Yates Co. SCOPE will be holding a judicial candidates forum on October 3 in Penn Yan.
Judicial candidates will often try to avoid answering questions citing the need to be impartial on issues that may come before their court.
This is bullshit.
I have had requests for endorsements from both Republican and Democrat candidates running in state judicial races. Nothing prevents them from answering questions. If a judicial candidate refuses to give you an answer it is probably because they think you won’t like what they would give.
In order to cut through their obfuscation tactics and figure out if they support gun rights or not here are some suggested questions for judicial candidates:
- Do you currently own any firearms? If yes, for what reason?
- Are you now, or have you ever been, licensed to carry concealed firearms either in New York or any other jurisdiction? If yes, what jurisdictions?
- Are you now or have you ever been a member of a local gun club?
- Of the justices currently serving on the U.S. Supreme Court, whose judicial philosophy most closely reflects your own?
- Do you believe the words and meaning of the Constitution should be interpreted in the context of present culture or as closely to the intent of the original authors as possible?
- Have you ever issued a ruling in any case relating to the ownership, use or possession of firearms? If yes, which cases?
- Has your campaign been endorsed by any independent special interest organization?
Both the AG’s office and local media have been silent on this, but a Virgina ABC television station has the story, “State attorney generals urge Congress to close ammunition sale loophole:”
“Attorney General Mark R. Herring and a group of 21 other attorneys general sent a letter on Monday to Congressional leaders urging their support of legislation that extends existing background check requirements on firearm sales to also include ammunition sales. Herring and the other attorney generals argued the background checks would decrease gun violence by stopping individuals who are prohibited from purchasing a gun from also obtaining ammunition … To purchase ammunition under the new law, individuals would either have to be licensed to own a firearm or undergo a background check … Joining Attorney General in sending the letter are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.”
Here is Herring’s press release.
Bill in question is H.R.1705/S.1924.
Senator Jim Gaughran has introduced his gun raffle ban bill as S-6738 to Senate Rules.
Bill text is short and sweet:
“NO FIREARM, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 265.00 OF THE PENAL LAW, SHALL BE OFFERED OR GIVEN AS A PRIZE IN ANY GAME OF CHANCE UNLESS THE AUTHORIZED ORGANIZATION IS A BONA FIDE ORGANIZATION OF VETERANS, VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS OR A POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION.”
The memorandum/bill justification statement is missing, perhaps because Gaughran feels the stupidity of the legislation speaks for itself.
Senator Robert Ortt held a press conference today at the Tonawanda Sportsmen’s Club to criticize the bill:
Politico reports, “Lentol gets first primary challenge in a decade“:
“Activist and community board member Emily Gallagher will launch a campaign against Assemblyman Joe Lentol on Monday, giving the Brooklyn Democrat his first primary challenge in a decade … As the longtime chairman of the powerful Codes Committee, he’s often praised by liberal lawmakers for his work on issues like raising the age of criminal responsibility …”
Not to mention gun control.
Democrats outnumber Republicans in the district better than 10 to 1 so he is totally safe in the general election. The only way to knock Lentol out is in a Democrat primary where turnout will be low, maybe 10-15%.
Gallagher’s position on 2A is irrelevant: When in doubt throw the incumbent out. NRA has members in the district and there is no reason they cannot participate in this process.
“The Nassau Democratic Committee has launched “Gun Shop Gaylor,” a website criticizing Legis. C. William Gaylor III (R-Lynbrook) for past legal work on behalf of a proposed “gun spa” — though he has decried the page as “sleazy politics.” … The GunShopGaylor.com website states: “So then why did Bill Gaylor support bringing a gun shop and shooting range to Lynbrook? To add insult to injury, not only did he support bringing guns into our community, he was even paid for this dangerous attempt.” …”
This is part of a much broader effort (especially on Long Island) to intimidate, shame and silence gun owners by implying the mere presence of guns increases violence and crime. The only alleged impropriety is that Gaylor did legal work for a business which wanted to sell firearms.
“… Gaylor said about three or four years ago, he represented a client looking to build a gun store and shooting range in Lynbrook. Gaylor said he helped the client in seeking zoning variance from the village. But the project, “never went forward, and the people didn’t buy the building that they were in contract for,” he said. In 2016, Queens security company ISS Action Inc. withdrew an application to the Lynbrook Village Board to build a “gun spa” — a combination shooting range and beauty parlor …”
That was probably for the best.
Note the part at 1:33 where Senator Jim Gaughran says the exemption is for “responsible people.” By definition that must mean he believes FNRA is run by irresponsible people.
Assembly bill is A-1413. No Senate companion yet.
Schumer chimes in on Beto’s proposal for gun confiscation:
“… Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday told reporters that he doesn’t “know of any other Democrat who agrees” with Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke’s proposal to confiscate assault-style weapons. “I don’t know of any other Democrat who agrees with Beto O’Rourke, but it’s no excuse not to go forward,” Schumer told reporters on a conference call Wednesday, according to the Times Union of Albany, N.Y. …”
Sure he does, Dianne Feinstein said the same thing back in ’95 on national television:
“One of the lines that many progressives and TV talking heads are reiterating is that no one really wants to take away Americans’ guns. Senator Dianne Feinstein apparently missed that directive. She admitted as far back as 1995 that she does, indeed, wish to take everyone’s guns away from them. In a 1995 broadcast of CBS’ 60 Minutes, Feinstein admitted she would love to have instituted an “outright ban” on all guns. Feinstein was the driving force to the failed (and now lapsed) 1994 “assault weapons” ban, and it was upon her success at getting the law passed that she made her admission. “If I could’ve gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America turn ’em all in — I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.” …”
Gun confiscation is out in the open and a mainstream proposition in the Democrat party.