Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Frewsburg residents attend gun appreciation rally

February 24, 2013

By GAVIN PATERNITI Special to the OBSERVER FREWSBURG — Area residents are taking a stand in the fight to protect their Second Amendment rights....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(52)

Steiner

Feb-24-13 7:43 AM

Hey libs, be sure and paint the gun enthusiasts as nuts or just angry males ! at the same time you could warn us about the calamities set to befall us with sequestration woes, global warming, fracking etc. Say did any of you catch all the gun violence shows on PBS ?

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Feb-24-13 7:51 AM

Looked up the new gun law (again) just to try to understand what folks are so upset about.

The law expands the definition of an assault weapon, reduces the size of gun magazines from 10 to 7 rounds, has provisions to better keep firearms from individuals with mental illness and has stiffer penalties on people who use guns during the commission of a crime.

So then I thought, it must be what is now included in the definition of an assault weapon. I must admit even though my husband owns guns, I have fired guns (rifle, shot gun, revolvers), have lived on game we got from the woods for awhile (both shot and from bow) and one of my brother in laws is a big game hunter who has written several books on hunting...still I know very little.

So I started to look up some of the assault weapons that are now banned under this new bill.

AR-15....first built to for the US ARMED FORCES. ie built for military use

AR-47...used by the Soviet ARMED FORCES

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Feb-24-13 8:00 AM

Beretta...used by the Italian ARMED FORCES..oh and this one is designed to be fitted with a rifle grenade.

So the assault weapons that were designed to be used in combat, now people are fighting to be able to own and use them in our backyards? Please explain to me why anyone would think that these type of weapons should not be banned for CIVILIAN use? They are MILITARY weapons...ie designed to kill...HUMANS.

Now the magazines...like the one the shooter used in Tucson..that can fire 31 bullets in 15 seconds.

They were banned 1994 - 2004 (why was that ban lifted?)

In the last year of the ban, the state of Va found only 10% of the guns confiscated after a crime had these large magazines. Last year, this rose to 22%. Yes, it does appear like a ban was at least somewhat effective on keeping the large round mags from the hands of criminals.

NRA spend $1,452,551 in contributions to politicians last year. 29X larger than what individuals gave.

$$talks bull walks

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

HVANCDY

Feb-24-13 8:57 AM

Thank the NRA for failing to police it's club. - Obama OUT-GUNNED the NRA ! Note : Why arn't the Amish gun crazy seeing that they live in remote areas and actually hunt for food not sport ?

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Feb-24-13 9:11 AM

Judeye-where does one buy a grenade these days? I can discharge 7 rounds from my "assault" weapon in about 4 seconds and change out the magazine in two seconds. So in 22 seconds I have discharged 28 rounds right. With a 10 round magazine 6 seconds is needed to discharge 10 rounds. That means in the same amount of time I can discharge 2 more rounds. The law makes a lot of sense doesn't it? The AK-47 used by many countries is user selected between semi and full auto. Full auto is against the law. That goes as well for the AR-15. The Springfield 03 was built for military use so should that be outlawed as well? I have no problems with some aspects of the law such as keeping weapons out the hands of certain people or stiffer penalties.I do have problems with punishing law abiding citizens as a feel good move to further ones political goals.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Feb-24-13 11:29 AM

Judeye, your glass of Kool-Aid is almost empty. Time for a refill. Btw, how many guns that are highly used in hunting are considered "assault rifles" by Cuomo's retarded Act? Amazing how one politician gets so many people looking the other direction ("look, something shiny over there!"), ignores the real cause of a tragedy, but boy is that hook firmly lodged in their mouths.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

popawheelie

Feb-24-13 11:38 AM

though the definition of a "assault weapon" in NY is ridiculous, having only to have one characteristic like a thumb hole, pistol grip, etc. they are not any different then any semi-automatic rifle these characteristics don't make them more dangerous most just make them look fancy. this law only punishes the law abiding citizen and does little if anything to stop crazy's from getting guns, and just like the seat belt law that started out to only be enforced only in connection with another offense, now they have road block to catch you, so where is it going to end. I believe this law was rammed through without do process. believe in bill of rights and second amendment.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SmallTownSmallMind

Feb-24-13 12:16 PM

"Guns are not about hunting; they are about defending ourselves from a tyrannical government."

This is where I get lost. What exactly led us to believe that we are going to have to defend ourselves against a tyrannicalgovernment. How did we get here folks? Just four short years ago when George W. was in office, I never heard this ground swell of belief that the government was tyrannical and coming for your guns---and that was with the most rights ending bill (Patriot Act)ever enacted and put into law. If ever there was a time to become paranoid about a tyrannical government, that was the time. Four years later, the country is over-the-top, panties in a bunch, crazy about Obama and the government being a tyrannical one coming for your guns. Please, can someone explain to me, in a logical, rational way, how this came to be. Don't be angry with me (or be angry if you want); I just want a logical explanation of how, in such a short amount of time, this could occur.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Feb-24-13 1:14 PM

As I have said in other forums you can take a .22 cal tube feed rifle which holds 1520 rounds and it is legal.Take that same caliber of gun and put a "scary looking stock" on it and instead of a 15 shot .22 you now have a 10 shot .22 which now becomes illegal. Is there any sense to this thinking. How about you judeye can you tell me why it is illegal now that you make it a 10 shot?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1Laona

Feb-24-13 1:19 PM

STSM,come to the rally on Thursday(2/28)Bus leaves from behind Biglots at 5:30AM.You'll be traveling with your neighbors,people who took the day off to stand up for their rights.Many will be meeting with their representatives to thank those who voted against the NY SAFE ACT and ask those who voted for it WHY.I'd ask Judeye to come but I see from below that she's still walking.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Feb-24-13 1:37 PM

localresident...Btw, how many guns that are highly used in hunting are considered "assault rifles" by Cuomo's retarded Act"

EXACTLY...would you or anyone else please answer this question. I really want to know which is why I looked up the weapons that have come under the new law. Please show me which of those weapons now banned would be "highly used in hunting"

Oh..and as a parent of a disabled person, who is both physically and mentally disabled, I hope you will understand that I do not appreciate the word "retarded" to be used in this manner.

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Feb-24-13 1:42 PM

1Laona..please explain exactly what and why you are protesting this law.

What is it that you find so objectionable?

More importantly, if you do not think a ban on some kinds of weapons and some kinds of ammo will help reduce gun violence in our country....just what do YOU think will. I would love to hear your ideas. In fact, maybe you could ask the entire bus on your way to Albany to come up with other ideas that will reduce gun violence in our country. Or is it just a time to whine and complain and not address the reasons behind this new law?

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SmallTownSmallMind

Feb-24-13 1:48 PM

1Laona, I appreciate the offer to ride along on the 28th; however, I am working and I live in Nashville, TN, some 700 miles away. I would though, really appreciate if you could answer my question and explain to me how in four short years we could have gone from the most prohibitive rights time in recent history without any complaints of government tyranny to now when we have busloads of people believing that our government is potentially a tyrannical one. I just want to understand better, 1Laona. Please explain this to me, and thank-you for the invitation, my friend.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Feb-24-13 1:49 PM

A .223 caliber rifle is used a lot in hunting. as is a .30 caliber and many other ones. The only difference between most of them are COSMETIC changes that have no bearing on how powerful they are. No matter how you slice it a .223 has the same hitting power in any gun of the same caliber. Actually the longer barreled ones probably are better at long range and then you also have to take into consideration the loads in them. But for the most part we are talking factory loaded ammo. Not sure if that answer helps judeye but in my estimation it doesn't matter what a gun looks like if it is the same caliber as a so called legal one. Remember ALL fully automatic rifles have been outlawed for a long time already. All Cuomo did was outlaw the cosmetics of the guns and some capacities. Which really makes it a useless law in fighting crime.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Feb-24-13 1:53 PM

The Patriot Act was rallied against. But that to was kind of snuck in on people and the public was lied to over it. Also we had just come off the twin towers terrorist acts in recent history so there were a lot willing to forego their rights in order to "feel" safe. Those are some of the same sheep that are fighting for more restrictive gun laws now.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

concerned

Feb-24-13 1:59 PM

Force the mentally ill to take their meds and keep guns out of their hands and we would be in this debate. As to criminals they will obtain guns regardless of how many laws we pass!

