Doc

And so the mystery continues. Is there anyway of telling at what point in the investigation this video report was made? In other words was this early on and refuted by subsequent other reports, or was this kind of after the dust had settled which of course would give this account more credibility. I never can understand why there is always this kind of contradictory information that comes out. Can't these reporters ever get it right? Where are they getting their information? There never seems to be any names associated with sources of info.

Well, here's the deal ..... We already have universal background checks for initial purchases. A few weeks back when I bought my Ruger American .270, I had a background check run on me along with all kinds of other info filled out on a form. So, what's new? Ok, here is what's new: background checks required for private sales. The question is, is this just another version of outlawing private sales of guns because of the unrealistic plan of having a federal firearms dealer run the check for you for some piddly little fee (which is just another way of saying that it will never actually happen) and your firearms will be virtually unsaleable.

There is only one realistic way to fight these kinds of screw-jobs by politicians, and that is to become a single-issue voter, and remember who voted for what on this. Of course we are in the minority, but you would be surprised how powerful a minority can be if we can just get our gun owning people to vote as a unified block. We can indeed put the fear of God back into these creeps. Also, actively work and campaign for the defeat of those that voted for this mess. Volunteer a bit of time as campaign workers. I understand that this state is a liberal, pinko, bastion of commies, but we have voted in Republican state senators and assemblymen before, and we can do it again if we can just keep in mind exactly who screwed us and who took us and our 2nd amendment rights seriously. We have to make it politically expensive for the politicians that thumbed their noses at us. We need a list made of Assembly and Senate who are our allies, and who are our enemies and vote accordingly during the next election.

That was the first thing that crossed my mind as I was reading that part. How many disturbed people will this law keep from seeking help with their mental problems? I agree with the intent of the mental health clauses in this bill, and I have no idea as to how to achieve what they are trying to achieve in any other ways, but I have to believe that this stuff just may have made the situation of wackos with guns actually worse instead of better.

I do believe that that was what was behind the hi-balling of this legislation. They were afraid of letting the NRA get too organized, so they fired this legislation through without adequate public comment period and so quick that probably most of those that voted for it didn't even have a chance to understand what they were voting for. When is the last time anyone here has ever seen legislation move anywhere near that fast before. It just never happens unless they are trying to slip something over on the public. It shows the sneaky underhanded tactics that the Dems are willing to use when ever they want to screw the public.

Yes, this thread is very unsettling ......... but true. If you all think that this is the end, just wait until the next multiple murder. They aren't done yet. And by the way, we aren't done yet either. There is still the federal action coming. Keep those emails, letters and phone calls coming folks. And then there is the follow-up activity where every vote for this legislation should mean an automatic vote for that candidate's opponent in the next election. If our sincerity about this kind of crap is to maintain any credibility, we had better follow through with our determination to bring havoc on the re-election campaigns of any of these people that are voting against our 2nd amendment rights.

I want to know exactly which senators voted for this bill. And then, I want gun owners to follow through with their threat to use their votes against these people. To me that is the next logical step. If these guys are successful at thumbing their noses at gun owners without penalty, then the floodgates of firearms bans and legislated harrassment of legal firearms owners will explode in this state and eventually across the country. It's time to put up or shut up!

What a struggle trying to read this thing. Some of it is almost like in code or something. I believe it has gotten to the point of needing a lawyer at time of purchase if you are considering buying or selling a gun (I did see some 5 to 15 year mandated sentences for some violations). I see a new area of specialization developing for lawyers. Some of what I saw regarded mental health/gun ownership issues. In fact that was a pretty large chunk. Of course the devil's in the details, but on the surface, those things looked good. I will be continuing to dig my way through this mess and try to make some sense of it all, but I really don't hold out much hope for de-coding it all.

SH-H-H-h. There is nothing keeping them from opening up a new front involving ammunition components. Right now that is a ways down their list of priorities, but I will guarantee that reloaders will have their turn at having their rights trampled. Let me whisper a tip to you right now: Buy components. Buy as much as you can possibly afford. Powder, brass, bullets, primers, etc., etc. Put away a lifetime supply if you can. The price will never be cheaper, and the legal ability to buy is so far available. Pass it on!

