Obama's statements made during the debates, I will point out some of my concerns.

First, with the Republicans maintaining control of the House and enough of the Senate to prevent things being ramrodded through, I don't see gun control, including an "assault weapon" ban, making it into Federal law during the next two years. (There will be another election in two years that could change things, so that is as far as one can look for now). That is good news for gun owners because during the debates with Romney, President Obama hinted at wanting to do something with assault weapons. Obama also brought up inexpensive handguns, while speaking about the very high murder rate in America's Gun-Control Heaven, Chicago.

I would not be surprised if Obama now starts to talk about gun control with every shooting that gets national attention. He also has Chicago's crime rate as an excuse to bring the subject up regularly. While I think Congress will not vote for new gun control laws, we will need to keep a very, very close eye on Congress nonetheless.

One of the biggest threats I see for more gun control would be items that fall under the radar, which is what Obama told the Brady Campaign he was working on last year. Here is a list of things that the President could do without needing approval from Congress:

* Use of the BATFE and the Justice Department to run more staged projects like "Fast and Furious," that make it look like lax gun control laws in the US are causing mayhem and then trying to justify taking "actions" to "fix" the problem. Most of the media would be a willing accomplice in such an endeavor as they were with Fast and Furious.

* Use of the BATFE to ban a variety of guns from import by making sure they don't fit a changing "sporting requirement" use standard, with AKs being the first to go.

* Use of the BATFE to require reporting of sales of certain firearms by gun stores, a de facto registration.

* Use of the BATFE to try and make certain firearms into Class III weapons that require a tax stamp and registration - for example shotguns that only have a pistol-grip for a stock

* Use of the BATFE to block import of military surplus ammunition.

* Sign various UN treaties that affect our right to keep and bear arms. We will need the Senate (and maybe the courts) to block these back door attempts at limiting our Constitutional Rights.
Another extreme danger is that there will be more Supreme Court appointments. Two anti-rights judges were appointed during Obama's last term, Judge Kagan and the self-described "wise latina" and Judge Sotomayor. There is only a one-vote pro-rights margin currently, and that could be wiped out easily. Don't count on the Senate to save the day they didn't with the last two appointments.

And while the potential Supreme Court appointments are very, very important there are also the many lower Federal Courts that can be filled with anti-gun fanatic judges just waiting for the opportunity to rule on a Second Amendment case. You can bet money the antis will be using these courts more and more often to get what they can't get through the Legislative branch.

And lastly let’s not forget we have a President who thinks that if the Congress doesn’t pass the kind of legislation he wants regarding firearms he can just write an Executive order which he believes has the full power of law. It is my understanding that his (any President’s) Executive Orders are meant to help him do his job by being able to make the rules he thinks he needs to run the various government agencies under his control. They are not meant to take the place of Congress who are in fact the only ones who have the power to make the laws for all the citizens of this country.

To say I am disappointed in the outcome of the recent Presidential election would be an understatement. But be that as it may it means to me that we have to get stronger, we have get more people who believe in the right to own and use firearms for self-defense and recreation involved with the NRA and other groups including SAFE. And most importantly we cannot let our guard down for even a moment. We cannot afford to lose or in any way limit our Constitutional Right to own and use firearms.

Our annual SAFE Firearms Civil Rights Conference and the Women on Target Shooting Clinics we conduct each year go a long way in educating the public about the seriousness and importance of our issue. We will continue these programs and do even more if we can in the future in our attempt to protect and preserve what so many have fought and died for. We in this country have more freedom than any other nation in the world and it is our responsibility to do everything in our power to make sure the next generations are not deprived of those freedoms. Our forefathers did whatever was necessary and made sure we had those freedoms and now it is incumbent on us to make sure our children and grand-children have them as well. As unhappy as I am about this years’ elections I have no intention of giving up or slowing down in our never ending battle to protect and preserve our God given rights and I hope you will all join me in this battle.

As I write this it is still a few days away from Thanksgiving and so I hope everyone has a good Thanksgiving with family and friends, especially considering the terrible results of Storm Sandy and its aftermath.

The next meeting of SAFE will be the last for this year and so I wish every single one of you who read this a Merry Christmas and a Happy and Healthy New Year.

Nov 2012

First let me start by saying thank you to all of the SAFE Board members and volunteers who helped make our Annual Firearms Civil Rights Conference a success. For the record we had over 800 attendees and 17 candidates for public office to hear our local, national and international speakers. We were very fortunate to have Ambassador John Bolton speak to us regarding the dangers to the citizens of the United States of America on the United Nations and their gun control program. We need to stay alert and be ready for action should the United Nations try to get the American public to sell out our birth right, namely our Second Amendment right to own and use firearms for self-defense as well as for recreation. Along those same lines our guest speaker Ms. Wendy Long, candidate for the United States Senate for New York was a breath of fresh air in that she plainly said she supports our Second Amendment rights and would vote against any proposal that would in any way limit, mitigate or diminish that constitutional protection. I for one am thankful she spoke so plainly and forcefully on a subject that is so important to all of us. Our other speakers Nikki Goeser, Second Amendment Activist from Tennessee, NRA’s website News Radio Show host, Cam Edwards, NRA investigative reporter and website radio show hostess Ginny Simone, Executive Director of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, Anthony Bernardo and Mr. Darin Goens, the NRA’s New York State Legislative Liaison, all did a fantastic job at bringing the latest information to the assembled guests. I believe that those folks in the room are and have been sufficiently motivated to take a more active role in the upcoming elections including getting family and friends to go to the poles to vote. This is and will be one of the most important elections in most of our lifetimes and we must participate and win if we are to keep our individual right to own and use firearms.

Another set of people who contributed greatly to the success are the donators of our door prizes. Thanks to them we gave away over $3,000.00 worth of firearms and other prizes and gift certificates. The following people, businesses donated the prizes for our event and you can thank them by patronizing their establishments and telling all your friends why you are doing that. Hunter Sports, Massapequa, Camp-Site Sport Shop, Huntington, Coliseum GunTraders, Uniondale, American Outdoor Sports, Farmingdale, WWW.Inthespiritof76.com and Mr. Tim Curry (a SAFE member) and Marilyn Cohen, a SAFE Board member. These people deserve our gratitude for stepping up and showing their support for our program by donating prizes for our attendees.

I almost forgot to mention some of the other legislators who attended our conference and who have been long time supporters of our Second Amendment rights and who deserve our vote come Election Day. Mr. Lee Zeldin, 3rd Senate District, Mr. Dean Murray, 3rd, Assembly District, Mr. Daniel Losquadro, 1st, Assembly District, Mr. Phil Boyle, 4th, Senate District, Mr. Al Graf, 5th, Assembly District. And on the federal level, Ms. Wendy Long, the next US Senator from New York who is running against incumbent Ms. Gillibrand, who is no friend of the gun owning people in this state, Mr. Stephen Labate, 3rd, Congressional District running against Mr. Steve Isreal, who is also no friend to the firearms owning public and Mr. Randy Altschulter, 1st, Congressional District who is running against Mr. Tim Bishop, who has never been a friend of firearms owners, and Mr. Edward Romaine who is running for Brookhaven Town Supervisor and who has been a longtime supporter of our Constitutional Right to own and use firearms. These are the people I hope you will support come Election Day. I know I will and now I am asking all my friends and acquaintances to do the same. And just in case there is any doubt I will be voting for Mitt Romney and against Mr. Obama. Considering how close this election is said to be we need to make sure everyone who can vote, does. Nothing less than our Constitutional Right to own and use firearms is at stake. I want to make sure we do everything in our power to make sure we hand down to our children and grandchildren all of the Constitutional rights we had growing up. It is not just something we want to do but something we have a duty and a responsibility to make sure of.

I have made this statement before and I will repeat it here now. I am a single issue voter. While there are literally hundreds of issues facing all who run and hold public office, I have only one issue that determines whether or not I will support a candidate. That is the firearms issue! I know there are people who think I am crazy or narrow minded and who will try to marginalize me and my vote but for me there is only one issue that I use when voting. If I can’t trust a public official or candidate to fully support my Constitutional Right to own and use firearms for any and all recreational opportunities and or for personal self-defense, than on what issue should I trust them? I strongly believe that if the candidate or current office holder is a strong supporter of my Constitutional right to own and use firearms whenever I believe it is necessary then these people would most likely be good on all or almost all of the other issues they will be faced with that will ultimately affect me. There is no one who will agree with everything you believe in and if they do they are probably lying to you just to get your vote. The Second Amendment is the test I use to separate the fakes and the phonies and the frauds from a genuine candidate or office holder. Feel free to adopt and use this same principle, it is not exclusively mine.

We also have another issue to acknowledge and that is our NRA/SAFE Women On Target (WOT) Shooting Clinics. Since we at SAFE started doing these programs in 2003 we have been doing 2 or 3 Clinics each year and now we have completed our 23rd, WOT Clinic. That means in the last 10 years SAFE has exposed NRA Firearms Training programs and firearms to over 1000 women from all over Long Island, New York City, upstate Westchester County and New Jersey. These are women who will and do talk to their friends and co-workers and any other women they come in contact with about the positive educational experience they had while handling firearms. I will tell you that when we started doing this program that I thought we would have a hard time trying to get enough women into the class considering how anti-gun the folks from downstate would be. Well I couldn’t have been more wrong. Since SAFE started doing this program we have filled every class with women and in fact had many more women on standby. We spend the entire day doing this program with 2 classes a day with 25 women in each class and if that isn’t enough we have nothing but SAFE volunteers, NRA Instructors and assistants and helpers. All of us at SAFE owe a debt of gratitude to all of the volunteers who have made this happen. This just something else we at SAFE can be proud of. One more thing, we have never charged a single penny to any woman who wanted and or who participated in any of our classes.

Sept 2012

 

The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty Conference Comes to an Impasse

On July 27th, the Conference on the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (UN ATT) has broken down and will not report a draft treaty to the member nations. This is a big victory for American gun owners, and the NRA is being widely credited for killing the UN ATT, (just in case someone should ask; what has the NRA done for me lately?). For nearly 20 years, the NRA has worked tirelessly to warn American gun owners about the United Nations efforts to undermine the constitutional rights of law-abiding American gun owners by putting in place international controls on small arms.

The NRA became a recognized as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) and has monitored all UN activities that could impact on our Second Amendment rights. As a result, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre testified before the UN (2012 remarks, 2011 remarks) making it clear that the NRA would fight any international treaty that included civilian arms.

The NRA has and continues to work with our allies in the US Congress and successfully assembled strong bipartisan opposition to any treaty that would adversely impact on the Second Amendment. On two occasions the NRA was successful in convincing a majority of the US Senate to sign letters to President Obama that made it clear that any treaty that included civilian arms was not going to be ratified by the U.S. Senate.

On July 26th, US Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) gathered the signatures of 51 US Senators on a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton opposing any treaty that infringes on our rights.

New York State Police Have No Duty To Provide Police Protection

In New York State, the police have no duty to provide police protection to any particular individual. The Courts in New York have held that "generally, a municipality may not be held liable for the failure to provide police protection because the duty to provide such protection is owed to the public at large, rather than to any particular individual" (Conde v. City of New York, 24 AD3d 595, 596 [2005]; see Cuffy v. City of New York, 69 NY2d 255, 260 [1987]). Now what do you think about that? If any and all police have no duty to protect us all individually then why are they so adamant about individual citizens not having the right and the means to do so for ourselves?

Because of this I would propose a New York State Constitutional Amendment that would provide within the New York State Constitution an absolute right of the people to keep and bear arms for all traditionally recognized purposes including personal self-defense. I propose the following. RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

SECTION 1. THE PEOPLE SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS FOR THE DEFENSE OF THEMSELVES, THEIR FAMILIES AND THE STATE, AND FOR ANY AND ALL LAWFUL HUNTING AND RECREATIONAL USES, AND FOR ANY OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES, AND NO COUNTY, MUNICIPALITY OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE SHALL REGULATE, IN ANY WAY, THE OF THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

It is my understanding that this bill if and when introduced would require the New York State Legislature to pass it in both houses two years in a row and then it would become a public referendum for the citizens of New York State to vote on. Under no condition would I support a NYS Constitutional Convention. It is my understanding that if a Constitutional Convention should take place they who attend could change any part or all of it if they so choose. I just want the people of our State to have a chance to put into our NYS Constitution an absolute right to own and use firearms legally and lawfully and especially because the US Supreme Court has already ruled it is an individual "Right" and not a privilege.
 

SAFE Firearms Civil Right Conference & Women On Target Shooting Clinic

Now I need your help. On September 30th SAFE will be having our Firearms Civil Rights Conference (FCRC) and on October 13th, we will be doing our 21st Women On Target (WOT) Shooting Clinic. I need volunteers for both events. If you would like to volunteer for either event or both I need to hear from you no later than the Regular SAFE members meeting on September 10th. If you are volunteering for FCRC you will need to be at the Hotel by 9:30 -9:45 AM to help set everything up, otherwise you are just early for the general meeting. As for the WOT shooting clinic, you need to be a certified NRA Instructor. I need at least 8 people for the WOT and about 10-12 for the FCRC. Please contact me at home at 631-475-8125 and if I'm not there leave a message on my machine. Please speak slowly and leave your name and a phone number where I can get back to you or you sign the volunteer sheet at the September 10th meeting.
 

Gun Free Zone Is Nothing More Than A Killing Zone, Wake Up Legislators

The horrific slaughter that occurred recently has brought a slew of demands from many anti-gun fanatics. As is always the case, we're now discovering that the assailant was mentally unstable, and again as is always the case, the assailant screams for help were ignored. In practically all instances of massive gun violence (including the massacres at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School) guns were already banned on those properties. In one case, a person who had a license to carry a gun lamented that his gun was locked in his vehicle because he could not bring it on campus. In this case, as is probably the case in many instances, one gun in the hands of just one law-abiding citizen could have saved dozens of lives. It should also be noted that Chicago has already listed over 200 murders since January of this year, yet it has the strictest gun laws in the country. The assumption often is often made by the media is almost always based on the premise that anyone who owns a gun, buys a gun, stores ammunition, or wishes to carry a concealed weapon for the purposes of protection, is an extremist. I would also note, as is usually the case, that in their zeal to ostracize those whose political beliefs differ from theirs, many in the media are quick to lay blame at the feet of the Tea Party or the lawful gun owners without so much as a shred of evidence.

Back to top

---

Jul-Aug 2012

USA Reverses Stance On Treaty That Would Regulate Arms Trade

The United States reversed policy recently and said it would now back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto. The decision, announced in a statement released by the US State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making." "Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.

While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, most anti-gun groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.

The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons. Nations would supposedly remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.

The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the US Bush administration, which said national controls were better. Last year, the United States accounted for more than two-thirds of some $55.2 billion in global arms transfer deals. The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people. The US lobbying group the National Rifle Association has also opposed the treaty.

Folks have to remember that the Senate must consent to all treaties by a 2/3 majority before the president can ratify them. While I seriously doubt the Senate would consent to any treaty that infringes on the 2nd Amendment there is no guarantee. Most Republicans, and many Democrats, in the Senate seem to be pro-2nd Amendment and it should not be possible to get a 2/3 vote but again don't count on it. It doesn't matter who signs a treaty, without Senate approval, it is not valid.

In the US, the treaty power is a coordinated effort between the Executive branch and the Senate. The President may form and negotiate a treaty, but the treaty must be advised and consented to by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Only after the Senate approves the treaty can the President ratify it. Once a treaty is ratified, it becomes binding on all the states under the Supremacy Clause. While the United States House of Representatives does not vote on it at all, the requirement for Senate advice and consent to ratification makes it considerably more difficult in the US than in other democratic republics to rally enough political support for international treaties. Also, if implementation of the treaty requires the expenditure of funds, the House of Representatives may be able to block, or at least impede, such implementation by refusing to vote for the appropriation of the necessary funds.
 

Anti-Gunners in the New York Assembly Show
Persistence with Passage of Micro-stamping

On June 19th, 2012 the New York Assembly passed by a 85 to 60 vote Assembly Bill 1157B, micro-stamping legislation sponsored by Assemblyman Michelle Schimel (D-16). The Assembly has passed this ill-conceived legislation during each of the last five legislative sessions, despite evidence that this bill does nothing to prevent or solve violent crime. Micro-stamping is easily circumvented and relies on the false premise that crimes are committed with legally-registered firearms.

This session, New York finally eliminated its costly and ineffective CoBis system - the state ballistic imaging database. That expensive program tapped taxpayers $4 million annually for roughly a decade without solving a single crime. On June 19th, the anti-gun majority in the New York Assembly demonstrated that they learned absolutely nothing from that failed experiment. No other state has imposed micro-stamping, and yet, anti-gun lawmakers in Albany are determined to foist this bad law onto New Yorkers despite numerous warnings that it would have damaging consequences for law-abiding gun owners. Fortunately, the New York Senate has resisted even considering this legislation in recent years. While we continue to reinforce our position with the New York Senate that micro-stamping is a bad proposal on multiple levels, we take nothing for granted. The technology simply isn't proven, and it would increase the cost of firearms and ammunition. Equally disturbing, A-1157B would force several large manufacturers out of the state, hurting the local economy by eliminating jobs. For reference purposes here are the 21 Assembly members from Long Island and how they voted on the micro-stamping bill. You might want to contact each of them via phone or e-mail and either say thank you or ask them why they voted for useless legislation. It's up to you!
 

Boyle NO	631-647-9400	Montesano NO	516-937-3571
Conte ER	631-271-8025	Murray NO	631-207-0073
Curran NO	516-561-8216	Ra YES	516-437-5577
Englebright YES	631-751-3094	Raia NO	631-261-4151
Fitzpatrick NO	631-724-2929	Ramos YES	631-435-3214
Graf NO	631-589-8685	Saladino NO	516-844-0635
Hooper YES	516-489-6610	Schimel YES	516-482-6966
Lavine YES	516-676-0050	Sweeney YES	631-957-2087
Losquadro NO	631-727-0204	Thiele YES	631-537-2583
McDonough NO	516-409-2070	Weisenberg YES	516-431-0500
McKevitt YES	516-739-5119

Back to top

This past month has been one of the real busy ones. We had had our first regular meeting of SAFE and when I passed the sheet around the room 16 people signed up and said they would help out with the Friends of NRA Dinner tomorrow night. That is outstanding show of volunteerism from SAFE members. Additionally we finally came up with 25 passengers for our bus trip to Albany NY Capitol to visit the State Legislators, Assembly and Senate. We had a good time with most people catching up on their sleep on the trip up and all of us going over in detail the micro-stamping bills already in the legislature. Unfortunately there are two (2) bills in the Assembly, A-1157B and the second A-9055C (the more dangerous bill) because in this 2100 page State Budget Bill is buried the authorization for funding even though the actual micro-stamping bill hasn't passed yet. It would be a lot easier to pass a micro-stamping law later because the funding for it would have already been passed in the massive State Budget Bill. On the trip back to Long Island we had snacks and drinks and a couple of very interesting videos on the Second Amendment including the Award winning video "In Search Of The Second Amendment", A Documentary by David Hardy that was 111 minutes long. This video has some great stuff and interviews with the leaders in the Second Amendment movement. More at the next SAFE meeting.
 

Senator Moran Introduces Bill to Protect Second Amendment
Rights from United Nations Arms Treaty

U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) introduced legislation just recently to protect the rights of American gun owners from being undermined by a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The Second Amendment Sovereignty Act, S-2205, would prohibit the Obama Administration from using the "voice, vote, and influence" of the United States during Arms Trade Treaty negotiations to restrict in any way the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens, including regulation of civilian firearms and ammunition. "The Second Amendment Sovereignty Act ensures that our country's sovereignty and firearm freedoms will not be infringed upon by an international organization made up of many countries with little respect for gun rights," Senator Moran said. "Our Second Amendment rights are not negotiable."

In October of 2009 at the U.N. General Assembly, the Obama Administration reversed the previous Administration's position and voted for the United States to participate in negotiating the Arms Trade Treaty, purportedly to establish "common international standards for the import, export, and transfer of conventional arms," including tanks, helicopters, and missiles. However, with regular calls to include civilian arms and ammunition within its scope, the Arms Trade Treaty could restrict the lawful ownership of firearms that Americans use to hunt, target shoot, and defend themselves. The Treaty is expected to be finalized in July 2012.

"America leads the world in export standards to ensure arms are transferred for legitimate purposes, and this bill will make certain that law-abiding Americans are not wrongfully penalized," says Senator Moran. The introduction of the Second Amendment Sovereignty Act is Senator Moran's most recent effort in his push to make sure an Arms Trade Treaty that undermines the constitutional rights of American gun owners is dead on arrival in the Senate. In July 2011, Sen. Moran led 44 of his Senate colleagues in notifying President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton of their intent to oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty that in any way restricts Americans' Second Amendment rights. This opposition is enough to block the treaty from Senate passage, as treaties submitted to the U.S. Senate require approval of two-thirds of Senators present to be ratified.

With permission from Ammoland.com the following article is of importance to us all. In Ilion, NY the Remington Arms Company, LLC. with more than 1,000 employees in New York State, manufacturing rifles, shotguns and pistols for our nation's men and women in military, law enforcement, hunters, shooters and law-abiding citizens voiced its strong opposition to firearms micro-stamping this week.

Micro-stamping is a patented process that micro-laser engraves the firearm's make, model and serial number on the tip of the gun's firing pin so that, in theory, it imprints that information on discharged cartridge cases.

Three independent studies to examine the sole-sourced concept of firearms micro-stamping have concluded that the would-be technology should not be mandated. In a letter sent to key New York legislators and Governor Cuomo (D), Remington at once dispelled misinformation that it micro-stamps firearms for the military it does not and addressed some of the potential consequences of passing micro-stamping legislation in New York.

"Mandating firearms micro-stamping will restrict the ability of Remington to expand business in the Empire State. Worse yet, Remington could be forced to reconsider its commitment to the New York market altogether rather than spend the astronomical sums of money needed to completely reconfigure our manufacturing and assembly processes. This would directly impact law enforcement, firearms retailers and law-abiding consumers throughout New York- if not the entire country." Read more at Ammoland.com.

In Elmsford, NY the Kimber Mfg., Inc., one of America's leading firearms manufacturing companies located in Yonkers, has announced strong opposition to both the proposed micro-stamping legislation and its inclusion in the budget (AB 9055C) under consideration by the New York State General Assembly. In addition to the Governor's office, Kimber has contacted the Mayor of Yonkers and a number of elected representatives regarding this issue.

Independent studies of micro-stamping technology have been unable to substantiate its efficacy. In fact, studies have shown that the technology is flawed and requires additional testing, analysis and evaluation. Furthermore, Kimber is unaware of any study or findings that show micro-stamping technology to be an effective means of reducing criminal misuse of firearms. "Absent definitive findings on both issues, micro-stamping legislation yields little more than a false sense of achievement for our elected officials; likely costs New York good manufacturing jobs and tax revenues, and distracts from the pursuit of truly effective solutions."

Back to top

I hope everyone had a Merry Christmas and that each of you got what you wanted and not what you might have deserved. Only Kidding! I am sure you all got what you wanted because you deserve it. This is the beginning of what I hope will be a Happy & Healthy New Year for all of you.

In this newsletter you will find 2 events that are very important to us all. First is the bus trip to Albany, New York for a Sportsmen's Legislative Day. It is an opportunity for us to meet & greet our elected officials. That includes your own personal State Senator and your Assembly member. As a matter of fact it is very important to take this opportunity to make sure these folks understand your feelings and your logic about what firearms ownership and use means to you. If anything the laws in New York need to be changed so as to empower you the law abiding citizen to not only be able to defend yourself or your family or your property but even to be able to come to the aid and assistance of another person if need be. It is a proven fact that everywhere in the country where the law abiding citizens can get firearms lawfully and more easily that the crime rate in those areas go down and people like Mayor Bloomberg who never met an anti-gun law he didn't like have a hard time explaining that.

We should also strongly emphasize the importance of having concealed firearm licensing reciprocity with all states that have a background check similar to that of New York State. We are one of only two states that do not recognize the handgun licenses from any other states. For example, did you know that 14 other states recognize our New York State concealed Handgun License while we in New York State do not recognize any other states concealed handgun licenses? Why not? We all go through the same background examinations, contrary to what some people in New York Government say. After all, do we here in this state not recognize automobile driver's licenses from all other states? Do we not recognize marriage licenses from all other states? The answer is, of course we do, and so what is the problem with New York recognizing concealed handgun licenses from other states! The legislators need to change their attitude about us gun owners.

The second event that is very important to us is the SAFE/NRA Friends of NRA Dinner. In the first two years of SAFE working these Dinners we have accomplished much including raising more money in two years than the previous group did in ten years. This is a good start and we need to grow from here. This is good not only for the NRA Foundation which is a 501-C-3 non-profit tax exempt organization, but also for us in New York State because half the profits from the dinner are spent right here in our state.

That means programs like our Women On Target and junior shooting and education programs are being funded. It is very important to get as many people as possible to attend this dinner because the valuable work we do regarding the shooting sports is necessary to the next generation. It is our responsibility to make sure the next generation has not only the right but the means to own and use firearms for all lawful purposes, including the right of self defense. Besides that it is a great deal of fun and a night out for all your family and friends. Get your reservations in as soon as possible.
 

Here is very interesting piece of history & something to consider

There is a story that after the Japanese decimated our naval fleet in Pearl Harbor on Dec 7, 1941; they could have sent their troop ships and carriers directly to California to finish what they started. The prediction from our Chief of Staff was we would not be able to stop a massive invasion until they reached the Mississippi River. Remember, we had a 2 million man army while most of our war ships were fighting the Germans.

So, why did they not invade? After the war, the remaining Japanese generals and admirals were asked that question. Their answer…...They know that almost every home had guns and the Americans knew how to use them. The world's largest army composed of America's hunters! I had never thought about this.

A Internet blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion: There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin, allow me to restate that number. Over the last several months, Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth largest army in the world. This is more men under arms than in Iran and more than in France and Germany combined.

These men deployed to the woods of a single American state to hunt with firearms, and no one was killed. That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and the 700,000 Michigan hunters who hunted this past season. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. Overall this country had almost 20 million armed hunters who would have been a most formidable force to face any invaders.

What's my point? America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home grown firepower. Hunting is not just a way to fill the freezer. It's a matter of national security. That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed. And you might wonder why Barrack Hussain Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder want to disarm all Americans, stopping at nothing to take away our Second Amendment right to have and to own a firearm.

Obama and Eric Holder have even gone so far as to set up an Illegal gun operation called (Fast and Furious) to supply the Mexican Drug cartels with thousands of guns to make it look like we, the law abiding people had illegal gun dealers along our southern borders who were supplying the guns to them. And to make matters worse even after one of our own US Border Patrol Agents was murdered with one of those government approved Illegal guns the US Attorney General Eric Holder in front of a Congressional Panel denied knowing anything about this illegal operation, even though his department set the entire thing up. This just goes to show the extent this Obama administration is willing to go to. They are more than willing to lie and deceive the American public to get their way! Keep this in mind the next time you are asked to consider gun control and who you Vote for in the next Election in 2012.

Back to top

December 2011

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition" - Rudyard Kipling

"That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or laborer's cottage is the symbol of democracy.
It is our job to see that it stays there." - George Orwell

What Are The "Facts" In This Debate Over Firearms Ownership & Use

An armed society is a polite society, or so says one opinion. Manners are good when one may be required to back up his acts with his life. Let me put that another way. There are those who fear that the easier it is to get firearms or the less restrictions that are placed getting them will ultimately lead to a bloodbath have really not paid attention to the real world effects and consequences of less gun control. Every time a State or locality has passed a law making more it reasonable for honest law abiding people to get and use firearms, guns for self protection the media and all the anti-gun fanatics claim the streets will run red with the blood of innocent victims. However they have not considered the obvious, bad people always have access to all the guns they need and want. Honoring the Second Amendment just levels the playing field and makes the bad people less likely to take on the good people. Score one for us!

The latest evidence, which you might not have heard given the media silence on the subject, comes from Chicago and Washington DC. Before the US Supreme Court relaxed gun restrictions and outright prohibitions, the mayors of those two cities had dire predictions. "More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence," said Mayor Adrian Fenty. And Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said his city was heading back to the Old West where "you have a gun, and I have a gun and we'll settle it in the streets."

It has not worked out quite that way. Newly released information for Chicago shows that the murder and gun crime rates plummeted after the gun ban was eliminated, falling much more than the national rate in fact. In the first six months of this year, there were 14 percent fewer murders, the largest drop since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982. This was also what happened in Washington in the year after the 2008 decision that ended that city's ban. The murder rate fell two-and-a-half times faster than in the rest of the country.

Of course, there is a risk to draw too many conclusions from such short term figures; they could be a statistical anomaly. But it has happened over and over throughout the country relaxed gun restrictions, less crime and violence. And in jurisdictions around the world, when guns are banned, murder rates rise.

This is of great interest lately in Indiana, where the General Assembly has made this one of the most gun friendly states in the past couple of years. One subject under discussion for example is how much should the state usurp local authority? There are groups that believe there should be only one statewide standard throughout the state. How can the conflict between the rights of the people to carry a lawful gun and personal property rights be resolved when it comes to taking guns into a business? Another question how smart is it to let people carry guns around openly in settings where we're not used to seeing that? We need to be more realistic and a little less hysterical in our deliberations. When the facts don't support our fears, it's time to move beyond the fears.
 

HR-822 the National Handgun Reciprocity Law

HR-822 the National Handgun Reciprocity Law just recently passed the US House of Representatives by a vote of 271 to 153. Unfortunately the vote from the New York State delegation was 18 against and 11 for. All 8 New York Republicans voted in favor as well as 3 New York Democrats. Thank you to the Republican delegation and "Thank you" to Democrat Congress Members Bill Owen, Kathy Hochul, and Brian Higgins for putting the rights of the people ahead of the party line. Each of you should say thank you as well to your Congressional Representative if they voted for the bill because they need to know 2 things, first, that you're watching how they vote on issues of importance to you and second, that you appreciate it when they do the right thing. This is also a good way to make friends and allies for the future and there will be many issues regarding firearms that will come up in the future, count on it.

This bill does not affect existing state laws. State laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within each state's borders. HR-822 does not create a federal licensing system or impose federal standards on state permits; rather, it requires the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they recognize drivers' licenses, marriage licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards. As of now, 49 states have laws in place that permit their citizens to carry a concealed firearm in some form. Only Illinois and the District of Columbia deny its residents the right to carry concealed firearms outside their homes or businesses for self-defense. Thanks to the persistence of millions of American gun owners Congress has moved one step closer to improving crucial self-defense laws in this country.
 

---

This Annual SAFE meeting will be filled with the membership giving direction and conducting elections for SAFE for the coming year. It is in fact one of the most important meetings of the year and it should be attended by all. Unfortunately we did not do as well in the general elections this year as I had hoped we would. But that doesn't mean we won't be involved in the future, we sure as hell will. We will have to do better so we can drive the message home that we do not want anyone and will not tolerate anyone limiting or restricting my individual right to choose whether or not I own and use a firearm, especially for self protection.
 

---

  For everyone who reads this newsletter and Legislative Report I wish you all, what some say is politically incorrect, a Merry Christmas and a Happy & Healthy New Year.

Back to top

November 2011

 

Crime Data Contradicts Fear Mongering Anti-gun Politicians

I have just come across some newly released data for Chicago that shows that, as in Washington DC, the murder and gun crime rates didn't rise after the bans on firearms ownership were eliminated, in fact they plummeted. They have fallen much more than the national crime rate. In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago's murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect back in 1982. By comparison, there was a 6% drop in murders in the four of the nations other most populous cities. In addition to the decrease in murders committed with guns, crimes committed with guns fell more than non-gun crimes. Robberies with guns fell by 25%, while robberies without guns have fallen only by eight percent. Assaults with guns fell by 37%, while assaults without guns fell by 12%.

Considering the major increase in firearms ownership nationwide you have to ask yourself, why there is these seemingly contrary statistics. Just as with right to carry laws, when law-abiding citizens carry guns some criminals stop carrying theirs. Unfortunately this drop in crime hasn't benefited everyone. The benefit could and should have been even greater but getting a handgun permit in Chicago and/or Washington DC is an expensive and difficult process, which means only the relatively wealthy, can afford to go through it. The rules and regulations that still exist in Chicago and Washington DC primarily disarm the most likely victims of crime, the poor. The spoiled, middle class, mostly white anti-gun crybabies have it right for once, thanks to government intervention, laws claiming to protect citizens from criminals and crimes are better for the wealthy while harder than the poor. Who would have guessed!
 

Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act!

The US House of Representatives has passed the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act! This important legislation has been languishing in both houses of Congress for the past several years. The Senate version of the bill, sponsored by Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), was passed out of the Judiciary Committee in 2009 and placed on the Senate Calendar. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) allowed the bill to die with the close of the 111th Congress and it was not reintroduced in the Senate in the 112th Congress. Now that a version of the legislation, HR-2349 has passed out of the House, we need to pressure our Senators to sign off on it and send it to the President.

The Veterans' Second Amendment Protection Act was introduced in response to a Veterans Administration policy of submitting names of veterans to the FBI for inclusion in the NICS firearms purchaser background check database. The VA has been submitting the names of veterans who have a fiduciary who was appointed to manage their financial affairs as "mental defectives" who are then permanently prohibited from possessing or having access to firearms and/or ammunition. Keep in mind it is not uncommon for a veteran with minor memory issues or problems such as compulsive buying or gambling to have themselves declared mentally incompetent temporarily to manage their own affairs and turn over control of their financial affairs to a spouse or relative to manage for them. Even if such an arrangement and diagnoses is temporary, such as in the case of severely wounded veteran undergoing long term rehabilitation or comatose patients, once the name is submitted to NICS, it is very difficult for them to ever regain right to own firearms.

The Veterans' Second Amendment Protection Act specifies that only veterans who have been adjudicated to be a danger to themselves or others are to be submitted for inclusion in the NICS database. This simple adjustment could restore firearms rights to as many as 100,000 veterans who have had their names unnecessarily submitted to NICS. This important reform is long overdue and your immediate action is required!!!

Please contact both of our New York Senators who both claim to support the Second Amendment and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Tell them that you want HR-2349 passed with the Veterans' Second Amendment Protection Act language intact. Do it "Today" and then do it again every week until the bill is passed and signed by the President. Also, please forward this Alert to every veteran and gun owner you know and re-post it on every veteran or firearms related forum, blog, and website you can find. Our veterans deserve our support on this and the support of our senators. For contact purposes here are all three US Senators e-mail addresses; Senator Charles E. Schumer, schumer.senate.gov, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, gillbrand.senate.gov, Senator Harry Reid, reid.senate.gov. Please take the time to let them what you think. Otherwise they will say they never heard from anyone and they will do as they wish.
 

SAFE Sponsored Boy Scout Venturing Crew News
By: Bill Raab
 

SAFE's own Venturing Crew 762 recently held a shooting session at the Roslyn Rifle & Revolver's Indoor facility in Westbury. They assisted a new group, Crew 86 of Deer Park in the basics of rifle shooting. The young men and women of Crew 86 were very pleased to learn about the shooting sports, and in addition to shooting several different kinds of 22 caliber rifles and they got a chance to shoot both an MK76 rifle in 9mm and an Uzi in the same caliber.

One of our Boy Scout Venture Crew members, Jonathan B, is currently finishing his Eagle Scout project, and several others are working on various advancements in the Venturing program. They will be assisting at a rifle and shotgun shoot next month, while taking some shooting time out to enjoy for themselves as well. It's good to see a group of young people with the kind of foundation they have. And we are delighted to be able to offer any help we can towards their becoming safe and responsible firearms owners and users.

Back to top

October 2011

The 2011 SAFE Firearm Civil Rights Conference (FCRC) is now over and thanks to all 700 of you folks who showed up it can classified as a complete and total success. As I said at the FCRC the event was made successful because of all the hard work by the members of the SAFE Board and the volunteers who came to set up the room and then work the tables and or distribute drawing tickets for all the prizes donated. Below is a list of those prizes and who donated them and how to contact them. I would urge all members of SAFE and their families and Conference attendees to use these businesses for future purchases. These businesses have clearly shown that they are supporters of our Constitutional rights with regard to the Right To Keep & Bear Arms. They just didn't say the words but they followed through and now we need to show them our support by shopping in their stores. Altogether these donators gave us 24 prizes to give away (with most being winners choice) and 4 special gifts to speakers. From all of us at SAFE thank you!!!

Donator of Special Membership Prize Drawing 2011

Guns & Ammo, 4762 Sunrise Highway, Bohemia, NY 11716, phone: 631-244-0915
 

Donators of Prizes for 2011 SAFE Firearm Civil Rights Conference

Guns & Ammo, 4762 Sunrise Highway, Bohemia, NY 11716, phone: 631-244-0915

Hunter Sports, 4166 Sunrise Highway, Massapequa, NY 11758, phone: 516-799-7923

Camp-Site Sport Shop, 1877 New York Ave, Huntington Station, NY 11746, phone: 631-271-9621

Mr. Tim Curry of, WWW.IntheSpiritof76.com

Mr. Bill Raab, SAFE Board of Directors

T&T Tactical, 2180 Jericho Turnpike, Garden City Park, NY 11040

AG-Fox Inc, 139 West Main Street, Bay Shore, NY 11706, phone: 631-666-0910

Long Island Photography Inc, www.longislandphotography.net

Some of these donators gave us gifts that were for the general attendance and some gave specialty items to be given to some of our guest speakers. In either case they all helped to make our conference a success. At the very least when and if you get the chance please say "Thank You" for your support.

 

What a Tangled Web They Weave When
The Administration Tries To Deceive

In case you have not been paying attention, here is the latest on the Administration's Fast & Furious Scandal. A gun dealer's tape shows a possible cover up of a third gun found at the scene of a murdered US Border Patrol Agent. The deafening sound of silence you hear is the Obama administration imploding under the weight of irrational and incompetent policies based on long discredited progressive ideology and now a wave of scandals that involve illegal gun running, witness tampering and political payoffs and, cover ups of all of the above.

Remember the infamous Watergate tape? We may have found its rival in tapes obtained by CBS News between an agent for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and a gun dealer who helped the ATF in its botched gun running operation into Mexico known as "Fast and Furious."

The operation was exposed when Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed in December 2010 at the hands of an illegal immigrant working for the Sinaloa Cartel just 10 miles from the Mexico border near Nogales, Ariz. This raised the ugly question of how US law enforcement agents could wind up getting killed by guns provided with the aid of certain segments of the US law enforcement community.

Two guns linked to the Fast and Furious program were found at Terry's murder scene. Many have pointed out the existence of a third gun found at the scene. That third gun was the subject of conversations on tapes recorded approximately mid March in 2011 and obtained by CBS News between the primary gun dealer cooperating with ATF in its Fast and Furious operation. Andre Howard, owner of Lone Wolf Trading Co. in Glendale, Ariz., is heard talking with the lead ATF case agent, Hope MacAllister.

There are Court filings in this case resulting from the operation that have mentioned only two guns, Romanian WASR "AK-47 type" assault rifles, which were found at the scene. Ballistic tests were inconclusive however as to whether these were the murder weapons. Why was the existence of the third gun an SKS assault rifle, hidden? In a Fox News report they say the information was hidden to protect an FBI informant who works inside a major Mexican cartel and provided the money to obtain the weapons used to kill Terry. This is an outrageous cover up of material facts in the death of a US Border Patrol Agent.

Congressman Darrell Issa, speaking recently in a conference call with reporters, called the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' Operation Fast and Furious "dumb, useless and lethal." Issa said that in addition to the slaying of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, he has been informed by Mexican authorities that there have been some 200 different incidents involving guns linked to the Fast and Furious operation, launched by the Obama administration and which allowed an estimated 2,500 firearms to enter the illegal gun trade.

The Bush Administration had an operation called Project Gunrunner, which was a firearms' trafficking interdiction effort designed to prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands. Congressman Issa made quick distinction between the two efforts, noting that under President Bush, the Second Amendment was fully supported while there was aggressive prosecution of gun law violations.

Back to top

Sept 2011

 

In the United Kingdom Disarmed Citizens are at the Mercy of Criminals

By now you have seen the headlines and images of destruction: the rioting, looting, violent assaults, and arson. London and other UK cities look like war zones and their citizens are afraid to venture out, because the danger is very real. It's a view of the temporary breakdown of society. It is gut check time; a time when the concept of being able to defend oneself gives way to the stark reality that few viable options to do so exist.

Gun laws in the UK are among the most restrictive in the world. In March of 1996, a deranged man walked into a school in Dunblane, Scotland and killed 16 children and one teacher. In the aftermath of this tragedy, British politicians sought to reduce violent crime by enacting a ban on all handguns. Handgun owners were given a February 1998 deadline to turn in their firearms and they did. The UK was supposed to become a much safer place but dramatic increases in crime following the gun ban proved it didn't.

A July 3, 2009, newspaper article reported that "Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European Union, it has been revealed. Official crime figures show the U.K. also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa."

And the current issue has proved it further. Restrictive laws concerning long-guns, combined with the outright ban on handguns, leave the country's honest citizens defenseless. In a side note it was reported just recently that sales of one type of aluminum baseball bats on Amazon UK rose 6,541 percent. In many places, it was reported that police were unable to stop the mayhem. As a result, panicked, defenseless law-abiding citizens were forced to flee their homes, while others watched as their businesses were destroyed. Compare this to the 1992 Los Angeles riots, when armed citizens were able to protect their lives, families, and property from looters and violent mobs.

Another newspaper article reported one resident as saying, "its absolute bedlam on the street. People have been openly looting for an hour, two hours, and the police have been ineffectual. They've done nothing." Another victim, who was trapped in her hair salon in Clapham Junction while a mob smashed its way in and trashed it, said, "They were mocking us, saying, 'look, look, they look scared'. Where are the police? I want protection. This is what they're here for… I'm not secure at my workplace. I'm not secure at my home. Will they be there to protect us tonight? They weren't here to protect us last night."

And another newspaper reported that mobs were forcing hapless victims to strip off their clothes while being robbed, and described a shocking video that shows a bleeding, already-pummeled teenager being robbed in broad daylight by lawless thugs who pretend to help him to his feet, and then steal the contents of his backpack while he can barely remain standing, much less defend himself.

This is what a disarmed country looks like. This is how little is left when free men and women surrender their right to own a firearm. One has to wonder how differently this all would be playing out if the law-abiding were allowed to arm themselves. How different would the reports be if violent, opportunistic thugs were confronted with armed resistance from their intended victims?

It has been said that, "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." In this case, good men and women have been stripped of their ability to do something, and evil has certainly triumphed.

Ironically, the UK is an outspoken proponent of the United Nations' efforts to negotiate an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). Presumably the UK's goal in supporting an ATT is to spread the safety and sanctity they imagine their country as having to the rest of the world. Perhaps these recent violent assaults on the public will cause the British to rethink their position; I certainly hope so. It's time for the British government to drop its draconian gun control laws and restore the right of self-defense to its law-abiding citizens. It's time to face the facts. When law-abiding citizens are disarmed, their society is not a safer one! Gun bans do not reduce violent crime! The police cannot and will not always be there to protect you! England's current situation is just the latest example that proves to us yet again, that the answer to preventing violence is not in victim disarmament.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus Hold National Conference

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising over 42,000 college students, professors, college employees, parents of college students, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that they enjoy virtually everywhere else.

This week, the group held its Second National Conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The event featured many distinguished speakers, including author and scholar John R. Lott Jr., Professor Bob Cottrol of George Washington University, Nelson Lund, the Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment at the George Mason University School of Law, NRA-ILA Grassroots Division Director Glen Caroline, and NRA-ILA Grassroots Division Information Specialist Sara Adler, among others.

Topics covered included victims' personal experiences, a debate over allowing permitted concealed handguns on college campuses, academic, legal and legislative panels, and discussions on student activism and lobbying, among others. The event was well attended and was a great success.

One of the afternoon's highlights was NRA-ILA Grassroots Division Director Glen Caroline's keynote speech. To watch a video of the speech, please go to; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8GNu8p60aI

Back to top

First let me thank everyone who voted for me in the recent National Rifle Association elections as well as those who helped get me re-elected. Thanks to your hard work and support I have been re-elected to the National Rifle Association Board of Directors for another 3 years. As I have told others I am extremely proud and honored to serve the firearms community of New York and will do so to the best of my ability for as long as you want. Thanks again.

---

Urge Your Representative To Cosponsor HR-822,
The National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act Of 2011

Dozens of states have passed carry laws over the past 25 years because the right to self-defense does not end when one leaves home. However, interstate recognition of those permits is not uniform and creates great confusion and potential problems for the traveler, just look at New Jersey. While many states have broad reciprocity, others have very restrictive reciprocity laws. Still others deny recognition completely.

HR-822 would solve this problem by requiring that any lawfully issued handgun carry permits be recognized, while protecting the ability of the various states to determine the areas where carrying is prohibited. The bill would not create a federal licensing system; rather, it would require the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they now recognize drivers' licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards and marriage licenses. Rep. Stearns has introduced similar legislation since 1995.

In the few weeks since its introduction, HR-822 has added over 163 cosponsors. Go here to see if your Congressman is a cosponsor; http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:822:./list/bss/d112HR.lst:@@@P. However, more support is needed to make this bill a higher priority. If your Congressman is not yet a cosponsor, respectfully urge him or her to support the fundamental right to self-defense by becoming a cosponsor of HR-822. If your Representative is already a cosponsor, please offer your thanks for his or her support.
 

SAFE's Second Annual Friends of NRA Dinner
& Fund raiser an Outstanding Success!!!

Thanks to the attendance of over 220 people this years Friends of NRA Dinner was not only a lot of fun (you can ask the attendees) it was very rewarding financially. The preliminary numbers are in and at this point we have generated just over $18,000.00 in profits for the NRA. Keep in mind we get to keep half those profits right here in New York to be used in and for programs we deem appropriate. In New York the local group of dinner chairmen decide what programs are worthy for financial support. Take my word for it there are many more worthy programs presented than we have money for including such requests such as from the NRA itself to help fund the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund (CRDF) which gets involved in New York lawsuits and which ultimately helps to protect our rights. The more the powers that be in our state realize we are now not just willing to challenge them but we are financially capable of challenging their oppressive rules, regulations and laws. In doing so it is more likely that these powers are to not going to go there in the first place. And anything we can do to prevent bad legislation from being introduced in the first place the less time we will need in fighting ridiculous proposals. We may actually be able to get good legislation introduced and passed respecting our Constitutional right to own and use firearms for personal self defense purposes as well as for recreational opportunities. This makes two years in a row we have hit the ball out of the park with successful dinners.

First I would like to thank all the members of the Suffolk Friends Dinner Committee without whose help and hard work that nothing would have happened. I need to make a special mention and Thanks to Mr. Scott Emslie who has spent many years working in and for the Fishkill Dinner committee, one of the largest attended and most financially productive fundraising dinners in all of New York State. This man came all the way down to Long Island bought one of the higher costing dinner tickets, paid for his own hotel room and then spent all evening volunteering and working to help us make the dinner the success it was. We can't thank you enough Scott. Some other people we should all be thankful for are those who donated firearms and other prizes to the event and in some cases sold as many as 30 seats to the dinner. We should all show our gratitude by patronizing (in a good way) all these stores and the people who own and run them. Thank You. They are listed here;

Brian Andersen (this man did all our firearm mandatory background checks)
Guns & Ammo, 4762 Sunrise Highway, Bohemia, NY 11716
(631) 244-0915

Jon Swezey
Camp Site Sport Shop, 1877 New York Avenue, Huntington Sta., NY 11746
(631) 271-4969

Mark Wroobel
Hunter Sports, 4166 Sunrise Highway, Massapequa, NY 11758
516 799-7923

Andy Chernoff
Coliseum Gun Traders, 1180 Hempstead Tpke # 110 Uniondale, NY 11553
(516) 481-3593

Angelo Sbrocchi
American Outdoor Sports, 238 Farmingdale Road, NYS Route 109, Farmingdale, NY 11735
(631) 249-1832

Back to top

Gabriel Razzano v. Nassau County: Court Requires Nassau County To
Implement New Procedural Safeguards to Protect Gun Owners Rights

I, John L. Cushman of Patchogue (Long Island), New York, have announced my candidacy for another term on the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association and am seeking your support and your vote. A former US Marine, I have been a member of the New York State Conservation Council (NYSCC), Board of Directors from 1973 to 2000. I won the Grassroots Activist of the Year (Nationwide, September, 1996) given by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. In April 1998 I was inducted into the NY State Outdoorsmen Hall of Fame Inc.

I am a founding member and current president of the Sportsmen's Association for Firearms Education (SAFE) Inc. I am a past Chairman of the Coalition of NY State Sportsmen (served 5 years); an organization encompassing several groups particularly interested in firearms legislation and shooting sports throughout NY State. I am a founding member and former president of the Suffolk Alliance of Sportsmen (SASI) Inc., a current member of the Board of Directors of the NY State Rifle & Pistol Association. I am a NRA-Certified Instructor in Personal Protection, Rifle, Pistol, and Shotgun and Range Safety Officer.

The NY State Conservation Council, the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and SAFE have endorsed my candidacy for the NRA board. Num
erous local and county groups have also added their endorsements. I am seeking support of all voting members of the National Rifle Association in my bid for reelection to the NRA Board of Directors. I have been an NRA Life Member since 1972 and currently a Benefactor member.

While serving on the NRA board of directors and I have been a member of the following committees: Executive Committee, Vice Chair, Grass Roots Development, Recreational Shooting and Urban Affairs, Public Affairs, Military & Veterans Affairs and Ways & Means. I have also been elected by the NRA Board to serve as a Member of the Board of Trustees for the NRA Whittington Center in Raton New Mexico.

Life member of the following: NRA (Benefactor Member) Whittington Center Gun Club (Life Member) Whittington Center Trailblazers (#115) Whittington Center Founders Club (#4664) New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (Life Member) New York State Conservation Council (Life Member) North American Hunting Club (Life Member) Second Amendment Foundation (Life Member) Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (Life Member) Law Enforcement Alliance of America (Life Member).

38 Colleges Receive NSSF Grants To Build Target Shooting Programs

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has awarded 38 grants, a record number totaling $190,000 to help both new and existing collegiate target shooting programs flourish. Only two years old, NSSF's Collegiate Shooting Sports Initiative has helped establish competition and club shooting opportunities at colleges across the country, from Harvard to Clemson and the University of Vermont to Montana Tech. This latest round of grants will support programs in 38 schools.

"It's gratifying to see collegiate shooting and the Collegiate Shooting Sports Initiative growing at such a fast rate," said Zach Snow, NSSF's manager of shooting promotions. "That tells us NSSF is on the right track in providing funding that makes it possible for men and women to continue target shooting during their college years."

Following are several Collegiate Shooting Sports Initiative success stories: The Clemson University Shotgun Club was founded four years ago by a small group that enjoyed getting together to target shoot. Today the club has more than 95 registered members and a website and puts on "fun shoots" and learn about us barbecues. Demand for shooting sports education at the school Clemson offers for credit "shotgun sports" classes has led to construction of three world class trap/skeet fields and a 100-yard rifle range. "I know that without support from the National Shooting Sports Foundation and an overwhelming sense of pride by the club's members, we would not be where we are today," said student organizer Wake Fickey, who as a high school student competed in the NSSF developed Scholastic Clay Target Program and now has helped his university build a premier program.

New England has become a hotbed of collegiate target shooting. There are growing programs at Harvard, Harvard Law, Tufts, Northeastern, MIT, Yale and Brown. The New England Collegiate Clay Target Championships are an exciting highlight to the season. New programs debuted this fall at Stetson College and Colby College. Formed with encouragement from the Flagler Gun Club plus the school's athletic director and several enthusiastic students, Stetson now has 40 students participating, about half on the varsity team and half at the club level. "We like having these young men and women at the club," said Tom Wolfe, a Flagler Gun Club official. "Our members, who are largely older, say these students have brought a terrific spirit to the club." Stetson, located in Deland, Fla., wasted no time hosting the area's first intercollegiate shoot with Jacksonville University, the University of North Florida and Embry Riddle Aeronautical University. An eight to 10 school competition is being planned for March. "This program is contagious, and NSSF is right there providing assistance and intelligent counsel," Wolfe added. Stetson's success is a good example of how gun clubs work with nearby colleges to support their target shooting programs. Flagler Gun Club even created a special low cost student membership rate so that students could participate at this members-only facility.

NSSF has long supported youth shooting programs for the Boy Scouts of America and 4-H and through the Scholastic Clay Target Program. The Collegiate Shooting Sports Initiative works to provide a seamless "next step" for those who want to continue participating in the shooting sports, just as student athletes do in other sports. "It's only natural than students who have enjoyed target shooting in junior high and high school will want to participate and introduce their new friends to the shooting sports at college," said Snow. "Whether it's competing in intercollegiate matches or spending an evening with friends at the range, students can enjoy the type of target shooting they're comfortable with and learn about firearm safety through these programs."

