Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Why Shooters Don’t Like Licenses

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Gun Nuts
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

July 27, 2006

Why Shooters Don’t Like Licenses

By David E. Petzal and Phil Bourjaily

Advocates of tougher gun laws are unable to understand the horror that shooters feel when the word “license” comes up. After all, say the anti-gunners, aren’t drivers licensed? And pilots, and just about anyone who has anything to do with anything that moves? Well, here’s an example why we don’t like licensing, and it happened to a co-worker of mine who had a permit to keep two handguns in his home in New York City.

Mr. M, as we will call him, moved from one borough of New York to another, and as required by law sent in his application for a new license with the new address, along with a money order for $340. Time went by, and nothing happened. When Mr. M called the New York City Police Department, he was told that his permit had been sent to him. Then, after much back and forth, he was told that the permit application had been lost (but not, apparently, the $340 money order). And then he was told that since he had not notified the NYPD of his move, his permit was revoked.

Then followed a Kafka-esque back and forth with the NYPD, who advised Mr. M that since he didn’t have a permit for them, he had to surrender his guns or be arrested. So he did. And, pursuant to Title 38, Chapters 5 and 15 of the Rules of the City of New York, Mr. M requested a hearing, appealing the revocation of his license. He hired a lawyer to represent him and amazingly, the hearing officer found for him. This was on April 3, 2006.

Well, you say, the system works; the system is fair. Not quite. On May 10, a Mr. Thomas Prasso, who is Director (of what he does not say) wrote a letter to Mr. M that says:

“As a result of an administrative hearing held on April 3, 2006. Your license has been CANCELLED. A copy of the hearing report is enclosed.

“This determination concludes the Police Department’s review of this matter. You may appeal this determination by commencing an Article 78 proceeding in Supreme Court within four months of the date of this letter.”

And so Mr. M is out his two guns, which he will never see again, $340 for the money order, and $550 for the lawyer. If he is inclined to spend a lot more money and waste a lot more time, he can indeed pursue an Article 78. But what would you say his odds are of getting his license?
      
Do people go through this kind of s**t when they change the address on their automobile licenses? No, they do not.

Comments (53)

Top Rated
All Comments
from John Chambers wrote 7 years 3 days ago

First of all, the fact that Director Prasso (who is the Director of the NYPD, Pistol License Division, and a very fair minded individual) LESSENED the punishment from a "revocation," to a "cancellation," is significant. This means that Mr. M will not have a mark on his record that will follow him the remainder of his life. In addition, if he paid only $550.00 for an attorney to represent him at his Administrative Hearing, he deserves to have his handgun license canceled. Just like any other area of the law, there are those who are specialists in this area, and he would have been much better off seeking us out, instead of settling for his local Canal Street lawyer to take him into the lion's den.At this juncture, an Article 78 would not be the way to go (assuming he could file within the required statutory limitation), but if he re-applied, he would have a high likelihood of success given the fact that Director Prasso converted the revocation to a cancellation.John S. Chambers, Esquirewww.nygun.com

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Whatsina Name wrote 7 years 12 weeks ago

First of all, if anyone thinks for even one second, that what happened to Mr.M is in anyway "accidental" or "an un-intentional mistake", then they are not just ignorantly kidding themselves, but downright stupid!The saying: "There is more than one way to skin a cat.", has been considered a valuable bit wisdom by "Paper Shufflers" for as long as they have recognized their own hidden power. It happens way too frequently to be an unfortunate coincidence!Next, I believe we are doomed to loose our guns. Why? Because, simply too much "Apathy" by those who have the most to loose. American Citizens. Not just Gun Owners, but those who choose not to own guns, but understand that without them, we are all right back in the position we fought to be "FREE" from. Thus, it is all us, every American Citizen who has the right to vote, but more importantly, the ability to fight. To do whatever it takes to turn back the ever-encroaching cancer of Gun Control.Therefore, until there is a MASS AWAKENING, we are doomed. If it does not come very soon, it will be too late. Once the damage is done, it much harder to repair, then to prevent it.As for Mr. M... I only hope that by hearing his story, some of you out there will wake-up, and then start shaking every sleeping person you can get your hands on, and Wake them too. Then at least Mr. M.'s costly experience will not be for nothing. Maybe, just maybe, something good might come from it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Barbara wrote 7 years 34 weeks ago

There is nothing wrong with owning a gun and having a safe home,but when you get these right wing pro-gun people who eat,live and breath gunpowder along with watching a dose of the history channel that is when its time to put a hold on things until you can come up with idea of the mentality of the owner themselves.It just seems that alot of the people who try to get things done properly usually end up getting the shaft,while the other route gets ahead. So does it really pay to even get a license, and where does that money go?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

What is it about gun-oriented blogs and boards that attracts so many people of certain mindset? That particular mindset works this way:That person doesn't agree with me.Therefore, that person is a liberal.FYI, I am a libertarian. Try to wrap your mind around the idea that there may be more to the political spectrum than Republican and Evil Liberal. I know this isn't what Rush and Hannity told you, but try anyway.Here's something to think about. Back before there were motor vehicles there were some public roads and some private roads. You paid a toll to use private roads. If there was no public road across a person's property, you either crossed only with his permission, paid a toll, or didn't cross at all. Public, that is government-owned, roads historically were mainly for the benefit of the government. For a well documented historical example of this, read up on just why the ancient Romans put so much time and effort into building roads. Ever since there has been such a thing as government roads, the traffic on those roads has been regulated however much the government that owns them saw fit. Whether you want to believe it or not."Try to imagine that I go pay my own hard earned money to buy a rifle or a car or whatever." You are at liberty to drive that car around your yard without a license. You can own it without a license. You simply cannot drive it on public streets and highways without meeting license and insurance requirements. Can you take that rifle you mentioned and shoot it anywhere you please? BTW, why is it that folks like you moan about your "hard-earned" money so much? Do you think Toyota just game me a car? Do you think I woke up and found my guns undeer my pillow one morning? You aren't the only one who works for a living.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Will Coffman wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

Hey Demko,Try to imagine that I go pay my own hard earned money to buy a rifle or a car or whatever. That is not the same thing as me breaking into a military base and commandeering an M1A1 Abrams tank. And I never said anything about camping out on property that I and my fellow citizens agreed was to be used as the place we conduct public business.Use a little more brain power. If that's possible.This is just so typical of liberals, take any argument on a non-sequitor leg to make it seem like the person you are arguing against is wrong. I admit to your cleverness, but you are wrong on so many levels, it is sad.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

Everybody is paying taxes for military equipment and government office buidings, too. Try taking a spin in an M1 tank or camping on the county courthouse lawn. When the nice men with guns and badges question your activities, tell them you helped pay for it, so you are entitled to use it. Get back to us on how well they accepted that line of reasoning.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Will Coffman wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

How many years after the Constitution was ratified did the American people think that riding a horse to get from one place to another was not a right? Why did the fact that technology advanced us to automobiles cause the ability to move from one place to another to cease being a right? And please don't give me this crap about using public roadways, because the assumption ought to be that everybody is paying taxes to maintain those roadways, and you can still have law enforcement arresting people who endanger other motorists, but that doesn't require licensing.I mean, seriously, think about this. This is the frog in the pot syndrome. We've come to believe that the government needs to license people for everything they do, and yet it protects not a single person. Do you know how easy it is to get a license in most states? It is nothing but a revenue instrument for the government. Licensing for anything is just an excuse to take money from you and give the government a paper trail to hunt you down.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kristopher wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

Auto licenses and registration only apply to vehicles on public roads.Are the victim disarmament supporters who make this analogy willing to let anyone ( including teens ) buy any firearm ( including machineguns ) with no paperwork whatsoever, provided the firearm is never worn on public property?I didn't think so. When Anti-gun losers support my right to own ANY firearm on private property, with no paperwork, then I will take their "automobile license" analogy seriously.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Wayne Dougherty wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

I think this story of bureaucratic screw-up with gun licensing should be presented to antigun groups and politicians. They're always quick to say they support the rights of law-abiding gunners blahblahblah. Put it to them; these are the laws they wanted, press them to address the screw-ups.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

Car ownership is a right. Use of the public streets and highways, which are owned by The State® is not. You may, in other words, use your personally-owned car to tool about your property in glorious freedom from licensing, speed limits, seatbelt laws, and open container restrictions. You, apparently, have no such right to use the public highways; there are many and various licensing requirements and laws in place to contradict that idea.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Stephen Rider wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

"Car ownership is NOT a right. Gun ownership IS."Actually, you have just as much right to own a car as you do gun. The generic term is "property", and Kelo notwithstanding, it is a right in this country.The 2nd amendment specifies the right to gun ownership, but the 10th effectively specifies that, unless the Constitution says "no you don't" regarding a right, the answer is by default "yes you do".

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ken wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

Gee whiz, Guys & Gals---so many political attitudes. For myself, be grateful for what we get and TRUST NO ONE. And by the way, driving a car and some of the other things listed as privileges all come under the heading of the right of _freedom_ to come and go as we please.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Mr. HamptonYou are so correct....there is a VERY disturbing trend in todays America of restricting law abiding citizens, whilst allowing the convicts to run the institution....so to speak....if we actually PUNISHED the scumbags for being just that, we wouldnt have near the trouble we have today.But, instead we "reward" those "poor misunderstood humans" that break laws and do nothing more than become breeding factories and expect those that follow the moral path to foot the bill.SickeningNOW.....the question before us is this.....HOW do we change and reverse this trend?More rambling thoughts from MikeThanks for you time

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Don Adams wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

The only people talking up Hillary are the Republicans. They want her to run so they can win again. The only hope any of us have is to vote out whoever is in office. If they have served two (2) terms VOTE THEM OUT!!! The only way to regain control of OUR country is to put term limits on Congress. They won't do it so we have to do it for them. Here in Florida we have a Congressman who has been abandoned by the Republicans. She plans to spend all of her inheritance to get the office of Sen. Bill Nelson(D). Why would someone spend millions of their own dollars to get in office? True, they get a six figure income, but not a seven figure. There must be some big incentive to do that.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from craig curtis wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

wow are we done venting in here!! im so glad i live in a small rural town purchase permits are a hassle but our carry permits made it esiar to buy hanguns .if i were the gentelman who got *&%ed in new york id be writing everybody in government from city to state and i wouldnt stop their make waves all the way until heads role oh that pisses me off new york would have to kiss my lilly white american -- then id move . the sherrifs take our money for permits and they never seem to screw things up knock on wood !!!why would you want to live in the big ugly apple anyway good luck with that !

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from S Hampton wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

I think it important to remember that driving, flying, and other related activities are privileges. Owning a gun is a right and you don't charge fees for rights. If the anti's would be concerned with criminals instead of law abiding gun owners it would be great. But that isn't going to happen nor would I ever trust the Schumers, Fiensteins, Clintons, and Kofi's of the world

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Eric wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Seems pretty simple to me....if you wish to have firearms and not take a bunch of BS, don't live and pay tax in a state, city or township that feels it is their responsibility to monitor and "fee" you to death.As for the United Nations taking my arms....fine! .....from my cold dead hands.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from bobby c wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

to the guy in new york city who lost his pistol,i live in brooklyn n.y. and also have a pistol permit.if i,ve learned anything in dealing with the license dept.you mail everything certified with a return requested,so they have to sign for mail.second.there are a lot of different opinions about politics and gun laws.so why don,t we take a step back,take a deep breathe,and put our ideas togeher and come up with a plan,for gun rights/politicans and then go down thier throat with both feet.theres a time for talk and a time for not talking.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Pardon me, G Miller, I misattributed "The expiration of the assault weapons ban was entirely do to the fact that George Bush told the REPUBLICAN congress, he did not want to see it on his desk, period.!!!!!!" to you; it was Jim's post. You remain, however, a liar and poltroon.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

"You keep asking for authoritive sources on every point others make"You, sirrah, are a bald-faced liar. Other than asking for a citation for your exclamation point-laden bovine fecal bolus, I defy to find even one other example of me asking for documentation on this blog.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from G Miller wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

JA Demko, you're full of crap. You keep asking for authoritive sources on every point others make, but it's clear you can't cite any for your points because what you've been spouting shows you're just a plant from the DNC.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

"The expiration of the assault weapons ban was entirely do to the fact that George Bush told the REPUBLICAN congress, he did not want to see it on his desk, period.!!!!!!"You can, of course, document this emphatic assertion with some type of citation? From an autoritative source, I mean, not something that Billy Bob told you down to the VFW.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Hey, a really interesting and informed bunch of comments folks! There is little that I could add to it except to say that no, Bush is not really our friend and no politician will ever be. This administration would turn on us instantly if they thought it was to their advantage. All Americans need to have it drummed into their thick heads that the government is all too often the ENEMY! And NEVER to be trusted! That is what the U.S. Constution was written for. That we should NEVER give our government this kind of power! The New York City guy who had his pistols stolen by city government maggots made the basic error of dealing with them in the first place. Speaking for myself, I will never obey any such laws.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

For Greg Russell again, BTW, what I personally would consider as the least powerful revolver for hunting deer is the 357 mag. You could also go with a 45 Colt in a strong gun like Ruger, then you could use light loads for self defense & heavier loads for hunting.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

For Greg Russell: The expiration of the assault weapons ban was entirely do to the fact that George Bush told the REPUBLICAN congress, he did not want to see it on his desk, period.!!!!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Greg, first of all let me say that I was very optomistic when Bush first got into office and my faith in him skyrocketed soon after 9/11 (like most of the country), but after the past few years, I have begun to wonder how many lead paint chips the guy ate when he was a kid. You think Bush is a real Christian? Then why does he do such a wonderful job of selling our country's soul to the Chinese, who are the largest and most organized persecutor of Christian since the Romans where throwing them to the lions? And remember that Christian Afghan who was sentanced to death? I hardly heard a peep from Dubya and what he did say was pretty much along the lines of "Let the Afghans handle it, even if he does get his head cut off." There were a hell of a lot of Christians pissed with him over that, too. All the guns law that have been discussed Bush has either had a minor role in (Lawfull Commerce) or none at all (Castle Doctrine, more concealed carry, etc). And if you want any more reasons why Bush really pisses me (and a lot of Conservatives) off, take your pick: Dubai Ports deal, Harriet Miers, his absolute refusal to crack down on illegal immigration (thats a biggie with me), an ultr-bloated federal government, the 2004 cluster-f*** royal in Fallujah, etc. The fact that the little toad wart Michael Moore doesn't like Bush is one of the few things he has left going for him.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Bush and Kerry move in the same economic circles. Their educational backgrounds are similar. Their circles of friends and acquaintences largely overlap. That's the way it is. You, unless you also happen to be from their social stratum, are nobody to either of them. Bush's good ol' boy act is no more genuine than Kerry's deer hunter act. Both of them move are wealthy, powerful men who interact primarily with other wealthy, powerful people. Unless you are wealthyand powerful, your only value to them is as a photo-op. Your individual vote doesn't have enough value for one them to bother pissing on you if you were on fire."And unlike howard dean, I`ve met Republicans I like, and who do work for a living." Statements like this make me question the wisdom of universal suffrage.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

