Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/17/2013 3:34:17 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
To: Kaslin

SWEET!


2 posted on 04/17/2013 3:35:03 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

The grand irony is that this is happening at the exact same time that the Boston bombings are reminding people that there are worse weapons than guns.


4 posted on 04/17/2013 3:36:03 PM PDT by Wanderer99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Giffords' husband can't even buy a used gun in Arizona through a dealer.

What kind of anti-gun advocate is that ~ reminds me of the mob counseling that people don't need guns.

6 posted on 04/17/2013 3:38:33 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
when you see video of the president's furious -- and I mean furious -- Rose Garden statement

LOL! I hope he's spitting mad! Watch out for domestic violence, Reggie!

7 posted on 04/17/2013 3:39:22 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

FYI...on the NY Safe Act

Albany Police Officers Union, local 2841, “We respectfully demand that you do the right thing and repeal the law.”

The letter:

To: Andrew M. Cuomo / Dean G. Skelos / Neil D. Breslin / John T- McDonald III / Phil Steck / Sheldon Silver / Jeffrey D. Klein / Cecilia Tkaczyk / Patricia Fahy Note; see the formal list of people this letter went to at the bottom.

April 15,2013

Honorable Ladies and Gentlemen:

The Albany Police Officers Union condemns and opposes the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act (the SAFE Act) Substantively, we believe that it violates fundamental constitutional rights, that it is unduly and purposely burdensome on law-abiding citizens, and” that it will not deter criminals or menially ill individuals from plotting and carrying out bloodshed and violence. Procedurally, we believe that the way in which the bill was rammed into law via an unjustified and expedient “message of necessity”, which circumvents the right and the ability of the citizens of this State to voice their concerns about the bill and have them addressed, is an outrage. This flawed law’ and the w ay in which it was rushed and passed., shows the apparent contempt that those who govern have for the governed, and. calls into question whether we truly have a representational government. Morally, we believe that this law is about ideology and politics and not about making anyone any safer. We respectfully demand that you do the right thing and repeal the law.

First, while we applaud and support your overall concern for public safety and your desire to improve it. The SAFE Act will not improve public safety. Criminals and the mentally ill will not abide by it, and it is either foolish or dishonest to think or suggest otherwise. While law-abiding citizens will abide by the law and not load a ten-round magazine with more than seven rounds, do you really expect a criminal or mentally ill individual intent on doing violence not load ten rounds into a ten-round magazine? While law-abiding citizens will abide by the law that previously legal thirty-round magazines must be sold within one-year to an out-of-state resident or turn in to local authorities, do you really expect a criminal or mentally ill individual intent on doing violence to sell or turn in his thirty-round magazines? While law-abiding citizens will abide by the law requiring that they register weapons which they already do and which have been deemed “assault weapons”, do you really expect a criminal or mentally ill individual intent on doing violence to do so? Do you really expect a criminal or mentally ill individual intent on doing violence to be concerned about any increase in penalties for shooting first responders? Do you really expect that a mentally ill individual who owns firearms and who is intent on doing violence will voice his intentions to his or her mental health professional and thus put into motion the confiscation of his or her firearms? Do you-really expect that a mentally ill individual will “safely store” his firearms? Of course you don’t. Again, only law-abiding citizens, who are not intent on doing violence, will abide the NY SAFE Act criminals and the mentally ill who are intent on doing violence will not do so. The public will not be any safer under this 1aw. What then, have you accomplished?

Second., the SAFE Act carries with it unfair burdens on law abiding citizen. What is the point of making law-abiding citizens register their previously lawfully owned and lawfully used firearms which are now deemed to be “assault weapons”? What is the point of making law-abiding citizens who affirmatively “opt into” protection from public identification that they hold permits or own firearms? What is the point of making law-abiding citizens renew their pistol permits or “assault weapon” registrations every five years? Why are you preemptively punishing those who have done nothing wrong?

Third, -we fully believe that the SAFE ACT broad prohibitions against will not. withstand constitutional challenge and scrutiny. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides and U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the right of individuals to possess and carry firearms and to use them for lawful purposes. The SAFE Act, however, infringes on that right as it bans the possession and use of certain firearms that were heretofore possessed and” used lawfully for the defense of life, liberty, and property, and as it bans the possession and use of certain firearms that were heretofore possessed and used lawfully for safe use of firearms recreation, hunting, and shooting.

We as police officers are on the front lines of public safety. Respectfully, none of you are. We see, feel, work, and live with the effects of gun violence in ways that you cannot. We believe that you see gun violence as a means to move your agenda and your ambitions forward. You know that the SAFE Act will not work in the way that you pretend it will. You know that this shameful SAFE Act was about ideology and politics and not about making anyone safer.

Regarding the reduction in violent crime this new legislation is proposed to have, in 2011 the most current year for which FBI crime statistics are available, New York State had 77l homicides, 445 were committed with a firearm, 394 of that 445 were committed with a handgun, 5 were committed with a rifle, 16 were committed with a shotgun, in 30 the firearm type was unknown, 160 were committed with a cutting instrument, 143 were committed with another type of weapon, and 26 were committed with bare hands. We believe based on these statistics, that the SAFE Act will do nothing to reduce violent crime as the primary target of the legislation is the “assault rifle” which would be included statistically with standard rifles and used in less than 1% of New York homicides in 2011.These so called “Assault Weapons” were not used in the commission of one reported crime in Albany County in 2011.

For the reasons set forth above, the Albany Police Union believes that the SAFE Act is wrong - substantively, procedurally, and morally. The SAFE Act infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens, it will burden and negatively impact firearms ownership by law-abiding citizens and will not affect the willingness of criminals or those who are mentally ill from perpetrating violence. Again, we respectfully demand that each and all of you do the right thing and repeal the law.

Very truly yours,

Thomas Mahar: President Albany Police Officers Union, local 2841 Council 82, AFSCME, AFI-CIO


8 posted on 04/17/2013 3:40:11 PM PDT by Fitzy_888 ("ownership society")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Thank you GOP for standing strong.

thank you Republican senator Kelly aYote. and she's pretty too


9 posted on 04/17/2013 3:40:22 PM PDT by Democrat_media (Mary Landrieu voted for the UN to take away our 2nd amendment rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
"You get NOTHING! You LOSE! Good DAY, sir!"
10 posted on 04/17/2013 3:42:02 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: FReepers; Patriots; FRiends



Our Republic functioned properly today. Citizens patriots actively won the day!

Our Constitution was upheld!


Please Show Your Support for Free Republic Today.

If you can Donate Monthly, that would be ideal.

12 posted on 04/17/2013 3:45:16 PM PDT by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

I’m confused. The only thing that got voted down today as I understand are the amendments, some of which would have instituted universal background checks (national rights exercise database). But the base bill already has a rights-exercise database provision. So why are so many on left AND right acting as if the bill is KO’ed? Is there some procedural thing I’m missing here?


13 posted on 04/17/2013 3:46:06 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Obama has his panties in a bunch. We have three years to make him look like a total loser and completely demoralize him. Wouldn’t it be ironic that things get so low for him that he takes a ....


14 posted on 04/17/2013 3:46:30 PM PDT by ConservativeInPA (Molon Labe - Shall not be questioned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Score one for the First Amendment.

I'd have a difficult time answering the question of whether I support gun control; if you mean accurate aiming, perhaps even involving holding the gun with both hands, then, yes! Of course; by all means.
On the other hand, if by "gun control" you mean a tyrannical government unconstitutionally infringing upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms then the answer would have to be: "Of course not; what's the matter with you?"

23 posted on 04/17/2013 3:57:43 PM PDT by stormhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
The heinous bombings at the Boston Marathon makes law-abiding citizens even more insistent on having guns for protection against the evil in the world.
26 posted on 04/17/2013 4:00:51 PM PDT by District13 (Obama scares me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Big Bang Bumparoo!


28 posted on 04/17/2013 4:01:59 PM PDT by stevio (God, guns, guts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

I have summarized the results of all of tonight’s votes over on this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3009008/posts
start here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3009008/posts?page=170#170


29 posted on 04/17/2013 4:05:46 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

I will tell you....Prior from AR voted NO only because his vote wasn’t needed. We will defeat this Marxist in 2014. Count on it.


33 posted on 04/17/2013 4:09:35 PM PDT by mosaicwolf (Strength and Honor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Ubama and the scumbag liberals are stomping their feet? Good.


36 posted on 04/17/2013 4:12:14 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
OK, a couple of important statements were left out.

First, Senator Dianne Feinstein during the debate on her so-called assault weapons ban urged her colleagues to “show some guts.” I am reminded that in Japan failed leaders tended to “show their guts” in a more ritual way via seppuku(also called harakiri). Perhaps the Senator from California should take her own advice.

Finally, after reading what our President said today about this being only the first round. I am reminded of the words of former Sec. State and Senator Hillary Clinton, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

39 posted on 04/17/2013 4:26:27 PM PDT by Robert357 (D.Rather "Hoist with his own petard!" www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223916/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Hip! Hip! Hooray! Finally some good news.


40 posted on 04/17/2013 4:32:32 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

remember the MSM was confident is reporting THE GREAT ONE Obama was PERSONALLY making calles.

the democrats must hate him, really really hate him.


46 posted on 04/17/2013 5:00:49 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

This bill was never major. The base bill does almost nothing, the amendment that was rejected was about the minimum possible thing they could do and say they did anything.

Obama should feel lucky that the entire bill isn’t hijacked to roll BACK some of the restrictions on guns.


47 posted on 04/17/2013 5:39:35 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson