Sunday, December 18, 2022

It’s Debatable: Concealed Carry Act

concealed carry weapon

Editor’s note: This commentary is in the Nov/Dec 2022 issue of Adirondack Explorer magazine, as part of our “It’s Debatable” feature. In this regular column, we invite organizations and/or individuals to address a particular issue. For more on this issue, read this story by Gwendolyn Craig. Click here to subscribe to the magazine, available in both print and digital formats: www.adirondackexplorer.org/subscribe.

The question: Does the Concealed Carry Act fit the park?

Let us walk in the woods with our handguns*

I’ve been hunting, fishing, hiking, canoeing, camping and shooting in the Adirondacks most of my adult life. I’ve watched the mountains morph from a wild area with few trails, into a forever wild area with limited access to large tracts of land with fringe areas developed for trails and opportunities for outdoor enjoyment.

Over the passage of many years the mountains have become a playground for the people of New York state. On any given weekend you may run into people enjoying the mountains from all areas of the state including New York City. The magnificent Adirondacks have evolved into the Adirondack Park, run by an agency of the same name and controlled by outsiders who govern the mountains as New York City governs Central Park. They’ve established regulations that suppress any type of growth or activities that do not meet with their approval including limiting the number of people who can use certain areas.

The most egregious calamity to befall the Park occurred on July 6, 2022, when Gov. Hochul, in an attempt to circumvent the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, signed a law that declared parks are sensitive areas and where it is illegal to carry a concealed handgun. With the stroke of a pen hundreds of years of Adirondack tradition were flushed down the drain with no thought and no consideration to the traditions or mores of current day Adirondackers.

No longer is a walk in the woods with a handgun legal. In fact if you are caught with a handgun in the vast Adirondacks, you will be charged with a felony. A felony for carrying your legally owned and registered firearm anywhere within the Adirondack Park while violent felons are let go with a slap on the wrist in Central Park. While hunting may be allowed the law makes no provision for hikers, canoeing or fishing, severely limiting the means of self defense while in the Adirondack Park.

Hochul’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act is worse than a slap in the face to all the concealed carry permit holders who live within the boundaries of the Adirondack Park. It is a travesty: criminals are treated with more respect and consideration than are the legal and lawful gun owners who live within the park. It is time for politicians to understand that the hunting, shooting and firearm traditions have been bred into the DNA of Adirondack natives and politicians should remember that we believe that firearms have two enemies, politicians and rust.

*In October, a federal judge temporarily halted parts of the law, including the park restriction, and the New York attorney general intended to appeal.

Tom King, president of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, is from from Rensselaer County

Handguns should stay outside parks

Public parks are a place of serenity for most people. Spending time in nature offers a sense of calm outside of a world filled with chaos. But would we have the same sense of calm if handguns were permitted in these spaces?

With mass shootings and gun deaths rising exponentially, the New York Legislature passed a law that prohibits firearms in sensitive places, including public parks — with exceptions for hunting. While some are expressing their dissatisfaction with this new law, I’m applauding it. As a gun owner, I believe in the Second Amendment. I also believe we can adhere to common sense regulations to keep people safe, such as Assembly Bill A41001 which restricts concealed handgun carrying.

The Adirondack Park is 6 million acres of public land for families to use, people to hike and nature to be preserved. It’s critical that everyday New Yorkers feel safe to enjoy this public park. Prior to this law being passed, some New York parks had events canceled due to fears of firearms being permitted in public parks. The new law will address those fears, without having any impact on lawful hunting.

Most gun owners agree that common sense protections are needed. In 2020, more than 1,000 New Yorkers died from gun violence. Guns have now become the leading cause of death among children in our country. Every year, over 8,000 children are killed or seriously injured by firearms nationwide. In May of this year, 10 innocent people were murdered at a supermarket in Buffalo.

The shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was my wake-up call, spurring me to post a video destroying my AR-15, asking: “So when do we change?”

The answer is now. New York has some of the strongest gun laws in the country, and Congress has finally acted and passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the first gun safety legislation enacted in nearly 30 years.

However, it’s not enough, especially given that just this summer the Supreme Court ruling overturned a 100-year-old gun safety law in our state. I’m glad our lawmakers here acted swiftly in response and passed this new legislation. New Yorkers and all Americans deserve to live without fear of violence. 

— Scott Pappalardo, from Orange County, is a member of Gun Owners For Safety

Photo at top: Hunters like Tiffany Bezio of Whitehall are able to carry concealed guns in the Adirondacks while hunting.  Photo by Cindy Schultz

Related Stories


The Adirondack Almanack publishes occasional guest essays from Adirondack residents, visitors, and those with an interest in the Adirondack Park. Submissions should be directed to Almanack editor Melissa Hart at editor@adirondackalmanack.com


Tags:


168 Responses

  1. Evan says:

    The second essay makes absolutely no sense. How does banning guns in the park make anyone feel safer? Was there an epidemic of legal gun owners committing gun violence in the Adirondacks? Gun accidents? Guns become sentient and shooting people? Of course not. If a crazy person wanted to commit gun violence, or any sort of violence, the last thing that will stop them is an (unenforceable) gun law. Let’s use logic people, not tired scare tactics about ‘evil guns.’

  2. John Roberts says:

    I am sorry but I totally disagree with you ! New York is one of the hardest states to get a concealed carry permit.we have to have a clean record and it takes forever to get one.when a liberal governor puts forth the biggest unjust law that restricts my rights against the supreme court’s it’s time to fight back not give her the ok to trample our rights.these laws have made me an instant criminal that could put me in jail because she she was running for governor and wanted to make herself look good for votes.these laws will absolutely not make us any safer,actually we are less safer.her political ambitions is the reason she put this law on the books.this is a liberal Democrat agenda which is trying to take our weapons from law abiding citizens starting with the President.we are law abiding citizens,I will keep my weapons.

