Don’t be fooled. Gun confiscation has already begun in NY

posted at 11:31 am on April 13, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

We’ve heard it over and over again, particularly on shows like Morning Joe. Anyone who thinks that the government is “coming to take your guns” is a paranoid loon, watching for black helicopters and guarding their sheep from soldiers. Unfortunately for those formerly right leaning, Second Amendment minded folks who bought into this story, reality has come screaming up from behind well ahead of schedule.

Following the passage of “The SAFE Act” in New York State, Big Brother got busy pretty quickly grabbing up the guns. Of course nobody was reporting on it very much until they managed to collect them from the wrong guy and a judge made them give them back.

BUFFALO, N.Y. — Thursday, a state Supreme Court Judge ruled guns seized from David Lewis, 35, must be returned to him after he was incorrectly identified as violating the mental health provision of the SAFE Act.

“We know that from the health care agency to the State Police, there was some kind of breach,” said Lewis’ attorney, Jim Tresmond.

I don’t know how much more chilling that lede could be, really. This isn’t some worry about the government possibly confiscating guns. These are guns that were already confiscated by the government. But if you think that’s as bad as it gets, guess again. Here’s why his guns were taken.

Tresmond says his client was ordered to turn in his weapons last week because he was once on anti-anxiety medication, which is a violation of the SAFE Act. Wednesday, State Police informed the Erie County Clerk’s Office that it made a mistake when it said Lewis was in violation of the state’s new gun law.

For all of our more liberal leaning readers who continue to ask “what’s so bad” about universal background checks before we’ve even seen the specifics, this is your answer. In New York, you can be placed on a “list”of people with no Second Amendment rights on the say so of any doctor who has questions. And it already happened to David Lewis. Thankfully, he’s getting his guns back… for now. But what is the larger effect of this if we put it on a national scale?

The NY SAFE Act requires “mental health professionals, in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment, to report if an individual they are treating is likely to engage in conduct that will cause serious harm to him- or herself or others.”

If such a determination is made, “the Division of Criminal Justice Services will determine whether the person possesses a firearms license and, if so, will notify the appropriate local licensing official, who must suspend the license. The person’s firearms will then be removed.”

The law has come under fire from gun-rights advocates as well as mental health professionals, who fear the new law discourages people from seeking professional help for mental health issues.

Okay, I can see your point about the adverse effect on those seeking help for mental disorders. If you know that you’ll have your constitutional rights curtailed if you tell a doctor you are depressed or filled with anxiety, you might not go seek help. But that also sort of buries the lede here…

They’re Already Taking Away Guns From People For Having ONCE Been Prescribed ANTI-ANXIETY MEDICINE.

Doug Mataconis gives the legal beagle perspective on catching up people seeking medical help in a legal net. (Read the whole thing.)

The SAFE Act in particular seems to me to be overly broad in defining what qualifies as a reportable condition. It’s one thing for a person who is delusional on the level of a Seung-Hui Choi or Jared Loughner to be caught up in the net, it is quite another for someone who was apparently merely on an anti-anxiety drug to have their Constitutional rights limited. If taking that kind of medication is enough to get you on a list, then what about the millions upon millions of Americans who are on some form of anti-depressant or who take medication that alters their mood in any manner? Are they going to get put on a government list too, and what, exactly, is the government going to do with that list? History is replete with examples of psychiatry being abused by the state, and the danger of abuse becomes even higher when the law broadens the number of conditions that are reportable to the state.

We have thus far been unable to get anyone from New York to own up to how many people have had their guns taken away this year under the new SAFE Act. Neither has the YNN news team. But the facts in evidence are not in dispute. The law is still so new that the “new law smell” hasn’t worn off it yet but they are already going around and confiscating guns.

This new universal background check bill is the hot ticket in DC right now. You can read the full text of it here, which thus far contains nothing about expanding how one qualifies as “mentally ill” but there are multiple amendments to come, so we don’t even know what will be in the final version. A repeating theme is that it will have to “do something” about keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. But how is that to be accomplished? Will it only affect those who have been adjudicated in court to be proven, dangerous, unstable individuals and who have had the opportunity to object to their classification? Or will it be something that slides closer to what we now have in New York?

And yet… we’re all paranoid. Right, Joe Scarborough? I could insert one clip after another of the insulting, uninformed comments in the mainstream media made toward those who expressed concerns over this type of unbridled nanny state activity. But you’ve seen them all before. and there’s no use boring you with them here again now. As for me, I’ll stay in my basement, eating my Cheetos, cleaning my Glock and guarding the sheep. You never know.

UPDATE: (Jazz) From the comments. An excellent question.