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-24-13 2:04 PM

Judeye, For purposes of hunting, can you tell me what the functional differasnce are, if any, between a Remington 742 WoodMaster in cal 308 and a Colt AR-10 in the same caliber, equiped with a 5 round magazine. In your opinion, what characteristic(s) would make one more/less acceptable for hunting purposes than the other?

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-24-13 2:21 PM

Check out the article on page A4 of today's, 24FEB, Buffalo News; "NRA uses government memo to push Confiscation accusations". Compiled by the Obama Justice Dept., this preliminary report states: "...even a total elimination of assault weapons would have little overall effect on gun killings because assault weapons account for a limited % of those crimes. The nine page document says that the success of universal background checks would depend in part on requiring gun registration (something I've pointed out here previously) and says that gun buy backs would not be effective unless massive and coupled with a ban." It goes on, but you can research it yourselves.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-24-13 2:30 PM

Judeye, Have you ever attended a local "High Power" rifle match? Do you know what guns are "highly used" in those target shoots? FYI There are far, far more rounds expended in the various forms of target shooting than in hunting. You & the governor need to get off this mindset that the only/primary purpose of owning guns is to hunt. There are an estimated 90 million gunowners and only 13 million licensed hunters. There are far more interests than just hunting.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

kcw007

Feb-24-13 2:45 PM

Judeye, The Model 98 Mauser, U.S. Models of 1903, 1917 rifles & 1911(A-1) pistol , all designed and built for military use but WIDELY adopted for civilian purposes. Then there's the Winchester shotgun Models of 1897 & 12, along with models various model shotguns made by Remington, Stevens, Savage & Ithaca, taken off the shelves of sporting goods stores and carried into battle from WWI until now. Are these assault weapons too?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

Feb-24-13 6:27 PM

Judeye - How does a thumbhole stock make a gun more dangerous? How about a collapsible or telescoping stock? Or a pistol grip? Do guns with these features make them more dangerous? How about bayonet lug? How many people have been stabbed to death with bayonets in the US recently?

The 7 round capacity essentially will make almost every full size handgun illegal in NY. With the exception of the venerable 1911 pistol, nearly every other full size pistol has a standard capacity that exceeds 7 rounds. Manufacturers will not make special magazines only for NY, it is not cost effective. You want to know what is the big deal with reducing magazine size from 10 to 7? NY just banned nearly every modern handgun.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RipleyResident

Feb-24-13 6:31 PM

Oh, and 21 comments in and this still hasn't been stated clearyl.

The AR-15 was NOT designed for the military. The M-16 (or the current M4 designation) was. The AR-15 LOOKS like an M-16, but is not really even the same gun. The AR-15 was designed to be a semi-automatic rifle right from the start.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Feb-24-13 6:51 PM

Judeye, sorry you don't like the word I used (retarded), but you're right, it's worse: the (un)SAFE Act is unconstitutional. How you think limiting weapons used in 1% of gun crimes is going to change the face of gun violence is a complete mystery. What's more, that you actually believe Cuomo has anybody's best interest at heart besides a White House run is anybody's guess. funny that the AR-15 was designed for civilians from the get-go. But, hey, you know, distorting the truth works for Obama/Bloomberg, so it'll work for Cuomo too I guess.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Feb-24-13 6:54 PM

And as someone else showed, you're bein selective in listing the guns being banned, ignoring the scores of others that "happen" to meet the criteria.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

American

Feb-24-13 8:18 PM

"Chief Wes Kahley of the York City Police Department. Kahley said of the 11 homicides in York City in 2012, none were committed with assault rifles. “They’re out there, we run into them, of course they’re scary weapons. But to me what should be addressed is how illegal guns are being put on our streets,” Kahley said. Another issue, Kahley said, is guns getting into the hands of people who are mentally ill. “We have a lot of issues even as police departments when we deal with someone with mental health issues in trying to get information to best serve that person to best protect society…because the individual’s rights are put before society’s rights,” he said." Another cop that says Cuomo did it wrong.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 52 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web