  3. Adirondack Resident says:

    The Adirondack “Park” is not a park in the same way as any other park in NYS. This restriction is absurd.

  4. Joan Grabe says:

    When family members who were NYPD officers came to our home in the Bronx they wrapped up their revolvers and placed them on a high shelf in the coat closet. They were required to carry them but when they retired they kept those revolvers locked up and retired gunless to enjoy whatever activity they wanted. Who today feels so threatened that , if not for their job, would apply for a concealed carry permit ? To walk in the woods ? But not be hunting ? Try being like the rest of us who manage to get through our days unarmed and never give it a thought !

    • Dan says:

      In America, a person doesn’t have to “be like the rest of us,” that’s called individuality. I don’t question or care to judge your decision to venture out unarmed. Perhaps you would show the same courtesy to those of us with a different point of view, or would prefer to live in a world of identical drones?

  5. Bret says:

    Scott, I am curious how many of the 1000 people killed in NY during 2020 were killed in the Adirondacks.

    Joan, I wonder what the people who were killed at the supermarket in Buffalo would think about your comment “the rest of us who manage to get through our days unarmed and never give it a thought!” They certainly did not get through their day. Had one of them had a legal concealed firearm the outcome could have been different.

    • Joan Grabe says:

      Really ? Then how about all those armed law enforcement officers cowering in the hallway in Uvalde ? For every one of your examples I have an example of the misuse of a weapon that resulted in death. But that is not the point here. Gov. Hochul wants to keep firearms out of certain locations – not take away your guns. I don’t see the need to go the extremes here and I am still not giving it a thought.

  6. Bob Meyer says:

    If you look at the pro concealed carry contributor, it ends up being all about “those other people“ telling us what to do. This argument is tired and false and leads to the divisiveness that is threatening to destroy the very fabric of civilized society.

  7. Raquette Lake Gun Owner says:

    Why would the Adirondack Almanac publish this false information and disinformation?
    The recently enacted firearms legislation prohibits concealed carry in sensitive areas such as schools, NYS Parks, houses of worship. State Land in the Adirondacks is Forest Preserve, not a NYS Park and therefore the prohibition on concealed carry does not apply. Fear raising stories are not helpful to an informed discussion.

    • Paul says:

      I was thinking the same thing. I don’t think this is accurate at all?

      And this is totally incorrect:

      “The Adirondack Park is 6 million acres of public land”

      What?

  8. The Heller decision, and Bruen supreme ct decision make clear ny safe act and gov hochuls bs new tyrannical gun laws are unconstitutional.

    The supreme ct stated you have to show historical precedent. Hochul has not.

    So one is hiking and bobcat, wild animal or derange stragler hiding in woods attacks you , they want you to be a victim.

  9. MaryLou Giuliano says:

    Allowing concealed handgun permit holders to carry their handguns in the ADK park is not going to destroy the peace. Do you think these folks who worked often over a year at the permitting process ,are going to be randomly shooting up the sky? Seriously, THINK about the reason these folks have requested and received permits. It is for self-defense. This person could protect YOU from a bear attack, a snake strike or a human attack. Gov. Hochul seems to misunderstand which part of our population is the problem. It is not the legally permitted handgun owners.

  10. Nathan says:

    most of my family and have carried handguns in the adirondacks for over a century. During that time no one was ever shot. But we have used to scare overly aggressives/curious bears with a shot to run them off. Have saved ourselves from a few rabid foxes, coyotes. Scared away a few mountain lions, bobcats, raccoons from the livestock. It is living in wilderness, far from a hospital, or even police help. A easily carried gun is just part of life and safety from dangerous encounters. It’s not nyc with only criminals being armed. All those crazy anti-gun laws only make every citizen an easy victim, while criminals are all armed. Legal owners are just that, legal. Let’s go after all the criminals and if they commit gun crime, do real time, no plea to joke time. A guy robs store get 1 year or less, but legal owner walks in park gets possibly years??? Stop coddling criminals, leave honest people alone.

  11. The Adirondack park is not 6 million of public land. Far from it .

  12. Bob says:

    I really do understand your point . But you make as many laws that you want criminals and the mentally ill don’t care . Law abiding citizens are being harassed and being portrayed as the bad people . Your gun laws are never going to get the mass shooting to stop . Ban all guns every state every weapon put 100 of thousand people out of work it will change nothing .Is there a answer no but we should be protecting are children at schools better than we are now . Banning guns gives criminals and mentally Ill people a better opportunity to commit acts of violence .

    • William says:

      Correct Bob. Laws only affect people willing to obey them in the first place. There is a law against murder already, how is that working out? It is not like some insane criminal who was about to shoot up a school stopped because, “Dang, it is a gun free zone”.

      • ADKresident2 says:

        So, by your “logic,” why make any laws at all?

        • Ed says:

          Criminal laws are really not intended to prevent anything. They establish a baseline for moral/orderly behavior, but truly exist to assign punishment for violating these norms. Generally, for simple ‘victimless’ crimes and property crimes there is no acute need to ‘intervene’ or stop before commission. In the case of murder, rape, assault there is a need to prevent because a life is at stake. The problem is the preventive steps taken by other countries are EXPLICITLY banned by our constitution (2A), and the weak half-measures promulgated by states like NY do nothing to prevent these crimes – they only punish. And the vicious cycle continues. I do believe there is a legal fix to this – but I don’t believe in that fix (personally), nor do 50% or more of the US citizenry. However, the true fix is not a legal one, it’s a cultural one that is complicated, messy, and too much work for our lazy public leaders to engage in in a meaningful way.

  13. Mike says:

    Guns, sprays, knifes, fire starters, should be banned from the park. We can’t pick and choose things by our fears and phobias. All potentially dangerous things we carry need to be banned to eliminate all fear in the park.

