There will be a question on the November ballot asking whether or not the state should hold a constitutional convention. If approved there would be future votes on choosing delegates then actual changes to the constitution.
Looking at it from strictly a 2A perspective, I don’t believe there is much to get out of a Con Con:
- For antigunners, there’s no real need. The legislature can pass gun control bills at will. The Governor just does not want more of it right now.
- For pro-gunners, it’s doubtful we would get anything through. I could see a creatively crafted re-wording of the pistol licensing law prohibiting discrimination that would make the state “shall issue”, but would it pass the voters? Probably not.
With 2A off the table, the benefits of a Con Con to gun owners would be indirect. I can see these items proposed and passed:
- Term limits. Far too many old farts have been around for 30+ years. Albany needs new blood.
- Fair redistricting. Districts look as if someone sneezed on a map. Doing it fairly would wipe out the Republicans, but that is going to happen anyway.
- End to fusion ballots.
These would make elections much more competitive thereby giving gun owners more clout and that is what we sorely need in Albany.
Who is opposing the Con Con? The bulk of the money is coming from unions and lawyers. They’re not antigun per se, but are largely responsible for the culture of cronyism and corruption. If their power is diminished that is a good thing.
Vote Yes on the Con Con.
City Council bill Int 1724-2017 is on the move.
The Post has the story:
“… The City Council Public Safety Committee voted 6-1 Monday to require the NYPD to hand out written warnings about the risks of gun ownership to new applicants for firearm permits …”
What exactly is the warning?
“Warning: The presence of a firearm in the home has been associated with an increased risk of death to self and others, including an increased risk of suicide, death during domestic violence incidents, and unintentional deaths to children and others.”
What brain trust came up with this?
“… “Just like the [Surgeon General’s] warning that you see on the side of cigarette packs have changed the perception of smoking, these gun warnings are the first step to changing the public’s conversation,” said Councilwoman Vanessa Gibson, a co-sponsor of the gun bill. “We would be one of the first major jurisdictions to enact this type of legislation.” …”
This is why I’m not a “progressive.” I’ve read a lot of dumb bills over the years but this ranks right up near the top.
BTW, who was smart enough not to support this idiocy?
“… Steven Matteo (R-Staten Island), the Republican leader, was the only committee member to oppose the committee’s legislative package …”
Good for him.
Governor Cuomo has appointed Geoff Berman as head of the state Democrat Party.
According to the Daily News:
“… Berman was once a senior adviser to Everytown for Gun Safety, the gun control group established by former Mayor Michael Bloomberg …”
This is both good and bad.
Bad because the last thing New York needs is another gun control activist in a position of power.
Good because Everytown has not had much luck at moving their agenda and Berman is at least partly responsible for their ineffectiveness. Hopefully he’ll give the Dems the same quality advice he gave Bloomberg.
CNN reports, “9 Democratic primaries to watch in 2018“:
“… there is a lot worth watching as Democrats sort out their candidates, and priorities, ahead of the November 2018 elections. Here are a few races, some big and others probably below the radar, that could give us a hint about where the party is headed … 6. New York: Who’s going to take a run at Cuomo? … a tougher-than-expected 2018 primary race could take a potential 2020 presidential bid off the table for Cuomo — and augur trouble for similar, more moderate blue-state Democrats around the country …”
That leads us to this:
“… Outgoing Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner and New York City Councilman Jumaane Williams, both Democrats, were coy in a joint radio appearance Thursday when asked if they might unite to form a gubernatorial ticket next year …”
Miner is the better known of the two which, in this case, isn’t saying much.
On 2A, both are antigun. Miner is an advocate while Williams is an activist.
How much of a threat to the Governor would they be?
Previous polling shows Cuomo would defeat Miner in a primary. I am unaware of any polling regarding Williams, but the Democrat base has problems with him on other social issues.
New bill introduced yesterday, A-8742:
Prohibits the use of lead ammunition in the taking of wildlife on wildlife management areas, state forests, forest preserves, state parks or any other state-owned land; requires DEC to promulgate rules and regulations prohibiting the use of lead ammunition in the taking of wildlife on New York city watershed lands.
There have been various anti-lead bills floating around Albany for years. This is just a more explicit version aimed at lead ammunition.
What makes this one stand out is the concern over lead on watershed land. It’s sponsor Deborah Glick, whose district is 100+ miles from the areas in question, is apparently unaware of the fact that lead ore was mined in various parts of the Hudson Valley. There is no way to remove this lead from the watershed because God put it there. It is a total non-issue based upon the fact NYC has been drawing water from the area for more than a hundred years and people aren’t dropping dead from lead poisoning.
Glick will probably get an award from the enviro-wackos for introducing this bill.
This story is getting lots of media attention:
Only problem I have with this story the omission that the “far right” are not the ones trying to disarm LGBTQ people.
Time is not on the side of the antigunners.
There is a limited window after an atrocity where they might be able to exploit it for political advantage:
“Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer, and 25 additional members of Prosecutors Against Gun Violence (PAGV) today announced their strong support for the Automatic Gun Fire Prevention Act introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), which would ban the sale and possession of accessories used to increase the rate of fire on semi-automatic weapons …”
At this point the media has lost interest and it is reasonable to assume the antis window has closed.
Some people don’t want to accept that:
Whining Congress isn’t taking up your personal political agenda is undignified. It demonstrates weakness and proves lack of public support for the issue.
An internal Democrat poll shows George Latimer leading incumbent Rob Astorino in the Westchester County Executive’s race 47% to 46%.
Because of the source there is likely significant bias which means Astorino is probably doing better than polling suggests. You get a hint of that with this acknowledgement:
“… The Latimer campaign internal poll shows 52% have a favorable view of Astorino and 38% an unfavorable one. For Latimer, 46% view him favorably and just 24% unfavorably …”
Anyone interested in helping Astorino can e-mail Rob Alberty or call the campaign at 917-755-6162.
The Buffalo News reports:
“Rep. Brian Higgins isn’t exactly sticking to his guns. After accepting $5,000 in donations from the National Rifle Association between 2006 and 2012, the Democratic lawmaker from Buffalo announced on Facebook earlier this month that he now plans to donate that money to local and national organizations dedicated to fighting for what he called “common sense gun safety policies.” …”
He accepted multiple donations between 5-10 years ago knowing full-well the beliefs of the people making those donations and just decides now he doesn’t agree with them?
An honest person who accepted monies under false pretenses would return it to the original donors, not turn around and hand it to people inimical to them. This is one of the lamest political stunts I have ever seen.
From the AP wire:
“… The slaying of five dozen people in Las Vegas did little to change Americans’ opinions about gun laws. The nation is closely divided on whether restricting firearms would reduce such mass shootings or homicides, though a majority favor tighter laws as they have for several years, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. The massive divide on stricter limits remains firmly in place …”
In other words, antigun politicians are unlikely to be able to exploit this atrocity for legislative gain.
Even before this poll you could see it coming:
“… The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives has signaled to Congress that it would prefer new legislation instead of new regulation to impose restrictions on “bump stocks,” which could end up being a major hurdle to any federal action on the firearms accessory … “ATF is pushing for a legislative approach rather than going through an administrative process,” a House aide told the Washington Examiner. This aide said that during the meeting, the ATF didn’t clarify whether they could re-regulate bump stocks, but did raise the option of new legislation …”
Marc Thiessen opines:
“Congressional Republicans are backing away from legislation banning “bump stocks” … and are turning to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to ban them by executive action instead. “We think the regulatory fix is the smartest, quickest fix, and then, frankly, we’d like to know how it happened in the first place,”House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis., said …”
They’re playing hot potato. That’s a sure sign they want the issue to go away. It probably will to except for a few places like Massachusetts and maybe New York where sympathetic politicians are desperately trying to keep the gun control movement alive.