JA Demko, you have a lot of anger, damn man.But ya know, since I`m not votin` one of the commie or socialist 3rd or 4th parties, I`m not voting` demon-crat, Republican is what`s left. And unlike howard dean, I`ve met Republicans I like, and who do work for a living.As to your fantasy that kerry and Bush have anything in common, you probably still believe the election was stolen from Gore, and that it was his very own medals that the traitor kerry threw over the White House fence.Does your psychiatrist know you`re on the internet again?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Good for you. Lots of folks were happy with Nixon, too. Bush spends like a drunken sailor, lies like a cheap rug, and panders like a crack whore to his cronies in comapanies like Haliburton. His Christianity is of no importance to me one way or the other save when his publicists tell him it's time to kiss a little fundie ass for the sake of the poll numbers.The Dems and a Reps have a sweet racket going here. Each side has their membership trained to believe that they must vote for X (their candidate) because_if nothing else_X isn't Y (the other party's candidate. Whether X or Y wins, the same group of fatcats profit. Here's something to think about GWB and John Kerry had far more in common with each other than either of them did with you. Neither of them were as worried about your guns as they were about keeping their rich friends happy.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Matt-Are you kidding me? It`s already been stated that the Bush Administration was key in getting legislation passed protecting gun manufacturers from senseless lawsuits from the antis’, as well as Ashcroft stating the Administration’s stance, (and rightfully so), that the Second Amendment IS an individual one, NOT a collective one.And I disagree that Bush is not a friend and that he doesn`t have our best interests at heart. I don`t agree with everything Bush has done or would like to do, but I do believe that, 1) Bush is a Christian, (hugely important to me), 2) Bush is a friend to gun owners, 3) Bush has benefited the working man, (via tax cuts), 4) Bush has looked out for the country’s welfare, 5) Bush is hated intensely by many people, (I believe because he IS a Christian), I approve strongly with Bush when he told the world that “you`re either with us or against us”, and I LOVE the fact that he does NOT consult the latest polls before deciding what position he’ll take concerning any issue. 6) I think he`s great if for no other reason than the fact that michael moore doesn`t like him.I do NOT agree with the Bush backed, so called Patriot Act because it goes too far in trampling on personal liberties, (or COULD do so), I do NOT like the Bush environmental policies, (or lack thereof), and don`t understand where they`re coming from.All in all, if you consider everything the country has been through in Bush’s Presidency, he has done a tremendous job-the economy is reasonably robust, no more attacks have occurred on US soil, and gun owners HAVE benefited. There are many, many NRA initiatives that have become law and are benefiting gun owners such as Castle Doctrine laws passed all across the country, new areas passing Concealed Carry laws, my home state of Indiana recently implemented a new Life Time Concealed Carry permit, the first state in the Union to offer such a permit.Again, I don`t agree with EVERY move this administration has made, but overall, I`m happy with what he has done for the country, the economy and gun owners. And as I`ve said many times, there are many issues I have an interest in, in the political arena, but if I must choose only one issue to base my choice of a party or candidate on, it WILL be the Second Amendment EVERY time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Very interesting comments and well thought out too. Can you think of any other nation in the history of humankind in which we could have such a free exchange of ideas? I can not. Anyhow, I ask everyone who thinks that Hillary does not have a chance at winning, to either understand or remember that she and her husband did NOT believe they would win the Presidency until the second time they tried. When Bill won snap out of the gate on the first go - they were all stunned and not ready. Can you immagine, in your worst nightmare, what she would do now that she has been the President twice already? She lies, panders, and is not to be trusted. Now, suddendly, she has religion - is in favor of the military - will not touch the subject of the 2ed Amendment - is distancing herself from her radical friends in Hollywood. Gee, I wonder why? Gee, I wonder what she has planned for her "subjects" once elected? Gee, I hope I never find out. With that in mind, I hope the Republicans find a person ( man woman, I don't care) who can handle the job and get this country back on track.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Greg, Bush is certainly better than Clinton (pretty much anyone would have been) but if you can please tell me one real thing Bush has done for gun owners in the past six years besides being better than Clinton, I would like to hear it. Whether it is guns, illegal immigration, the size of the federal government, spending, whatever, it is time for the Republican die-hards to wake up and relize Bush and his cronies are NOT conservatives, and they do NOT have our best interests in mind.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Agree on things getting sidetracked.It's baffling what Hillary Clinton and the UN has to do with a 100-year old state law a politico misread and used to take away some poor man's handguns.Focus, Boys! Focus!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal;Thanks for the topic for us to bash about.To the rest......Let us TRY and come together.....this discourse goes to show just how VERY divided we as a nation truly are......even united by the common cause of our heritage (Hunting) and the common fear (our losing our 2nd and other rights) we bash and beat on each other.Scarey at best!!1 more thought for us all to ponder........we CAN have more than the GOP or the Dems in power......we HAVE choices......IF we choose to!!We MUST NOT be blinded by partisanship...PERIODSuch blindness has brought us to this juncture....Reno did us NO favors.........nor has Ashcroft. They ALL go against us....they ALL have found a way to divide even us TRUE Americans...Those that understand and love our AMERICAN heritage.Let us all give credence to OTHER parties. The libertarians and constitutionalists come to mind. The GOP and Democratic parties profit from such devisivness. Let us all stop PAYING this heavy toll and ASSURE our great nation survives intact for our children and grandchildren.Just another rambling thought from Mike. Thanks for your time

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Not sure what you expect Matt-this administration has done some good things for us, and granted, we`d always like more, but it`s a far cry from the clinton administration.Good luck finding someone you`re satisfied with.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

I don't give a damn if Ashcroft DID state the overobvious when he said the Second Amendment was an individual right. I don't give a damn what ANY politician say because they are ALL liars. I care about what they DO. Ashcroft and the Justice Dept. and all the rest have not made gun-owner's lives any easier. Tell the ATF to know it off, executive order away as many federal gun laws as possible, and THEN I'll believe Bush is working in our best interest. The Lawful Commerce Act is about the closest one can get to a gun-friendly law Bush passed but most of the credit for that goes to Conress. The fact is Dubya has don't DICK for gun-owners in general and even less for hunters in particular and I'm sick of the NRA endorsing these clowns just because they run on the GOP ticket.P.S. On a slightly sunnier note, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Allen gets the GOP nomination because unless he has some skeleton in his closet I don't know about, he is one of the few politicians I would trust enough to vote for.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dennis Bender wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Thanks Dave for your frank and honest opinions. I am a subscriber to the magazine and look for your column first. I am now disabled and would like to continue to hunt whitetails with a handgun. I can only use my strong side, the right. What is the least capable handgun cartridge that is necessary for whitetail and do you have a preference in handguns. I am more than adequate with a Ruger single-six for small game. I would not expect to take a shot beyond 50 yards. Thanks for the advice.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Rob-agreed, perhaps a little hard, but SOMETHING has to happen to wake people out of the fog they appear to be in. We`re facing serious realities, that will take us to a point of no return, and it`s imperative that we understand that once lost, many freedoms won`t be won back.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

"men of substance?" What does that men? You have a crate of MRE's and a couple thousand rounds of Wolf ammo in the basement? You read Fred in Shotgun News? Here's a few questions for you: Who are your ocal politicos and what are their stances on gun control? Same thing at the state level? What, exactly, did Ashcroft paying lip service do to advance the gun rights cause, other than give you a warm fuzzy feeling? Do you remember what Mr. Bush said he would do if a renewal of the gun ban reached his desk? The Democrats are no friends of liberty and neither are their cronies in the GOP. The parasites in office right now are the ones who need to be the target of pressure. The parasites in the so-called right are gleefully rubbing their hands together because they know you'll vote for whatever bloodsucker they put forward just because he isn't Hillary Clinton. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if the whole "Hillary for President" meme is the work of the GOP. Hell, they've got you stampeded.The UN disarming the US remains about as much of a credible threat as Monaco doing so. The only way the N is going to have any effect on the US_at all_ is if the parasites in office right now sign treaties doing so. Watch the parasites, not the UN.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rob wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Greg,Nice post, a little hard, but it looks like we hit the same points and probably posted at the same time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rob wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Greetings all,Very good dialogue we've got going here.The dangerous thing about Hillary is that she has been moving toward the center on some issues lately. Next to her, all of the other likely democratic nominees seem like far left-nuts to the rest of the country. Plus, in order to compete with Hillary, they will have to run even further left in the democratic primary in order to get the Deaniatic web money they'll require to defeat her. This will make her look like the moderate democratic candidate to many people, which will give her a serious leg up in the general election should she win the nomination. She'll also have Bill to stump for her, which is an asset no one should take lightly. Depending what happens over the next year and a half, the country may vote democrat simply for a change in direction due to disatisfaction with Iraq dragging out. Hence, the threat is more real then some here believe. Besides, taking a look at the other likely democratic front runners, are any of them better then Hillary for gun owners? No. So how is Hillary's defeat particularly consoling? Do any of you think you'll find a friend in Kerry, Edwards, Feingold, which others?As for Bush not being a friend to gun owners, did his attorney general not issue a statement which clearly supported the citizenry's right to keep and bare arms? Yes, Mr. Ashcroft, Bush's first attorney general, did. This reversed Janet Reno's previously established position at the Justice Dept. Mr. Bush also signed the Lawful Commerce In Firearms Act which ended suits against gun manufactures, not withstanding a few arrogant judges who have ignored the law like the infamous Judge Weinstein. Do any of you believe Mr. Clinton would have done any of this? Do you think any presumptive democratic nominee in 2008 would do this?When it comes to Mr. Bush, what we should be focused on is the earlier referenced security measures, embodied in the Patriot Act, that can be perverted to dangerously compromise a multitude of rights guarunteed in the BOR. The Ben Franklin quote is one we should all paste on our workshop walls.As for the U.N., that sad body should not be so easily dismissed out of hand. They are an obvious failure militarily, but are capable of much other types of evil. There are many, many international supporters of their Ban The Trade In Small Arms bill. These international supporters, George Soros is one example, have proven capable of dumping tons of cash into the coffers of anti-gun American polititions and organizations like the Brady group. This makes them an expensive group to fight. The level of corruption in the U.N. alone, as proven with the oil for food scandal, should make it obvious what we're dealing with. We can argue about Saddam and terrorism all day, but one point is clear: U.N. corruption allowed his regime to be proped up for many years. The same could conceivably happen with other regimes that sponsor, or may have sponsored terrorism. This affects us because fear of terrorists is what leads us to things like the Patriot Act and the dangers to consitutional liberty referenced by earlier posters. We must look at the big picture and how various organizations and events intersect to have an effect on us as gun owners that is not always obvious.Finally, please stop with the NRA bashing. I know, I know, we all tire of their endless quests for more donations of our hard earned cash. Neverthless, their strong presence and defined organization will prove crucial to fighting infringements on our 2nd amendment rights as it has in the past. We are unarguably stronger with them then without them and it is just irrational to maintain otherwise.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

JA Demko-No, I`m not on drugs, but thanks for asking.Your assertion that Ms. clinton could not possibly win the white House is fools gold, if you can remember, if not for the brilliance of the Founding Fathers implementation of the Electoral College, Al Gore would have won the White House in the election against GW. Do you REALLY have much faith in the American people? And IF you`ll note, I DID point out, that if not Ms. clinton, then whomever the dems nominate, as well as a handful of those calling themselves Republications, will be trouble for America’s gun owners.To the united nations, they’ve proven themselves to be corrupt, self-serving and mostly ineffective, however-there are several nations who are seriously intent on making something come of this, so called, civilian ban on small arms and light weapons. Add to that, the support of Soros and all the other gun grabbers, and you`re an idiot to ignore what could potentially come of this. You sir, are a prime example of the apathy that ALLOWS the Bill of Rights to be assaulted, that and your refusal to recognize what formidable foes we face, because YOU have decided they really aren’t of any consequence.As was pointed out, many areas of the country enjoy a resurgence of Second Amendment benefits, and NRA is even on the offensive, rather than simply reacting to attacks. There are however, other areas of the country in which Second Amendment rights are as restricted and as under attack as ever before. Chicago comes immediately to mind of a spot that has ridiculous restrictions and bans on firearms, yet continues to have terrible crime. And if you happen to be a citizen of that area, tied down to a job that you can`t leave, you`re suffering, and your apathetic brethren are telling you how silly you are to complain, and think that we could EVER have firearm issues in the US.Your arrogant remarks notwithstanding, there is MUCH that gun owners need to be knowledgeable of, have a healthy respect for, and be prepared to battle, whether YOU see the need or not. Unfortunately, as it sounds like we’ve been doing all along, we’ll continue to carry your weight as we stand up against these very real threats.Lastly, I`m NOT your pal, as I surround myself with men who have substance and are busy working to make a difference for Second Amendment rights, NOT people who hammer out cute sounding rhetoric on their keyboard before putting their heads right back into the sand…… or perhaps UP somewhere.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

MR. DemkoYou are stageringly correct in your post....we have MUCH more to worry about than Hitlery Clintoon and that toothless nutless dog known as the United Nations.We need to fear those elected officials in power RIGHT NOW!!The ENTIRE B.O.R. is under seige....by the majority of our "Leaders" at least damn FEW seem to be on the side of "The Free Citizens of America"Sorry to say....we have NO ONE to blame but ourselves....Voter apathy is to blame for this slipery slope we are sliding down.....NOW......the question is this.......how do we secure our footing before we drown.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

"It`s extremely frightening to me to continue to hear the comments about how Ms. clinton can NEVER win the White House, blah blah blah blah. I hear the same chatter, that the united nations could NEVER cause us to lose our Second Amendment rights, what happened in Australia could NEVER happen in the US, and other assorted fairy-tales."First, Hillary Clinton has not (yet) even declared herself a candidate. On that account alone, you've begun pants-wetting too early. Secondly, the whole entire population of registered Republicans can be guaranteed to vote against her. Of the Democrats, she will enough votes from being anti-gun and from being a woman that she stands virtually no chance of victory. I can't stand the woman, but I will admit she is intelligent enough to realize that herself. If you insist on having something Hillary-related to obsess over, worry about which Democratic candidate she and Bill will endorse and stump for. Bill, particularly, is still much beloved.As for the UN...are you on drugs? Maybe you should be. Name one single thing which the UN has ever successfully accomplished of a military nature that wasn't actually a US military venture. Has the UN ever successfully confiscated so much as a cap pistol? You just keep worrying about Hillary Clinton and blue helmets pal. While you fondle your M1A and dream about being a sniper for The Resistance, the Republicrats and Democans are busily chiselling away at the whole Bill of Rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

I think the chances Hitlery Clinton will win the White House are EXTREMELY remote, but stranger things have happened. For some reason, this gun owner apathy seems to be a more regional thing. How else to explain the gun laws in states like New York or California vs. those in say, Virginia or Texas? Thats not to say gun owners everywhere don't share a lot of blame for the sorry state we are in now. As far the the UN (which I despise with every fiber of my being, and then some) goes, I seriously doubt American gun owners would stand for a UN disarmerment campaign. Having our own elected leeches strip us of our rights slowly is one thing, but having a foreign body do it all at once is quite another. Personally, I would love to see Koffi Annan try to round up our firearms because it might be just what this country needs to get our heads out of the clouds concerning the Second Amendment.P.S. Yes, Bush has been far from a friend to American gun owners and I challange anyone here totting the NRA's one-party banner to name a single gun law he has helped destroy, a single American railroaded by the ATF he has pardoned, etc.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

It`s extremely frightening to me to continue to hear the comments about how Ms. clinton can NEVER win the White House, blah blah blah blah. I hear the same chatter, that the united nations could NEVER cause us to lose our Second Amendment rights, what happened in Australia could NEVER happen in the US, and other assorted fairy-tales.Yes, Ms. clinton could very well win the demon-cratic nomination for President, and she very well could win the white House. She sounds almost reasonable compared to howard dean, and she will pick up a lot of female as well as minority vote.Probably more to the point though, any dem nominated, and even a few Republican possibles I`ve heard, are not only NOT going to protect our Second Amendment rights, but they will actively pursue taking them away. The mantra always goes the same: Gun owners are a dangerous sub-culture in America, indirectly and in many cases directly responsible for high crime, and firearm tragedies all across the country, and they need to be dealt with.The apathy American gun owners are so famous for has absolutely got to stop, we HAVE to begin to take our foes seriously, and we have to identify exactly who our allies are, and take appropriate steps to create alliances with those who are our friends.Wake up American gun owners before it`s too late.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Quite sickening (not to mention scarey) to say the least. A "Free" citizen has not only rights stolen but personal property as well. THAT is exactly what was done in this case, blatant THEFT of personal property. Seems to me that the officials should be put in prison for theft.How is it our "representatives" can use our God given rights as toilet paper.....its high time ALL Americans stand up and slap our elected officials around so to speak.When the powers that be have eradicated the 2nd what is to stop them from taking the 1st, the 4th,the 6th ammendments. A hint to all that read this. THAT is exactly what is happening, a total eradication of ALL our rights...in the name of "Security"In the words of that great man Ben Franklin "those that would trade 1 essential liberty for any percieved security deserve neither liberty nor security"We ALL need to get on the ball, horse, soap box and 'puter box and let them know in no uncertain terms that if this BS doesn't stop..we SHALL use the ballot box to get our point across.....God forbid we have to use our fail safe.................. a.k.a the ammo box.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

I worked in NYS firearm laws and legislation for some six-years ‘till ’96 with/for some of the best organized conservationists in the state. I went to bat in a ten-county area for folks having a problem acquiring or with handgun licenses. As I recall there are some 60-counties in NYS with 60-different licensing officers [county judges] having 60 different spins on the same law. NYC is in its own world to boot.DP, your poor friend got hit at the wrong time and in the wrong place with a NYC Mayor and his staff wanting career progression. I would certainly file an Article 78 Appeal and write a complaint to the NYS Office of Court Administration [the boogie men of the NYS Court System] even though many NYS handgun license holders are fearful to make too much fuss since a handgun license can be revoked for “any good reason”. However, your friend already lost his handguns, what’s the Powers-that-Be going to do now?FYI—one of the greatest mysteries in NYS Handgun licensing was trying to figure out what criteria the individual counties used to decide the applications fees. The variation was incredible, as much as $200. Many folks simply couldn’t afford to apply for a handgun license. To bring this subject up in a gov’t meeting was like throwing a dead fox in a hen house.Good luck to your friend.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CA McDonough wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Kudos for saying what everyone who loves to hunt and shoot already know. Unfortunately the idiots who vote these mega-idiots into office have the just plain wrong perception regarding guns (among other things)and they just keep multiplying. Everyone who finds hunting and shooting near and dear to thier heart needs to stay alert, politically active and work to change this perception.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

You know, the Hillary Clinton thing is getting tiresome. I'd rather slam my genitals in a cardoor than vote for her, but _realistically_she has zero chance of being elected president. The US electorate isn't "ready" to elect any woman to the Oval Office; certainly not one who carries as much animosity as Mrs. Clinton. Obsessing over what might happen if she is elected is about as productive as worrying about those shipping containers full of Chinese soldiers I was told are on our docks in California.The Republicans are our "friends" in as much as they don't enact the loathesome restrictions. They let the Democrats do it. Then they say "well, we tried..." Other than the Clinton ban, which had a built in sunset, the laws never go away either because our "friends" in the GOP never repeal them. Think of all the hateful executive orders regarding guns. The President could undo any of them with a stroke of the pen; no need to involve the legislature at all. How many have been undone by a Republican president?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jstreet wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Just think what might happen if Hillary Clinton wins the White House. I can't fathom the amount of crap hunters and shooters will have to endure if that shrew wins. Gun registration would be the least of our worries.Jim

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

It is not fair. In New Jersey just across the river if you move you have to get a new Firearms purchasers permit. In my town that takes 15 days. In some towns it can take up to a year. It is BS. Just recently in Jersey City they voted to only allow a person to purchase one Hand Gun a month. I am not a hand Gun nut but I am sure there are many people who would want excercise the right to bear arms and buy more than one. The right to bear arms does not specify how many. What is with these Nut Job council members who voted this in.NYC is all screwed up, they take the guns from law abiding citizens and screw them. I think he should talk to the NRA and get some of their attorneys involved.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" I'm not sure which part of that the antis have problems with. And I hate that idiotic comparison between cars and guns. Car ownership is NOT a right. Gun ownership IS. I feel sorry for your friend but in a place like New York, you have to expect that to happen. He really has three choices: 1) do what he did, 2) just sell his guns and get it over with, or 3) say f*** it and keep unregistered guns. I know which I would have done.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from Whatsina Name wrote 7 years 12 weeks ago

First of all, if anyone thinks for even one second, that what happened to Mr.M is in anyway "accidental" or "an un-intentional mistake", then they are not just ignorantly kidding themselves, but downright stupid!The saying: "There is more than one way to skin a cat.", has been considered a valuable bit wisdom by "Paper Shufflers" for as long as they have recognized their own hidden power. It happens way too frequently to be an unfortunate coincidence!Next, I believe we are doomed to loose our guns. Why? Because, simply too much "Apathy" by those who have the most to loose. American Citizens. Not just Gun Owners, but those who choose not to own guns, but understand that without them, we are all right back in the position we fought to be "FREE" from. Thus, it is all us, every American Citizen who has the right to vote, but more importantly, the ability to fight. To do whatever it takes to turn back the ever-encroaching cancer of Gun Control.Therefore, until there is a MASS AWAKENING, we are doomed. If it does not come very soon, it will be too late. Once the damage is done, it much harder to repair, then to prevent it.As for Mr. M... I only hope that by hearing his story, some of you out there will wake-up, and then start shaking every sleeping person you can get your hands on, and Wake them too. Then at least Mr. M.'s costly experience will not be for nothing. Maybe, just maybe, something good might come from it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Barbara wrote 7 years 34 weeks ago

There is nothing wrong with owning a gun and having a safe home,but when you get these right wing pro-gun people who eat,live and breath gunpowder along with watching a dose of the history channel that is when its time to put a hold on things until you can come up with idea of the mentality of the owner themselves.It just seems that alot of the people who try to get things done properly usually end up getting the shaft,while the other route gets ahead. So does it really pay to even get a license, and where does that money go?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

What is it about gun-oriented blogs and boards that attracts so many people of certain mindset? That particular mindset works this way:That person doesn't agree with me.Therefore, that person is a liberal.FYI, I am a libertarian. Try to wrap your mind around the idea that there may be more to the political spectrum than Republican and Evil Liberal. I know this isn't what Rush and Hannity told you, but try anyway.Here's something to think about. Back before there were motor vehicles there were some public roads and some private roads. You paid a toll to use private roads. If there was no public road across a person's property, you either crossed only with his permission, paid a toll, or didn't cross at all. Public, that is government-owned, roads historically were mainly for the benefit of the government. For a well documented historical example of this, read up on just why the ancient Romans put so much time and effort into building roads. Ever since there has been such a thing as government roads, the traffic on those roads has been regulated however much the government that owns them saw fit. Whether you want to believe it or not."Try to imagine that I go pay my own hard earned money to buy a rifle or a car or whatever." You are at liberty to drive that car around your yard without a license. You can own it without a license. You simply cannot drive it on public streets and highways without meeting license and insurance requirements. Can you take that rifle you mentioned and shoot it anywhere you please? BTW, why is it that folks like you moan about your "hard-earned" money so much? Do you think Toyota just game me a car? Do you think I woke up and found my guns undeer my pillow one morning? You aren't the only one who works for a living.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Will Coffman wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

Hey Demko,Try to imagine that I go pay my own hard earned money to buy a rifle or a car or whatever. That is not the same thing as me breaking into a military base and commandeering an M1A1 Abrams tank. And I never said anything about camping out on property that I and my fellow citizens agreed was to be used as the place we conduct public business.Use a little more brain power. If that's possible.This is just so typical of liberals, take any argument on a non-sequitor leg to make it seem like the person you are arguing against is wrong. I admit to your cleverness, but you are wrong on so many levels, it is sad.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

Everybody is paying taxes for military equipment and government office buidings, too. Try taking a spin in an M1 tank or camping on the county courthouse lawn. When the nice men with guns and badges question your activities, tell them you helped pay for it, so you are entitled to use it. Get back to us on how well they accepted that line of reasoning.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Will Coffman wrote 7 years 35 weeks ago

How many years after the Constitution was ratified did the American people think that riding a horse to get from one place to another was not a right? Why did the fact that technology advanced us to automobiles cause the ability to move from one place to another to cease being a right? And please don't give me this crap about using public roadways, because the assumption ought to be that everybody is paying taxes to maintain those roadways, and you can still have law enforcement arresting people who endanger other motorists, but that doesn't require licensing.I mean, seriously, think about this. This is the frog in the pot syndrome. We've come to believe that the government needs to license people for everything they do, and yet it protects not a single person. Do you know how easy it is to get a license in most states? It is nothing but a revenue instrument for the government. Licensing for anything is just an excuse to take money from you and give the government a paper trail to hunt you down.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Kristopher wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

Auto licenses and registration only apply to vehicles on public roads.Are the victim disarmament supporters who make this analogy willing to let anyone ( including teens ) buy any firearm ( including machineguns ) with no paperwork whatsoever, provided the firearm is never worn on public property?I didn't think so. When Anti-gun losers support my right to own ANY firearm on private property, with no paperwork, then I will take their "automobile license" analogy seriously.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Wayne Dougherty wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

I think this story of bureaucratic screw-up with gun licensing should be presented to antigun groups and politicians. They're always quick to say they support the rights of law-abiding gunners blahblahblah. Put it to them; these are the laws they wanted, press them to address the screw-ups.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

Car ownership is a right. Use of the public streets and highways, which are owned by The State® is not. You may, in other words, use your personally-owned car to tool about your property in glorious freedom from licensing, speed limits, seatbelt laws, and open container restrictions. You, apparently, have no such right to use the public highways; there are many and various licensing requirements and laws in place to contradict that idea.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Stephen Rider wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

"Car ownership is NOT a right. Gun ownership IS."Actually, you have just as much right to own a car as you do gun. The generic term is "property", and Kelo notwithstanding, it is a right in this country.The 2nd amendment specifies the right to gun ownership, but the 10th effectively specifies that, unless the Constitution says "no you don't" regarding a right, the answer is by default "yes you do".

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ken wrote 7 years 36 weeks ago

Gee whiz, Guys & Gals---so many political attitudes. For myself, be grateful for what we get and TRUST NO ONE. And by the way, driving a car and some of the other things listed as privileges all come under the heading of the right of _freedom_ to come and go as we please.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Mr. HamptonYou are so correct....there is a VERY disturbing trend in todays America of restricting law abiding citizens, whilst allowing the convicts to run the institution....so to speak....if we actually PUNISHED the scumbags for being just that, we wouldnt have near the trouble we have today.But, instead we "reward" those "poor misunderstood humans" that break laws and do nothing more than become breeding factories and expect those that follow the moral path to foot the bill.SickeningNOW.....the question before us is this.....HOW do we change and reverse this trend?More rambling thoughts from MikeThanks for you time

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Don Adams wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

The only people talking up Hillary are the Republicans. They want her to run so they can win again. The only hope any of us have is to vote out whoever is in office. If they have served two (2) terms VOTE THEM OUT!!! The only way to regain control of OUR country is to put term limits on Congress. They won't do it so we have to do it for them. Here in Florida we have a Congressman who has been abandoned by the Republicans. She plans to spend all of her inheritance to get the office of Sen. Bill Nelson(D). Why would someone spend millions of their own dollars to get in office? True, they get a six figure income, but not a seven figure. There must be some big incentive to do that.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from craig curtis wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

wow are we done venting in here!! im so glad i live in a small rural town purchase permits are a hassle but our carry permits made it esiar to buy hanguns .if i were the gentelman who got *&%ed in new york id be writing everybody in government from city to state and i wouldnt stop their make waves all the way until heads role oh that pisses me off new york would have to kiss my lilly white american -- then id move . the sherrifs take our money for permits and they never seem to screw things up knock on wood !!!why would you want to live in the big ugly apple anyway good luck with that !