    • Georgia Davison says:

      So Mike, if you and/or your friends or family are walking/camping in the Adirondack Park, and a big old BEAR comes at you/them, you don’t think BEAR SPRAY should be available to try to protect yourself/others???? WHAT PLANET ARE YOU FROM????? Yes, I know, Black Bear attacks in NY are not all that common. But, do YOU OR YOUR FAMILY/FRIENDS want to take that risk, when a can of Bear Spray could prevent it? The same goes for guns and knives, if attacked by a human. This world we live in is getting more dangerous all the time. Bear Spray, guns, knives, etc. could help save a life… it could even be your own !!! We should all have the right to defend and protect ourselves, those we love, and what is ours… the US Constitution says so, at least for now.

      • Mike says:

        No bear spray needed. Two pieces of 2×4 sanded down so as not to get any splinters that cause an infection and kill you can be clapped together loudly wearing a heavy pair of leather gloves. PPE is very important, and you must wear ear plugs and safety glasses. It will scare all bears away every time without unnecessary harm to the animal. Bear spray needs to be banned from the park now.

    • ADKNative says:

      Lol! I love sarcasm.

  14. Bill Keller says:

    “No longer is a walk in the woods with a handgun legal. In fact if you are caught with a handgun in the vast Adirondacks, you will be charged with a felony.” Such nonsense. ““The bill language does not specifically reference the Forest Preserve, which is distinguished both in statute and the state constitution from all other public parks in New York state,” according to Hochul’s office.

    The new law “changes nothing for lawful gun owners on both Forest Preserve and private lands within the blue line of the Adirondacks,” a spokesman for the governor said in a statement.

    “These areas are not considered ‘sensitive locations’ under the law, however there will be sensitive locations within these areas, like playgrounds and hospitals, consistent with locations outlined in the law for every other part of the state,” the spokesman said.

  15. Mike V says:

    Typical of most debates, this one chooses two view points that are on the far end of the topic being discussed, which is fine as it gets the conversation going. While most gun owners do agree that there should be some limits on what is acceptable they also realize that a “park” in downtown Syracuse or Albany is not the same as the Adirondack “park”. I grew up in NNY but have retired to NC and am disappointed that I can not bring a legally purchased handgun (with State and Federal background checks) to my hunting camp, even though I have gone through extensive training provided by my local sheriff plus more background checks by the Federal government to allow me to carry a handgun concealed when I choose to. Every state on my travels north recognize my permit, but NYS does not. Personally I think NYS could use a bit of common sense in these matters.

  16. Doug says:

    Scott Pappalardo this is clearly an OpEd. You are from Orange County. Clearly so much closer to the wilds of the city than the wilds of the Adirondack forests. You are part of the problem of this country and the usurping, infringement and disrespect for our constitutional rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights. You are obviously swayed by the partisan politics, influenced by the politically controlled main stream media and all their falsified statistics. People like you will lead our country to serfdom and defenseless citizens. In destroying your AR15, you clearly don’t believe in the second amendment and in stating the lie that most gun owners agree that common sense protections (more laws) are needed and wanted. There are plenty of laws available on the books, even more than needed in some areas. The problem is clearly understood as the lack of enforcement and follow through of these so called protections. Closing of jails, revolving door mental health systems, bail reform, etc… are at fault. People who pay attention know that the vast majority of crimes committed using a handgun are by non law abiding criminals who are presently in illegal possession of a weapon and who have no use for the laws that are in place nor fear of consequences from the lack of enforcement by the court systems of the laws that are in place.

  17. mrdale14424 says:

    Thank you Adk Almanac & Explorer for publishing controversial topics such as this for discussion. I appreciate the comments section, especially!

  18. Alan says:

    As was once said “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”. What exactly does this mean? We can believe that we are secure by outlawing war, hate and handguns. If this makes you feel safer you are no different than the person who will not leave their home for fear the world is out to get them. The cause of violence is still there, still hiding and still ready to explode into action. Oppression (The action of oppressing; arbitrary and cruel exercise of power., The state of being oppressed., A feeling of being weighed down in mind or body.) whether it comes from hate, mistrust or a government entity only breeds more anger and distrust. We turn persons who are emotionally destitute away from institutions once recognized as protecting or containing those individuals by closure. It appears that someone has made the decision that killing is acceptable as long as it’s contained to some manageable number. As long as the mental state of society is not recognized as the problem and the cause of instability is not dealt with in an intelligent manner, no amount of heaping on of laws or oppression will fix it.

  19. David Pietkiewicz says:

    The Concealed Carry Improvement Act truly is a sham and egregious violation of our citizen’s rights. What criminal or disturbed person is going to care whether or not they are within a New York designated “sensitive area?” How many Concealed Carry Permit Holders have historically committed crimes? Most likely…”zero!”

  20. Todd Eastman says:

    I’m glad I grew out of my “Davey Crockett” phase…😎

  21. C. says:

    I think men (and it IS mostly men) who feel they need to carry a gun everywhere they go are a bunch of weenies.

    • Georgia Davison says:

      REALLY ??? My 70 year old neighbor and his wife were attacked in a mall parking lot as they walked back to their care. The attacker had a very large hunting knife, pointed it at the wife’s face, and demanded they give him their wallets and any jewelry they had. The husband grabbed his small pistol out of his coat pocket, cocked it and pointed it at the attacker, and that attacker dropped his knife and took off like he was shot out of a cannon. They called the police who took the knife and ran fingerprints, but couldn’t get any info from it. The couple were shaken but safe. If the husband didn’t have that pistol on him, who knows how it would have turned out. WE NEED TO KEEP OUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. Legal gun owners, in general, are NOT the problem. It’s the CRIMINALS….who will ALWAYS find a way to get a gun.

