NY starts confiscating guns from registrations

[gym]

Next time someone starts to complain about gun control, ask them who they voted for, and how many letters they have written and to whom, expressing this revelation that they had. I would bet you that they didn't do either 80% of the time. Because they say it won't make a difference.
Then remind them how we stopped the assault weapons ban, dead in it's tracks. Because we were united and got off our asses and did something about it.
Anyone who really thinks when an elected official suddenly finds 10,000 -100,000 emails and letters saying you better not do this, in his mail box, means nothing is tripping.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Sorry. I'm not buying that NY is a lost cause, nor am I buying the "everybody move elsewhere" as the solution either. Moving is A solution...but all the effect of a mass movement of gun rights activists out of the state would be to further consolidate the stronghold of the gun control activists, and allow them to further expand elsewhere that much easier.

You want a reason not to move? OK, I'll give you 29 of them: Electoral College votes.

One state, which represents 2% of the states, contains 5.4% of the electoral vote. Between NY and CA, that's 15.6% of the vote. Add a couple more significant states and you're talking a HUGE political bias on the national scale.

Think about it...is this what we really want?


These states MATTER...and the solution isn't as simple as a mass exodus to other states, unless that mass exodus also takes away a significant portion of their electoral votes in the process.

We can't all fight every battle...but somewhere, somehow, SOMEBODY CAN. We need to support those who stay who may very well be one of the few who may actually be able to help. With respect to excessively restrictive gun rights, one of those avenues is the court system...and getting a good case to go far enough to gain legal ground is part of how we've gotten where we are today, as compared to the 1970's.

Decades of changing demographics significantly altered California into what it is today. We shouldn't be supporting this strategy as a long-term solution for gun rights because it will FAIL.

 

[StrutStopper]

First, I am glad I moved out of NYC in'88. Never looked back. Glad I moved out of the state completely a few years later. Today I find myself in a state where our waffling governor tried to pass some pretty nasty gun control laws while riding the emotional wave after the Sandy Hook shooting. 2A supporters came out of the woodwork to fight. I testified against gun registration, AWBs, and several other bills at the statehouse along with hundreds of others. Of course, the mothers against gun violence and other anti-gunners turned out in droves too. The top state trooper got up and spread some anti-gun manure as well, I was happy to point out a bald faced lie of his and watch the Judiciary committee raise their eyebrows. The state even dragged in the police chief from Sandy Hook to testify. Although he and other antis got to speak for the better part of an hour and we all got about 30 seconds to 1 minute each we did a great job countering it all, and none of the bills even made it to a vote.The only one that passed was a Governor's task force to look at how to report people with mental problems to the NICS system. We did get some pro-gunners on that panel to keep the anti's in check. I expect to have to do it all again next year, and I will. I certainly hope the people of NYC and NYS have their day in court and have the NY Safe Act overturned as unconstitutional.

 

[barnbwt]

but all the effect of a mass movement of gun rights activists out of the state would be to further consolidate the stronghold of the gun control activists, and allow them to further expand elsewhere that much easier.

I think the point is that the resistance in those places is so insufficient at this point that the further entrenchment and strengthening of the Bastion of Idiocy is a foregone conclusion, and resistance can only slow it. The argument is not one of panicked/cowardly retreat, which is how most seem to perceive it, but tactical retreat. Yeah, if NY passes a law prohibiting citizens from leaving the state, I'd recommend we pull out all the stops to support those guys and keep them above water. But since retreat is still an option, well, their energy and resources can more effectively serve the movement elsewhere (and lest I sound like a collectivist, no one has any moral authority to force their action; I merely state that which makes logical/tactical sense).

NY wouldn't be a problem any more if all the gunnies being persecuted in CA gave up and moved in. PA wouldn't be in play at all in the game if they moved there instead. Yes, moving from NY to AZ serves little tactical purpose. But NY to TX or CO may make all the difference over the next decade.

As far as the Electoral College, didn't both NY and CA go to a proportional allocation scheme which removes yet another barrier to majority hegemony?

Strutstopper, do you think your testimony would have been as effective (or possible) if you had remained to fight the good fight in NYC? Thank you for working on our behalf, btw; I wish I had a head for public speaking and could help in this role, but unfortunately I'm not good for much besides donations/teaching/ranting/taking newbs to the range

TCB

 

[TJ AK-74]

RetiredUSNChief - I disagree with your 29 reasons, based on the fact that NY is so far gone, that even with staying and fighting hard, it is highly unlikely to ever change the tide of that state.