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from S Hampton wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

I think it important to remember that driving, flying, and other related activities are privileges. Owning a gun is a right and you don't charge fees for rights. If the anti's would be concerned with criminals instead of law abiding gun owners it would be great. But that isn't going to happen nor would I ever trust the Schumers, Fiensteins, Clintons, and Kofi's of the world

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Eric wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Seems pretty simple to me....if you wish to have firearms and not take a bunch of BS, don't live and pay tax in a state, city or township that feels it is their responsibility to monitor and "fee" you to death.As for the United Nations taking my arms....fine! .....from my cold dead hands.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from bobby c wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

to the guy in new york city who lost his pistol,i live in brooklyn n.y. and also have a pistol permit.if i,ve learned anything in dealing with the license dept.you mail everything certified with a return requested,so they have to sign for mail.second.there are a lot of different opinions about politics and gun laws.so why don,t we take a step back,take a deep breathe,and put our ideas togeher and come up with a plan,for gun rights/politicans and then go down thier throat with both feet.theres a time for talk and a time for not talking.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Pardon me, G Miller, I misattributed "The expiration of the assault weapons ban was entirely do to the fact that George Bush told the REPUBLICAN congress, he did not want to see it on his desk, period.!!!!!!" to you; it was Jim's post. You remain, however, a liar and poltroon.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

"You keep asking for authoritive sources on every point others make"You, sirrah, are a bald-faced liar. Other than asking for a citation for your exclamation point-laden bovine fecal bolus, I defy to find even one other example of me asking for documentation on this blog.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from G Miller wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

JA Demko, you're full of crap. You keep asking for authoritive sources on every point others make, but it's clear you can't cite any for your points because what you've been spouting shows you're just a plant from the DNC.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

"The expiration of the assault weapons ban was entirely do to the fact that George Bush told the REPUBLICAN congress, he did not want to see it on his desk, period.!!!!!!"You can, of course, document this emphatic assertion with some type of citation? From an autoritative source, I mean, not something that Billy Bob told you down to the VFW.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Hey, a really interesting and informed bunch of comments folks! There is little that I could add to it except to say that no, Bush is not really our friend and no politician will ever be. This administration would turn on us instantly if they thought it was to their advantage. All Americans need to have it drummed into their thick heads that the government is all too often the ENEMY! And NEVER to be trusted! That is what the U.S. Constution was written for. That we should NEVER give our government this kind of power! The New York City guy who had his pistols stolen by city government maggots made the basic error of dealing with them in the first place. Speaking for myself, I will never obey any such laws.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

For Greg Russell again, BTW, what I personally would consider as the least powerful revolver for hunting deer is the 357 mag. You could also go with a 45 Colt in a strong gun like Ruger, then you could use light loads for self defense & heavier loads for hunting.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

For Greg Russell: The expiration of the assault weapons ban was entirely do to the fact that George Bush told the REPUBLICAN congress, he did not want to see it on his desk, period.!!!!!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Greg, first of all let me say that I was very optomistic when Bush first got into office and my faith in him skyrocketed soon after 9/11 (like most of the country), but after the past few years, I have begun to wonder how many lead paint chips the guy ate when he was a kid. You think Bush is a real Christian? Then why does he do such a wonderful job of selling our country's soul to the Chinese, who are the largest and most organized persecutor of Christian since the Romans where throwing them to the lions? And remember that Christian Afghan who was sentanced to death? I hardly heard a peep from Dubya and what he did say was pretty much along the lines of "Let the Afghans handle it, even if he does get his head cut off." There were a hell of a lot of Christians pissed with him over that, too. All the guns law that have been discussed Bush has either had a minor role in (Lawfull Commerce) or none at all (Castle Doctrine, more concealed carry, etc). And if you want any more reasons why Bush really pisses me (and a lot of Conservatives) off, take your pick: Dubai Ports deal, Harriet Miers, his absolute refusal to crack down on illegal immigration (thats a biggie with me), an ultr-bloated federal government, the 2004 cluster-f*** royal in Fallujah, etc. The fact that the little toad wart Michael Moore doesn't like Bush is one of the few things he has left going for him.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Bush and Kerry move in the same economic circles. Their educational backgrounds are similar. Their circles of friends and acquaintences largely overlap. That's the way it is. You, unless you also happen to be from their social stratum, are nobody to either of them. Bush's good ol' boy act is no more genuine than Kerry's deer hunter act. Both of them move are wealthy, powerful men who interact primarily with other wealthy, powerful people. Unless you are wealthyand powerful, your only value to them is as a photo-op. Your individual vote doesn't have enough value for one them to bother pissing on you if you were on fire."And unlike howard dean, I`ve met Republicans I like, and who do work for a living." Statements like this make me question the wisdom of universal suffrage.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

JA Demko, you have a lot of anger, damn man.But ya know, since I`m not votin` one of the commie or socialist 3rd or 4th parties, I`m not voting` demon-crat, Republican is what`s left. And unlike howard dean, I`ve met Republicans I like, and who do work for a living.As to your fantasy that kerry and Bush have anything in common, you probably still believe the election was stolen from Gore, and that it was his very own medals that the traitor kerry threw over the White House fence.Does your psychiatrist know you`re on the internet again?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Good for you. Lots of folks were happy with Nixon, too. Bush spends like a drunken sailor, lies like a cheap rug, and panders like a crack whore to his cronies in comapanies like Haliburton. His Christianity is of no importance to me one way or the other save when his publicists tell him it's time to kiss a little fundie ass for the sake of the poll numbers.The Dems and a Reps have a sweet racket going here. Each side has their membership trained to believe that they must vote for X (their candidate) because_if nothing else_X isn't Y (the other party's candidate. Whether X or Y wins, the same group of fatcats profit. Here's something to think about GWB and John Kerry had far more in common with each other than either of them did with you. Neither of them were as worried about your guns as they were about keeping their rich friends happy.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 37 weeks ago

Matt-Are you kidding me? It`s already been stated that the Bush Administration was key in getting legislation passed protecting gun manufacturers from senseless lawsuits from the antis’, as well as Ashcroft stating the Administration’s stance, (and rightfully so), that the Second Amendment IS an individual one, NOT a collective one.And I disagree that Bush is not a friend and that he doesn`t have our best interests at heart. I don`t agree with everything Bush has done or would like to do, but I do believe that, 1) Bush is a Christian, (hugely important to me), 2) Bush is a friend to gun owners, 3) Bush has benefited the working man, (via tax cuts), 4) Bush has looked out for the country’s welfare, 5) Bush is hated intensely by many people, (I believe because he IS a Christian), I approve strongly with Bush when he told the world that “you`re either with us or against us”, and I LOVE the fact that he does NOT consult the latest polls before deciding what position he’ll take concerning any issue. 6) I think he`s great if for no other reason than the fact that michael moore doesn`t like him.I do NOT agree with the Bush backed, so called Patriot Act because it goes too far in trampling on personal liberties, (or COULD do so), I do NOT like the Bush environmental policies, (or lack thereof), and don`t understand where they`re coming from.All in all, if you consider everything the country has been through in Bush’s Presidency, he has done a tremendous job-the economy is reasonably robust, no more attacks have occurred on US soil, and gun owners HAVE benefited. There are many, many NRA initiatives that have become law and are benefiting gun owners such as Castle Doctrine laws passed all across the country, new areas passing Concealed Carry laws, my home state of Indiana recently implemented a new Life Time Concealed Carry permit, the first state in the Union to offer such a permit.Again, I don`t agree with EVERY move this administration has made, but overall, I`m happy with what he has done for the country, the economy and gun owners. And as I`ve said many times, there are many issues I have an interest in, in the political arena, but if I must choose only one issue to base my choice of a party or candidate on, it WILL be the Second Amendment EVERY time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gary wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Very interesting comments and well thought out too. Can you think of any other nation in the history of humankind in which we could have such a free exchange of ideas? I can not. Anyhow, I ask everyone who thinks that Hillary does not have a chance at winning, to either understand or remember that she and her husband did NOT believe they would win the Presidency until the second time they tried. When Bill won snap out of the gate on the first go - they were all stunned and not ready. Can you immagine, in your worst nightmare, what she would do now that she has been the President twice already? She lies, panders, and is not to be trusted. Now, suddendly, she has religion - is in favor of the military - will not touch the subject of the 2ed Amendment - is distancing herself from her radical friends in Hollywood. Gee, I wonder why? Gee, I wonder what she has planned for her "subjects" once elected? Gee, I hope I never find out. With that in mind, I hope the Republicans find a person ( man woman, I don't care) who can handle the job and get this country back on track.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Greg, Bush is certainly better than Clinton (pretty much anyone would have been) but if you can please tell me one real thing Bush has done for gun owners in the past six years besides being better than Clinton, I would like to hear it. Whether it is guns, illegal immigration, the size of the federal government, spending, whatever, it is time for the Republican die-hards to wake up and relize Bush and his cronies are NOT conservatives, and they do NOT have our best interests in mind.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Agree on things getting sidetracked.It's baffling what Hillary Clinton and the UN has to do with a 100-year old state law a politico misread and used to take away some poor man's handguns.Focus, Boys! Focus!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Mr. Petzal;Thanks for the topic for us to bash about.To the rest......Let us TRY and come together.....this discourse goes to show just how VERY divided we as a nation truly are......even united by the common cause of our heritage (Hunting) and the common fear (our losing our 2nd and other rights) we bash and beat on each other.Scarey at best!!1 more thought for us all to ponder........we CAN have more than the GOP or the Dems in power......we HAVE choices......IF we choose to!!We MUST NOT be blinded by partisanship...PERIODSuch blindness has brought us to this juncture....Reno did us NO favors.........nor has Ashcroft. They ALL go against us....they ALL have found a way to divide even us TRUE Americans...Those that understand and love our AMERICAN heritage.Let us all give credence to OTHER parties. The libertarians and constitutionalists come to mind. The GOP and Democratic parties profit from such devisivness. Let us all stop PAYING this heavy toll and ASSURE our great nation survives intact for our children and grandchildren.Just another rambling thought from Mike. Thanks for your time

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Not sure what you expect Matt-this administration has done some good things for us, and granted, we`d always like more, but it`s a far cry from the clinton administration.Good luck finding someone you`re satisfied with.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

I don't give a damn if Ashcroft DID state the overobvious when he said the Second Amendment was an individual right. I don't give a damn what ANY politician say because they are ALL liars. I care about what they DO. Ashcroft and the Justice Dept. and all the rest have not made gun-owner's lives any easier. Tell the ATF to know it off, executive order away as many federal gun laws as possible, and THEN I'll believe Bush is working in our best interest. The Lawful Commerce Act is about the closest one can get to a gun-friendly law Bush passed but most of the credit for that goes to Conress. The fact is Dubya has don't DICK for gun-owners in general and even less for hunters in particular and I'm sick of the NRA endorsing these clowns just because they run on the GOP ticket.P.S. On a slightly sunnier note, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Allen gets the GOP nomination because unless he has some skeleton in his closet I don't know about, he is one of the few politicians I would trust enough to vote for.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dennis Bender wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Thanks Dave for your frank and honest opinions. I am a subscriber to the magazine and look for your column first. I am now disabled and would like to continue to hunt whitetails with a handgun. I can only use my strong side, the right. What is the least capable handgun cartridge that is necessary for whitetail and do you have a preference in handguns. I am more than adequate with a Ruger single-six for small game. I would not expect to take a shot beyond 50 yards. Thanks for the advice.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Rob-agreed, perhaps a little hard, but SOMETHING has to happen to wake people out of the fog they appear to be in. We`re facing serious realities, that will take us to a point of no return, and it`s imperative that we understand that once lost, many freedoms won`t be won back.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

"men of substance?" What does that men? You have a crate of MRE's and a couple thousand rounds of Wolf ammo in the basement? You read Fred in Shotgun News? Here's a few questions for you: Who are your ocal politicos and what are their stances on gun control? Same thing at the state level? What, exactly, did Ashcroft paying lip service do to advance the gun rights cause, other than give you a warm fuzzy feeling? Do you remember what Mr. Bush said he would do if a renewal of the gun ban reached his desk? The Democrats are no friends of liberty and neither are their cronies in the GOP. The parasites in office right now are the ones who need to be the target of pressure. The parasites in the so-called right are gleefully rubbing their hands together because they know you'll vote for whatever bloodsucker they put forward just because he isn't Hillary Clinton. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if the whole "Hillary for President" meme is the work of the GOP. Hell, they've got you stampeded.The UN disarming the US remains about as much of a credible threat as Monaco doing so. The only way the N is going to have any effect on the US_at all_ is if the parasites in office right now sign treaties doing so. Watch the parasites, not the UN.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rob wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Greg,Nice post, a little hard, but it looks like we hit the same points and probably posted at the same time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Rob wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Greetings all,Very good dialogue we've got going here.The dangerous thing about Hillary is that she has been moving toward the center on some issues lately. Next to her, all of the other likely democratic nominees seem like far left-nuts to the rest of the country. Plus, in order to compete with Hillary, they will have to run even further left in the democratic primary in order to get the Deaniatic web money they'll require to defeat her. This will make her look like the moderate democratic candidate to many people, which will give her a serious leg up in the general election should she win the nomination. She'll also have Bill to stump for her, which is an asset no one should take lightly. Depending what happens over the next year and a half, the country may vote democrat simply for a change in direction due to disatisfaction with Iraq dragging out. Hence, the threat is more real then some here believe. Besides, taking a look at the other likely democratic front runners, are any of them better then Hillary for gun owners? No. So how is Hillary's defeat particularly consoling? Do any of you think you'll find a friend in Kerry, Edwards, Feingold, which others?As for Bush not being a friend to gun owners, did his attorney general not issue a statement which clearly supported the citizenry's right to keep and bare arms? Yes, Mr. Ashcroft, Bush's first attorney general, did. This reversed Janet Reno's previously established position at the Justice Dept. Mr. Bush also signed the Lawful Commerce In Firearms Act which ended suits against gun manufactures, not withstanding a few arrogant judges who have ignored the law like the infamous Judge Weinstein. Do any of you believe Mr. Clinton would have done any of this? Do you think any presumptive democratic nominee in 2008 would do this?When it comes to Mr. Bush, what we should be focused on is the earlier referenced security measures, embodied in the Patriot Act, that can be perverted to dangerously compromise a multitude of rights guarunteed in the BOR. The Ben Franklin quote is one we should all paste on our workshop walls.As for the U.N., that sad body should not be so easily dismissed out of hand. They are an obvious failure militarily, but are capable of much other types of evil. There are many, many international supporters of their Ban The Trade In Small Arms bill. These international supporters, George Soros is one example, have proven capable of dumping tons of cash into the coffers of anti-gun American polititions and organizations like the Brady group. This makes them an expensive group to fight. The level of corruption in the U.N. alone, as proven with the oil for food scandal, should make it obvious what we're dealing with. We can argue about Saddam and terrorism all day, but one point is clear: U.N. corruption allowed his regime to be proped up for many years. The same could conceivably happen with other regimes that sponsor, or may have sponsored terrorism. This affects us because fear of terrorists is what leads us to things like the Patriot Act and the dangers to consitutional liberty referenced by earlier posters. We must look at the big picture and how various organizations and events intersect to have an effect on us as gun owners that is not always obvious.Finally, please stop with the NRA bashing. I know, I know, we all tire of their endless quests for more donations of our hard earned cash. Neverthless, their strong presence and defined organization will prove crucial to fighting infringements on our 2nd amendment rights as it has in the past. We are unarguably stronger with them then without them and it is just irrational to maintain otherwise.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

JA Demko-No, I`m not on drugs, but thanks for asking.Your assertion that Ms. clinton could not possibly win the white House is fools gold, if you can remember, if not for the brilliance of the Founding Fathers implementation of the Electoral College, Al Gore would have won the White House in the election against GW. Do you REALLY have much faith in the American people? And IF you`ll note, I DID point out, that if not Ms. clinton, then whomever the dems nominate, as well as a handful of those calling themselves Republications, will be trouble for America’s gun owners.To the united nations, they’ve proven themselves to be corrupt, self-serving and mostly ineffective, however-there are several nations who are seriously intent on making something come of this, so called, civilian ban on small arms and light weapons. Add to that, the support of Soros and all the other gun grabbers, and you`re an idiot to ignore what could potentially come of this. You sir, are a prime example of the apathy that ALLOWS the Bill of Rights to be assaulted, that and your refusal to recognize what formidable foes we face, because YOU have decided they really aren’t of any consequence.As was pointed out, many areas of the country enjoy a resurgence of Second Amendment benefits, and NRA is even on the offensive, rather than simply reacting to attacks. There are however, other areas of the country in which Second Amendment rights are as restricted and as under attack as ever before. Chicago comes immediately to mind of a spot that has ridiculous restrictions and bans on firearms, yet continues to have terrible crime. And if you happen to be a citizen of that area, tied down to a job that you can`t leave, you`re suffering, and your apathetic brethren are telling you how silly you are to complain, and think that we could EVER have firearm issues in the US.Your arrogant remarks notwithstanding, there is MUCH that gun owners need to be knowledgeable of, have a healthy respect for, and be prepared to battle, whether YOU see the need or not. Unfortunately, as it sounds like we’ve been doing all along, we’ll continue to carry your weight as we stand up against these very real threats.Lastly, I`m NOT your pal, as I surround myself with men who have substance and are busy working to make a difference for Second Amendment rights, NOT people who hammer out cute sounding rhetoric on their keyboard before putting their heads right back into the sand…… or perhaps UP somewhere.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