Number one question for those who favor “universal background checks” – how do you enforce them?
In other words, how will authorities know if an individual who possesses a firearm submitted to a background check?
If they can answer this question without needing to resort to a database, or a registry, then I am all ears.

dugan on April 13, 2013 at 12:14 PM


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Well, obviously, it’s anyone upon whom the same government doing the confiscation deems suitable to the task.

And I wouldn’t worry about the ramifications of that, either. After all, there’s no way their process could go awry… if carried out properly…

… y’know, like in Pennsylvania…

The Schaef on April 14, 2013 at 7:44 AM

We just elected an attorney general in PA who has pledged to start going after guns in a “big way.” They’ve already said she has an eye on running for Gov. Have a feeling she’s looking at New York and salivating.
Pennsylvania has been turning more Republican,, especially around the Pittsburgh area. But she has big dreams of turning PA into a socialist Utopia.

I read also down in Texas of all places, in a strong conservative area.. around Ft. Hood I believe.. there is an anti-gun prosecuter harassing soldiers over guns.

One staff Sgt. was out walking with his son in the woods, he had a rifle slung over his shoulder and the DA shows up with cops and demands he turn over his rifle.. Open carry is legal in Texas.. but the prosecutor responded with something like “I don’t care what the law says.. nobody should have guns except the police. When people see someone carrying a gun and they’re not police, it scares them.”

http://beowulfjournal.wordpress.com/2013/04/13/police-anti-gun-prosecutor-clash-with-soldiers-in-area-around-fort-hood/

JellyToast on April 14, 2013 at 8:49 AM

ROCnPhilly on April 14, 2013 at 8:46 AM

i meant the blog post itself.

sesquipedalian on April 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Must have been on to sell his book.

Was gonna buy it…

ROCnPhilly on April 14, 2013 at 9:03 AM

Taking the firearms away is far less restrictive than locking him up and, in most cases, will remove the danger. Taking away someone’s liberty by involuntary detention should be the last resort.

cam2 on April 13, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Remove what danger? If someone is such a danger as to require the removal of their firearms, why do you then consider them to be safe?

This is where your facade crumbles. You try to make it about “safety”, but all you do is go in and take the guns away from a dangerous person, and then let them go on about their own business.

Why only guns?

Tomblvd on April 14, 2013 at 9:04 AM

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

He was a budget director!

WryTrvllr on April 14, 2013 at 9:05 AM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today
 
nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

 

Thing is though, your ‘beliefs’ are not what matters here.
 
verbaluce on December 22, 2012 at 7:42 AM

rogerb on April 14, 2013 at 9:12 AM

This is another case here in NY, which I hope will be challenged in court. The SAFE act is a mess, that was rammed through in the middle of the night. This man had his pistol permit revoked and was told they would confiscate his guns, because his 10 year old son was talking about a water gun in school and was perceived as a threat.

He transferred ownership of his guns to a friend, so they didn’t get them, but he is being told he cannot have his pistol permit back until the child is 18. This law will never pass constitutional muster and I hope it kills Coumo’s chances for higher office.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/04/n-y-dads-pistol-license-suspended-over-something-his-10-year-old-son-said-and-it-could-be-8-years-before-he-gets-it-back/

Madisonian on April 14, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Must have been on to sell his book.

Was gonna buy it…

ROCnPhilly on April 14, 2013 at 9:03 AM

so you were a fan of his before you realized he disagreed withya on an issue? gotcha!

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM

And, also in California …

California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Keep Arms

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-12/california-seizes-guns-as-owners-lose-right-to-bear-arms.html?cmpid=yhoo

Pork-Chop on April 14, 2013 at 9:36 AM

If taking that kind of medication is enough to get you on a list, then what about the millions upon millions of Americans who are on some form of anti-depressant or who take medication that alters their mood in any manner? Are they going to get put on a government list too, and what, exactly, is the government going to do with that list?

The government already has the list, courtesy of obamacare and the digitized database of our heath records.

olesparkie on April 14, 2013 at 9:36 AM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Thing is though, your ‘beliefs’ are not what matters here.

verbaluce on December 22, 2012 at 7:42 AM

Why don’t you asshats move somewhere else if you don’t like the second amendment? I heard Cuba, Venenzuala or Angola are nice places with very strict gun laws and the resulting safety and prosperity that come from a government making things safe for everyone.

acyl72 on April 14, 2013 at 9:36 AM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

O/T but its occurred to me more than once and so I might as well say it here.

The above is good opportunity to show how the left and right differ in their thinking.

A lefty, if told a Clinton underling supported something, would immediately be more prone to agree – solely because they liked Clinton. They assume that conservatives are moved by the same emotional appeals. They are not. By their very nature, conservatives are results oriented, which requires reason over emotion. Furthermore, conservatives do not fear being considered “uncool”, so ads and arguments that sell products or ideas using the “ensures me a cool lifestyle” theme don’t work, either. Yet lefties continually try to sell bad ideas to conservatives this way.

Lefties are the fad market drivers because they are easily led by such things. Clothing, coffee, apple, … This need to feel good is exploited not only by product marketers, but by community organizers and other power seekers who sell ideas for political gain. They just have no idea its being done because the coercive techniques used have been well-honed to bypass conscious thought processes.

Years in advertising and PR. Believe it.

ROCnPhilly on April 14, 2013 at 10:08 AM

so you were a fan of his before you realized he disagreed withya on an issue? gotcha!

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Liberals cast anyone out of the collective for any opinion or view that doesn’t conform to the party line.

darwin on April 14, 2013 at 10:12 AM

‘nonpartisan’ is a liberal. Therefor, very partisan. He enjoyed the day of the Sandy Hook massacre, presuming to tell us how the Left would finally get our guns. If he screams, refer to his own posts that day. He’s a ghoul.

Why bother with him?

Liam on April 14, 2013 at 10:13 AM

‘nonpartisan’ comes back every day, with the same tired arguments trashed many times in days before, seeking a new audience in hope he can finally score a ‘win’ among a new crowd.

Read his own posts on any thread you choose. That’s how you’ll get to know him best.

Liam on April 14, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Why bother with him?

Liam on April 14, 2013 at 10:13 AM

It’s fun letting np reveal his ignorance?

darwin on April 14, 2013 at 10:19 AM

It’s fun letting np reveal his ignorance?

darwin on April 14, 2013 at 10:19 AM

That is like letting your yard reveal its green. After you’ve seen it, it becomes a given.

Aviator on April 14, 2013 at 10:24 AM

so you were a fan of his before you realized he disagreed withya on an issue? gotcha!

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Ha ha. No.

He is very astute when he explains economics and the workings of the monetary system. Read excepts and agree with much of what he says.

I will forego purchasing his book because he has chosen to trash talk the Constitution in oreder to sell his book to liberals. And that is what it is. You probably think more of him now, though, eh? You should buy the book. He’s just like you…

Look at it as though I am boycotting him until he repents. That should be a concept you can grasp. Lefties do it all the time and make a big fuss. Conservatives do it, too, but we do it quietly. We don’t organize it and promote it. We don’t even mention it to one another. But we do it. We call it voting with our dollars. It has an effect, too. A much larger effect than even most conservatives know.

Whatever happened to Katie Couric?

ROCnPhilly on April 14, 2013 at 10:24 AM

It’s fun letting np reveal his ignorance?

darwin on April 14, 2013 at 10:19 AM

There’s that, but he doesn’t get it. He’s a waste of time, really. I’ve seen him get trashed on a thread in the morning, then come back in the evening with the same arguments. Then we gotta do it all over again. And he still doesn’t get it!

He’ll be back again for a third round, as if liberal talking points magically come true by endless repetition.

Liam on April 14, 2013 at 10:25 AM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

You mean the same David Stockman who already stabbed Reagan in the back in 1985? Writing the ironically named tome “The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed”. Yea, I trust that guy.

For God’s sake, try to keep up.

Tomblvd on April 14, 2013 at 10:30 AM

i’m aware of internet traditions.

sesquipedalian on April 14, 2013 at 8:35 AM

Like the tradition of noting that you are an idiot?

OK.

You’re an idiot.

And anti-American trash.

Solaratov on April 14, 2013 at 10:38 AM

so you were a fan of his before you realized he disagreed withya on an issue? gotcha!

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM

You really are stupid, parmesan.

One needn’t be a “fan” of someone to read what they’ve written. Hell, I’ve read lil barry d’ohbama’s books (have you, btw?)

It’s called “Know your enemy.”

Solaratov on April 14, 2013 at 10:44 AM

That is like letting your yard reveal its green. After you’ve seen it, it becomes a given.

Aviator on April 14, 2013 at 10:24 AM

What a profoundly stupid and brilliant thing to say.

. . . put some lipstick on it:

“After your grass has revealed its greenness, green it is.”

The implications are pretty far reaching.

Sun Tzu Aviator.

Totally impressed.

Axe on April 14, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Methinks these government gun repo men ought to have watertight life insurance policies.

Just saying…

dmbream on April 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM

so you were a fan of his before you realized he disagreed withya on an issue? gotcha!

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM

And you weren’t a big fan of his until you realized he agreed withya on an issue? gotcha!

Did you have a point here, or just being moronic as usual?