For assistance on getting a collegiate target shooting program started or for information on applying for a future NSSF grant, visit www.nssf.org/college.

Back to top

---

December 2010

For the past 7 years and the 15 NRA/SAFE "Women On Target" (WOT) Clinics we have held teaching just under 750 women the safe handling and marksmanship basics is indeed something we should all be proud of. Few sportsmen's organizations have done as much depending almost entirely on our own resources, meaning money and volunteers. One of the last SAFE WOT Clinics was even video taped and a copy of it is now on our web-site for all to see and was also sent to NRA Headquarters, specifically the women's division and they think the video and what it shows is outstanding. It is certainly something all members of SAFE can be proud of. Add to this the direct involvement of SAFE as a sponsoring organization for the Boy Scouts Venturing crew in firearms and you have one very active pro gun organization. This does not even take into account the number of legislative and political activities we are involved in on a regular basis protecting your rights and abilities to own and use firearms for all lawful purposes. Because it was an election year for all state and federal offices we took the time to put the legislators on notice that their jobs may in jeopardy if they fail to give strong support for our constitutional right to own and use firearms lawfully. Personally I am not as satisfied as I had hoped to be because we did not win enough elections here in New York State and on Long Island but we did win some which is a definite improvement. Mr. Lee Zeldin defeated Mr. Brian Foley for the 3rd district in the New York State Senate and he is and will be a strong voice for our firearm rights here in New York. Another strong new voice in the Assembly will be Mr. Dean Murray who originally won a special election and now has won in the regular election for the 3rd Assembly District.

Unfortunately we lost a long time friend and a strong advocate for sportsmen's rights in general and firearms rights in particular and that is Ms. Ginny Fields from the 5th Assembly district. I still have a hard time accepting that she lost a primary in her own party but that contributed greatly to her loss in the general election. It is a great loss to everyone in the sporting community. As a matter of fact she is one of the only people to get a mailing from the NRA endorsing her in the primary race which is a rare thing in its own right. Rarely does NRA get involved in primary races at all. Whatever you do Ginny, we at SAFE wish you the best of luck.
 

---

We had a great SAFE Firearms Civil Rights Conference this year. This year was one of our biggest and best attended conferences in the last eleven years we are doing them. With over 1000 people attending and more than 20 candidates for public office mingling with the crowd as well as 2 candidates who spoke who were running for Statewide office (normally no candidates speak at one of our conferences unless they are running for an office that everyone in the room can vote for or against) even Newsday could not ignore the pro gun movement taking place in Suffolk and Nassau Counties. Newsday acknowledged not only the size of our event (even though they underestimated that) but they were very aware of the energy in the room. They did numerous man in the street interviews with attendees and all had the same issue. We the lawful firearms owners are fed up with being the scapegoat for anyone who uses a firearm wrongfully. We are tired of the various public officials and people in the media using any crime committed with a gun as an excuse to irresponsibly lump all lawful gun owners into a class of people who should not have firearms. We are good people and we demand we be treated as such.
We gave away almost $6000.00 dollars worth of firearms all donated and all perfectly legal and we raised about $400.00 dollars funds through a silent auction and donation jar specifically for our support of our BSA Venturing Crew.
 

---

The court decision in the lawsuit against Nassau County regarding the so called colored gun issue has still not been published. This is unheard of, taking this long to render a decision that we believe should have been published 6 months ago. The lawsuit is much more than colored guns and we must win this issue. This lawsuit is about preemption which means only the state may make laws and or rules regarding handguns and where, when and how they may be carried. If Nassau County gets away with spelling out what color guns are appropriate and which are not, then what other issues may local issuing agents decide? Everyone can surely see how we would wind up with 62 different sets of laws and or rules and regulations and how much trouble that would be for the law abiding citizens of this state. If you want to know more about this issue all you have to do is attend our monthly meeting for clarification. It is one of the most important issues we will face here in New York. And if anyone is interested in donating to SAFE to be used in the lawsuit just send a check payable to SAFE for whatever you can afford and in the note section write "chwick-v-mulvey."

What will our New & Improved Congress do Now!

At the federal level the Republicans have taken the House. While Democrats retained the Senate, the balance of power is too close for them to steamroll anything through. Add to this mix "pro-gun" Democrats and Second Amendment-friendly leadership in both chambers and Election Day appears to have been a good day for gun owners. So doesn't this mean we're not going to see any more anti-gun legislation, at least at the federal level? Are we safe? Can we relax? Does anyone think the anti-gunners are going to fold up their tent and go away? Does anyone truly think we're not one major "gun free zone" incident away from new opportunities for the anti-gun fanatics to exploit? And does anyone think those who crave power for themselves and their agenda aren't going to exploit that for all they're worth? Now is NOT the time to sit down and relax. We must remain as vigilant as ever. It wouldn't be the first time one of those people we supported and helped to elect had a change of heart after getting into office and voted the wrong way. When that happens we must respond swiftly and strongly that this new behavior is wrong and why it is wrong. It may be nothing more than a simple misunderstanding or it may be that this new Congressman or US Senator intentionally misrepresented themselves to us. In the first case we will educate and hope that rectifies the problem and in the latter case we will begin with education and them begin the long process of removal from office. But this can only happen when we are all vigilant. We all need to work together.

---

At our Annual meeting we take care of all our legal obligations making yearly reports to the members, answering any questions and holding elections for Directors to the Board and to the SAFE Nominating Committee for next year. We try to make this portion of the meeting as quick and painless as possible so that we can move onto more serious business of the organization, such as making plans for coming year. While this meeting is required by law it can be quite informative and enjoyable. For those of you cannot make our last meeting before the Holidays I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy & Healthy New Year.

Back to top

November 2010

Once again SAFE has had an outstanding Women On Target (WOT) Shooting Clinic. We had over 130 women contact us (me) and register for the class but we were only able to accommodate the first 60 women. It is after all a first come first serve event. We had ladies from as far away as New Jersey and Orange County NY as well as ladies from all over NYC and Long Island. We are proud of the fact that this has been our 17th WOT Clinic with a total of over 750 women participants so far. Just for the record we now have a list of more than 60 ladies waiting for the next SAFE Clinic. I want to thank all of the people who attended as Instructors, Assistants and Helpers (listed alphabetically) and who collectively made this happen. On behalf of SAFE Thank You!

Carl Adamo, Gene Balaban, Andrew Balistreri, Marilyn Cohen, Eric Collins, Carol A. Cushman, John L. Cushman, Rose Lee Davis, Kevin Gray, Michael Houze, James Kelly Jr., William Kirchhoff, William Kirchhoff II, Charles Kutch, Peter Pappas, Heather Raab, William A. Raab, William D. Raab, Nick Salerno, Richie Snizek, Kathleen Strickland, William Strickland.

The following is a list of Individual Supporters and Gun Stores who donated many thousands of dollars of prizes to be given away at our exceptionally well attended Annual SAFE Firearms Civil Rights Conference. When I say donated I mean they didn't just donate a prize or two they literally came out and supported the event by attending the Conference themselves, donating guns and/or gift certificates or other items. These people are not just store owners of gun stores or sporting goods stores they are active and involved members of the Firearms community on Long Island. Every one of these people and businesses deserves nothing less than our full support. What do I mean when I say full support…, I mean even if the huge chain store down the street can sell you that gun or accessory for a bunch of dollars cheaper you should do all you can to spend your money and show your support for the stores and businesses that supported our firearms rights conference and indirectly supported our "Individual Civil Rights". These folks deserve no less from us;
 

Rohrbaugh Firearms Corp P.O. Box 785 Bayport, NY 11705 631-242-3175	Guns & Ammo 4762 Sunrise Highway Bohemia, NY 11716 631-242-3175 631-244-0915
American Outdoor Sports 672 Sunrise Highway W. Babylon, NY 11704 631-249-1832	Hunter Sports 4166 Sunrise Highway Massapequa, NY 11758 516-799-7923
Coliseum Gun Traders 1180 Hempstead Turnpike, #110 Uniondale, NY 11553 516-481-3593	Camp-Site Sports Shop 1877 New York Ave Huntington Station, NY 11746 631-271-4969
Suffolk County Trap & Skeet Range 165 Gerard Ave Yaphank, NY 11980 631-924-5600	Mr. Ed Kaspshak, SAFE Member C/o AG Fox Jewelry 1548 Union Blvd 631-666-0910

 

---

For those of you don't or cannot make the monthly meetings you have missed a lot of speakers who are candidates for public office. Just to name a few we had John Gomez (a couple of times) running against Steve Isreal for the Second Congressional District, Lee Zeldin (a couple of times) running against Brian Foley for the 3rd New York Senate seat, Gary Brensten (a couple of times) running against Chuck Schumer for New York State Senator, Peter Zinno running against Carolyn McCarthy for the Fourth Congressional District, George Demos, Chris Cox and Randy Altshuler each spoke a couple of times in their race against Tim Bishop for the First Congressional District of which Randy Altshuler won the primary. We had other speakers all of whom wanted to either learn more about our issues with firearms or wanted to impress upon us their strong support for our Second Amendment Rights. I must tell you that only one of the incumbents now holding office came to our regular SAFE meetings and reinforced her strong support for our firearms rights and that was Ms. Ginny Fields representing the 5th Assembly District. While she did not win her primary she is still on the ballot for election and the membership of SAFE made the following plea and that is no matter what party her name appears on we will vote for her as she has never let the firearms owning public down and we will not let her down now. Now this election isn't over until the very last ballot is cast and we should be working right up to the last minute we can. Our candidates cannot elect themselves, they need us and we need to elect those folks who believe as we do, in our constitutionally protected right to own and use firearms for every lawful form of recreation and for self defense of self and or family. l urge you all to stay involved right up to the last minute. This year I will not be able to. I fell and hurt my back about 8 years ago and now it is time to pay the piper. I have a good deal of damage to several of my vertebrae's and my spinal cord. I also have damage to the nerves coming out of my spinal cord and so I will have 2 surgeons, one an orthopedic for the bone damage and the other a neuro surgeon for the nerve damage. I am scheduled for a 6 hour surgery on October 19th at Winthrop University Hospital in Mineola, NY. I tell you this so that no one will get angry when I do not respond to e-mail or the phone because the Hospital has no WIFI for the computer even if I could get around and I may not be able to for a couple of weeks. I have waited long enough and the pain has become quite severe so it is about time to address this issue. So try to stay out of trouble at least until I can get back on my feet.

A 95 year old man fends off would be robbers

The man told investigators that two men came to his home on Mount Moriah Road at 12:45 p.m., said Tuscaloosa County Metro Homicide Unit Capt. Loyd Baker. The men asked whether they could cut his grass, and he declined. A few minutes later, the men returned to the door and asked for water. The homeowner, who was speaking to the two men through the closed front door, told them there was a spigot on the side of the house, Baker said. The man recognized one of the men from many years ago, he said. He grabbed his rifle and opened the front door when he heard them say that they were going to rob him. One would be robber fired five shots and hit the house several times as they ran from the house. The resident fired his rifle three times at the man but said he was not sure whether he hit him. Homicide investigators and members of the U.S. Marshal's task force arrested Tony Hill, 41, on Thursday afternoon after the homeowner gave them his name. They were still searching for the second man. The homeowner was not injured.

Back to top

October 2010

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) claims hunting and the shooting sports are viewed in a favorable manner. That was the case just recently, when a news story, titled "Even during recession, hunting remains bulletproof industry," was featured on the Money page of USA Today. The story was run in newspapers across the country after it hit the Gannett newswires. "This placement emphasizing the economic impact of hunting illustrates that hunting works for America," said Chris Dolnack, NSSF senior vice president. The article focused on the fact that even during tough economic times hunting license sales rose in key states and purchases of hunting-related equipment remained high.

NRA CHALLENGES CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FEDERAL HANDGUN
BAN FOR LAW ABIDING 18-20 YEAR OLDS

The NRA is challenging federal laws that prohibit law-abiding Americans eighteen through twenty years of age from legally purchasing a handgun through a federally licensed firearm dealer. The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Lubbock Division. James D'Cruz of Lubbock, TX is the plaintiff in this case. "In Heller and McDonald, the U.S. Supreme Court clearly stated that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for all law-abiding Americans," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "That right is not limited only to Americans twenty-one years of age and older. Indeed, throughout our nation's history, adults beginning at age eighteen have served in the military and fought for this country with honor. But while the Supreme Court has consistently made clear that the federal government cannot ban or unduly restrict sales of items protected by the Constitution, the federal government continues to prohibit these adults from purchasing handguns from federally licensed dealers, which represent the largest and most accessible means of purchasing handguns."

The suit asserts: "At eighteen years of age, law-abiding citizens in this country are considered adults for almost all purposes and certainly for the purposes of the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights. Indeed, at eighteen, citizens are eligible (and male citizens could be conscripted) to serve in the military-to fight and die by arms for the country. Yet, Section 922(b)(1) prohibits law-abiding adults in this age group from lawfully purchasing from the most prevalent and readily available source what the Supreme Court has called "the quintessential self-defense weapon" and "the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home." The plaintiff, Mr. D'Cruz, is well-trained in the proper handling and use of firearms, including handguns. His initial training was with his grandfather, a World War II veteran, who wanted his grandchildren to understand the proper and safe techniques for use and storage of firearms. Mr. D'Cruz received further training from his father and as a member of the Navy Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps, where he achieved the rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade. During his junior and senior years of high school, Mr. D'Cruz was a member of the JROTC's marksmanship team, and as member of that team has competed in regional and national marksmanship competitions. Mr. D'Cruz received numerous awards, including a first place medal for marksmanship, in a regional competition. Mr. D'Cruz also received a Foreign Legion unit award for marksmanship. The case is D'Cruz v. BATFE.
 

Gun Ownership Rises to All-Time High, Violent Crime Falls to 35-Year Low

Coinciding with a surge in gun purchases that began shortly before the 2008 elections, violent crime decreased six percent between 2008 and 2009, including an eight percent decrease in murder and a nine percent decrease in robbery. Since 1991, when violent crime peaked, it has decreased 43 percent to a 35-year low. Murder has fallen 49 percent to a 45-year low. At the same time, the number of guns that Americans own has risen by about 90 million. Predictions by gun control supporters, that increasing the number of guns, particularly handguns and so-called "assault weapons," would cause crime to increase, have been proven to be completely untrue.
 

Crimes per 100,000 population
Year	Total Violent Crime	Murder	Rape	Robbery	Aggravated Assault
1991	758.1	9.8	42.3	272.7	433.3
2008	457.5	5.4	29.7	145.7	276.7
2009	429.4	5.0	28.7	133.0	262.8
Trend 2008-2009	-6%	-8%	-4%	-9%	-5%
Trend 1991-2009	-43%	-49%	-32%	-51%	-39%

There are well over 250 million privately owned firearms in the U.S., including nearly 100 million handguns and tens of millions of so called "assault weapons", the types of firearms that gun control supporters have tried the hardest to get banned and the number of firearms typically rises about 4 million per year. Annual numbers of new AR-15s, the most popular semi-automatic rifle that gun control supporters call an "assault weapon," are soaring. In 2008, there were more than 337,000 new AR-15s configured for home defense, competition, training, recreational target practice and hunting. NRA supported Instant Check firearm transactions have increased over 10 percent annually since 2006.

Over the last quarter-century, many federal, state and local gun control laws have been eliminated or made less restrictive. The federal "assault weapon" ban, upon which gun control supporters claimed public safety hinged, expired in 2004 and the murder rate has since dropped 10 percent. The federal handgun waiting period, for years the centerpiece of gun control supporters' agenda, expired in 1998, in favor of the NRA-supported national Instant Check, and the murder rate has since dropped 21 percent. Accordingly, some states have eliminated obsolete waiting periods and purchase permit requirements. There are now 40 Right-to-Carry states, an all-time high, up from 10 in 1987. All states have hunter protection laws, 48 have range protection laws, 48 prohibit local gun laws more restrictive than state law, 44 protect the right to arms in their constitutions, 33 have "castle doctrine" laws protecting the right to use guns in self defense, and Congress and 33 states prohibit frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry. Studies for Congress conducted by the Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, the National Institutes of Justice, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found no evidence that gun control reduces crime. The FBI doesn't list gun control as one of the many factors that determine the type and level of crime from place to place.

Back to top

Sept 2010

 

SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION SUES IN NEW YORK STATE TO VOID
'GOOD CAUSE' CARRY PERMIT REQUIREMENT

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a federal lawsuit against Westchester County, New York and its handgun permit licensing officers, seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement of a state law that allows carry licenses to be denied because applicants cannot show "good cause." SAF is joined in the lawsuit by Alan Kachalsky and Christina Nikolov, both Westchester County residents whose permit applications were denied. Kachalsky's denial was because he could not "demonstrate a need for self protection distinguishable from that of the general public." Nikolov's was denied because she could not demonstrate that there was "any type of threat to her own safety anywhere." In addition to Westchester County, Susan Cacace and Jeffrey Cohen, both serving at times as handgun permit licensing officers, are named as defendants. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, White Plains Division.

Attorney Alan Gura is representing the plaintiffs, along with attorney Vincent Gelardi with Gelardi & Randazzo of Rye Brook, NY. Gura recently represented SAF and the Illinois State Rifle Association in their landmark Second Amendment Supreme Court victory over the City of Chicago. Under New York Penal Code 400.00, handgun carry permit applicants must "demonstrate good cause for the issuance of a permit," the lawsuit alleges. This requirement violates the Second Amendment, according to the plaintiffs.

"American citizens like Alan Kachalsky and Christina Nikolov should not have to demonstrate good cause in order to exercise a constitutionally-protected civil right," noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. "Our civil rights, including the right to keep and bear arms, should not be subject to the whims of a local government or its employees, just because they don't think someone needs' a carry permit. Nobody advocates arming criminals or mental defectives, but honest citizens with clean records should not be denied out of hand.

"Thanks to our recent victory before the Supreme Court," Gottlieb stated, "the Second Amendment now applies to state and local governments. Our lawsuit is a reminder to state and local bureaucrats that we have a Bill of Rights in this country, not a Bill of Needs'." The case is filed as Kachalsky v. Cacase, U.S. Dist. Ct. S.D. N.Y. 10-05413. Just in case you didn't know it SAFE is and has been an affiliate of the Citizens Committee for the Right Keep and Bear Arms and the Second Amendment Foundation for the past 17 years and we were honored to have their Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb be a speaker at our 2009 Firearm Civil Rights Conference. If you like you may go to the SAFE web-site and see the interview Mr. Gottlieb gave.

SAFE has over the past year and a half donated over $2,000.00 to the Chwick-v-Mulvey case in Nassau County. Additionally we have taken in donations from our members and forwarded that money to the lawsuit. This is an especially important case because Nassau County wants to arbitrarily decide what color guns you may own and possess in order to be lawful. They want to make it a crime to own any other color than those designated by County Law. This bill would impose a $1,000.00 fine and impose a sentence in jail for one year and confiscate your property without any compensation. All this without being involved in any crime what so ever, just having a gun of a different color. And if you think this new law would affect only Nassau County residents, think again. Anyone in the State of New York with a legally licensed handgun would become an instant criminal just by passing through Nassau County. This might even impact people from other states who are legally and lawfully transporting their legal and lawful firearms through New York State to another state where they would be legal to be in possession of a colored handgun. Just for the record almost immediately Suffolk County introduced the same legislation. Naturally SAFE attended the very next meeting of the committee and we made an appointment with the introducer of the bill Suffolk Legislator Jack Edington. After a vigorous discussion SAFE was able to persuade Mr. Edington to withdraw the bill pending the outcome of this Nassau Lawsuit. We believe we will win but in New York anything is possible. We strongly believe the individual Counties do not have the authority to independently and arbitrarily make such rules and especially those of such a severe nature by otherwise lawfully citizens of the state. We also strongly believe that the state alone has or should have such power so as to maintain uniform application of the law statewide. Because if they (the counties) don't abide a statewide standard and uniformity we could have anarchy by having 60 different county rules on the same subject. Unfortunately this is not the only lawsuit going in New York State on the firearms issue. As you see from above there is another very important lawsuit going on and I can predict more lawsuits in the future especially since and because of the two favorable DECISIONS by the US Supreme Court on our firearm Rights under the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

And like most people who cannot contribute money to every single worthwhile cause simply because we don't have enough money to do so we in the firearms representation field need help in funding and supporting these other lawsuits regarding firearms. To that end another Long Island Firearms group has contributed $2,000.00 to the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) to support its legal actions, including the lawsuit in Westchester County challenging a state law that allows carry licenses to be denied because applicants cannot show good cause. This is the second such contribution from a New York group. Earlier, the Shooters Committee On Political Education (SCOPE) contributed to the SAF legal action effort.

"SAF is very grateful for this level of support from Long Island Firearms," said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "The level of support we are getting from New York gun owners clearly demonstrates their dedication to correcting the Empire State's onerous gun laws. For far too long, officials in the Empire State have treated the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as a highly-regulated privilege. It is time for that to end." On July 16, SAF filed a lawsuit in federal district court on behalf of Alan Kachalsky and Christina Nikolov, both Westchester County residents whose permit applications were denied. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, White Plains Division.

The LongIslandFirearms.com web site recognizes the implications of this lawsuit and they have generously put their money on the line. We at SAFE appreciate the support of the LongIslandFirearms.com group. They maintain a website that promotes firearms education, gun reviews and other activities. Their website is LongIslandFirearms.com

Back to top

---

Jul-Aug 2010

52 PEOPLE SHOT, AND CHICAGO'S MAYOR DALEY STILL SAYS
SELF-DEFENSE FOR THE PEOPLE IS NOT NEEDED!

Fifty-two people shot in Chicago, eight of them fatally in a single weekend, yet Mayor Richard Daley refuses to acknowledge the right of the people to self defense. Year after year the statistics have piled up yet Mayor Daley has stubbornly defended the city's handgun ban. While he has luxuriated at his vacation home with the safety of armed bodyguards, the bodies of Chicago crime victims have stacked up like cordwood. Within days of the US Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment also applies to all States, cities and local municipalities Mayor Daley has proposed some of the most draconian and restrictive handgun licensing laws ever seen. This arrogant moron just doesn't get it. I would have thought the decision of Supreme Court would put an end to his insanity, and give the citizens of Chicago back their right to defend themselves. Daley thinks his constituents should be content to call 911 and wait for help to arrive while they're being shot, stabbed, raped, robbed or beaten. Those crimes happen fast, and when seconds count the Chicago police are just minutes away. Chicago residents have endured the terror of public disarmament for almost three decades, and all they have to show for it is a body count. Mayor Daley should be ashamed. He should be impeached or removed for not abiding by the very constitution he swore an oath to uphold, even the parts he doesn't personally agree with.

Even though the Supreme Court has ruled in our favor and I am glad they have I have a couple of real concerns. First, how did four people get on the US Supreme Court and because of a personal bias or hatred for guns rule against such an obvious straight forward Amendment in the US Bill of Rights. With all the literature and documentation in the form of historical records provided to this learned court by the parties involved how could these four people not understand the original intent and purpose of the Second Amendment? It was written as a guarantee to the people for the purpose of protecting the citizens from a government that might or could turn despotic or decide to rule the people instead of serving the citizens. If these jurists are as learned as they claim then why don't they understand and support the citizens rights under the Second Amendment regardless of their personal desires? Or is the Court now being filled with people who use their personal desires and wishes to trump the Constitution of the United States of America?

My second real concern is that even though this a win for all lawful gun owners in the country it still means that corrupt public officials whether elected or hired as civil servants can and will make life difficult for all lawful gun owners because they are the ones who make the laws and rules we honest people are compelled to abide by. These are the people who make the laws or rules that are reasonable or ridiculous. After all, most of the problems that have plagued the honest law abiding gun owner all over the country has come from politicians who claim to be trying to do something about the criminal misuse of firearms. Yet every proposed law has affected lawful firearms owners and not the criminals. Why is this? It is because criminals by definition do not obey any law so why should they obey these pesky firearms laws. So, even though we have finally won in the highest court that our civil right to own and use a firearm is protected by the US Constitution we will still have arrogant self serving public officials who will do everything in their power to limit, restrict and make difficult our ability to truly exercise that right. So it is up to us to make sure these types of public officials never get into office.
 

State Senate Candidate Takes Her Campaign to Shooting Range

On Tuesday April 20th, 2010 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a federal animal cruelty law so broadly written that it would criminalize the distribution of hunting videos and magazines under many circumstances. The 8-1 ruling in U.S. v Stevens is a big win for the National Rifle Association and hunters across America. A brief submitted by the NRA was cited in the majority's opinion.

"The NRA condemns animal cruelty. However, hunting and depictions of hunting are not animal cruelty. This excessive law would have imposed felony penalties for creating, possessing or selling mainstream hunting images. Therefore, we are pleased that the Supreme Court ruled against this overbroad law," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "Indeed, NRA publications like American Hunter, the largest-circulation all-hunting magazine in the world, could have been in jeopardy if this law was upheld."

Anti-hunting extremist organizations like the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) were the primary advocates for the deliberately overreaching language in Congress and its defenders in Court. HSUS's intentions should have been apparent from the beginning. Before becoming president of the organization, Wayne Pacelle said, "The definition of obscenity on the newsstands should be extended to many hunting magazines." And, this is precisely what the law did.

"American hunters and sportsmen are our country's true conservationists. It is offensive that those who work hardest for the preservation efforts of wildlife in this country are grouped with those who commit actual animal cruelty," concluded Cox. "Fortunately, the Supreme Court chose the First Amendment over Pacelle's radical agenda, and the overruling of this law prevents the unwarranted punishment of ethical hunters and outdoor media in the United States."

REPORT CONFIRMS MORE GUNS = LESS CRIME; NO PUBLIC SAFETY THREAT

A report published by MSNBC.com confirms "everything gun rights groups have been saying for years, that more armed citizens does not equate to increased violence, and actually coincides with a reduction in homicides. The on line news agency recently released an investigative report that record numbers of American citizens are now legally carrying firearms for personal protection. Yet, the report also reveals that homicide rates have declined dramatically during a period when gun sales have skyrocketed. Further, the report noted that Washington, DC with its extreme gun control has the highest murder rate in the nation, while Utah, with very liberal gun laws, has the lowest rate.

"This is further evidence that everything the gun prohibitionists have been claiming and predicting over the past two decades has been fundamentally fraudulent," said Second Amendment Foundation Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "They have repeatedly argued that more guns will equate to more crime and more firearms deaths, and MSNBC.com just let the air out of their sails with this exhaustive and well-balanced report." Gottlieb said the public "has gradually, but steadily come to the realization that the gun ban lobby has built its campaign of citizen disarmament on a mountain of falsehoods, one heaped on top of another."

"This is why," he said, "anti-gun groups have lost their momentum and their credibility. They failed to gain traction even with a Democrat-controlled Congress and an anti-gun White House. They are so desperate for attention that they have now declared war on private businesses just to generate publicity. Their high profile campaign of hysteria against Starbucks for complying with state laws that allow concealed and open carry in their coffee shops is based on an issue they fabricated just to grab headlines and television face time, and the public knows it.

"Every restrictive gun law, every ban, every gun-free-zone they have advocated and defended have one thing in common," Gottlieb concluded. "They gave us a body count. The MSNBC.com report suggests America has had enough."

First let me start this months' column by explaining why there is a change of venue for the SAFE Women On Target (WOT) Shooting Clinic scheduled for May 1st, 2010. We originally had it scheduled for use at the Bethpage Rifle & Pistol Club but because of a contract requirement that was not in the best interests of SAFE we cancelled the use of that club and scheduled this clinic for the Medford Indoor Shooting Range on Route 112. We have done these WOT clinics at this range numerous times before and the owner was most accommodating.

You see SAFE ran an NRA Certified Instructors Course at the Bethpage Club where we trained 32 men and women to be NRA instructors over a two day period in November 2009 and there was no contract requirement of any kind of SAFE to do this course then. Because everything ran so smoothly the SAFE Board of Directors decided to give the Bethpage Club a donation of $250.00 for their hospitality and to request the use of their facility for our upcoming WOT Clinic under the same circumstances. However, this time the Club wanted a contract that was not in the best interests of SAFE and extremely restrictive. So please go the last page of this newsletter for the latest and correct information about the location of the Women On Target Shooting Clinic. All other issues a remain the same.
 

Hypocrisy is the act of persistently pretending to hold beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually hold. Hypocrisy is thus a kind of lie and a hypocrite a liar. Usually hypocrisy may come from a desire to hide from others the real or actual motives or feelings of an individual. Hypocrisy is not simply an inconsistency between what is advocated and what is done.

Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, recently shot one of two intruders at his home just outside Tabor City, NC. The victim, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, a district attorney for Columbus, Bladen and Brunswick counties.

The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) and Columbus County Sheriff's Department are investigating the shooting, Gore said. Senator Soles, who was not arrested, declined to discuss the incident on the evening of the shooting. "I am not in a position to talk to you," Senator Soles said by telephone. "I'm right in the middle of an investigation."

Senator Soles, is a top ranking Democrat and the longest serving member of the State Legislature, already was the subject of an SBI investigation over sexual misconduct allegations with former male clients.

The peculiar or ironic thing is the Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn't hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim. This is the act of a hypocrite or in other words someone who believes the laws are not meant for them but for you and me to obey. This act has prompted some to ask if the Senator believes his life and personal safety is more valuable than yours or mine. But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can. Of course we know this isn't true.

This man is not the first nor will he be the last to exhibit such an arrogant attitude towards firearms owners. And that means we all should do everything in our power to make sure those elected to public office understand this issue or at the least will do what we the public want with regards to firearms ownership and use.
 

Congressman Tiahrt sent a message to the Bloomberg Anti-gun Mayors:
Stop Politicizing Fort Hood Deaths!!!

U.S. Congressman Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., released the following statement in response to heinous accusations from Mayor Bloomberg's anti-gun rights political organization Mayors Against Illegal Guns. On Monday the Bloomberg organization paid for a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post assigning blame for the Fort Hood massacre, in part, to firearm policy authored by Tiahrt and approved by Congress since 2002. "The mayors who politicized the tragic deaths of those whose lives were taken along with the dozens who sustained injuries at Fort Hood should immediately issue a public apology to the victims and their families," said Tiahrt. "Their use of soldiers' deaths, their smear campaign against me, and their attempt to deceitfully change public policy disgraces their reputations as public servants. Using the Fort Hood massacre to advance a devious ad campaign dishonors the freedoms our men and women in uniform have paid the ultimate sacrifice to protect. Americans everywhere should be outraged and demand that each of these mayors be held accountable. "The Tiahrt trace data amendment prevents the release of confidential law enforcement data to the public while making certain it is provided to local, state and federal law enforcement officials for use in criminal investigations. That's why the Fraternal Order of Police, the world's largest organization of sworn law enforcement officers, supports the Tiahrt trace data amendment.

"Contrary to what Mayors Against Illegal Guns have asserted, the Tiahrt amendment does not affect background check outcomes, does not affect who is permitted to own firearm, and does not restrict law enforcement officials from accessing and effectively using all available firearm data for criminal investigations. Allowing the federal government to maintain a firearm registry of law abiding American citizens who have passed a background test will do nothing to prevent terrorist attacks. Retaining a federal registry for 45 days or even 45 years will not make us any safer but will expose which citizens own guns and how many they own something every violent criminal would like to access."

Unfortunately, many opponents of the Tiahrt language, including Mayor Bloomberg, appear to be more interested in lawsuits against firearm manufacturers than about protecting law enforcement officers, the public, and privacy rights of law abiding citizens who own firearms.