MR. DemkoYou are stageringly correct in your post....we have MUCH more to worry about than Hitlery Clintoon and that toothless nutless dog known as the United Nations.We need to fear those elected officials in power RIGHT NOW!!The ENTIRE B.O.R. is under seige....by the majority of our "Leaders" at least damn FEW seem to be on the side of "The Free Citizens of America"Sorry to say....we have NO ONE to blame but ourselves....Voter apathy is to blame for this slipery slope we are sliding down.....NOW......the question is this.......how do we secure our footing before we drown.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

"It`s extremely frightening to me to continue to hear the comments about how Ms. clinton can NEVER win the White House, blah blah blah blah. I hear the same chatter, that the united nations could NEVER cause us to lose our Second Amendment rights, what happened in Australia could NEVER happen in the US, and other assorted fairy-tales."First, Hillary Clinton has not (yet) even declared herself a candidate. On that account alone, you've begun pants-wetting too early. Secondly, the whole entire population of registered Republicans can be guaranteed to vote against her. Of the Democrats, she will enough votes from being anti-gun and from being a woman that she stands virtually no chance of victory. I can't stand the woman, but I will admit she is intelligent enough to realize that herself. If you insist on having something Hillary-related to obsess over, worry about which Democratic candidate she and Bill will endorse and stump for. Bill, particularly, is still much beloved.As for the UN...are you on drugs? Maybe you should be. Name one single thing which the UN has ever successfully accomplished of a military nature that wasn't actually a US military venture. Has the UN ever successfully confiscated so much as a cap pistol? You just keep worrying about Hillary Clinton and blue helmets pal. While you fondle your M1A and dream about being a sniper for The Resistance, the Republicrats and Democans are busily chiselling away at the whole Bill of Rights.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

I think the chances Hitlery Clinton will win the White House are EXTREMELY remote, but stranger things have happened. For some reason, this gun owner apathy seems to be a more regional thing. How else to explain the gun laws in states like New York or California vs. those in say, Virginia or Texas? Thats not to say gun owners everywhere don't share a lot of blame for the sorry state we are in now. As far the the UN (which I despise with every fiber of my being, and then some) goes, I seriously doubt American gun owners would stand for a UN disarmerment campaign. Having our own elected leeches strip us of our rights slowly is one thing, but having a foreign body do it all at once is quite another. Personally, I would love to see Koffi Annan try to round up our firearms because it might be just what this country needs to get our heads out of the clouds concerning the Second Amendment.P.S. Yes, Bush has been far from a friend to American gun owners and I challange anyone here totting the NRA's one-party banner to name a single gun law he has helped destroy, a single American railroaded by the ATF he has pardoned, etc.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greg Russell wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

It`s extremely frightening to me to continue to hear the comments about how Ms. clinton can NEVER win the White House, blah blah blah blah. I hear the same chatter, that the united nations could NEVER cause us to lose our Second Amendment rights, what happened in Australia could NEVER happen in the US, and other assorted fairy-tales.Yes, Ms. clinton could very well win the demon-cratic nomination for President, and she very well could win the white House. She sounds almost reasonable compared to howard dean, and she will pick up a lot of female as well as minority vote.Probably more to the point though, any dem nominated, and even a few Republican possibles I`ve heard, are not only NOT going to protect our Second Amendment rights, but they will actively pursue taking them away. The mantra always goes the same: Gun owners are a dangerous sub-culture in America, indirectly and in many cases directly responsible for high crime, and firearm tragedies all across the country, and they need to be dealt with.The apathy American gun owners are so famous for has absolutely got to stop, we HAVE to begin to take our foes seriously, and we have to identify exactly who our allies are, and take appropriate steps to create alliances with those who are our friends.Wake up American gun owners before it`s too late.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Quite sickening (not to mention scarey) to say the least. A "Free" citizen has not only rights stolen but personal property as well. THAT is exactly what was done in this case, blatant THEFT of personal property. Seems to me that the officials should be put in prison for theft.How is it our "representatives" can use our God given rights as toilet paper.....its high time ALL Americans stand up and slap our elected officials around so to speak.When the powers that be have eradicated the 2nd what is to stop them from taking the 1st, the 4th,the 6th ammendments. A hint to all that read this. THAT is exactly what is happening, a total eradication of ALL our rights...in the name of "Security"In the words of that great man Ben Franklin "those that would trade 1 essential liberty for any percieved security deserve neither liberty nor security"We ALL need to get on the ball, horse, soap box and 'puter box and let them know in no uncertain terms that if this BS doesn't stop..we SHALL use the ballot box to get our point across.....God forbid we have to use our fail safe.................. a.k.a the ammo box.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

I worked in NYS firearm laws and legislation for some six-years ‘till ’96 with/for some of the best organized conservationists in the state. I went to bat in a ten-county area for folks having a problem acquiring or with handgun licenses. As I recall there are some 60-counties in NYS with 60-different licensing officers [county judges] having 60 different spins on the same law. NYC is in its own world to boot.DP, your poor friend got hit at the wrong time and in the wrong place with a NYC Mayor and his staff wanting career progression. I would certainly file an Article 78 Appeal and write a complaint to the NYS Office of Court Administration [the boogie men of the NYS Court System] even though many NYS handgun license holders are fearful to make too much fuss since a handgun license can be revoked for “any good reason”. However, your friend already lost his handguns, what’s the Powers-that-Be going to do now?FYI—one of the greatest mysteries in NYS Handgun licensing was trying to figure out what criteria the individual counties used to decide the applications fees. The variation was incredible, as much as $200. Many folks simply couldn’t afford to apply for a handgun license. To bring this subject up in a gov’t meeting was like throwing a dead fox in a hen house.Good luck to your friend.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CA McDonough wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Kudos for saying what everyone who loves to hunt and shoot already know. Unfortunately the idiots who vote these mega-idiots into office have the just plain wrong perception regarding guns (among other things)and they just keep multiplying. Everyone who finds hunting and shooting near and dear to thier heart needs to stay alert, politically active and work to change this perception.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from JA Demko wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

You know, the Hillary Clinton thing is getting tiresome. I'd rather slam my genitals in a cardoor than vote for her, but _realistically_she has zero chance of being elected president. The US electorate isn't "ready" to elect any woman to the Oval Office; certainly not one who carries as much animosity as Mrs. Clinton. Obsessing over what might happen if she is elected is about as productive as worrying about those shipping containers full of Chinese soldiers I was told are on our docks in California.The Republicans are our "friends" in as much as they don't enact the loathesome restrictions. They let the Democrats do it. Then they say "well, we tried..." Other than the Clinton ban, which had a built in sunset, the laws never go away either because our "friends" in the GOP never repeal them. Think of all the hateful executive orders regarding guns. The President could undo any of them with a stroke of the pen; no need to involve the legislature at all. How many have been undone by a Republican president?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jstreet wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

Just think what might happen if Hillary Clinton wins the White House. I can't fathom the amount of crap hunters and shooters will have to endure if that shrew wins. Gun registration would be the least of our worries.Jim

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tom wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

It is not fair. In New Jersey just across the river if you move you have to get a new Firearms purchasers permit. In my town that takes 15 days. In some towns it can take up to a year. It is BS. Just recently in Jersey City they voted to only allow a person to purchase one Hand Gun a month. I am not a hand Gun nut but I am sure there are many people who would want excercise the right to bear arms and buy more than one. The right to bear arms does not specify how many. What is with these Nut Job council members who voted this in.NYC is all screwed up, they take the guns from law abiding citizens and screw them. I think he should talk to the NRA and get some of their attorneys involved.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Matt wrote 7 years 38 weeks ago

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" I'm not sure which part of that the antis have problems with. And I hate that idiotic comparison between cars and guns. Car ownership is NOT a right. Gun ownership IS. I feel sorry for your friend but in a place like New York, you have to expect that to happen. He really has three choices: 1) do what he did, 2) just sell his guns and get it over with, or 3) say f*** it and keep unregistered guns. I know which I would have done.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Chambers wrote 7 years 3 days ago

First of all, the fact that Director Prasso (who is the Director of the NYPD, Pistol License Division, and a very fair minded individual) LESSENED the punishment from a "revocation," to a "cancellation," is significant. This means that Mr. M will not have a mark on his record that will follow him the remainder of his life. In addition, if he paid only $550.00 for an attorney to represent him at his Administrative Hearing, he deserves to have his handgun license canceled. Just like any other area of the law, there are those who are specialists in this area, and he would have been much better off seeking us out, instead of settling for his local Canal Street lawyer to take him into the lion's den.At this juncture, an Article 78 would not be the way to go (assuming he could file within the required statutory limitation), but if he re-applied, he would have a high likelihood of success given the fact that Director Prasso converted the revocation to a cancellation.John S. Chambers, Esquirewww.nygun.com

-1 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment