Posts Tagged ‘New York’

From HotAir:

We’ve heard it over and over again, particularly on shows like Morning Joe. Anyone who thinks that the government is “coming to take your guns” is a paranoid loon, watching for black helicopters and guarding their sheep from soldiers. Unfortunately for those formerly right leaning, Second Amendment minded folks who bought into this story, reality has come screaming up from behind well ahead of schedule.

Following the passage of “The SAFE Act” in New York State, Big Brother got busy pretty quickly grabbing up the guns. Of course nobody was reporting on it very much until they managed to collect them from the wrong guy and a judge made them give them back.

BUFFALO, N.Y. — Thursday, a state Supreme Court Judge ruled guns seized from David Lewis, 35, must be returned to him after he was incorrectly identified as violating the mental health provision of the SAFE Act.

They’re Already Taking Away Guns From People For Having ONCE Been Prescribed ANTI-ANXIETY MEDICINE.

You’re not paranoid, they really are out to get you.

Jazz’s update, from commenter dugan:

From the comments. An excellent question. Number one question for those who favor “universal background checks” – how do you enforce them?

In other words, how will authorities know if an individual who possesses a firearm submitted to a background check?

If they can answer this question without needing to resort to a database, or a registry, then I am all ears.

The anti-rights tyrants already answered this question – registration:

Schumer has insisted on record-keeping for all private gun sales, saying the files are needed to keep the system effective.

I read this article over at Yahoo, lamenting that there are so many states pushing against gun control, and saw some odd states lumped in with Imperial New York:

Despite a major push from the White House, more states have cut back on gun regulations rather than pass gun-control reforms in the wake of the mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

Five states—New York, Colorado, Mississippi, Utah and Wyoming—have enacted seven new laws tightening restrictions on guns since Dec. 14, when a gunman shot 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School before turning the weapon on himself. A sixth state, Connecticut, passed the toughest gun laws in the nation this week, banning some types of semi-automatic weapons and requiring all gun buyers to undergo background checks before purchases. (Gov. Dan Malloy is expected to sign the bill into law on Thursday.)

New York passed the NY FU2A Act, Colorado passed the FU Magpul Act, Misssissippi… passed what exactly?  Utah passed what?  And Wyoming, which is pushing bills that would make enforcing unconstitutional gun laws a felony passed an anti-gun law?  WTF?

The reporter just went to this WSJ graphic and looked at the “strengthened vs weakened” and put those states in the anti-gun category without reading them:

Wyoming – WY H 216 – Would allow a judge to carry a weapon in his courtroom and prohibit someone else from carrying a weapon in his or her courtroom.

New York is going after gun owners, banning magazines, banning everything that exists, cranking out propaganda and pushing for total confiscation, screaming that anyone who opposes them is paranoid – all the while going out to utterly eliminate the Second Amendment.

By contrast, Wyoming said “yeah, a judge can carry a gun and can tell others they don’t need a gun in court”.

One of these things is not like the others.

Mississippi’s new law S2647  allows for petitioning by those deemed mentally unfit to restore their gun rights, and allows for some mental health reporting to NICS.  Utah’s H 50 allows for restraining orders against people dating to include the same restrictions on arms as a married restraining order; and H 121 allows a gun owner to give their guns to the state for 60 days for actual safe-keeping if they feel someone they live with is a threat.  It’s the state actually supporting gun rights by giving gun owners another option.  And Arkansas’ H1503 mirrors federal law with regards to the 4473 and the actual purchaser/unlawful procurement.

HotAir has a few notes on this story (but doesn’t dissect the “anti-gun” bills that arent), and includes a little political analyzing by Charles Krauthammer.  For those who’ve forgotten Charles Krauthammer’s opinion on guns, I suggest you read his column “Disarm the Citizenry, But Not Yet“:

It is simply crazy for a country as modern, industrial, advanced and now crowded as the United States to carry on its frontier infatuation with guns. Yes, we are a young country, but the frontier has been closed for 100 years. In 1992, there were 13,220 handgun murders in the United States. Canada (an equally young country, one might note) had 128; Britain, 33.

Ultimately, a civilized society must disarm its citizenry if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquillity of the kind enjoyed in sister democracies like Canada and Britain. Given the frontier history and individualist ideology of the United States, however, this will not come easily. It certainly cannot be done radically. It will probably take one, maybe two generations. It might be 50 years before the United States gets to where Britain is today.

What needs to happen before this change in mentality can occur? What must occur first — and this is where liberals are fighting the gun control issue from the wrong end — is a decrease in crime. So long as crime is ubiquitous, so long as Americans cannot entrust their personal safety to the authorities, they will never agree to disarm. There will be no gun control before there is real crime control.

Yes, Sarah Brady is doing God’s work. Yes, in the end America must follow the way of other democracies and disarm. But there is not the slightest chance that it will occur until liberals join in the other fights to reduce the incidence of and increase the penalties for crime. Only then will there be a public receptive to the idea of real gun control. The passionate resistance to even the phony gun control of the assault weapons ban shows how far we have to go.

It’s important to remember that Krauthammer thinks “it is simply crazy” that you don’t trust your personal safety to the authorities, and that you don’t “follow the way of other democracies and disarm”.  It’s best for you.  He’s part of the DC Ruling Class, and he knows what’s best for you.

From the BBC:

Mental illness has clearly been at the centre of some of the country’s most notorious mass shootings. But could the new law have an unintended consequence: making it harder for the mentally ill to seek help?

Here’s the thing: if someone is so mentally ill they can’t be trusted, they shouldn’t be out in society.  If they need supervision because of problems, whether permanent or temporary, they need that supervision.  If they can’t live on their own, whether it be because they want to kill themselves by driving into bridge supports at 90mph, or whether they just can’t handle the stresses of life, then maybe they shouldn’t be living on their own until they have those problems conquered.  Whatever the cause, if they need treatment and it will benefit them, they should be treated until they’re well; and if treatment won’t help, then maybe they shouldn’t be out.

If a person is so mentally ill they can’t be trusted in society, then they shouldn’t be trusted in society.

“If I had that fear that it would go to the police, I would feel violated,” she says (a gal with illnesses that needed treatment – ST). “Like big brother is watching me.”

Because, sadly, he is.

Mental health professionals and advocates fear that as a result of the new law, those who need treatment will stay away from the very people who ought to be able to help them.

“It has set back stigma a trillion years,” says Sharon McCarthy, programme director for the Westchester branch of the National Alliance on Mental Illness.

“In developing this law, you brought in the mentally ill people,” says Ms McCarthy, whose daughter is bipolar. “You didn’t bring in the gangs. You pinpointed that group.”

This isn’t about gangs.  This is about disarming the population at large.

Those who are mentally ill and shouldn’t be released simply shouldn’t be released.  Those who are in some supervised status should be supervised.  The objective of treating mental illness, for those who are simply unwell, but not madmen, should not be to demonize them, either.

But here we get to the bigger problem – it’s not about guns, it’s not about preventing the mentally ill or unwell from harming themselves if supervision fails, it’s about control.

…the Safe Act has plenty of supporters.

Westchester County’s Board of Legislators passed a resolution urging similar action by federal leaders.

The board’s chairman, Ken Jenkins, says the act has adequate protections and that no-one should fear that the mental health provision will be used for anything other than preventing the sale of handguns and assault-style weapons to those who have been reported.

He says it’s only reasonable that gun ownership now comes with an extra burden.

“For the privilege of having… specific types of guns, you now have the additional responsibility for opening up your privacy,” he says.

No.

The Second Amendment clearly states THE RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  Nowhere in there does it say “privilege”.  At the point that a right becomes a privilege, it’s no longer a right – it’s something to be permitted or denied by your rulers who run the state.

There is no “responsibility” to open up one’s privacy in order to enjoy a RIGHT (aside from counting numbers of voters – but not the votes themselves).  There is no “responsibility” to surrender your privacy to beg for a privilege that the state is out to destroy.

The mentally ill, and more importantly those who feel they would like some therapy or counseling, are sadly correct to be a bit paranoid.  The database on them may well impact their future employment prospects and their future prospects in life.  It’s already part of a bill that is out to destroy the natural right of self-defense and to destroy the self-determination of the citizen because the Ruling Class wants to subjugate the population.

The series of mentally ill murderers in the last few mass murders were not normally troubled people going through a rough patch, they were deeply troubled, and identified as such.   With the massive stigma already attached to mental illness and the difficulties in forcibly committing someone who is dangerous preventing friends and family from acting, that led to many people’s deaths.  There are madmen out there – and many of them are easily identified by anyone who looks at photos of them, and they were well-known to friends and family, who are always concerned with the well-being of the mentally ill person.  But they’re already so scared of the consequences and hamstrung by groups that worked to prevent commitment, that those who needed to be committed were not; and those who’d seek their own help don’t.  Due to the perceived aberration of asking for mental health, individuals who need help receive it much less and their families and friends are that much less likely to ruin their lives on a hunch.

The stigma does run deep.

Via HotAir and Breitbart:

And lastly, but not least, the Assault Weapons ban and the limitation on the size of magazines, let me say this as clearly as I can: this is just the beginning. We believe that weapons of war have no place on our streets. That’s the message that the retired admirals and generals have spoken to us about. The comment one of them used was: if you want to learn how to use a semi-automatic weapon, join the United States military, but these are weapons of war, and we believe there’s no rational reason why someone would need a clip that can hold fifteen, twenty, thirty, one-hundred bullets, one-hundred rounds. We have to do more and we will do more.

The US military doesn’t use semi-auto weapons, aside from some pistols and a few specialty rifles.  The vast majority of personal weapons are service rifles that are actual assault rifles and fire in full auto mode.  (AP at HotAir splits some hairs, but to the ATF and in the non-military world, 3-round burst is full auto.  You’ll be paying $5000 for your $500 gun and $200 for permission to get probed in order to own one.)

When Biden speaks of retired admirals and generals, he’s talking about these clowns and this clown.  To which this is the appropriate response.

A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home.

- Madison

Yet just about a week ago, Biden said this:

When you go to [gun] registration, it raises all the black helicopter crowd notion that what this is all about is identifying who has a gun so that one day the government can get up and go the house and arrest everyone who has a gun, and they’ll cite Nazi Germany and all that.

See, Joe, when you talk like a supervillain “this is only the beginning”, and you’re engaging in incrementalist attacks on Constitutional rights, the paranoid guys are right, no matter how much you try to make fun of them or the dictator of New York state Cuomo tries to accuse them of being crazy.

“What the extremists do is spread fear and unrealistic theories of conspiracies and the citizenry that needs to be armed because the government is possibly tyrannical, and they need their arms to defend themselves against the tyrannical government,” Cuomo continued. This is true: at gun rallies, I’ve heard this “slippery slope” line of argument from multiple attendees. They view the right to bear arms as a kind of check against government power.

Having personally visited a camp for US citizens, no these aren’t unrealistic theories:

H

Cuomo continued:

“These people are spreading fear because the facts don’t work for them,” Cuomo said.

cuomo and goebbels

This is just the beginning

Let’s start with this story and quote via HotAir:

I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom

I found myself asking the same questiosn Allahpundit did before even reading it – who in the bloody hell is “we”?  Who is this “we” that has the authority to stomp all over citizen rights?  Who is this “we” and how did they get this power?  Who is this “we” and how is this justified?  Who is this “we”, who the heck do they think they are, and do they really need to be shown the consequences of stepping on US citizen rights?

The next piece, via NY Daily News:

The $12 million ad blitz targeting senators wavering on gun control will be just the beginning, Mayor Bloomberg warned Sunday.

“I have a responsibility … to try to make this country safer,” Bloomberg said on “Meet the Press” when asked if he’d spend big-time in next year’s elections to target the National Rifle Association and members of Congress for opposing gun restrictions.

To make this country safer for tyrants.  He’s a big city billionaire who’s decided to go out and drop millions of dollars to destroy your rights.  Feel safer yet?

“If I can do that by spending some money, and taking the NRA from being the only voice to being one of the voices, so the public can really understand the issues, then I think my money will be well spent and I think I have an obligation to do that,” he said.

“If 90% of the public wants something, and their representatives vote against that, common sense says they are going to have a price to pay for that,” Bloomberg said, referring to the proportion of people polls show support universal background checks.

The surveys that came up with those numbers are sketchy at best.  When you explain to people exactly how “universal background checks” don’t work, and do fail, and do lead to registration and confiscation, then people start to see why there is still a sizeable group that opposes “universal background checks“.

Bloomberg said the country must not lose the opportunity to crack down on guns offered by the Newtown massacre. “It would be a great tragedy for this country and for tens of thousands of lives if (the opportunity) is lost,” he said.

Never let a good crisis go to waste.  This is an opportunity to seize on emotion, to act in the moment, to do things they couldn’t normally do because heads aren’t clear yet.  People haven’t bothered to look at the long-term effects, or even the short-term effects, and how none of the actions Bloomberg or his henchmen would take has anything to do with safety, but has everything to do with control.  When people do look at it, they see that none of the actions would’ve prevented the murders in Connecticut, and the only people impacted are those who do nothing wrong.

Also, that story carries a couple of nifty visuals of media bias.  Contrast this picture of Bloomberg:

bloomberg 130326 small

To this of Wayne LaPierre:

lapierre 130326 small

Gee, media bias much?

For examples of Bloomberg’s new ads, we have “Responsible” and “Family”, in which a scruffy bearded guy dressed like a hunter tells us he’s a hunter and talks about family and things, all the while pointing a shotgun at waist-level and with his fingers in, on, and around the trigger and trigger guard; or, as Mary Katherine Ham at HotAir rather eloquently puts it:

Forgive me if I don’t feel like giving up my rights as a law-abiding citizen to a billionaire mayor who can’t instruct his recruits to keep their booger hooks off the bang switch.

Seriously?  You expect us to buy that crap?  With personal crusades against soda, guns, smoking, trans fats, and pretty much anything fun, you expect us to believe any of this crap?

Sorry, not buying it.  And there aren’t many people who will be, either.

From Long Island Newsday:

ALBANY — As the legislature began the process of enacting a new state budget Sunday, its top Republican said lawmakers effectively will cancel a ban on the sale of gun and rifle magazines larger than seven rounds that was set to take effect April 15.

In doing so, Senate co-leader Dean Skelos (R-Rockville Centre) confirmed a plan lawmakers outlined last week.

The budget will include an “indefinite postponement of the issue concerning the clips,” Skelos said just before the Senate began passing the first of several bills to enact a $136 billion state budget.

See, the problem is that 7-round magazines are uncommon in modern firearms.

Well, with one arguably non-modern exception.

colt 1911

Of course, none of that stopped Cuomo:

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo previously signaled he would back down on the seven-round limit because manufacturers don’t make such magazines. The governor called it an “inconsistency” and insisted he was not rolling back the gun law.

Tyrants rarely do roll back their tyranny.

First off, New York is offering $500 bounties on those who think they have rights:

ALBANY, N.Y. –  Nearly a year before signing the nation’s most stringent gun control measure into law, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo launched a hotline that allows state residents to report illegal gun owners in exchange for a $500 reward.

The measure is part of a four-pronged approach established by the governor’s office to reduce gun violence in urban communities, according to CBS6Albany.com.

Now that just about everything has been made illegal by the NY SAFE Act, the tyrants want you to turn in your neighbor – the only way they can get total control is through willing subjects who will help their masters eliminate all resistance.

The gun measure outlaws the purchase of any magazines that carry more than seven bullets, the nation’s most stringent limit. That would have put a severe limit on the sale of guns with industry-standard 10-bullet magazines when the provision of the law went into effect April 15.

10 rounds is not “industry standard”.  For modern rifles, 30 rounds is industry standard.  For modern pistols in .40 S&W, “standard” starts at 12 and goes up towards 17, for modern pistols in 9mm, “standard” starts around 13-15 rounds and goes up from there.  10 rounds is restricted.  7 rounds is further restricted.  All are infringements.

Next up, via HotAir, Bloomberg is back on the warpath and out for domination:

Democrats facing tough reelection races will either attract the ire of the National Rifle Association or prominent gun control activists such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I). A vote against the ban could spark primary challenges that could weaken Democrats in the general election…

“People are not going to say, ‘That’s a tough vote for them, let’s not do anything,’ ” said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “There is a feeling that to win this thing we need all the Democrats. That means people who are in tough races in 2014 don’t get passes. I would expect issue ads and advocacy for all senators.”

For those who forgot, Josh Horwitz is the guy who says you’re a violent insurrectionist if you own an AR15.

And speaking of senators, Feinstein’s AWB was dumped by Reid, who won’t put it up for a vote.  I didn’t bother doing a story since it’s a non-story.  It’d be like a WWII news story saying “Japanese decide not to invade mainland US today”.  It’s meaningless, and ignores that Feinstein has already stated she will never give up in her quest to make sure that you, the citizen, is a disarmed subject with a boot stamping on your face forever, while she stays armed to the teeth to guard against you.  And she’s an idiot.

The “big surprise”, whch wasn’t, is that Harry Reid is “reversing course” and willing to introduce a bill that requires “universal background checks”, which means mandatory registration of all firearms.  Because, of course, that’s what “universal background checks” require in order to function.  Joe Manchin and Chuck Shumer agreed on that a couple weeks ago.

The Huffington Post reports, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will introduce gun control legislation Thursday night that includes a proposal for universal background checks, a high-ranking source told The Huffington Post.”

The liberal website adds:

“The news will cheer up gun control advocates who were left despondent days ago after Reid announced the baseline bill would not include a ban on assault weapons. That measure, which is sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), will be considered as an amendment, diminishing its chances of ending up in the final bill produced by the Senate. A provision that would ban the production and sale of high-capacity magazines will also be considered as an amendment, the source said.

I’ll reiterate this small point – they want to ban standard capacity magazines.  “High” is a relative term, and used only to indicate the next target.  In NY, “high” became 8 or more rounds in a magazine.

m1 garand

That’s the M1 Garand.  It has 8 round clips (not magazines).  It had fewer rounds than contemporary weapons like the M1 Carbine, the Enfield No1 Mk III, the 1941 Johnson, and numerous other rifles.  It was a tool of freedom used to liberate Europe and the Pacific from National Socialist and Imperial tyranny.  Now, the 8 rounds it holds are “high” capacity for imperial socialist tyrants in New York… and soon, in your neighborhood thanks to federal dictates.

And yes, they do want background checks as a way to register your guns as a prelude to confiscation:

Schumer has insisted on record-keeping for all private gun sales, saying the files are needed to keep the system effective. That led to stalemated talks with conservative leader Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who says the data would lead to federal records on gun owners.

If you want to arrest someone for a private sale you’ve outlawed, you have to keep track of all sales.  All guns must be known to the government.  And when they decide to drop down to 5 round magazines “FOR TEH CHILDRENZ!!!”, then they’ll know whose house to go to.

Outlining the first part of the plan, Cryan said the measure would limit the capacity of ammunition magazines from the current maximum of 15 to five.

They do want to ban everything.  They are out for domination.

Next up, the Hill says that some senators are feeling vulnerable because of all the talk of gun bans:

The Senate’s upcoming vote on the assault weapons ban is going to put vulnerable Democrats in a difficult spot.

Democrats facing tough reelection races will either attract the ire of the National Rifle Association or prominent gun control activists such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I). A vote against the ban could spark primary challenges that could weaken Democrats in the general election.

Reid said Tuesday the proposal would not muster 40 votes, and interviews with rank-and-file lawmakers show that seems accurate.

A wave of Democratic defections on the assault weapons ban would not sit well with gun-control and liberal advocacy groups. They warn Democratic senators who vote to kill one of President Obama’s biggest priorities will suffer political repercussions.

But Reid is going to “compromise” and only put the tip in with magazine bans.  Just the tip, baby.

And look who shows up in this story again:

“People are not going to say, ‘That’s a tough vote for them, let’s not do anything,’ ” said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “There is a feeling that to win this thing we need all the Democrats. That means people who are in tough races in 2014 don’t get passes. I would expect issue ads and advocacy for all senators.”

These people are professional agents for the advancement of tyranny.  They work solely to strip you of your rights.  That’s what they do, that’s all they do.  Their entire lives are dedicated to disarming you “for your own good”.  They’re the enlightened, anointed, brilliant ruling class who think that the litany of historical disarmaments and genocide in the long run, and the demonstrable history of individual victimhood from smaller oppressors like criminals all somehow won’t apply this time, because shut up and “you must want to kill children”.

Next up, Joe Biden uses Rule for Radicals #5 – Ridicule is your most potent weapon:

When you go to [gun] registration, it raises all the black helicopter crowd notion that what this is all about is identifying who has a gun so that one day the government can get up and go the house and arrest everyone who has a gun, and they’ll cite Nazi Germany and all that.

Ha ha ha, they’re so stupid.  Godwin’s law, ha ha ha.

The administration Biden is part of ran guns to the narcoterrorist cartels in Mexico, resulting in the murders of hundreds of Mexican citizens and two US federal law enforcement agents.  The Obama administration has engaged in behavior that is wildly criminal.  Let’s just get that out there once again.

The thing is, that’s mockery.  And it’s also a lie.  It’s akin to the “so have you stopped beating your wife yet?” question.  It mocks and simultaneously derides anyone who brings up actual actions that are being taken by state governments right now.

SACRAMENTO — The California Senate approved a $24-million expenditure on Thursday to speed the confiscation of guns from people who have been disqualified from owning firearms because of criminal convictions or serious mental illness.

The neat thing about this program is that you lose your property and rights even if you’ve done nothing.

They had better luck in nearby Upland, where they seized three guns from the home of Lynette Phillips, 48, who’d been hospitalized for mental illness, and her husband, David. One gun was registered to her, two to him.

“The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,” regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office.

In an interview as agents inventoried the guns, Lynette Phillips said that while she’d been held involuntarily in a mental hospital in December, the nurse who admitted her had exaggerated the magnitude of her condition.

Todd Smith, chief executive officer of Aurora Charter Oak Hospital in Covina, where documents provided by Phillips show she was treated, didn’t respond to telephone and e-mail requests for comment on the circumstances of the treatment.

Phillips said her husband used the guns for recreation. She didn’t blame the attorney general’s agents for taking the guns based on the information they had, she said.

“I do feel I have every right to purchase a gun,” Phillips said. “I’m not a threat. We’re law-abiding citizens.”

No one was arrested. Most seized weapons are destroyed, Gregory said.

Ignore her situation for the time being, even though it may be an injustice of sorts, and look at her husband’s.  He lost his rights and property and has done nothing.

With mandatory registration, when they decide to come for your guns for “your own good” like the willing subject Phillips was, who didn’t blame the AG for taking her rights and property, they can.  With mandatory registration, the next ban they pass will result in door-to-door confiscations.  Not all at once, but slowly, and rights will disappear.

Finally, from American Thinker:

Universal Background Checks: the Liberal Holy Grail

Feinstein’s assault rifle ban has been removed from the Senate gun-control bill. While that is good news, it was recognized from the beginning as a bridge too far. What has survived, and may well become law, all in the spirit of bipartisan compromise, will actually be far worse.

The goals of the left have always been shrouded in deception and misrepresentation. Hide your true agenda behind a deceitful argument and then, after grabbing power, do what you really meant to do all along.

Read the whole thing.  It’s a breakdown and explanation of why “universal background checks” become mandatory confiscation.

From the Denver Post:

A Democratic sponsored bill that limits ammunition magazines of more than 15 rounds passed through the Senate Monday, despite some members of the party defecting and casting votes in opposition to the measure.

The bill passed on a 18-17 vote, with Democratic Sens. Cheri Jahn of Wheat Ridge and Lois Tochtrop of Thornton voting against it. Two Republican lawmakers on Monday said they will disobey the measure if it becomes law.

House Bill 1224 is originally sponsored by Rep. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora, and passed through the House in February on a 34-31 vote.

It’s very interesting how it was passed in the House, and how that procedure was done.

The measure now heads back to the House for a vote because it was amended in the Senate.

That’ll be the last chance to beat it.

“I will willfully and purposefully and civilly disobey this law,” said Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, a line that drew loud applause from the gallery. Vicki Marble, R- Fort Collins, joined Brophy in saying she would not obey the measure if it became law.

Good for them, but the Emperor of New York has dictated how they will live by throwing his billions behind Democrat tyrants in Colorado.  Welcome to the new tyranny.

From Capitol Confidential:

Cuomo had a sarcastic reply when asked how he felt about persistent protest of that measure, including signs comparing him to Adolf Hitler.

“It’s just another fun day at work doing the peoples’ business and working in public service to make this state a better state,” the governor said, smiling. “Oh, what a joy it is. Let’s go have another substantive conversation on an important issue.”

Yup, by disarming the citizenry, trampling their rights, and overall going full imperial against the people who employ you to protect their rights.

The real reason Cuomo’s mad?   Though he does use the same histrionics, he doesn’t look anything at all like Hitler.

He looks exactly like Goebbels.

cuomo and goebbels

Of course, if Goebbels was going to pull something like this off:

The bill passed quickly last month through a “message of necessity” that waived the legally required three-day waiting period. The Senate, led by a Republican-dominated coalition, passed the measure by a 43-18 vote less than two hours after the bill’s text became public. The Democrat-dominated Assembly passed the bill the next day, and Cuomo signed it.

He’d at least make sure there were exceptions carved out in the law for the Gestapo.

From Bloomberg’s Dictatorial Mayors Against Citizens Owning Guns group:

A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home.

- Madison