Here is an interesting website: http://www.270towin.com/states/New_York

This info is from the above site:

2010 Census Reapportionment: New York lost two electoral votes, giving it 29 through the 2020 presidential election. This is the 7th consecutive Census where New York has lost two or more electoral votes. New York, one of the 13 original colonies, joined the Union in July 1788. However, the state did not choose electors in the first election due to an internal dispute. In the 1810 census, New York became the nation’s most populous state, and had the most electoral votes from the 1812 election until the 1972 election, when it relinquished that distinction to California. Texas surpassed New York in those numbers in 2004. Like many other northeastern states, New York’s electoral clout has diminished in recent years. New York has been primarily a “blue” state ever since the Great Depression, only siding with a losing Republican when it chose its then-current governor Thomas E. Dewey over Harry S. Truman in 1948. In 2012, Barack Obama easily defeated Mitt Romney by 26% in the state.

Basically, if the 35% of thinking New Yorkers that didn't vote for Obama (and are most likely somewhat pro-gun) all left NY by the time they do the 2020 census, NY would lose 10-11 electoral votes, and those extra votes would most likely be given to the pro-gun states that they move to, leaving only 18 electoral votes. Not to mention that if NY loses 10 votes and conservative states gain 10 votes, that is a 20 vote swing in our favor. And if they move to states that are split closely, like PA, they could swing those states' votes as well, adding even more. Essentially, by staying in NY, gun owners are allowing the 10 electoral votes that represent them to go to the more anti-gun (D) candidate each election...

 

[gym]

Let's face it NY is not going to change, it as CA. on the opposite coast is the epicenter for ant-gun, pro Obama sympathizers. They are Democratic stronghold, a City where the very rich and very poor both support a corrupt political system for very different reasons.
The minority's who share the streets with the 7 figure wall street types, both have what they want there. And we will not get a big enough foot hold in either city in the next decade or more. In LA, it's the same thing, more homeless than anywhere else other than NY.
The cities with the largest homeless populations are:
New York City: 64,060
Los Angeles city and county: 53,798
Seattle/King County: 9,106
San Diego city and county: 8,879
San Jose/Santa Clara County: 7,631
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
I just Googled as I knew it to be true before I wrote it. The middle class is being pushed out with either $5000 dollar per month rents in NYC, or free from public assistance. Neither of those groups are pro gun, or really give a darn about anything other than money. The poor are voting in an administration that supports them as are the wealthy. Unfortunately the rest of the state is really meaningless as far as numbers go, as there aren't enough folks out of the 5 boroughs to change the fate of the state.
In communities of close knit ethnic groups like Brighton Beach, and Jackson Heights, you have literally millions of sub culture almost independent little counties that have no intention of integrating into the American fabric that we all grew up in.
Welfare mothers with 5 kids can pull in 150,000 per year with a grandparent as the head of the family unit, aside from free room and board, "in many cases a house, free electric food, internet, cable, etc. Why would anyone want to work for minimum wage.
We can't stop this until we get all these politicians out of office. The current administration knows these folks will "vote" to keep things the way they are. It's a free ride on the backs of the American working man. So when they say no guns, these folks will say "yes sir" guns are bad. Same thing with the Health insurance, they need 4 young healthy people out of 10 to float the thing. Bottom line if we wait it will collapse, but not so fast, not until anyone who stays there loses their rights. You won't get any help, if you stay. Both are port city's and will always generate wealth, so it's a very hard problem to solve with the amount of electoral votes they have. I got way too political there, but guns are not popular in that atmosphere, nor anything, "the man" doesn't like. They symbolize freedom, the opposite of "control"

 

[DoubleMag]

If your neighbors big, huge, beefy dog is coming into your yard, pee's on your morning paper, digs your flower bed, claws your car to pieces,eats your dog's food and then mauls your dog, I think you should just move. It's a free country, and let's be realistic it's probably cheaper vs. the legal hassles etc.

 

[45_auto]

If your neighbors big, huge, beefy dog is coming into your yard, pee's on your morning paper, digs your flower bed, claws your car to pieces,eats your dog's food and then mauls your dog, I think you should just move.

We had a similar situation around here. Luckily no one had to move. The "big, huge, beefy dog" rather dramatically lost a fight with a "small" truck shortly thereafter. Too bad the neighbors couldn't control him well enough to keep him in their yard.

I find it amazing how well "kharma" works sometimes with just a little help!

 

[barnbwt]

Unfortunately (or fortunately, to be honest) there are no "trucks" of national scale . Not to mention that such demise dooms both the yin and yang of the poor creature (to toss in some more Eastern philosophy )

TCB

 

[danez71]

RetiredUSNChief - I disagree with your 29 reasons, based on the fact that NY is so far gone, that even with staying and fighting hard, it is highly unlikely to ever change the tide of that state.

Here is an interesting website: http://www.270towin.com/states/New_York

This info is from the above site:



Basically, if the 35% of thinking New Yorkers that didn't vote for Obama (and are most likely somewhat pro-gun) all left NY by the time they do the 2020 census, NY would lose 10-11 electoral votes, and those extra votes would most likely be given to the pro-gun states that they move to, leaving only 18 electoral votes. Not to mention that if NY loses 10 votes and conservative states gain 10 votes, that is a 20 vote swing in our favor. And if they move to states that are split closely, like PA, they could swing those states' votes as well, adding even more. Essentially, by staying in NY, gun owners are allowing the 10 electoral votes that represent them to go to the more anti-gun (D) candidate each election...

Food for thought.....

Keep in mind that the election is already a forgone conclusion before they even count CA votes.

What has been more meaningful from CA is the Financial contribution. And dare I say NY(C) too.


EX: His (Obama) latest Democratic fund raiser netted over $20 MILLION in less than 24 hrs for a dinner fund raiser and a breakfast fund raiser the next morning just a couple weeks ago.


Also keep in mind, if all the pro RKBA people moved out of CA, CA would still be in the top 10 economies in the WORLD. Thats right... the WORLD.

The last time I checked (today), CA produced more agriculture than TX. So when push comes to shove, the Feds are going to want to keep the CA farmers happy before the TX farmers. (TX is 3rd on the list)


Its the same with NY, even if all the pro RKBA left, NYC would still be the financial capital of the world. And they would still contribute just as much money to the gun grabbing candidate of the moment.

All of that money funneling in to the gun grabbing political party buys them more national political clout to push their ideals than just the simple electoral votes.


And when/if all of the pro RKBA arms people leave those 2 states, then the Feinsteins and Bloombergs get to stand up and say "99% of the people of our great states wants gun control. We are leading the nation to safer communities."

Then they make it clear that the candidate who fits their agenda best will get their money.

Then they say "WE WON!!!"




Some people say its "tactical" to abandon NY and CA. But I fail to see sound reasoning .

It may sound cool to say "tactical" as a way to give more credit to the idea, but I have also yet to see anyone give a historical example of how giving up two battle fronts on opposite sides of you AND conceding to allow the enemy to get the bulk of the money has ever paid off.

 

[Warp]

And when/if all of the pro RKBA arms people leave those 2 states, then the Feinsteins and Bloombergs get to stand up and say "99% of the people of our great states wants gun control. We are leading the nation to safer communities."

And yet they will have so much violent crime they will be a laughing stock with nobody giving a crap what they say.

 

[Busyhands94]

We as gun owners should all do our part to convert anti-gunners. I'll be level with you, I'm friends with a girl named Samantha, she was afraid of guns and didn't want to have anything to do with them. Quite frankly I'm surprised we're even friends, but I have known her for years and we had coffee a few days ago. She actually started the conversation on guns, I cheerfully answered any questions she had. I explained to her that guns are power tools, and that it's all about who's using them. They can be used for good and enjoyment, or evil. Well, it all paid off yesterday she called me and had a little chat.

She said that she wanted me to teach her how to shoot, cast bullets, and hunt small game. I am PROUD... to say the least. I think once she's been through the hunter's safety course, I'll take her out to my buddy's private range and start her off with a single shot .22 rifle. Then if all goes well my .38 with some nice and light field loads. Or maybe a .410 for when she's ready to hunt rabbits. She said she liked Westerns, so I'm thinking I'll load her up some real light 30-30 loads for my uncle's levergun, and bring my cap and ball six shooter also.

That's quite possibly one less person that will vote for stupid anti-gun bulls, that's how we can as gun owners do our part to make civilians into shootists. And the more shootists there are, the less comfortable the gun grabbers will be.

 

[itsa pain]

So what do you mean by

Those are your words. Don't beat around the bush. You can't look me in the eye and tell me that is not about fighting the govt. with arms. That is war, you are just not willing to say it out loud, but you obviously imply it. If you can't even admit it, how are you going to do it? Walk loudly and carry a small stick?

The original post I was commenting on said

Those are his words. Are you going to look me in the eye and tell me that is not about war? Don't talk big and not have the guts to say it out loud. Don't accuse me of bringing up something that is obviously implied, just because you and others are not man enough to stand behind what you say.



That is proof that what I say is right. Because government pushed fear of outright bans, we have come out in droves to speak with out wallets. Your example shows that we can speak louder than the liberal politicians. They shove fear down out throat, and we respond



There is power in numbers, how are you going to get the majority of people on your side if they are fence sitters? By showing them we are winning right now. That gun laws don't work. Or will you do it by saying, "hey lets form a militia and fight the government?" Which will win the fence sitters? Where do you want the fence sitters? On our side or theirs? You say there is not enough pro-gun people on TV to sway the fence sitters, so your plan is to give up and take up arms against them AND the government? ignorant plan. WE ARE WINNING ALREADY DON"T BE STUPID and sabotage it for everyone else.

If America was like New York in most places, I would be the first to fight. It is not. It is not even close. Talk like yours may get us there though

They have declared war on gun owners and if you think they haven't watch when someone resists them. Hell they shoot people with no guns. Moving is an idiotic way to get around it. Why don't you move? I bet there are many states that are more pro gun then the one you are in

 

[itsa pain]

How/why is gun control a progressive issue anyway?

That has to be a joke, right?

 

[Gaucho Gringo]

Several months ago I wrote my states elected Representatives & Senators that I would never vote for them or any member of their party ever again if they voted for anti gun legislation. They wrote me back and said basically goodbye and good riddance. So I guess I am not voting for anyone associated with the party who starts with the letter D.

 

[gym]

Tonight while coming home from a gun show at the local fairgrounds in FL, I noticed signs up on "US1". I almost went off the road trying to get a picture. They said "Impeach Obama". There were about 10 or more, large signs, and a table set up with 3 adults, taking names on a petition to Impeach the President.
Anyone who lives up near Vero knows where the Caddy dealer is in town, "they are actually friends of ours ". Well right across the street were these folks busy setting up and waiting for folks to pull into the two empty lots next to them. I had the sushi so I went home after almost getting rear ended. I will go back tomorrow and sign up.
Maybe people are starting to wake up. Vero is a pretty conservative town. This was far better than the gun show.

 

[MattShlock]

NYC did the same thing with "assault weapons" a coupla decades ago... Grandfathered, register, we change our minds, file affidavit you have sold or removed them from the city limits. That's the Left!

 

[armoredman]

I distinctly remember a California state legislator who stood up and said if you are a law abiding gun owner, you should leave California soonest, because they don't want you there. Considering that they probably form a large part of the dwindling productive class in CA, that move is economic suicide for the state, but under current leadership would simply mean successful conservative states would be robbed to "bail" them out again.
Isn't the Republican party in CA listed on the Endangered Species List?

 

[danez71]

Originally Posted by danez71

And when/if all of the pro RKBA arms people leave those 2 states, then the Feinsteins and Bloombergs get to stand up and say "99% of the people of our great states wants gun control. We are leading the nation to safer communities."

And yet they will have so much violent crime they will be a laughing stock with nobody giving a crap what they say.

On the contrary - Once they outlaw guns, only the Outlaws will have guns,,,, which means most all of that violent crime will be committed by bad people with guns and thus bolstering their position that guns are evil bad things.

With that "evidence", the natural progression would be to further push to register and confiscate guns nation wide ala Autralia, UK, et al.

 

[Warp]

On the contrary - Once they outlaw guns, only the Outlaws will have guns,,,, which means most all of that violent crime will be committed by bad people with guns and thus bolstering their position that guns are evil bad things.

With that "evidence", the natural progression would be to further push to register and confiscate guns nation wide ala Autralia, UK, et al.

I disagree.

Which explains why the above has failed for the 'banners' for a little while now.

While places like Chicago and D.C. have a lot of violent crime, and gun crime, with very strict laws, most other states are making progress and getting less restrictive...and there is 0 traction for bans at the national level.

Now, make things even better by reducing the weight the anti states carry at the federal level, and things will only improve.

 

[Scooter22]

Problem with NY State is NY City. Thats what really swings votes away from upstate. This 5 round "law" makes every repeating long gun illeagle except for some of the bolt action mag feed shotguns.

 

[steelerdude99]

Problem with NY State is NY City. That's what really swings votes away from upstate. This 5 round "law" makes every repeating long gun illegal except for some of the bolt action mag feed shotguns.

That's their idea behind it. Not to run afoul of the Supreme Court ruling that says that the 2nd Amendment's is an individual right. "All guns" weren't outlawed, just ones that weren't "NY safe".

chuck

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

I disagree.

Which explains why the above has failed for the 'banners' for a little while now.

While places like Chicago and D.C. have a lot of violent crime, and gun crime, with very strict laws, most other states are making progress and getting less restrictive...and there is 0 traction for bans at the national level.

Now, make things even better by reducing the weight the anti states carry at the federal level, and things will only improve.

Respectfully, you may disagree all you wish. However, history has shown repeatedly that once the right to own firearms has been removed from the common citizen (or the common man was otherwise disarmed, in the event where no "right" actually existed in the first place), the citizens rarely, IF EVER, get their right to own firearms peacefully reinstated.

IF WE LOSE THE RKBA on the level that the UK or Australia (as examples) have done for their citizens, then it'll likely never come back to ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE to what it is now for us.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the pro-gun control crowd is in this for the long haul. They don't have to perform any outright confiscation of firearms....all they have to do is incrementally and progressively institute more and more gun control laws in the long term and in a few short generations they will have defacto eliminated this right from the American citizen.

When you cannot afford to buy, own, or shoot a firearm, then your right has been removed.

When you cannot pass down your firearm from generation to generation, then your right has been removed.

When you cannot afford the taxes involved in firearms ownership and use, then your right has been removed.

When you cannot afford the required high tech safety technologies mandated in the weapon, then your right has been removed.


When the GOVERNMENT has controll of all this, then it no longer matters what the crime statistics say...every citizen with a gun is automatically a criminal and therefore a part of the problem.

Once Uncle Sam is allowed that kind of leeway, you'll NEVER see the return of the RKBA in any fashion like what the Second Amendment is worded.

As for "reducing the weight the anti states carry at the federal level", like TJ AK074 mentioned in his posting: "Basically, if the 35% of thinking New Yorkers that didn't vote for Obama (and are most likely somewhat pro-gun) all left NY by the time they do the 2020 census, NY would lose 10-11 electoral votes...", I already mentioned that in post #52. Figure the odds that there will EVER be a mass exodus of population like that. Somewhere between slim and none.

And, since states like NY have a huge reason for being so powerful in the first place (namely, business and financial assets), they wouldn't be down for the count by a long shot. Large urban centers naturally breed liberal views.

 

[Warp]

Respectfully, you may disagree all you wish. However, history has shown repeatedly that once the right to own firearms has been removed from the common citizen (or the common man was otherwise disarmed, in the event where no "right" actually existed in the first place), the citizens rarely, IF EVER, get their right to own firearms peacefully reinstated.

IF WE LOSE THE RKBA on the level that the UK or Australia (as examples) have done for their citizens, then it'll likely never come back to ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE to what it is now for us.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the pro-gun control crowd is in this for the long haul. They don't have to perform any outright confiscation of firearms....all they have to do is incrementally and progressively institute more and more gun control laws in the long term and in a few short generations they will have defacto eliminated this right from the American citizen.

When you cannot afford to buy, own, or shoot a firearm, then your right has been removed.

When you cannot pass down your firearm from generation to generation, then your right has been removed.

When you cannot afford the taxes involved in firearms ownership and use, then your right has been removed.

When you cannot afford the required high tech safety technologies mandated in the weapon, then your right has been removed.


When the GOVERNMENT has controll of all this, then it no longer matters what the crime statistics say...every citizen with a gun is automatically a criminal and therefore a part of the problem.

Once Uncle Sam is allowed that kind of leeway, you'll NEVER see the return of the RKBA in any fashion like what the Second Amendment is worded.

As for "reducing the weight the anti states carry at the federal level", like TJ AK074 mentioned in his posting: "Basically, if the 35% of thinking New Yorkers that didn't vote for Obama (and are most likely somewhat pro-gun) all left NY by the time they do the 2020 census, NY would lose 10-11 electoral votes...", I already mentioned that in post #52. Figure the odds that there will EVER be a mass exodus of population like that. Somewhere between slim and none.

And, since states like NY have a huge reason for being so powerful in the first place (namely, business and financial assets), they wouldn't be down for the count by a long shot. Large urban centers naturally breed liberal views.

Your post seems to be full of ifs and whens that are not occurring.

That is the opposite of what is happening in most states and at the national level.

What part of the RKBA have we lost, at the national level, int he past 10 years? The "AWB" expired in 2004, which was getting an awful lot back...what since then have we lost?

Meanwhile, the majority of states are making progress. Shall Issue laws continue to pass, and restrictions/places off limits continue to be reduced.

 

[Warp]