Sweeney Response Letter to me

[Doc]

Equally important is that follow-up letter or e-mail to explain to them what just happened. Focus people .... Part of my ballot might as well be already filled out right now. I know how the state legislature part of it will look already.

[mike rossi]

If we assume that it is possible to vote out Sweeney, are you equally willing to vote out Mark Grisanti?

My next question is do you believe the chances are good that the person who replaces Sweeney in Long Island will be better in respect to hunting and/or second amendment rights?

My third question is Who will replace him as chair of the en-con committee? I am not familiar with how the committees are formed, nor how the chair person is selected, do you? I do know that one gentleman from downstate on the en-com committee didn't know what a muzzleloader was and had to ask seconds before voting. I will give him credit for at least asking when he doesn't know, which is probably better than some of those ego-maniacs...

[jjb4900]

If we assume that it is possible to vote out Sweeney, are you equally willing to vote out Mark Grisanti?

My next question is do you believe the chances are good that the person who replaces Sweeney in Long Island will be better in respect to hunting and/or second amendment rights?

My third question is Who will replace him as chair of the en-con committee? I am not familiar with how the committees are formed, nor how the chair person is selected, do you? I do know that one gentleman from downstate on the en-com committee didn't know what a muzzleloader was and had to ask seconds before voting. I will give him credit for at least asking when he doesn't know, which is probably better than some of those ego-maniacs...

good point. what if we have anti-gun, anti-hunting politicians running against someone who voted for the Safe Act, but has been a friend to sportsmen? a little more research needs to be done on each candidate before you cast your vote.

[mike rossi]

You know when Columbine happened, President Bush did the same exact thing which Obama did after Sandy Hook - in a matter of hours Bush proposed knee jerk gun legislation - remember?  That is beside the point. In this state or any state, we really cant vote in 100% republicans, therefore it should be obvious that sportsmen friendly DEMOCRACTS, are much, much, more important than pro-sportsmen republicans. That is if you want action, rather than the illusion of action, consider the importance of bipartisan support...

[Five Seasons]

If we assume that it is possible to vote out Sweeney, are you equally willing to vote out Mark Grisanti?

My next question is do you believe the chances are good that the person who replaces Sweeney in Long Island will be better in respect to hunting and/or second amendment rights?

My third question is Who will replace him as chair of the en-con committee? I am not familiar with how the committees are formed, nor how the chair person is selected, do you? I do know that one gentleman from downstate on the en-com committee didn't know what a muzzleloader was and had to ask seconds before voting. I will give him credit for at least asking when he doesn't know, which is probably better than some of those ego-maniacs...

 

very good points. Replacing sweeny with another LI dem will not net any difference in the safe act. it just doesn't affect that part of the state like it does ours. At least sweeney has the best interest of sportsman in mind.

[mike rossi]

very good points. Replacing sweeny with another LI dem will not net any difference in the safe act. it just doesn't affect that part of the state like it does ours. At least sweeney has the best interest of sportsman in mind.

Sweeney tied up the crossbow bill, a chairmen tied to the antis might tie up every pro-hunting bill... Pete Granis was a notorious anti- trapper when he was an assemblyman from NYC, during which he sponsored numerous anti trapping bills. He was later appointed commissioner of the DEC by Governor Idiot Spitzer... That was only a few years ago, remember?

[Doc]

very good points. Replacing sweeny with another LI dem will not net any difference in the safe act.

Not true! replacing anyone who voted "Aye" on that bill will send a message that such anti-gun voting will not be tolerated by gun owners. It will send a message that these guys serve at the pleasure of their constituents. It will send a message that gun owner's rights cannot be trampled on without consequences. I don't care if the opposition is even more anti-gun than the one being booted out. That message has to be sent. And like I said before, there needs to be follow up e-mails that explain that trampling on the rights of gun owners is a problem for them. Also, there should be emails to the new legislator explaining that they have just witnessed what happens to those that  vote against gun owners. So in case they are anti gun people, they have been put on notice that their fate is in the hands of their gun owning constituents. That is a very powerful message that ripples into all kinds of different issues, and a message that no one has been sending these guys.

 

I can't be anymore serious about all of this. If we don't use this so-called Safe Act as a rallying point for gun policy voting, we are indeed squandering the last chance to make a stand. Right now gun owners are quite united in their hatred for this law. We have not really been united on anything to this extent in any of my memory. It is up to us to keep that hatred alive and to push other gun owners to act accordingly at the polls. Stay focused people and don't be side-tracked by other issues. This is a one-issue election if voting is ever to really mean anything in this state.

[Doc]

good point. what if we have anti-gun, anti-hunting politicians running against someone who voted for the Safe Act, but has been a friend to sportsmen? a little more research needs to be done on each candidate before you cast your vote.

NO! See above reply.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

If they will vote against a COnstitutional right don't think for one minute they won't tun on hunting if it suits them .Hunting is no a right so do go to sleep and believe it is safe. THis has to be a ONE issue election.

[BizCT]

Get off your knees, Sweeney! You're blowing the game!

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

[Five Seasons]

NO! See above reply.

 

doc,

 

my point was that if we just vote them out, downstate there's a 90% chance they're just being replaced by another politician who supports the act. don't forget it was popular to many. The only win we have is if we replace with those against the act. and honestly I just dont see that happening. Most people have much bigger issues that they're voting for than gun control. I think we tend to live in a vacuum sometimes in what we think our neighbors value as opposed to what we value.

[shawnhu]

NO! See above reply.

doc,

my point was that if we just vote them out, downstate there's a 90% chance they're just being replaced by another politician who supports the act. don't forget it was popular to many. The only win we have is if we replace with those against the act. and honestly I just dont see that happening. Most people have much bigger issues that they're voting for than gun control. I think we tend to live in a vacuum sometimes in what we think our neighbors value as opposed to what we value.

Won't know until we try, unless you also fortune tale on the side.

If a current Pro-Safe act politician is voted out, chances of a replacement politician being Pro-Safe may be high, but if you DON'T vote them out, chances of a Pro-Safe politician in office is 100%. I'll take the other odds.

[jjb4900]

I'll take the time to look at each candidate and see what their stand is on ALL the topics that are important to me........I won't just cast a vote out of anger.

[mike rossi]

Doc, I understand you that are saying send safe supporters a message. But why is Steve Piatt and company focusing on Sweeney? The only common denominators which connects the dots is that he stalled the crossbow bill and he is a democrat. The recent anti-Sweeney rhetoric is not about the Safe Act, it is about the crossbow bill and the republicans are framing it as a partisan issue which serves them very well, but it doesn't do sportsmen any good.

 

I will post a voting registration link or mail anyone a voter registration form if they want to (try) to vote Sweeney out... Just stop make everything the republican party, the NYSCC, and the Outdoor Writers Association says or publishes sacred cows in the world of hunting...

[Doc]

I'll take the time to look at each candidate and see what their stand is on ALL the topics that are important to me........I won't just cast a vote out of anger.

And I am saying that as long as we cannot be united against those that voted for this unconstitutional travesty, the voting system means nothing. We have taken a slap in the face that emboldens politicians to continue abuses that go even beyond gun issues. They have to be made aware that we set limits on them. If you are unwilling to take this one simple step of unity, then there probably should be no complaining about what has been done to us and what is likely to be done in the future. And yes, anger is exactly my motive and should be. Basically I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it any more. It's time to put away our little pet ideologies and focus on one of the worst affronts to the Constitution that have been handed to the citizens in a long time. If we cannot unite and rally around this major assault on our rights, then I guess what is being said is that we are unwilling to fight back the anti-gun activists and the battle for gun-owner's rights is totally lost and with our consent. You can join this effort to make politicians understand that the citizens still have power, or you can squander the opportunity to send that message by diluting your vote and having it serve absolutely no purpose other than to further convince politicians that they have absolutely nothing to fear from voters.

 

However, the vote is still an individual right that each citizen can implement in a way that they see fit. Some may take this opportunity to make a firm statement about how we are to be governed, and the fact that pro-gun advocacy and political power is still a force to be reckoned with. Perhaps for others that issue is not all that important.

[Doc]

doc,

 

my point was that if we just vote them out, downstate there's a 90% chance they're just being replaced by another politician who supports the act. don't forget it was popular to many. The only win we have is if we replace with those against the act. and honestly I just dont see that happening. Most people have much bigger issues that they're voting for than gun control. I think we tend to live in a vacuum sometimes in what we think our neighbors value as opposed to what we value.

Absolutely, there are places in this state where you will have no choice. The ones that voted for the so-called Safe Act will be being opposed by others that are also anti-gun. However, if gun owners boot out the ones that voted for the act, just think of the powerful message that will have been sent. I maintain that the new holder of that office will be thinking twice before blatantly slapping the faces of gun owners again regardless of his actual feelings on the issue. It's all about the message and the demonstration that voting against the 2nd Amendment has consequences. Now whether we can actually pull off the unseating of these characters or not still remains to be seen. I already have seen some indications that gun owners don't really have the courage of their convictions, and it is very difficult to get gun owners to unite around any issue. And perhaps we are getting exactly what we deserve. But it occurs to me that we will never have as good an opportunity to galvanize the entire gun owning community for a positive statement as we have with the safe Act incursion on our rights. We have seen the brief outrage that took over the community. And while I have to admit that the issue has nearly faded into oblivion, I am hoping that the anger can once again be rekindled when election time comes around. Consider the message that gets sent if we do not act in a decisive fashion at the polls. We will be publicly declaring, loud and clear, that it is open season on guns and gun owners and that our political will is simply a paper tiger that can be shredded any time a legislator wishes. I'm hoping that is not the message that gets sent.

[Five Seasons]

I'll take the time to look at each candidate and see what their stand is on ALL the topics that are important to me........I won't just cast a vote out of anger.

 

well put

[Culvercreek hunt club]

If your Constitutional rights are not #1 priority then you ARE the problem. Everthing else is secondary.

[Five Seasons]

If your Constitutional rights are not #1 priority then you ARE the problem. Everthing else is secondary.

 

I don't see anyone arguing that. The debate is how to best go about it.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Supporting a candidate that has already demonstrated a willingness to vote against the Constitution becasue he tosses you a few bones in another area is wrong. You already know their view. I Would rather take a chance on a new person in office and if they don't deliver get rid of them also. Whatever Sweeney's views are on other topics do not matter. If her were spear heading free licenses and doubling the amount of state land I would still say he has to go.

[shawnhu]

doc,

my point was that if we just vote them out, downstate there's a 90% chance they're just being replaced by another politician who supports the act. don't forget it was popular to many. The only win we have is if we replace with those against the act. and honestly I just dont see that happening. Most people have much bigger issues that they're voting for than gun control. I think we tend to live in a vacuum sometimes in what we think our neighbors value as opposed to what we value.

Absolutely, there are places in this state where you will have no choice. The ones that voted for the so-called Safe Act will be being opposed by others that are also anti-gun. However, if gun owners boot out the ones that voted for the act, just think of the powerful message that will have been sent. I maintain that the new holder of that office will be thinking twice before blatantly slapping the faces of gun owners again regardless of his actual feelings on the issue. It's all about the message and the demonstration that voting against the 2nd Amendment has consequences. Now whether we can actually pull off the unseating of these characters or not still remains to be seen. I already have seen some indications that gun owners don't really have the courage of their convictions, and it is very difficult to get gun owners to unite around any issue. And perhaps we are getting exactly what we deserve. But it occurs to me that we will never have as good an opportunity to galvanize the entire gun owning community for a positive statement as we have with the safe Act incursion on our rights. We have seen the brief outrage that took over the community. And while I have to admit that the issue has nearly faded into oblivion, I am hoping that the anger can once again be rekindled when election time comes around. Consider the message that gets sent if we do not act in a decisive fashion at the polls. We will be publicly declaring, loud and clear, that it is open season on guns and gun owners and that our political will is simply a paper tiger that can be shredded any time a legislator wishes. I'm hoping that is not the message that gets sent.

Doc, I'm probably going to be in that situation where no matter who I vote for, they'll be pro-SAFE. But that's not to say I won't vote the bastard out that voted for SAFE. It's the right thing to do for all gun owners and pro 2nd amendment.

[Five Seasons]

Supporting a candidate that has already demonstrated a willingness to vote against the Constitution becasue he tosses you a few bones in another area is wrong. You already know their view. I Would rather take a chance on a new person in office and if they don't deliver get rid of them also. Whatever Sweeney's views are on other topics do not matter. If her were spear heading free licenses and doubling the amount of state land I would still say he has to go.

 

I never said I supported him, only that I would rather at least have him in the office then another anti-safe act, non-bow hunter. How some of you feel you can get a non-safe act congresman in downstate is laughable. You wont see an apponent run on that stance downstate. it's just not important to the majority of the population.

 

But culver, lets make sure we vote out your pro-crossbow guy too ok?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

These coming election are a one issue race for me. I don't give a rats butt about the cross bow issue. or any of the other hunting stances. It is about their belief they can sidestep the Constitution. Period. I wonder how those down state pantywastes would feel if it were another Constitutional right that was abused instead of the 2nd?

[Five Seasons]

amen to that

[Doc]

I never said I supported him, only that I would rather at least have him in the office then another anti-safe act, non-bow hunter. How some of you feel you can get a non-safe act congresman in downstate is laughable. You wont see an apponent run on that stance downstate. it's just not important to the majority of the population.

 

But culver, lets make sure we vote out your pro-crossbow guy too ok?

For me this election will be a punitive strike against those that voted for the Safe Act, and a reward for those that voted against it. Party affiliation and crossbow or no crossbow doesn't even enter into it at all. This is an election to make legislators understand that their votes have consequences (good or bad). It's simply time to remind them that we are paying attention. There is one thing that gets a politicians attention above all other things, and that is votes and getting elected. It's time that they were made to understand that we are united, and we do vote and we are putting all politicians on notice that if you vote for such underhanded and unconstitutional laws as the Safe Act, you will be out looking for a job. And I can only hope that that is really the case and that gun owners are not so wimpy that they have forgotten how to stand up for themselves.

 

Yes, we may very well vote in somebody that hates guns even worse than the ones that we vote out. But understand that they will come to the job with the understanding that if they make the same mistakes as their predecessors, they too will have to hit the road. Believe me, they will soon change their stripes once they understand that fact. A politician's dedication to principle only extends as far as their constituent votes will allow them. They know that, and they react to that, and it's time they get reminded of that.

 

I'm serious about all this. Those gun owners who are not registered to vote ..... don't wait. Get with it now! Those gun owners that you know that are not registered, persuade them to do so now. Make sure they understand the issue. Make sure they understand what to do about it. This all only works if we are acting as a united front. We are in the minority, and so it is important that we act as a dedicated voting block. That's the one potential advantage that we might be able to come up with. A small dedicated minority is way more powerful than the totally disorganized majority opposition. We can't have everybody running off in different directions, doing their own thing. We lose political advantage that way. Make it a one-issue election. Send that message that we are still as angry a we were back when this abuse was first done to us. Make them understand that time is not their ally and that we do not forget.