Midas on April 14, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I have used the VA for medical care for the last 13 years and I have never once been asked if I own a firearm. It isnt on any of the forms that I fill out, and I have never had any of the doctors or nurses there ask me anything about firearms. Not sure what VA you use, but here in deep blue Connecticut they dont ask that.

Johnnyreb on April 13, 2013 at 5:26 PM

My father was asked this a few months ago in Bismarck ND. He is a Vietnam vet.

When I lived in WA state back in the early to mid-90s I was asked if I owned guns. My own daughter who was in early elementary at the time had been asked by a Dr. if her parents owned guns.
It’s been going on in a lot of places for a long time.
First it was do you wear a seat belt. Now it’s do you own guns.

No one who has never been convicted of a crime should be denied their Constitutional rights based on something they might do.
Local states & governments need to serve their people better in helping the mentally ill rather than letting things get out of hand.
In the end, there is no way to prevent some of these rare tragic events.
And denying people their Const. rights, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. on down the line bcs of certain ‘holes’ we might see in ‘letting’ criminals get away with a crime or commit one in the 1st place will do nothing to deter them. Nothing.

If you are not a criminal & you are not breaking a current law, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It really is that simple.
And all of these machinations to try & prevent mentally ill people or possible mentally ill people from possibly committing a crime do nothing but erode the Constitution even further.
Murder is illegal & so are a host of other violent crimes. And lo & behold there are still people out there who commit them.
Bad things happen, like Sandy Hook. And sometimes you cannot prevent them.
What’s heinous is that people who use incidences like this, the families of the victims of Sandy Hook include, are helping take away our rights under their perceived notion that their tragedy is somehow unique in the history of human experience.
And it is not.

Badger40 on April 14, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Taking away someone’s liberty by involuntary detention should be the last resort.

cam2 on April 13, 2013 at 5:52 PM

It should never happen ever unless there is a warrant & the person is then charged with a crime.

A person who is mentally ill has to be determined by a Dr. Why should a Dr. also have the power to strip someone of their Constitutional rights?
Unless a mentally ill person commits a crime, such person should not be denied their Constitutional rights at all.
Consider the denying of a person’s Constitutional rights regarding CPS cases where a parent is accused by an anonymous person they’ve been molesting or abusing a child & the child is removed from the home while an investigation is being done.
No evidence, no right to face your accuser, no warrant & never legally charged with a crime. The Constitutional rights of a parent are just magically suspended bcs children are involved.

None of anyone’s silver tongued wrestling with words is going to make any of these things right.
Obviously you have no problem with suspending & the stealing of people’s Constitutional rights in certain cases.
The very fact you find this incident mild is a testament to that.
A state law that requires a person to surrender their weapons in which the right to own them is enshrined in the Constitution based on a Doctor’s testimony with no trial or proof of any crime committed is in of itself UnConsitutional & should never be allowed to stand.
You, Sir, are the kinds of people that Thomas Jefferson, Sam Adams, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, etc. fought so fervently against in the late 18th century.
You, Sir,and all others like you, are the enemies of Liberty.

Badger40 on April 14, 2013 at 1:23 PM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Most anti gun rights types were not a fan off Stockman’s prior.

Gotcha!
/

Ph uck off.

CW on April 14, 2013 at 4:13 PM

BUFFALO, N.Y. – Two New York State lawmakers are calling for an investigation of state police after a local man was mistakenly ordered to turn over his guns to police.
Although David Lewis got his guns back after hiring a lawyer, politicians and gun owners are beginning to ask questions about how state police are seizing guns based on someone’s medical history.
The national media starting to ask questions. On Friday, Erie County Clerk Chris Jacobs and James Tresmond, who is the attorney for Lewis, appeared on Fox News They and others are trying to make sense of how Lewis, a college librarian from Amherst, was mistakenly ordered to turn in his guns.
All of this apparently stems from Governor Cuomo’s signature gun control bill, the SAFE Act, which requires mental health professionals to notify the state when they believe a patient is at risk of hurting themselves or others. State Police and the Erie County Clerk had misidentified Lewis as such a threat, confusing him with someone else with the same name. Both sides have blamed each other for the snafu.
It’s not sitting well with some State Senator Michael Ranzenhofer (R-Amherst) and State Assemblyman Dennis Gabryszak (D-Cheektowaga). They are calling for an investigation of state police, specifically how the police are using medical records to seize guns.
REPORTER: What exactly are the state police allowed to do?
RANZENHOFER: That’s a very good question, and one of the things I’ve done is I’ve reached out to (State Police) Superintendent (Joseph) D’Amico to ask him that very question because, as I said, we’re getting a lot of calls from concerned constituents. I’m concerned when I hear about the state police – the state government — looking into people’s medical records, their mental health records.
Gabryszak said he is also in the dark
REPORTER: Do we know exactly what the state police are doing?
GABRYSZAK: That’s a good question, Aaron. Quite honestly, I can’t tell you right now that I know.
Both Gabryszak and Ranzenhofer worry police are violating medical privacy laws, or perhaps even worse.
“In my years of public service, I’ve never heard of a police agency being able to go into and just access someone’s medical records without a search warrant, without some sort of court authority, without some sort of oversight,” Ranzenhofer said.
Gabryszak said that gun owners should be concerned.
“If this happened with the first attempt here in Erie County with this David (Lewis), who was the wrong person, quite honestly, what does that say for what may happen in the future?” Gabryszak asked. “So, there’s an awful lot of questions that need to be answered.”
2 On Your Side called a spokesperson for the state police Friday afternoon to ask if the state police would explain the specific process they use to investigate a gun owner with mental health issues, and under what authority. They told us to send them our questions in an email. We did, but have not heard back. We’ll let you know if and when they respond.

Claiming information from multiple sources that ought to require the resignations of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and State Police Superintendent Joe D’Amico, WBEN Buffalo radio host Tom Bauerle yesterday told listeners he’s had it confirmed that New York State Police are lying when they say they made a mistake when they confiscated an Erie County resident’s guns. Instead, Bauerle charges, there is a high-level conspiracy to violate the Fourth Amendment rights of New Yorkers that reaches up to the Obama administration’s Department of Homeland Security.
The claim by the Erie County Clerk that New York State Police had simply provided “bad information” resulting in permit revocation and the confiscation of Amherst resident David Lewis’ guns is not true, Bauerle insists. “I’ve had it confirmed; the New York State Police are lying about him not being the guy they wanted.”
Police weren’t expecting Lewis to get a lawyer, Bauerle says, especially one who knows the Second Amendment.
“They had the guy they wanted,” Bauerle maintains, calling the official excuse “nonsense” and charging Gov. Cuomo “is a monomaniac on the subject of guns.” What happened, he explains, is that the state has a special HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) unit to search private medical records without warrants, and that Lewis was simply the first person to be caught up in that net.
It’s a scheme “to deprive New York citizens of basic protections,” Bauerle charges, where the state wants “carte blanche to look at every person’s medical records and cross-reference them with pistol permit holders” for purposes of confiscation and permit revocation. According to Baurele, his sources tell him this is being coordinated with officials in the Department of Homeland Security, and there was a meeting in Albany with the New York State Police and the Division of Criminal Justice Services “at the impetus of DHS.”
Bauerle alleges there is “a clandestine squad” violating the Fourth Amendment and circumventing HIPAA privacy protections in order to revoke pistol permits from those who have been prescribed anti-depressants or who have undergone mental health treatment, calling that “tyranny, plainly and simply.”
Max Tresmond, the son of Lewis’ attorney Jim Tresmond, joined the program and told Bauerle their law firm is having information leaked to them from inside the state “that confirms everything that you just conveyed to the public.”
As for next steps, the host and his guest advocated for continuing the investigation, having citizens demand a special prosecutor to investigate the allegations of “a plan to systematically violate the Fourth Amendment,” and also put out a call for more whistleblowers to “come forward,” guaranteeing protection of confidentiality.
“We are in the process of preparing a federal case on behalf of David Lewis,” Tresmond revealed, promising “we will be relentless in our pursuit of the truth.”
The interview can be listened to in its entirety at the WBEN website. Other outlets covering this story include The Blaze, information liberation and The Free Patriot. Unsurprisingly, mainstream “Authorized Journalists” are parroting the police line and not reporting on these allegations.
UPDATE: Gun Rights Examiner has been advised that citizen journalist Dan Roberts initially broke the story of New York searching medical records in order to revoke handgun licenses last Monday in a special AmmoLand investigative report. As this column has repeatedly, and from frustrating experience, stressed the importance of recognizing and crediting those who first bring us news, it’s appropriate to acknowledge this for the record.

Mr. Grump on April 14, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Mr. Grump on April 14, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Great update. Thank you, sir.

The finger pointing was just too suspicious. As was the coincidence of name, residence, and gun ownership. I hope we freemen can irradicate this type of treason at the state level before Toomey and Co. make it a national clusterfark.

ROCnPhilly on April 14, 2013 at 4:59 PM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Then so is the first. So close your pie-hole.

hawkdriver on April 14, 2013 at 5:38 PM

It won’t be long before their are border guards and crossing points into New York . . . just like the old Soviet bloc.

rplat on April 14, 2013 at 5:38 PM

Wow — this is disturbing to me on a lot of levels. Especially because my wife has a history of taking some of the sorts of medications that will get your Constitutional rights revoked in New York — but not for mental health reasons, but rather for treatment of another medication which responds to those same medications.

RhymesWithRight on April 14, 2013 at 8:46 PM

We’ve heard it over and over again, particularly on shows like Morning Joe. Anyone who thinks that the government is “coming to take your guns” is a paranoid loon, watching for black helicopters and guarding their sheep from soldiers.

Actually, I’ve heard the same junk from some here.

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 14, 2013 at 9:16 PM

Here’s the link for Mr. Grumps post, or at least one link with the same story.
http://www.examiner.com/article/radio-host-charges-cuomo-dhs-conspiracy-against-gun-owners

avagreen on April 14, 2013 at 9:29 PM

……and with embedded links to the radio spot (1 hr).

avagreen on April 14, 2013 at 9:30 PM

avagreen on April 14, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Thanks for the help. My post was two stories spliced together.

Mr. Grump on April 14, 2013 at 9:44 PM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Daily, you prove what a little puke you are. Stockman is no conservative and got a spanking for comments undercutting Reagan’s budget plans.

Even if he were conservative, that does not make his point any more valid. He would just be wrong.

arnold ziffel on April 14, 2013 at 10:48 PM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Yes, because Bill Maher has such a track record for “fair reporting”…

Maybe we can turn to Sharpton & Matthews for culture issues too?

BlaxPac on April 15, 2013 at 12:11 AM

Good link re what Sen Mike Lee is doing to protect 2A:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/345545/gun-battle-mike-lee-injects-dose-emotion-eliana-johnson

onlineanalyst on April 15, 2013 at 1:46 AM

When the PPACA is fully up and running, part of it will be a national data base of medical records, which will include everything you’ve ever had prescribed by a doctor.
They’ll just program the data base to highlight those names who have been prescribed “disfavored” medications, run those by the NICS registry (what do you mean a registry is against the law as passed by Congress?) and send out the Schutzstaffel to pick their guns.

Another Drew on April 15, 2013 at 1:49 AM

What paranoia. Anyone who thinks they need their guns to protect themselves from some horrible fate, should have their guns confiscated. That right there is the litmus test. Paranoid people have no business owning knifes, much less guns. Only in America do you find this sociological phenomenon of millions of people living in fear of their government. No other civilized western nation has these kinds of people in any great numbers. And no other nation on earth has madness like the “second amendment”. And no other advanced society on earth has gun violence like the US. In that respect, the US is like a third world craphole, like the Sudan, or Mali, or some place where people actually do have to worry about self-defense.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

What paranoia. Anyone who thinks they need their guns to protect themselves from some horrible fate, should have their guns confiscated. That right there is the litmus test. Paranoid people have no business owning knifes, much less guns. Only in America do you find this sociological phenomenon of millions of people living in fear of their government. No other civilized western nation has these kinds of people in any great numbers. And no other nation on earth has madness like the “second amendment”. And no other advanced society on earth has gun violence like the US. In that respect, the US is like a third world craphole, like the Sudan, or Mali, or some place where people actually do have to worry about self-defense.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

You’re not even an American citizen, are you?

Aitch748 on April 15, 2013 at 5:44 AM

No other civilized western nation

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

“No other Civilized western nation”? Perhaps such concerns should have been considered in Russia, circa 1917 or Germany circa 1931.

Over the course of the blood-drenched 20th century, the number of private murders has been dwarfed by the number of murders committed by out-of-control governments. This is not paranoia – this is a cold, realistic assessment of historical reality.

Consider this: William Ayres, a former leader of the Weathermen terrorist group, was (until his retirement) a Professor of EDUCATION at the University of Illinois. (He also has a relationship with the president that is entirely too close for comfort, given his past activities.) His wife, Bernadine Dorn, also a leader of the Weather underground, is an Associate Professor of Law at Northwestern University (and worked with the Department of Justice under the Clinton administration). Finally, Kathy Boudin, another member of the Weather underground (who was convicted of murder) is an Adjunct Professor of Social Work at Columbia University.

What we have here is evidence that our Governing Class is sick and morally depraved enough that they will allow terrorists and murderers into positions of power, prestige, and influence. With radical sickos like these being given powerful positions in our society, do you really think that it is “paranoid” to worry about our own self-defense?

Or did you just forget the /sarc tag?

SubmarineDoc on April 15, 2013 at 6:03 AM

They should be confiscating the illegal guns from the criminals first. Gang and drug activity goes way upstate from NY, and they kill each other and young people/innocent by standers like it was Chicago. Most of the gun crime statistics are coming from gangsters.

Get the perps with the guns behind bars, what fools these mortals be.

Fleuries on April 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM

A big problem many are passing over is the fact that yes there are many LEO’s out there who are more than willing to “Follow Orders” and violate citizens legal rights.

All the talk about how the Police and/or Military won’t back a government that is over stepping their powers is a bunch of B.S.
There are many tools in those professions that will happily violate your rights all in the name of the law..
They will be more than willing to kick your door down in the middle of the night…

RockyJ. on April 15, 2013 at 8:06 AM

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

If you feel that strongly about it, then all you need to do to disarm all law-abiding citizens is to propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution and get it legally passed by the Congress and the states, or a Convention and the states. There will then no longer be a right to defend yourself, community or state with projectile weapons from a government that oversteps its authority by performing unlawful search and seizures and abridging freedoms currently guarranteed by the Constitution.

Where is the problem in that? It was done to outlaw alcohol. Do it for projectile weaponry. Until you get that accomplished, confiscating weapons from law-abiding citizens is against the highest law in the land and those who attempt it should be prosecuted and, if found guilty, incarcerated or otherwise punished.

ROCnPhilly on April 15, 2013 at 8:13 AM

No other civilized western nation has these kinds of people in any great numbers. And no other nation on earth has madness like the “second amendment”. And no other advanced society on earth has gun violence like the US. In that respect, the US is like a third world craphole, like the Sudan, or Mali, or some place where people actually do have to worry about self-defense.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

You are free to live in any of these other countries if they’ll have you. Of course these other countries do have stricter immigration laws, so best of luck with that.

More guns is going to mean more gun violence, but fewer guns does not mean less violence.

ROCnPhilly on April 15, 2013 at 8:34 AM

More guns is going to mean more gun violence, but fewer guns does not mean less violence.

ROCnPhilly on April 15, 2013 at 8:34 AM

Sure it does. Canada doesn’t have anywhere near the violence per capita the US has. That’s my point. No other civilized country does. That is a uniquely American phenomenon. The US is a frightening place. You can get shot in any big city just by looking at someone the wrong way. And as far as mass shootings go, the last mass shooting Canada had was in 1989. America has them on a regular basis as part of its culture.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Just curious what you people think will happen to you if you no longer have a constitutional right to have guns?

I can tell you, we in Canada have no such right, and we are doing quite well, thanks. We are all unarmed. And nobody is taking us to concentration camps. We are all living quite well. Not only that, but our economy is more stable as well and our collective debt is much less. And our cities are clean and safe. It’s a miracle, I tell ya.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 11:06 AM

No. Fewer guns does not mean less violent crime. Do at least a little research, will ya?

Canada is a pretty nice place, the scenery, anyway. I hear that all the time from all my Canadian friends who live here, instead.

ROCnPhilly on April 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Sure it does. Canada doesn’t have anywhere near the violence per capita the US has. That’s my point. No other civilized country does. That is a uniquely American phenomenon. The US is a frightening place. You can get shot in any big city just by looking at someone the wrong way. And as far as mass shootings go, the last mass shooting Canada had was in 1989. America has them on a regular basis as part of its culture.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 11:06 AM

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Actually it does – just not necessarily with guns. Do some research – the aggravated assault rate is higher in Canada than in the US. Same with the UK – higher violent crime rates than the US – just not with guns. There are many countries with far fewer guns than the US, but yet higher rates of firearm related murder, and higher rates of murder, robgbery and assault with other weapons.

And if you look at the FBI statistics just for the US, over the last several years, as more law-abiding citizens have been buying lots more guns, the gun related crime rates have actaully gone DOWN.

Sorry, but logic and the facts just don’t support your claims.

dentarthurdent on April 15, 2013 at 12:57 PM

No. Fewer guns does not mean less violent crime. Do at least a little research, will ya?

ROCnPhilly on April 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Well we do know from the FBI crime stats, that as people in the US have bought more guns over the last several years, the murder rates across the board have all gone DOWN?
Now how could that be if gun ownership levels relate directly to crime rates? It sure looks to me like higher rates of gun ownership has actually led to LESS crime.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

dentarthurdent on April 15, 2013 at 1:00 PM

It’s amusing when someone cites other Western countries with strict gun control as paragons of civilization.

What they fail to mention is that, prior to the authoring of the US Constitution, the Second Amendment being part of it, the basic philosophy of those countries was that there were two classes of people. There was the landed nobility and royalty, who were basically issued a “Privileged Character” card at birth, and the commoners. The nobles could, and often did, walk all over the common man, and often had the use of force (with weapons) at their disposal. Ownership of a weapon more threatening than a farm implement by the common man was forbidden. Men who would rule other men cannot afford to have anyone shooting back.

Along comes a group of men who decided that all men were created equal; that regardless of what level of privilege you were born to, you were no more or less deserving of freedom and dignity. Here was a philosophy that said the common man had just as much a right to use force against threats to his life and liberty as the king, just as he had the same right to speak his mind and worship according to his own conscience.

Sadly, we’ve come full circle. Now we’re back to some thinking that there should be two classes of people — the ruling elite, who know better than the rest of us, and the common man, who needs cradle-to-grave care from the elites, lest he hurt himself.

Their reaction to the common man arming himself is no doubt the same as those who read our Constitution for the very first time. One has to wonder what they are so afraid of.

CurtZHP on April 15, 2013 at 1:20 PM

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dead-apparent-double-murder-suicide-ny-cop-18958104#.UWw7oEoZRdI

I hereby call on NY Governor Cuomo to pass legislation banning all police in NY from owning or carrying firearms. We cannot ever allow another tragedy like this to happen.

J.H. on April 15, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Here you go I found the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCCp2Jl3luc

mixplix on April 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM

You don’t have Barry H. Zero planning your future either.

Mr. Grump on April 15, 2013 at 7:00 PM

Here’s a video for all of you that will tell the authorities about the Second Amendment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCCp2Jl3luc

mixplix on April 15, 2013 at 7:29 PM

on this week’s realtimer with bill maher, conservative David Stockman (former reagan underling) agreed with fellow panel member bob costas that the 2nd amendment is an anachrononism today

nonpartisan on April 14, 2013

So?

JackM on April 16, 2013 at 8:46 AM

This is all the fault of the people of New York State. They wanted to vote for gun grabbers, now they’re getting their guns grabbed.

Now the rest of us must fight like hell to keep this from spreading.

Thanks for nothing.

JackM on April 16, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Just curious what you people think will happen to you if you no longer have a constitutional right to have guns?

I can tell you, we in Canada have no such right, and we are doing quite well, thanks. We are all unarmed. And nobody is taking us to concentration camps. We are all living quite well. Not only that, but our economy is more stable as well and our collective debt is much less. And our cities are clean and safe. It’s a miracle, I tell ya.

keep the change on April 15, 2013

What will happen? We will become like you.

Living as a ward of the state can be clean and nice. As long as the state takes no exception to you.

Freedom, liberty and individual determinism can be tough, but the tough love it.

Don’t worry, keep sniffing flowers and chasing butterflies, we got your back.

JackM on April 16, 2013 at 9:47 AM

Canada, the country that has accomplished absolutley nothing.

JackM on April 16, 2013 at 12:27 PM

And no other nation on earth has madness like the “second amendment”. And no other advanced society on earth has gun violence like the US. In that respect, the US is like a third world craphole, like the Sudan, or Mali, or some place where people actually do have to worry about self-defense.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

You think the Constitutional right that is the 2nd Amendment is madness?
You’ve been slammed on the crime thing. And really it is true.
But I’m sure you’ll just believe what you want to.
So the only people who need guns are people who live in ‘craphole’ nations?
There’s no reason Americans should be dismayed at their possible disarmament?
You think modern civilization means that government will never oppress its citizens again?
WTF fantasy world in your pea brain do you live in?
There a Nazi a$$holes all over this nation who are trying to limit all sorts of rights like if I smoke or drink soda.
You think it would never get to the point I’d have to defend myself against the Govt?
Tell the Waco dead their Govt would never perpetrate violence upon them.
The Constitution is a STATIC document. IT was not meant to mean whatever you;d like it to mean.
Weapons have always been necessary in all parts of the animal kingdom.
Guns are here to stay.
Stop pi$$ing your pants about it & educate yourself as to why they are necessary.It’s bcs there are crazy evil a$$holes everywhere, including fracking Boston in the middle of ‘civilization’.

Badger40 on April 16, 2013 at 1:46 PM

or some place where people actually do have to worry about self-defense.

keep the change on April 15, 2013 at 2:58 AM

And this.
You think people living in America don’t have to worry about self defense anywhere?
Tell that to the kids dying all the time in Chicago.
Tell that to the woman who was abducted in E. MT while she was running in a rural community & was abducted & killed by 2 men up here in the oil patch.
If she’d had a gun with her she might have had a fighting chance.

Badger40 on April 16, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Canada, the country that has accomplished absolutley nothing.

JackM on April 16, 2013 at 12:27 PM

So not true! They gave the world RUSH, didn’t they?

….

…For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw!

….

Fly by night, away from here….

ROCnPhilly on April 16, 2013 at 5:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4