Second Amendment

New York Gun Owners Flip the Bird to "Assault Weapons" Registration Law

|

Andrew Cuomo

New York Governor Cuomo the Junior may have rushed through his new gun control law with such speed that police will avoid its restrictions only through the blessed miracle of selective enforcement, but he may have a little trouble getting the state's firearms owners to attend his party. The new law requires owners of those scary-looking rifles known as "assault weapons" to register their property (amidst assurances that, oh no, the registration lists will never be used for confiscation), but gun rights activists are actively urging gun owners to defy the new mandate.

According to Frederic Dicker at the New York Post:

Assault-rifle owners statewide are organizing a mass boycott of Gov. Cuomo's new law mandating they register their weapons, daring officials to "come and take it away," The Post has learned.

Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it'd be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history.

"I've heard from hundreds of people that they're prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes," said Brian Olesen, president of the American Shooters Supply, one of the largest gun dealers in the state.

Dicker quotes a Cuomo administration official admitting, "Many of these assault-rifle owners aren't going to register; we realize that." Which means that state officials were merely posturing rather than entirely ignorant of history when they penned the law and jammed it through. As I've written before, gun laws traditionally breed massive levels of non-compliance — even in places where you might think people have no strong history of personal arms, or of resistance to the state, When Germany imposed gun registration in 1972, the country's officials managed to get paperwork on all of 3.2 million firearms out of an estimated 17-20 million guns in civilian hands. Californians may have registered as many as ten percent of the "assault weapons" they owned when that state imposed registration in 1990 (though the New York Times put the figure rather lower, at about 7,000 out of an estimated 300,000 guns covered by the law).

The reason for such reticence isn't hard to fathom. When gun owners charge that politicians can't be trusted to resist using registration lists for future confiscation, they're not being paranoid — New York City and California have both done just that.

Political officials might want to consider those experiences, as well as a recent poll finding two-thirds of Americans willing to defy tighter gun restrictions, before setting themselves up for public demonstrations of their impotence in the face of mass defiance.

NEXT: Chicago Mayor Wants Banks To Boycott Gun Firms

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Couldn’t they have made the law more workable by just requiring that criminals register their guns?

    1. Couldn’t they have made the law more workable by just requiring that criminals register their guns?

      Too much stick. Not enough carrot!

      It would have been better to let the criminals keep their guns if they would sign a document where they promise not to commit anymore crimes.

    2. Nope. Requiring felons to register their guns is considered aviolation of the 5th Amendment, specifically the right to not incriminate themselves.

      They can still pop them for possessing an unregistered firearm, but not for the act of failure to register.

      1. That doesn’t work – people who make/sell illegal drugs can be required to purchase tax stamps for them.

        1. Buying a tax stamp is not proof of possession of the taxable item, you may be buying the stamp in anticipation of possessing the drugs at some later time.

          Registering a firearm is a declaration of possession.

  2. Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it’d be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history

    This is the only way to get anywhere now. The left has completely taken voting out of the game in a lot of the country, through the simple act of handing out free stuff to people who don’t work, courtesy of money robbed from those who do.

    Only civilian and state level acts of resistance to the federal government is going to work now. Just might as well face it, either fight now, or just bend over and take it.

    1. Civilians are government employees not in the military. Citizens are the people not on government payroll.

      1. I have always thought of civilians as anyone not in the military. Never have heard that they need to not be government employees to be civilians.

        Also, I thought we were all citizens, unless we are permanent residents, tourists, some other type of visa holder, or illegal immigrants.

        First time I have ever heard it defined like that, Chris Mallory.

        1. It’s long been a pet peeve of mine that cops call us hoi polloi “civilians.”

      2. “A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety of the body politic, defending it with his life, a civilian does not.” – Johnny Rico

        1. So you’re a citizen, and I’m just a civilian. Got it.

      3. Haha, that’s the jargon guvvies use because they want to pretend that they’re kinda sorta in the military.

        Speaking as a veteran who is now a contractor, the guvvies love to shit on contractors and the general public because their whole life revolves around the goddamned pecking orders and empire building that make the federal bureaucracy such a magical land of incompetence.

        A lot of LE types have a similar attitude, though more because of the “thin blue line” mentality. What I’d say to cops who claim they’re not civilians is, “you’re not just a civilian but a model civilian that people emulate, and I’d hope you’re proud to be our neighbor and part of our community.”

  3. This is going to be better than Viagra for state prosecutors.

    1. Are you talking about selective enforcement… the means being maybe a homeowner defends their home and family with one of these ‘unregistered’ weapons, and prosecutors pounce on the ‘criminal’ gun felon who was protecting the family?

      1. Can’t imagine a jury having any difficulty at all rendering a guilty verdict under these circumstances.

        These guys (and Fuckstein too) are just now realizing that they’ve stepped on their dicks. I imaging they all would like to quietly back away from the issue if it was in anyway politically feasible at this point!

        1. Can’t imagine a jury having any difficulty at all rendering a guilty verdict under these circumstances

          So you’re saying that most people are such statist fucks already that we don’t really need anymore laws to convict innocent people? Just a jury of sheep?

          1. People with the intelligence required to understand the concept of jury nullification are usually weeded out.

            1. The pool just got bigger.

            2. They definitely don’t want me on any jury trying to convict someone for something like that, or for any victimless crime, like selling drugs. I’ll vote not guilty every time.

              1. Fat chance of you ever making it onto a jury, and if you do and engage in nullification, you’ll be jailed for committing perjury in the jury selection process.

                1. I don’t think you understood me, I said I wouldn’t convict the person in cases like that, not that I would lie to get on the jury.

                  1. not that I would lie to get on the jury.

                    You would never make it onto a jury, so it doesn’t really matter now does it?

                    1. It matters if there are enough of me, sarc. Then how are they going to find a jury to convict someone?

                      Oh wait, find people without a job, because they are too stupid to get one, and pay them.

                      Gotcha.

                    2. They put me on a jury once…

                      and I was honest.

                      Somebody must have lost a bet.

                  2. I don’t think you understood me, I said I wouldn’t convict the person in cases like that, not that I would lie to get on the jury.

                    At least in PA, one of the questions on the jury questionaire they hand you when you enter the courtroom, which you must answer under penalty of perjury is whether you will follow the judge’s instructions in determining a verdict. If you’re going to nullify you would have to answer no, and you will be booted.

                    1. If the judge cannot inform you about nullification, my assumption is that he cannot tell you you can’t.

                      Nullification would be neither following or NOT following the judges instructions. It would be another option.

                      No?

                    2. In a common law jurisdiction, a judge may not direct to convict, only to acquit (R v Penn). And an individual juror cannot be made to answer for his decision to convict or acquit (again, R v Penn). So, since the judge cannot direct a verdict to convict, you’re home free if you wish to nullify, and can honestly answer Yes to the question. As you will follow his instructions where he is lawfully permitted to issue them…

                2. Only if you admit to it.

                  “I think there is reasonable doubt the defendant committed the crime.”

          2. No I’m assuming that as these cases are prosecuted jurors will find themselves identifying with the defendant far more than any prosecutor would like. Would you vote to convict a person being tried for defending themselves with an item that these political grandstanders decided you couldn’t have because of an incident you had nothing to do with a state over.

            Go to the jury room fuck around for twenty minutes and acquit.

            1. Would you vote to convict a person being tried for defending themselves with an item that these political grandstanders decided you couldn’t have because of an incident you had nothing to do with a state over

              Fuck no, never. But that’s me.

              1. And despite what you hear there are more of you every day and there will be still more if this thing comes to pass!

            2. Would you vote to convict a person being tried for defending themselves with an item that these political grandstanders decided you couldn’t have because of an incident you had nothing to do with a state over.

              Me? No. But most people have the attitude of “The law is the law. If you don’t like it, change it. But it is the law. You can’t not enforce the law. It’s the law. Yeah, I know he didn’t actually do anything wrong, but the law is the law. I must vote guilty. He broke the law.”
              It’s the job of the prosecutor to make sure that everyone on the jury has that attitude.

              1. I’m sorry your honor but the prosecution failed to convince me!

                Now when do I get my jury money!?

              2. Me? No. But most people have the attitude of “The law is the law

                Yeah, that comes as no news to me. I actually know folks here in MD, that have lived here all of their life, that ‘think’ they are Libertarian. It’s a joke really, they may be Libertarian compared to the hardcore leftist PC crowd that infests this region, but they are in no form, Libertarian.

                Ask one of them, what do you think about lowering income tax in the city so that maybe someone will buy some of these boarded up row houses and renovate them. The answer ‘BUT ROADZ AND BRIDGEZ!’. I swear.

                I recently had a lunch conversation with one of them and we were discussing the plan of the shithead gov here in vowing to outdo Cuomo for the toughest gun laws in the nation, including of course, registering ‘scary assault’ weapons.

                My ‘Libertarian’ friend was going through a mental evaluation of what registration would mean for him, and when I suggested not registering, the look of shock on his face was very real.

                He looked at me like I was the fucking leader of the Taliban or something. To question any law in these peoples minds is unspeakable level taboo.

                1. To question any law in these peoples minds is unspeakable level taboo.

                  When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.
                  -Bastiat

                  I chose to keep my moral sense. Unfortunately that puts me into a distinct minority.

                  1. Glad to have you in the minority, bro.

                    I love that Bastiat guy. Can’t believe he was French. And to think they gave us that statue about liberty and now we have pissed all over her.

                    1. More like DPed her and then pissed on her (known in Germany as romantic sex), but yes, Bastiat’s The Law should be required reading in every Civics/Social Studies class in America.

                    2. Bastiat’s The Law should be required reading in every Civics/Social Studies class in America.

                      Forcing people to read your ideology is SOOOOOOO libertarian.

                    3. If we are going to have public schools with required readings in social studies class, The Law is a much better option than say, A People’s History of the United States

                    4. If my tax dollars are paying for it those snot-nosed punks attending public school at the point of a gun should be required to read the Bible, Shakespeare,Bastiat,Raymond Chandler, Heinlein and Mickey Spillane.

                    5. Forcing people to read your ideology is SOOOOOOO libertarian.

                      Tulpy-poo, you’re right. Just put the little rugrats in a room for eight hours a day while the parental units are at work. That’s how the public education system should work.

                      Is that bug still up your ass because the Commentariat still unrepentantly refuses to acknowledge its sin of not supporting Romneybot?

                    6. Education of the young is inescapably about indoctrination. It simply can’t NOT be. The question is not whether they will be indoctrinated, but according to who’s will?

              3. Fuck sarc, you are the pessimist’s pessimist.

                Things might just get better.

                1. Fuck sarc, you are the pessimist’s pessimist

                  Yeah, that’s true. But he also has my LOL award here at H&R for calling John, Red Tony.

                  And add to that, he is joined here by the most statist of all maybe real Libertarians, Tulpa.

              4. And the public defender too.

            3. What is this “jury trial” thing you keep talking about? Is that the thing where you get to face grossly inflated charges as punishment for not taking the plea bargain you were offered?

        2. Can’t imagine a jury having any difficulty at all rendering a guilty verdict under these circumstances.

          See: Bernhard Goetz, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz

      2. Exactly this just happened in DC where a man saw a boy being savaged by a bunch of pit bulls and got his gun to kill the dogs. He saved the boy but now faces gun charges. The guy who owns the pit bulls just faces a fine but the hero faces jail time.

        He had best hope he voted the right way in the last election or is somehow useful to the powers that be.

        There is a lot of civil disobedience going on all over the country but it is individual and quiet so you are still effectively a criminal if caught and there is no pressure to change anything. Authorities are fine with that since they always hold the trump card and they know the laws themselves are not meant to actually improve anything in any way.

    2. It’s going to be better than cholesterol (for the “justice” system) for gun owners….way to clog the courts and jails with formerly law abiding citizens (and taxpayers). What could possibly go wrong?

      (and Cuomo….nobody who looks as mobbed up as you do is going any further in politics…enjoy your stay in the NY statehouse because you’re done after this you greasy fuck)

      1. BaddaBing!

  4. Which means that state officials were merely posturing rather than entirely ignorant of history when they penned the law and jammed it through.

    Why, you… you cynic!

  5. No no, politicians, by all means, continue setting yourselves up for public demonstrations of your impotence.

    1. I agree. Show them that words carry meaning; such as “consent of the governed”

  6. Vacation plans for New York scrapped. I’ll go someplace I can take my death macgine assault obliteration hypercannon.

    1. Me too – White Mountains instead of the Adirondacks. Fuck you NY.

  7. They can’t go door to door searching for unregistered guns. But they can use every interaction between a cop and a civilian as an excuse to try to trick the citizen into admitting to having an unregistered weapon, and then arrest them.

    Basically this will have the effect of turning gun owners into a criminal class.

    From the liberal point of view, I fail to see this civil disobedience as a problem. If anything it is an opportunity to jail those who disagree with you politically.

    1. In which case, the whole attitude of “Don’t talk to the po-po” will spread everywhere. Cops have never had to deal with that here, where NO ONE is on their side.

      They’ve also never had to deal with living as societal outcasts, nor with trying to live in the middle of a completely hostile community. Remember after the Cornhusker Kickback? The Senator responsible couldn’t take his family out for pizza… and he presumably lived and shopped in a far more polite neighborhood than the average cop will.

  8. So, who comes up with all that crazy squid?

    http://www.Anon-ids.tk

    1. Sarcasmic….it was Sarcasmic who came up with all that crazy squid! Take him…he’s the guilty one! 😉

      1. Dang! Ratted out by a fish!

        1. I know….the irony!

      2. I vote to convict sarcasmic of crazy squidism. The chair!

  9. Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it’d be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history.

    That’s great, but they should also be working to get all those motherfuckers impeached. If that’s procedurally unworkable, there should be a stack of recall petitions in every place where gun owners congregate.

    1. From your lips to gods ear!

    2. there should be a stack of recall petitions in every place where gun owners congregate.

      Jail?

    3. The problem is that we have a huge geographic and/or demographic problem in this country.

      It’s exactly like this in MD. The state is completely controlled by statist dems, although most of the state is very conservative, because of the huge freeper voting bloc in inner city Baltimore.

      So, basically, you have very large inner city populations on total government dependency electing politicians who promise them more free stuff, who then impose their ideology and corruption on a very unwilling rest of the population.

      Democracy(yes I know we are supposed to a Republic), is a failure in this country, doomed to collapse.

      1. You forget PG county, otherwise I agree.

  10. The reason for such reticence isn’t hard to fathom.

    The word you were groping for is “reluctance,” not “reticence” (which refers to restraint in speech).

    (I understand that misuse of the word is so widespread that after a while “reluctance” is likely to become just another of its meanings, but someone has to try to hold the line.)

    1. Irregardless, we understood the meaning.

      1. LOL’d. I literally busted a gut.

        1. That begs the question: what does literal mean?

          1. What does “begs the question” mean?

            1. Not what EDG thinks it means, unless he is being sarcy.

              1. Is that like being saucy and hard?

              2. Being sarcy. 😉

                1. Yeah, now

                  Wait, what’s ‘sarcy’?

  11. Everybody in New York who owns a gun should be calling the State Attorney General to ask why the Governor has not yet been removed from office for illegally ramming that law through the legislature.


    1. for illegally ramming that law through the legislature.

      Explain.

      1. I believe he’s referring to the fact that Cuomo skipped the normal public comment period required by New York law by arbitrarily declaring it “an emergency”, basically guaranteeing that the citizens of New York had no opportunity to contact their reps about the legislation.

        1. Ah, thanks for the summary.

    2. The AG is biding his time until Cuomo runs for president so that he can replace Cuomo as Governor.

      We (well, not I, since I didn’t vote for the monster) made a huge mistake promoting a grandstanding AG to governor when we elected Client Nine. Why people thought promoting another grandstanding AG to governor was a good idea is beyond me.

  12. I really hope this movement is going somewhere and not just the last puff of smoke before the fire goes out. I hate seeing American gun ownership being dismantled one state at a time. It would be good to see the tide turn here and now. Hopefully that would provide an example before this goes any farther at the federal level.

    1. I always like to think that making an example of a politician is an effective strategy.

      However, Seattle has made examples of several mayors, and yet keeps electing a new mayor which is exactly like the old one they kick out. It’s a puzzlement.

      1. Have they had any chances at a ‘good’ candidate?

        Or is it like Cali, where there is only bad and worse, and so they just go with worse because they know who worse is?

        1. Former Sierra club director who wanted (and succeeded) in making a Critical Mass biking activist his director of transportation?

          In Seattle, that is a “good” candidate.

          1. That’s…

            FUCKING RETARDED.

            Might as well make one of the random commentors from PoliceOne.com the head of Internal Affairs.

          2. Well, that’s sort of what I was saying. They only have bad and worse candidates, so they go with worse, because they know the name.

    2. Tejicano; it’s going viral. The same crap we law-abiding New York gunowning citizens got rammed up our urethera is going nationwide; Federal and state by state.

      Led by the comedian-in-chief, Joey Biden.

  13. Jail?

    Soon.

  14. There was a post here a few days ago about the procedural violations required to get the law passed so quickly.

    I’m too goddam lazy to figure out how to search for it. Probably under Sullum’s byline, if that helps.

    1. Hmm, wonder if these procedural violations would actually be old-fashioned law-breaking.

      Usually, when a government official breaks procedure, more training is recommended, and a raise and promotion usually follow.

      1. No, it’s state-sanctioned Progressive Liberalism.

        Legislature, we don’t need no stinkin’ legislature. The serfs need to be guided to enlightenment.

    2. They should pass a law to force Reason to allow us to search comments again. That was one of the best ways I had of getting information. All I had to remember was part of someone’s comment.

      1. I also searched for comments from time to time. Now using Google is hit or miss.

  15. Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it’d be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history.

    It would be great if this actually happens, but am I the only skeptical about how well the “line” is gonna hold if things move from the “making entirely symbolic gestures of defiance” to the “going to jail with a felony conviction in the name of principle” stage?

    1. It isn’t going to do a whole lot of good if the gun dealers aren’t engaging in the same defiance. In my state I had to get a permit to purchase. Technically we don’t have to register, but that’s just bs since the dealer has to keep records and those can be accessed by the Feds. They won’t have to do house to house searches, a lot of states require permits to purchase and they’ll just go down the lists to see who registered their firearms.

  16. I believe he’s referring to the fact that Cuomo skipped the normal public comment period required by New York law by arbitrarily declaring it “an emergency”, basically guaranteeing that the citizens of New York had no opportunity to contact their reps about the legislation.

    Thank you.

  17. New York Governor Cuomo doesn’t ever plan to run for president, does he?

    ’cause that would mean his brand of gun control would need to play well in New Hampshire or Iowa, and I’m havin’ a hard time imagining that!

    1. On a national scale, it’s now a moot point. All that matters is who promises the most free stuff. The electoral votes from the most populous states have sealed that deal.

    2. All the pundits have been saying that this gun control push by Cuomo is so that he can energize the base for a ’16 run. I also find this hard to believe, but maybe he has really bad polling data that indicates that this shit is going to fly in the rural first primary states. Or he’s using polling data from NYC, which if he’s that stupid, he shouldn’t be allowed to govern a state, let alone be let anywhere near the presidency.

      If he runs he’ll just be another rat-faced New Yorker that will flame out early when his ersatz pillar of support vanishes. Sure, the media will give him play because of his fascist ways, and his rat-facedness, but bad as America is, we don’t want any rat-faced assholes from New York fucking up the country with their toxic bullshit.

      1. That’s right! America leaves that to those rat bastards from Illinois! 😉

        1. People from New York have evil, little rat faces, with pointy teeth, and beedy little rat-eyes.

      2. which if he’s that stupid, he shouldn’t be allowed to govern a state

        GBN, if there was a stupid test for politicians, we could get rid of 99% of them right away.

      3. He and Bob Casey are competing for the rattiest rat bastard in politics right now.

        1. If I am in PA in 2016 I will be going door to door for whomever runs against that lying fuck. In the primary and the general.

          1. If you’re in PA in 2016, you’ll be doing time in Rockview because you didn’t register your guns.

            In the future, all citizens are criminals.

            1. If so, I’ll be using every minute of phone time allotted to call registered voters.

          2. I’m not sure the public is prepared to support a candidate who doesn’t know what year it is, even if they have a lot of enthusiastic grassroots support.

            1. I am sure of it too. They elected a president who doesn’t know how many states there are.

              All you need to know, is to promise more free shit than the other guy.

      4. I’m from WNY and we don’t need any rat-faced assholes ruling our end of the State!

        The downstate rat-faced assholes elected this shitstain, we elected a Libertarian in WNY. Geography enslaved us.

        1. Y’all should secede from those rat bastards. Join PA, our liquor laws suck, but our gun laws are awesome.

  18. Look at the picture on the front page of Drudge. LMAO.

    Crazy Uncle Joe

    Biden also said convicted felons and those found guilty of domestic abuse should be denied the ability to own firearms.

    Is this stupid motherfucker really that fucking retarded, or does he just think everyone else is? It’s like saying that we should outlaw automatic weapons.

    I really want to punch at least one of these politicians in the mouth before I die, then I could go happily.

    1. Mental health, eh? I wonder how many cops have had internal investigations over domestic disputes and the like? Seems that they would not be qualified to own or possess a firearm…if they weren’t exempt, of course.

      1. Well, once you are a cop, you can be the biggest asshole that you want, almost without limitation. To get rid of those limitations, you go into politics and make it to DC.

  19. Do not register firearms unless you are Tulpa.

    1. Tulpa is a law abiding citizen, unlike the rest of us anarchists here.

      1. He also fully accepts responsibility for all the foreseeable consequences of his actions, like looking at a cop the wrong way.

    2. If an AW registration law does pass, I’m probably just gonna sell mine before it goes into effect. I’ll be royally pissed, but frankly it’s not something I consider worth going to jail over.

  20. Yet another newspaper article that confuses “assault weapon” with “assault rifle”.

    1. “What difference at this point does it make?”

  21. If you think Douglas`s story is nice…, five weeks ago my aunts step daughter actually earned $7425 putting in a fifteen hour week in their apartment and there friend’s mother-in-law`s neighbour did this for 6 months and brought in over $7425 parttime at there computer. the steps at this site…….. http://xurl.es/v4kp0

  22. New York Governor Cuomo the Junior may have rushed through his new gun control law with such speed that police will avoid its restrictions only through the blessed miracle of selective enforcement

    In other words, the dipshits who voted for this law didn’t even fucking read it first. Because you know those statist shits wouldn’t intentionally disarm their Praetorian Guards. Yet I’m supposed to slavishly obey such people, because they know better than me?

    Come on, Tony, explain to me how smart these people are.

    1. Come on, Tony, explain to me how smart these people are.

      Oh come now, Spaces in his many years of shitheadedness on this site has never once condescended to enter a thread discussing the obvious rights abuse of the citizenry and its patently unequal application to government to offer a defense. Witness his total absence from the police brutality threads.

  23. This low level refusal has been going on for a long time. Gun owners in NJ, MA, and CA who had their guns banned never turned them in. They locked them in the safe or the attic and got something else to hunt or target shoot with.

    Nobody in NJ turned in their M1 Carbines or FAL’s. Nobody.

    Some of us are looking forward to moving to a free state eventually.

  24. Registration and confiscation are not going to work in the U.S.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013…../#comments

  25. At least in New York, patriots have the benefit of numerous existing structures that can be turned to service as Liberty Poles without undue effort wasted on new construction.

  26. One of the questions in my mind about this whole situation is just how far do the various legislators really understand what is going on in America. Sure, the media is doing its damnest to present the “conversation” as one of “just how far should we ban guns this time?”. But do the politicians really believe that the thousands of people lining up to buy Evil Black Rifles are doing so just to have something to turn in when the ban comes?

  27. I probably shouldn’t be saying this, but:

    The reason that Cuomo and many New Yorkers look “rat-faced” is because some actually are rats, or rat-people.

    It goes back to New Amsterdam, and the days of the Dutch who brought them over. They morph back into rats at night, skulking into the sewers.

    Spitzer, by the way, was NOT a rat-person.

    Cuomo, Charlie Rangel, Ed Koch, Giuliani are definitely rat-people. Chuckie Schumer is a half-rat on his father’s side.

    They have a natural affinity for politics.

    Don’t ask any more questions about it, and you didn’t hear it from me.

  28. Cuomo hates the guns because all rat-people hate guns. They were used, along with poison, to exterminate the rat-people.

    His speech came from the heart, and struck a chord in the hearts of all rat-people. Squeals of delight and pride and dark lust for revenge were heard throughout NYC sewers, canals, trash-piles and tenements that night, my friends.

  29. I know a ton of people in Ohio, including myself who will tell the Federal gubmint to eff off when it comes to bans and universal registration. The seemingly benign face of gun control is a shameless facade. They want ’em all folks, but they will play hell getting mine.

  30. JD, while I don’t doubt your statement that California and NY have used gun registration in confiscation efforts, it would be helpful to have supporting links.

    1. Google “California SKS confiscation” for loads of info on what happened there.

      When registration was initiated there everyone was assured that it would not be followed with confiscation. The fact that the state “reimbursed” the owners with $230 per rifle is little more than window dressing. Rifles were registered then the owners told to turn them in.

  31. The question that needs to be asked of these gun grabbers is this:

    “If firearms owners defy the laws you have passed, you will send law enforcement officers to enforce those laws. In many instances, those firearms owners will resist; and in some cases those firearms owners will be killed by law enforcement. How many American firearms owners are you willing to kill to take their firearms from them?”

    1. The question may also be asked: How many law enforcement officers are willing to support this type of underhanded policy and perhaps put their life on the line when they are forced to approach law abiding, but enraged, firearm owners? Law enforcement officers aren’t immortal.

  32. Oh yeah, one more thing: “NO MO CUOMO”… pass it around…

    I think there were bumper stickers out there that said that years ago when his old man was in office. Anyone want to make some up? I’m sure they’ll sell.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.