Quote of the day—Michelle Schimel

The New York SAFE ACT represents a tremendous step toward sensible gun control.

Michelle Schimel
Assembly Member, NY State 16th District
August 6, 2013
Exit Wound: Who Will Take on Gun Control?
[The New York SAFE ACT is some of the most repressive, short of a total ban, legislation this nation has ever seen. That she thinks of it as a “step toward sensible gun control” should tell you all you need to know. I can only conclude that in her mind “sensible gun control” is a complete ban on firearms.

What we really need is for “sensible politician control” to be enforced.—Joe]


10 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Michelle Schimel

  1. Maybe this is an angle of argument we can use. Get a list of politicians all over the country who support the SAFE act and then be like, “You hear us talk of a slippery slope all of the time. Some of you believe this, some of you don’t. Well here’s this. The New York SAFE act bans new magazines that hold more then 7 rounds. They already had a more than 10 round ban. It bans all of the so called assault weapons in the state. Before the SAFE act new so called assault weapons were already banned, and all the ones existing in New York were registered. So, we already have evidence of a slippery slope, that a little bit of gun control leads to more and more and that even now, these politicians: (names of politicians) believe that the SAFE act is a, and I quote, “a tremendous step towards sensible gun control” or (Other quotes along those lines). The most draconian gun control laws in the United States exist in New York, and their politicians, and even politicians from other states, say it is just a first step. What else is left? Total gun bans? Removal of the second amendment? Forcing Gun Owners to wear an arm band with a small picture of a gun on it wherever they go so people know who uses their rights and who doesn’t? How much more of this can we take before the Second Amendment means nothing, just like those politicians I mentioned want it to be? Our founding fathers fought a war against oppression by a tyranical government. It was everyday men and women who fought against the most powerful military in the world at that time. And as soon as the war was won and America was a country they made the right to bear arms the second most important right all Americans could have. And now you have to be asking yourself, our fore fathers fought against tyranny who tried to lead from far away. Ask yourself this when your home safe at night. Who protects you and your family? Some politician living on the other side of the country? Or you yourself with the rights our fore fathers enshrined in our constitution that protects the rights we already have.”

    Or something along those lines.

    • Here’s how slippery it has gotten: friend of mine in the Bronx (I’m from Westchester County, marginally saner) just got a letter from the NYPD basically saying “since all long guns are registered, we came to the realization that your *Marlin Camp Carbine* is an “assault weapon” that accepts detachable magazines exceeding five rounds, our new arbitrary limit. Please turn it in, or give proof of proper disposition (ie sale out of state) by November x, 2013, or be in violation.”

  2. If it could save the life of just one child, shouldn’t we all own guns?

  3. Yup… and it drove several of my friends from the Range I frequent (Ardsley, NY) to move out of state.
    Nice move, NY – you pushed out some decent, law-abiding people, at least two of whom just recently started collecting on their public pension. So NYS’ tax dollars are going into their pockets and being spent entirely out of state.

    • They don’t worry about the public pensioners, because they are the most unorganized, UNORGANIZABLE group around. How do I know? I spent considerable time and effort trying to organize them. Look at my email address…

      • My two friends might be the exception, not the rule. They have their stuff together, they just chose to leave and truly enjoy their well-earned retirement.

  4. My question is, if this is a “great step forward”, why does NYC still have such a high crime rate? If these gun laws are going to work and make us all safer, I’m all for them…provided the politicians and anti-gun groups PERSONALLY go into the inner-cities and start enacting those laws themselves. Until they’re willing to put their beliefs to the test and go where the crimes happen (or originate from), I’ll hold on to my guns, thank you very much. And you can take your new “sensible” controls and shove them someplace very uncomfortable.

    • No, Young Grasshopper. It’s never been about safety. It’s all about coercive power. Gun control is for people control. If the left gave a damn about safely, security and prosperity, they’d embrace the principles set forth in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence.

      • Hence a “tremendous step forward” is a step toward totalitarianism. Never forget it.

Comments are closed.