Mr VJP

Oh yes they will, because along with ISIS comes martial law for the rest of us. Think the police will care which one you happen to be when they need to go to work? I don't.

Then don't complain when your gun rights get trampled!

Nobody is saying violence is what we need. I don't know how many times I've said that, and fools keep bringing it up. Non-compliance is what we need and we need to make it known we will not comply, which is what is happening. Many people are ignoring this law and Cuomo knows it. Some have even left the state and taken their fortunes and taxes with them as the ultimate protest. A few big gun manufacturers are doing the same thing. That hurts Cuomo and the state's anti-gun lawmakers more than any other form of protest. Should you be stupid and flaunt your AR in front of his face? No. But you don't comply with tyranny either and you make it known you will not. Want to come to a home and take a now unconstitutionally deemed "illegal" rifle. Do it. You won't find it because it has moved on. Be smart enough to be one step ahead of the tyrants in every respect, to protect yourself from some legal lynching. There are many things gun owners can do to show the anti-gun authorities you will not comply, and it can be done without fear of arrest and prosecution. But it takes a brain that understands the legal system, and how it persecutes it's enemies, to know how to do it. NY gun owners are in the equivalent of a chess game. The anti's make a move, NY gun owners make a move. If you don't have the guts to play it out, you lose. If you don't have enough advantage in the game to win, go for the stalemate. That way they don't win and you don't lose. My biggest gripe with NY is, if gun owners, years ago, had been smart enough, and lucid enough, to see this was all coming, they wouldn't be in the sheit hole they now find themselves in. There was a lot of skepticism, denial and mockery of the warnings for years in NY, and the people most responsible for it, still haven't learned they are wrong.

This is happening in California as I type this. I give NY about 1 year before you'll see it too. http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/california-gun-confiscation-bill-passes-state-senate-committee/

Selling online would involve shipping, which might be an issue for something this big. Shipping costs might be a little high too.

Politicians and anti-gun morons feel we need more laws against shooting people with guns, because we don't already have effective laws against killing people.

Finally someone is asking the right questions in this land. But will any elected hack answer them truthfully? http://www.examiner.com/article/cnn-commentator-nails-it-as-chicago-council-smashes-thumbs

BTW, notice all the people listed in the original post, except for a couple of Independents, are DEMOCRATS! Why would a gun owner ever vote for any Democrat?

You forget politicians swear to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States. By passing a law in violation of that oath they are a candidate for impeachment, and possibly charges of treason. Obama gets to decide which laws to enforce and which to ignore. What consequences does he suffer. You also seem to think they actually represent the people these days. Why are they spending us into bankruptcy buying votes then? Potholes? On my way out of my mountain road, potholes are the least of my worries, and the last thing I want to see here is some lazy taxpayer funded public employee blocking my way!

And these guys know what the reality of the SAFE Act is, but they don't seem too upset by the fact the law was passed! "Oh well, the government just took away some of my rights with the threat of imprisonment. What can you do? I think I'll have another beer and just take a nap." The founding fathers would be ashamed of all complacent, docile, apathetic, gun owners. Nothing you have in this life is worth the freedom you are about to see vanish. If you won't have freedom, what difference does it make if you risk going to jail? And when your grandchildren ask you what you did to stop it, what are you going to say? I voted against Cuomo? Big deal.

If Astorino has to contact NY gun owners to get them to vote for him, NY gun owners are stupider than I thought.

Anyone who is willing to comply with the SAFE Act law is just helping the anti-gun politicians to proceed to the next step. What will that be? Bans on all semi auto rifles? All handguns? All Semi auto shotguns? When do you guys decide to grow a pair and say, "I will not comply!" When guns are outlawed, I'll become an Outlaw! And that ain't just talk!

Well, it's certainly near the bottom when it comes to firearm rights and it's treatment of firearm owners.

They always have, and always will. But how do you get the idiots in America, who are clueless about guns, to see it?

There's an old saying, that is about to prove very prophetic...... "Registration eventually leads to confiscation" NY handgun owners may be the first to find out it's true.

WHO?? He ain't getting a lot of press, is he? Why is that?

I remember way back when NY first proposed having handguns registered. Many people didn't like the idea, but more handgun owners were of the opinion it was a GOOD thing, and if you had nothing to hide, you had nothing to fear. Remember that the next time someone tries to tell you that.

Elmo, these drugs are not drugs that get you "high". They are mind altering drugs. People on them are completely lucid and in control of their bodies. It's what these drugs do to their mind that makes them dangerous. BTW, all of the shooters listed in the article, including Rodgers, were on very powerful psycho drugs for some time prior to going off. Rodgers knew an overdose would kill him, as would any drug, but they didn't make him feel more powerful or invincible. They don't act like alcohol or cocaine and give you drive or beer muscles. Allowing these drugs to be prescribed by any therapist or physician without close scrutiny and regulation, is going to cause many more of these mass shootings. And if you take their guns, they'll resort to other methods, like gasoline or vehicles. Rodgers used a knife and a car in his attacks too. In countries where guns are not available, people on powerful psych meds still kill lots of people, without using guns. There is a connection, but American research grants are not pushing to look into it.

Because the murders committed by psycho drug using mentally ill people without using firearms are just not reported and sensationalized by the media to advance an agenda. BTW, my point is NOT that the mentally ill were the problem. The psychotropic drugs prescribed were. Millions of firearms, and firearms owners, did NOT commit any murders in any of those years. Therefore the firearms are obviously not the problem. The abuse of a Constitutional right by a few individuals to cause harm, is not a justification to repeal that Constitutional right from ALL of the people. If you don't think requiring our elected officials to look into the psycho drugs prescribed to these killers is just as important as their desire to ban firearms in civilian hands, you are no friend of the 2nd Amendment.

It is a fact that all of these mass shooters were using psychotropic drugs. The article gives you all of the specific facts on the drug use by each shooter. It is a fact that is the common link in all of these cases. All of the facts are listed in the article. To say the connection between the two is mere opinion is to deny the obvious, which is what the anti-gun crowd is doing and then misdirecting the public's attention to gun control as the answer. By denying the fact there is a common element in the use of these drugs and mass shootings, you are helping them get away with their misdirection, thereby helping them perpetuate the lie that the problem is firearms in our hands. That is the opinion of the anti-gun crowd, which you do not seem to be challenging. I am. See the point? Maybe another "opinion" piece on the subject might help you see it. http://www.cchrint.org/2014/05/26/will-lawmakers-investigate-elliot-rodgers-psychiatric-drug-use-or-ignore-it-that-is-the-question/

Of course, Virgil brings nothing to the debate as usual, other than some snide remark. Why don't you read the article and try to offer something constructive to the debate for once? Tell me what's in the article you don't believe is a fact. Or perhaps you want the debate focused on firearms and the eventual confiscation of them? BTW, that was simply a reprint from World Truth TV...... http://worldtruth.tv/nearly-every-mass-shooting-in-the-last-20-years-shares-one-thing-in-common-and-it-isnt-weapons/ Maybe you like them better, but I doubt it. Makes no difference to me what the source is if the facts are correct. The Main Stream Media is currently the most dishonest source of information Americans can view.

It's not a gun issue. Sometimes insurance pays for things the patients shouldn't be getting at all! http://prepperchimp.com/2014/06/17/nearly-every-mass-shooting-in-the-last-20-years-shares-one-thing-in-common-and-it-isnt-weapons/

I don't know if you can go to $1000 or not, but the best rifle in synthetic and stainless, in my opinion, is the Kimber Montana. They make a great one in .30-06. A match grade chamber, great trigger, pillar bedding and air gauged barrel insures fantastic accuracy. It is also the lightest .30-06 on the market, short of a custom rifle. And just because it's light doesn't mean heavy recoil. With the Kevlar composite stock designed by Melvin Forbes, of Ultra Light Arms fame, the felt recoil is minimal. And you don't need to put a scope on it that costs 2 or 3 times what the rifle did either. A good Leupold VX-II in 3x9-40mm will be perfect and it's guaranteed for life. You can find good prices on this rifle on www.gunbroker.com and should be able to get the rifle, scope, mounts and rings for about $1300 total. That may sound high, but you will not feel that way after you own it. It will last a number of lifetimes and will never be worth less than you paid for it. When it comes to a good rifle, go for the best you can possibly afford. Compromise somewhere else. I may sound like I'm sold on the Kimber Montana. I am. I have 5 of them now.

Hex type or torx head screws are a good idea as they don't strip easily. Other than that, the alignment tool is good for twist in rings, but any good 1 inch pipe will work well. Unless you're a perfectionist, really not needed for hunting accuracy. You'd have to be pretty far off to bend a scope, and you'd see it when you put the scope in the rings. A bench rest shooter may want to use everything he can to eliminate any variables, but a hunter need not worry so much. Just be sure the scope is snug enough not to move when the rifle is fired and the screws stay tight. P.S. Using a level to make sure the scope is level with the action is a good idea. It does effect long range shots if it's off.

Nothing mechanically wrong with the American engine. It's the drivers and the fuel they put in it that need an overhaul.