Probably not many. But their whole lives revolve around votes. To them their whole future and measure of success involves keeping as many of their voting constituents voting for them as possible. Our mission is to convince them that we are a solidly unified body of voters who will not tolerate being under-represented on the issue of gun control. That is why this forum has been temporarily taken over by this subject. It is not acceptable to have any gun owners waffling around on this issue. There is no room for defection. For politicians to think even for a minute that we are not unified against another useless round of further worthless gun control, is basically the unthinkable, and will surely lead to some fundamental losses that even the antis have never dared imagine. We are in the minority, and the only thing that we have going for us is that we are a voting block that is of single mindedness and therefore have power to be reckoned with. This all shows an understanding of what is important to politicians. If we all understand that then there is no need for them to "think the same as us civilians". They only need to understand the penalty for not listening to a very vocal core of dedicated voters.

I believe that the legislators are only now becoming aware of the fecal-storm that is upon them. I just hope that each gun-owner does his and her part to impress on these guys that there is a significant unified voting block out here that is intently interested that they "represent" us.

Frankly, I don't buy ammunition from Walmart. In fact if they shut down their whole sporting goods area, it probably would be months before I ever found out. Their stock has always been so sparce and irrelevant that I really don't go there to buy anything outdoor related anymore, especially anything that has to do with guns or archery. The fact is that I load my own ammo, and Walmart has never stocked re-loading equipment or components. So, if they have decided to make some political judgement to not sell any particular kind of ammo or whatever, I'm afraid I am not in a position to exercise any kind of boycott, or make any kind of protest ..... lol. Their views on gun issues is totally irrelevant to me.

I believe that the staff reads enough to get the gist of which side of the issue the letter-writer is coming from. I also believe that a check mark is made on a list indicating "For" or "Against". As far as the details of the content, they are only to validate true interest in the issue and are to indicate that the writer views this issue as very important. I have heard enough reports from legislators that show that they do boil these responses down to numbers and have in the past provided those exact numbers to the media as a ratio. I am convinced that they look at these letters as votes in thier next election. I think they have enough political savvy to understand that anyone who takes the time to compose and send an opinion on an issue is very likely to translate the response into an important part of their voting choice.

Nothing is stopping anyone from writing a rebuttal. But I'll guarantee that there are already plenty rebuttals on their way already.

Here is the reply from my State Senator (a confessed anti-gun Democrat....lol): Thank you for taking the time to e-mail me. Your comments and suggestions are very important to me and an integral part of the legislative process. Doesn't that sound like a quick brush-off? He doesn't even acknowledge the subject, and his response could just as easily be about something like fracking or any other subject that he doesn't want to commit to. Talk about a canned response meant to say nothing of content or commitment. Well, it doesn't matter. At least he knows that he just blew off one more vote in the next election, and if he gets enough similar responses, it may occur to him that in a close election, he may be cutting his own throat.

Here is a reply From Brian Kolb, NYS Assembly Minority Leader (less than 8 hrs from the time I sent him my message): Thank you for expressing your concerns about proposed gun control measures. The horrific tragedies in Newtown, Connecticut and Webster, New York have prompted calls for some fundamental changes in public safety regarding firearms and mental health. I welcome such discourse. Our nation has a framework in place to thoughtfully address issues such as these. I have always been a steadfast supporter of the Second Amendment. It is therefore worth noting that the United States Supreme Court has recently re-affirmed that the Second Amendment should be construed as stating that an individual has a fundamental right to gun ownership for the purpose of self-protection. I remain committed to advocating for our Constitutional Freedom. New York State already has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. We do not need any more. Our goal should be to address the underlying issues that have resulted in tragedies such as Newtown and Webster. We need to proactively ensure that individuals who should not have guns do not obtain them, period. There should not be further restrictions placed on law-abiding citizens. This will involve the cooperation of mental health professionals, interaction with local law enforcement and others, as well as an enhanced reporting system. The scope of these tragedies transcends a discussion that is simply about guns. It requires a fundamental examination of our society and public safety. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Brian M. Kolb Assembly Minority Leader

Another letter sent out to my State Senator and state assemblyman: I heard a lot of distressing talk in the Governor’s address about another round of proposed attacks on the rights of law-abiding gun owners in this state. As one of your constituents, I want to go on record as opposing a further spread of these ineffective attempts at violence control. I think that the legislated harassment of the law abiding in combination with the coddling of the criminal element has gone on entirely too long and needs to be halted right now. I also do not want the government mandating that I be placed in a defensive handicapped position to those criminals bent on doing harm to me or my family. I see no reason for our government to be legislating that law abiding citizens be put at a disadvantage to the criminal element when it comes to home defense. The time is now to begin innovative approaches to violence control rather than simply trotting out the old time-worn, unimaginative, failed, battles against guns and the law abiding citizens that use them. It’s time to insist that remedies focus on the root causes rather than the pieces of hardware that are legitimately used everyday in a legal fashion by your constituents. Thank you for your time.

My blood-pressure raises a little everytime I hear somebody saying "we don't need them". Who has the right to say what I do or don't need? I really don't need any home defense ..... unless somebody is breaking down the front door or crawling through a window. Who has the right to dictate that I am legally required to be less well-armed than your average home invader? Who do we trust with those kinds of life and death decisions in our lives? ..... The anti-gun crowd? If they can guarantee that those that would do me or my family harm would abide by any laws (existing or proposed), then maybe some negotiations might occur. Until that time, I have no interest in having people tell me what I need.

Actually, this January thaw has been pretty complete. There is almost no snow on the hill right now. All those scrapes and trails are exposed right now. And of course this is the best time to check for sheds. Couple up the shed hunting with scouting and get out there before the snow buries everything again.

Early spring is a good time to check out the previous year's rut and travel patterns. Scrapes and rubs and trails will be clear until the foliage starts to come on the under-story. Very often, the same areas will be used annually unless something happens to the area like maturing of trees, the change or elimination of food sources, the destruction of bedding areas, etc. Once in a while Mother Nature will throw you a curve like she did this hunting season in my area. We had a failure in the production of all acorns and wild apples. Since that is the primary (almost exclusive) food source that draws most of the deer into their fall travel, feeding and bedding areas, I had to rely primarily on in-season scouting trying to figure out the new and strange patterns. What I found was that without a concentration of these traditional food sources, and since we have not been an agricultural area for many decades, the deer travels were not very concentrated, and they ranged over a much wider area with very little obvious sign. If you are hunting farmlands, it might be worth your time to have a conversation with area farmers to see just what crops they intend to put in and where. It can be good intelligence to gather while you are refreshing your hunting permissions.

I think this may be a case where political idealogy is getting in the way of reasonable recognition of what is really happening in their personal lives. I would guess that if you are a devoted Cuomo/Biden/Obama fan and voted for them, it may be a bit difficult to admit that they are attempting to dismantle your rights to use your gun. It's interesting to watch people wrestle with that conflict. It's got to be tough.

It's just simply one more spin-off effect of gun registration. The info is out there now, there's nothing legislators can do now except perhaps pass laws that keep new gun registration info from being released.

I don't exactly disagree with what you are saying. But I do understand the practicalities on the receiving end of these letters and the fact that inspite of the content, it will be used simply as a "yes" or "no" opinion count on further gun control. So, just for the sake of getting counted on the right side of this issue, I went through the process. I do believe that any law that is on the books needs to be enforced or deleted. In terms of governmental issues regarding mental health, I guess I don't know enough about the issue to have much of an opinion on it. So, I guess I don't have any serious problems with the content of what they composed. By the way, I am still composing my own emails and letters to send out to legislators. I want these people to be buried in letters, calls, and e-mails so they understand that this is a matter taken seriously by the voting hunters and gun owners. So this little process by Ruger is simply another additional method of "piling-on". It won't effect my current letter-writing campaign.

Unfortunately, I believe you are right. These guys don't have time to read all these letters and e-mails. What really happens (as I understand it) is that staff members record "yea" or "nay" as to whether the mail is indicating support or opposition to new gun control efforts. All the details of your comments are disregarded. However, I have included some of the high-lights of my thoughts and reasoning just to make the correspondence look like a serious opinion.

I wonder how many "trigger words/phrases" on this thread alone have sent up red flags in the computers of the offices of homeland security?