      • Todd Eastman says:

        And how many people were not attacked that day?

        • Georgia Davison says:

          Todd, at least ten fold were not attacked that day. Most likely BECAUSE my neighbor HAD a pistol, pointed it at the attacker, and the creep ran away. How many MORE innocent folks might have BEEN attacked that same day, if my friend DID NOT have a pistol??? Answer THAT question smart aleck !!!

    • Eric says:

      If, hopefully not, but if, your life is ever in imminent danger, make sure to tell the 911 operator to not send one of those weenies with a badge and a gun.

  22. Eric says:

    First off, lets get the data right. The 1000 figure quoted by Scott is mischaracterized. He claims it is 1000 deaths from gun violence, it is really 1052 deaths by firearm. Historically ~50% of all gun deaths are suicide. In 2020 there were 836 murders in NY. 543 involved a firearm. 299 of those were in NYC alone. These numbers are still horrible, but we should not be inflating numbers just to try to prove a point.

    The CCIA is a blantant attempt to restrict lawful legal gun owners. According to the AG of NY, 74% of all guns recovered were from out of state. These are illegal unregistered guns, held by criminals with no regard to the existing laws. Bringing in any gun from another state was already illegal, and the data shows, widely ignored. 6% of all guns recovered from crime scenes were guns held by the original purchaser of that gun. There is no mention if these were bought and registered legally in NY or not, so a subset of these guns may be legal. So do the math and a max of 32 of the above murders by firearm is the zctual target of this overreaching unconstitutional attack on lawful gun owners. The best data I could find is that 1.7 million households in NY own a firearm, ~20%. Hotchul has said she doed not need data to know the issue, but in this case, it appears she does. Criminals do not follow laws, either the old ones that criminalized their behavior, nor the new CCIA that attempts to criminalize formerly lawful behaviors that just is not an issue.

  23. Boreas says:

    I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I have never felt the need to carry a sidearm in the Adirondack backcountry. I always felt more threatened in a bar drinking a beer after a hike. So I just decided to keep a cold one in the car to drink at the trailhead if desired. It was cheaper, no cigarette smoke (years ago), and quieter.

    If I had stayed in the Rockies longer, I may have added a sidearm to my bear spray arsenal for griz deterrence – but most of the places where griz and I shared trails were National Parks. I was “attacked” by a ground squirrel once when I pitched my tent in the dark over his hidey-hole. Once I realized he wasn’t a rattler, I shooed him away with my shoe.

  24. Charlie Stehlin says:

    John Roberts says: “this is a liberal Democrat agenda which is trying to take our weapons from law abiding citizens starting with the President..”

    I’m not sure if you’re exactly right about this John though you may very well be. I don’t tune-in to all of the hot air. The problem with the democrats is they don’t speak clearly, or loud enough. None of us needs assault-style firearms. None! Not even the police. Hochul is an opportunists, she did not think clearly on this matter which is unfortunate. If it is true that they are trying to take away all firearms from the citizenry I’d like to see this in print from a reliable source. If they (the democrats) are just trying to be rid of 50-clip automatic firearms which have killed far too many of our children, and others, already, then they should be clear on this and says so. If it were me on the podium I’d say:
    “My fellow Americans, and especially you republicans….I am not going, nor will I ever try, to take your guns away from you. Matter of fact I will stand by you in protecting your right to bear arms. You have every legal right to own your guns. But these semi-automatic guns that have killed so many of our precious, innocent, little children….none of us need those, not even law-enforcement. These are the guns I have a problem with and I strongly feel it is our civil responsibility to eradicate them from our streets. Give me this and I will stand by you ‘full tilt boogie’ to continue your right to bear arms……”

    The democrats, if they are trying to take away every gun a New Yorker owns…where’s the proof? If they are just using common sense and striving to be rid of these killing-machine semi-automatic, or automatic….guns which can wipe out a whole classroom of kindergartener’s in ten minutes, or less…. they should speak up loudly and say so, and stress their true aim. Evidently they’re not doing this because all’s we been hearing forever is…”those darn liberals are trying to take way our guns!” Which is it?

    • Eric says:

      But these semi-automatic guns that have killed so many of our precious, innocent, little children….none of us need those, not even law-enforcement.

      Congratulations, you just advocated to take almost every pistol, every single AR style weapon and a darn good majority of long guns away from citizens. In addition you just advocated to take every single gun, short of maybe shotguns, away from LE. Even the shotguns in use now by LE may be semi.

      Back to revolvers for everyone but the criminals.

      Also, I would bet not one single shooting in NY by a criminal in 40 years or more has been done using a 50 round automatic weapon.

      Details matter

      • Georgia Davison says:

        To Eric,
        I have a semi-automatic 22 rifle. The only things I’ve ever shot with it is woodchucks in my veggie garden, squirrels and raccoons tearing apart my bird feeders and one raccoon that was acting very strange AND was all foamy around its mouth. My husband was a forester for NYS DEC, and he took the suspect coon to work the next morning (in a big plastic bag…and yes, he wore gloves). They sent the body off to Albany, and the coon WAS rabid. I’m a responsible owner of said rifle, and the only time it comes out of the gun safe, is when the unwanted mentioned critters show up. It has a trigger lock on it AND the gun safe is locked. Our two kids grew up in this house and never came close to any gun accident. Just goes to show everyone, that people CAN have a USE for a semi-automatic gun, and know how to keep it safe and away from those that don’t know how to use it correctly and safely. Nobody will EVER take away MY 22 rifle !!!!!!

        • Eric says:

          Georgia, i think we are of the same mind. My comment above was aimed towards folks conflating AR style weapons with all semi automatics. A lot of folks do not understand what a semi automatic is, but think it is that evil AR style. Was out to dinner with a long time friend a year or so ago and this came up. She was shocked to find out that the weapon I had on me at the time, a Glock, was a semi auto. Folks just are not well educated in this regard. We both know that a semi automatic weapon in and of itself does not mean the ability to commit mass murder.

          • Georgia Davison says:

            Well said Eric. Thank you.

          • Mike V says:

            Eric – Spot on. I find it interesting that an AR is generally illegal (unless modified to NYS standards) but a Mini-14 is not (according to NYS information). Both fire a 223 cartridge and both have a detachable magazine. I guess because the Ruger has a fixed stock and a non threaded barrel that makes it ok. Go figure.

    • Paul says:

      Charlie, you seem to have a problem with assault style weapons than in another comment you seem to agree with banning “any” common semi automatic rifle? Help me out?

  25. Michael Young says:

    True, a there are almost 1,000 New Yorkers die due to gunshots. That figure is irrelevant. How many of those are from legal handguns, possessed by legal gunowners.
    Logic seems to have been thrown to the wind, which is why people are leaving this state in droves.

    • Boreas says:

      I wouldn’t say those numbers are irrelevant. It is a big number compared with other countries. Suicide, hunting accidents, and in-home child accidents would all be part of those numbers. Legal ownership is not always the same as responsible use and ownership. I too would like to know how the injury/death statistics break down in NYS compared to other states. But lack of logic is but one reason for population changes.

  26. Doug says:

    The liberals are trying to take away the guns, the proof your looking for is obvious in the bills that they pass and in the laws that they pass. The semi automatics didn’t kill those people, it was the person behind the trigger. If you believe that they will take the semi automatics from the police and the politicians security teams your dreaming. Did you know that semi automatics include most all concealed carry sidearms and many shotguns? Most popular sidearms are semi automatics and there are millions out there that have been lawfully owned and carried for years. This my friend and fellow citizen is how they play your emotions to fool you. The media does not tell you of the daily incidents that occur where these weapons save the lives and property of numerous innocent people.

    • Dana says:

      It is true – not all semi-automatics are high power, high capacity assault weapons. But it can also be said that assault weapons are a subset of military assault weaponry with the “auto” mode simply removed/disabled, and in some cases easily bypassed or replaced. It should also be recognized that semi-auto firing is typically more accurate and efficient than full auto – and consequently could be considered MORE deadly.

      Regardless, IMO, it isn’t the rate of fire that should determine whether a firearm is restricted, but rather the magazine capacity and ease of re-loading. To me, that is what differentiates the term “assault” from simple protection or hunting. I also feel, legislation, if employed, needs to be done logically and not emotionally. The legislation we are discussing is not very logical and appears to be more of a knee-jerk reaction to violence.

      • Eric says:

        Every point, spot on.

        One thing, the vast majority of the murders that this bill aims to reduce are not done with an AR style weapon.

        • Paul says:

          Statistically speaking almost every firearm crime in NYS is not perpetrated with an assault style gun. BUT we do need to figure out how to stop the few that are. Because it is terrible.

  27. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Joan Grabe says: “Try being like the rest of us who manage to get through our days unarmed and never give it a thought!”

    This can go two ways Joan. We are living in uncertain times! The world is seemingly falling apart at its seams. The thought of walking around in the woods unarmed while taking-in the magic, and at the same time utilizing our free spirits, is a most wondrous thought, to live outside of fear. There’s nothing like it! It seems like the only real place to experience such is via the narrative in an old book which I know not to be true, but it sure does seem like a reality to some extent.

    There are so many horror stories and they seem to be on an uptick. The political climate, or our leaders (if you can call them that!), contribute quite much to this I truly believe, whether through direct or indirect actions, or inactions. Their divisive nature and diatribes sure as heck don’t help neither! If there’s ever going to be any sense of hope it will not be through our leadership evidently, and they are the ones that have the power to change things, ie… by way of resources. There has to be a ‘will to change’ which is like expecting human nature to change.

    A few years ago I took my little girl way back into the Moose River Recreation Area to show her where I camped as a boy and also there is an old-growth white pine a little walk into the woods along a narrow trail which I wanted to show her. It was she and I and my loaded rifle which I felt comfortable with, especially because she was with me. I felt a need to protect her and, sorry to say, my long gun brought that sense of security to me………

    Nothing is guaranteed anymore Joan and if people feel a need to do what they must do so long as they are not out hurting others then there should be some unbiased understanding of this. This is a very complicated issue which is an extension of us as a complicated society…..unfortunately.

  28. Georgia Davison says:

    You can take away every type of gun from the law abiding citizens, and people will still get shot. The criminals will ALWAYS be able to get their hands on guns, and continue to pray on unarmed folks and continue to commit crimes. All the laws will do is take away our Constitutional Right to BEAR ARMS and protect ourselves and our property. DAMN THE GOVERNMENT !!!!!!!!!!!!!

  29. JohnL says:

    At the base of this whole argument is this: Do you believe that a law, or a sign, that tells people that they can’t have a firearm in a particular place, is going to be followed by a bad guy with a gun who is bent on mayhem. In my humble opinion, if you do believe that it will (deter a bad guy), then I feel sorry for you.
    Having said the above, the fact that this latest law was written immediately after the Supreme Court ruling on firearms this summer (against the state of New York) shows that this NYS governor and Legislature have absolutely NO respect for the Supreme Court and their decisions. In effect, they don’t consider them the last arbitrator in the law of the land. So much for 230 years of a proven system of government.
    Having said all of this above. I’m guessing a lot of people travelling in the Adirondacks will throw their kit gun in their pack same as always. They probably think, as I do, that it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than permission, if a need for it should arise.

  30. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Doug says: “The semi automatics didn’t kill those people, it was the person behind the trigger.”

    Which is like saying the rapid-fire guns had nothing to do with killing all of those innocent little boys and girls! Or whomever those guns kill in such brief moments of time. The precious moments! Come up with something better Doug as what you say is stale.

    I see where you’re going with the above statement….and yes society is chock full of mentally deranged people, some of whom attain access to guns which shouldn’t even be out there in the first place which this conversation has been about. Do you need a gun which can wipe out dozen-lots of children in mere minutes, if that long? If so for what? Shooting deer or rabbits? This is more than about the right to bear arms! This is political football and campaign financing which is more important than little boys and girls evidently. In many, if not all, of these cases it has been anyway! As if a puppet republican politician is afraid to stand the moral ground because it’s about his or her political future. Because the NRA will stop funding he or she if they dare stand up for those little children and do what’s right! Tell me different!

    • Paul says:

      Semi-automatic rifles and shotguns are extremely common hunting rifles, have been for a long time now. Why do so many people now have a problem with the guns that law abiding hunters commonly use? The semi-automatic rifles and an assault weapon with a large magazine are 2 totally different things? Most of these comments are politically charged disinformation.

  31. Charlie Stehlin says:

    “this NYS governor and Legislature have absolutely NO respect for the Supreme Court and their decisions.”

    Watch where you tread with your narrative JohnL. You just might start having other’s believe there is some hypocrisy about you!

    • JohnL says:

      Don’t need to watch ‘where I tread’ Charlie. The governor and NYS legislature absolutely tried to circumvent the Supreme Court decision. The timing is incontrovertible. That says to me that they (Hochol & Democratic Legislature) have no respect for the Supreme Court decision in Bruen. If that’s somehow hypocritical, I guess I am.

  32. Charlie Stehlin says:

    “The liberals are trying to take away the guns, the proof your looking for is obvious in the bills that they pass and in the laws that they pass.”

    Can you cite examples Doug? I’m open!

    • Doug says:

      Every gun law that Cuomo passed and that Hochul passed. Too many to list

      • JohnL says:

        Agree with Doug. For most legislators of gun control, the final target (pi), if you will, is the elimination of guns altogether, although they won’t (can’t) say that out loud. For the rest, their target is to get re-elected.

        • Steve B. says:

          I don’t believe that for a minute. What most so called liberal legislators want is a stop to the mass murders, typically enabled by easy access to a weapon such as a (AR15 style) rifle that is both auto loading and can carry a magazine of 5 rounds or more and can be quickly reloaded, or a pistol, such as a Glock 15 with a 30 round magazine, such as what was used to shoot Congresswomen Gabby Giffords and countless others. NY and many other states have banned the very high capacity magazines for rifles and make it difficult to obtain a pistol (without showing clear need), but as in the Buffalo shooting the perpetrator simply drove a few miles south to Pennsylvania and bought the magazines there. That’s problem one, states with weak and unenforced laws that make it easy to obtain weapons and magazines and ghost parts (like Texas), dilute the attempts in states with high crime to get a handle on the sale and movement of weapons. And the Republicans continue to keep their heads in the sand and do nothing while children continue to be murdered. Death by guns as BTW, are now the biggest threat to children in the U.S. Not cancer or other illness, not getting hit by a car or dying in car accidents, not accidents on the playground. Food for thought on that.

          I think the recent law as passed by NY State has some aspects that are just plain stupid and agree with many complaints here that it’s poorly written and affects law abiding gun owners in unintentional and negative ways, mostly as it was written quickly for political reasons for the Dem’s to show they really are tough on crime. Hoping they will re-visit and remove some of the stupid in it, time will tell.

          In the mean time, and for all you hunters, ask yourself if an AR15 type rifle is really needed to hunt deer (the most commonly hunted game animal in the US), especially with a 20 or 30 round magazine ?, or perhaps we could stop the manufacturer for civilian use and you can use a traditional bolt action .303 with 5 rounds ?. A rifle that was perfectly adequate for your fathers and grandfathers. I am aware that in some states you are not allowed to hunt big game such as deer with a 5.56mm gun, you need to use a larger caliber weapon and for good reason. Only other good use for a rifle with 20 rounds in the magazine is mass boar hunting, not an issue in the Adirondacks for sure. Maybe that type of rifle isn’t really appropriate or needed by most gun owners. If they banned the manufacturer tomorrow, it’s unlikely to affect many legal gun owners (the lib’s are not banning ownership outright, you get to keep yours) as there are millions (hundreds of millions ?) of these guns in legal ownership currently. Banning maybe saves 20 kids in an elementary school or supermarket, I think that’s worth it.

          • JohnL says:

            I love it when people tell me I ‘don’t need a semi-automatic rifle for hunting’. I feel like asking them why they think they need a high speed 0-60 in under 5 seconds car. I’d name one but I don’t know much about high speed cars as I drive an old Toyota Corolla, which has trouble getting out of its’ own way. My point is, what you thing YOU need and what I think I need about almost any subject are bound to be different. Everything I own is legal and I’ve never hurt anyone with them. So spare me the ‘you don’t need that’ argument.
            BTW, the example you use, the 303 british caliber, is an old (real old, like 1888 old) antiquated cartridge that virtually no-one uses anymore.
            Last point. The 2nd amendment wasn’t put in place for hunting or target shooting or anything of the sort. It was an extremely forward looking amendment to help future generations to deter a tyrannical government from taking away our God given rights. It’s for protection of the rights that our Founders risked their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to give us. Merry Christmas to you and yours Steve!

          • William says:

            You are really out of date. The AR is an exceptional hunting platform available in a lot of calibers and extremely reliable. Sure, my dad hunted with the old Remington 742 Woodsmaster and the old Winchester 100 jam-a-matic. Today’s AR is way ahead of them. Reliable, accurate, impervious to weather and efficient. It may be hard to see one of them get used legally but it happens everyday. The News only covers when they are used illegally. If anything, go shooting with one some time, it is a lot of fun. Like JohnL said, some people like Corvettes, some AR’s.

            So let’s just imagine for a moment that there is a nationwide ban and all of the AR’s are confiscated. No more AR’s, they are gone. So criminals all turn to a pump action shotgun loaded with buckshot, they are after all reliable and efficient. It gets used to devastate a bunch of innocents be it in a classroom or a supermarket. There would be instant calls to ban pump shotguns and buckshot. It just happens to be AR’s today. We are legislating against the tool, not the problem.

  33. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Georgia Davison says: “You can take away every type of gun from the law abiding citizens, and people will still get shot.”

    Or they’ll find another way to kill, whether that be by way of butter knife, or by clenched, angry fists. Some psychopaths are very creative in their methods of exterminating their fellow beings. With Putin it’s advanced weaponry (it was that way with GW Bush too!), with Ted Bundy it was asphyxiation……….. I can fill up some space here! This is fun! I suppose we can start a new conversation here. Such as: Why is it we avail more and more tools, tools which there are absolutely no real need for, unless it is we’re bent on ruin, to those who wish to harm others? It seems to me we create our own misery and support it, oftentimes unknowingly, even though we don’t like it…….. support it by way of our religious or political postures in many cases!

  34. JB says:

    It is at least clear that there is a lot of confusion, and regardless of our political beliefs, let’s make no mistake: this is a direct result of the complete lack of transparency during the legislative process. On the night of the “emergency session”, the deliberations were carried out by party officials in secrecy. Originally, even experts were giving quite extreme interpretations as to the implications of Bill A41001. Having read it myself the morning after, I largely agreed with them. How would anyone have known any different?

    The current “official” interpretation from NYSP ended up being far less restrictive, but, frankly, even I can’t say with certainty whether someone could actually be charged for carrying a handgun on Forest Preserve. Is there any clear language in writing from any official channel (e.g., DEC)? The text of the bill is extremely ambiguous, to say the least.

    The point is that, even for those who could care less about gun ownership (or would like to see guns disappear), we all should care whether this becomes an acceptable way of governing society. And unfortunately, it is indeed becoming a pattern. This is how people become disenfranchised — or worse — and I don’t think that it ultimately makes for a safe and healthy society.

  35. James Racquet says:

    HUNTING is a privilege, owning a firearm is a right NYS cannot overrule Federal law as in the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America Period. # back to the Supreme Court.

    • G. Davison says:

      AMEN James. The only way anyone will take away my guns, is to pry them from my cold dead hands. We as citizens of this country, have the right to own and keep guns.

  36. If the law restricts only concealed carry, I have no problem with it. If someone feels a need to carry a handgun for protection, let them carry it openly.

    If the law is other than that, I might feel differently. I have no issue with responsible gun owners and am one myself.

    • Paul says:

      I don’t know. I am not sure that is a great idea. Some nut could just grab it. When I go hunting I keep even my rifle under the back seat on the way to may camp thieves love to grab guns.

    • William says:

      Why would you restrict one and not the other? Concealed simply means you don’t know about it. Odds are you have been next to someone carrying concealed and are none the worse for it. Now if you go through life all paranoid wondering who may have a gun…..I would submit that is not the problem of the person carrying.

    • ADKNative says:

      Agreed John. The timing says it all.

  37. Susan says:

    It is so simple. Banning guns in the Adirondacks will NOT stop some lunatic from bringing one in and doing what he or she wants to do. It will only provide a scenario where the criminal is armed and the innocents have no form of protection. And with the weakened criminal justice laws, we have MORE wackos on the loose than ever. The legally carrying people are not the perpetrators in almost ALL cases of someone being killed or injured by gun fire. If there are known criminals on the loose in the Mountains like we had a few years ago with the two escaped convicts from Dannemora, I want to be packing!

  38. Greg Boyer says:

    The Second Amendment:
    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    In short, the Second Amendment states that as an American citizen, you have the individual right to arm yourself. The amendment also firmly establishes that the government cannot infringe on that right.

  39. Paul says:

    What is this publish a bunch of fake info and stir the pot?

  40. Greg Keefer says:

    I wonder if the gov has ever stepped foot in the Adirondacks? This is yet another distraction to shift focus from the real problems, including the daily crimes in our cities.

  41. Dan says:

    A few things to clear up here:

    • Sorry Scott, from Orange County, but the Adirondack Park is not 6 million acres of public land, it’s less than three.
    • The Editor’s note at the end of King’s debate about a federal judge halting parts of the CCIA is outdated. There have been lawsuits, injunctions, temporary restraining orders and appeals on various parts of the legislation. It changes constantly.
    • Perhaps the “intent” by most lawmakers was not to include State Parks and Forest Preserve lands as we know it, but if you watch the video of the Senate debate from back in July, you will see that some of the lawmaker’s intent was just that.

    Bottom line: New York’s concealed carry laws were pretty stringent to begin with, at least in terms of permit requirements. If you had a CC permit, or even a restricted permit before this was passed you were basically pretty clean. All the Supreme Court’s decision did in the Bruen case was tell judges they had to issue CC permits, rather than restricted ones. That’s it, no standards or requirements were lowered. Hochul over-reacted. The last people you have to worry about committing crimes are permitted handgun owners, yet they’re being singled out here. Actually, all gun owners are as the legislation goes far beyond handguns. But that’s another debate.

  42. T Nolan says:

    Scott Poppalardo has used his common sense to be brainwashed and uses data that is spun to fit the stupid idea that guns cause the problems not the mentally warped person using them for crime.
    How about cars Scott, and knives and fists . Scott .It is all about power nuts who want to control others in any way they can and pander to the most votes they can get and they sure got you and your friends big time.

  43. Todd Eastman says:

    Gunnies are funny! 🙄

    • JohnL says:

      Glad you appreciate the safety we ‘gunnies’ provide TE. You’re welcome…..and Merry Christmas!

    • Eric says:

      I think a lot of people in a mall food court who are alive today due to the actions of Elisjsha Dicken would disagree with you. In NY now, if a similar event occurred, anyone there would be a sitting duck unless someone choose to break the law, carry and was willing to risk prosecution to use their concealed weapon and end it. Most likely, if a good guy with a concealed weapon was there, they would flee first if possible, defend themselves and loved ones if necessary, but not defend others.

      • Steve B. says:

        Unfortunately such interventions are really far and few between, with a case like Uvalde making you wonder if the Police were not able to act, how do you expect private citizens to. And in the mean time, 304 children murdered in school shootings since Columbine. Is why most Americans support more stringent gun laws.

        • JohnL says:

          Respectfully Steve, I have a couple major corrections to your comment.
          1. You said police were not able to act. They were ABLE to act. They just DIDN’T act. I wasn’t there but from reports I’ve seen, they should have.
          2. If you don’t believe thousands of crimes are avoided yearly by good men/women with guns, check out the article below.
          If you don’t believe that source, just search “people with guns saving lives” on Duckduckgo.com or google. You might be surprised how brave and competant legal gun owners really are. Thanks and Merry Christmas.
          https://fee.org/articles/guns-prevent-thousands-of-crimes-every-day-research-show/

          • Steve B. says:

            Sad to say the mainstream media pretty much ignores information like this, you need to read it inside the NRA magazine. Thx for the discussion and a Merry Christmas to yourself and family as well.

  44. An Adirondack Resident says:

    Todd Eastman says “And how many people were not attacked that day?”

    Well then, you also have to ask “And how many people were not shot by law-abiding citizens carrying properly-licensed firearms of any sort that day?”

    99.9999999% of the time, the answer is “The entire population.”

    Ergo, the problem is not legal gun owners or concealed carry, and the solution is not to further restrict legal gun ownership, including concealed carry in any location.

    • JohnL says:

      “Ergo, the problem……………in any location”. Bingo Adirondack Resident! Merry Christmas!

    • Dana says:

      Let’s just ignore the death count for another couple hundred years. Not many solutions being offered in this debate. It is only a debate if people listen to each other. Shame on us all…

      • An Adirondack Resident says:

        “Not many solutions being offered in this debate…”

        One side thinks more gun laws are the solution.

        The other side thinks that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are not the problem and the solution lies elsewhere.

        There are more gun restrictions passed every year, yet the problem of psychopaths and criminals (who do not follow laws) killing people gets worse every year.

        Obviously, guns of any type in the hands of honest, law-abiding citizens is not the problem and passing more laws that restrict the 2nd amendment rights of honest, law-abiding citizens is not the answer.

      • Georgia Davison says:

        Dana,
        The only REAL solution would be metal detectors and guards at every entrance to everywhere that isn’t our own homes. That would certainly catch most weapons trying to be brought into stores, schools, malls, etc., but that would certainly take a lot of time. So you have to choose….. time or increased safety.

  45. Christopher Bunyan says:

    First off no state can super cede the US constitution. Hochul is attempting to remove 2nd amendment rights from NY residents. The government is not your baby sitter and is not there to protect you from your own lack of self responsibility. Laws do not remove firearms from the hands of criminals. If you notice most violent crimes or shootings occur in places where no responsible, law abiding gun owner can legally carry a weapon. The more you allow government bureaucracy into your life the less freedom you will have. Good luck getting it back.

    • Steve B. says:

      There are plenty of places in NYC where a private citizen who has taken the time to get licensed to own and carry a gun, can legally do so. Its done all the time. The typical NRA talking point is “Hochul wants to take your guns away”, ignoring that she was once endorsed by the NRA “Kathy Hochul has a proven record of defending the Second Amendment,” said Chris W. Cox, chairman of NRA-PVF. “Because of her strong support of our rights, Hochul has earned an ‘A’ rating and endorsement from the NRA-PVF.”

      She obviously has a responsibility to make NY safe for its citizens. Can she and the assorted state senate and assembly persons make mistakes when enacting a bill in Albany, well of course. But her heart is in the right place is my take, and unlike what so many gun owners like to believe about Democrats, they do not want to take your guns away. Would they like to see fewer guns used by the mentally ill and street criminals ?, yes. Maybe think of ways they can accomplish that. An outright belief that no gun laws will achieve that is misguided. The assorted courts have already decided that various governments can regulate what kinds of guns may be owned, when and where they may be carried, etc…., the 2A states you may own a gun, doesn’t say zip about you owning a machine gun, the courts have decided that can be regulated.

      • Dan says:

        Hochul “was” endorsed by the NRA in 2012, at the time she supported concealed carry in any state. Gillabrand was also on the NRA’s nice list at one time. But NRA endorsements and politician’s views obviously change.

        Feeling safe and being safe are two very different things.

  46. Georgia Davison says:

    Well stated, JohnL.

  47. An Adirondack Resident says:

    Uvalde is a case where the Police failed to act incompetence of command. It is likely an armed private citizen at the scene, unburdened by organizational overhead, could taken the initiative to act, and lives would have been saved.

  48. Dem against guns says:

    We Democrats should lead by example. Pass a law that all of us who are registered Democrat give up our 2nd Amendment rights.

    • Georgia Davison says:

      Are you crazy? Start giving up Constitutional Rights? That will be the beginning of the end of our society. It will all be downhill from there. If the government can get that one by us all, what is to stop them from taking away ALL our Constitutional Rights? As far as guns go, MOST shootings are not done by law abiding citizens. It’s the “crazies” who do those crimes. Even if you got rid of all legally owned guns, the ones who want to do bad deeds with a gun will ALWAYS be able to get a hold of a gun. To take away all guns from folks who are responsible owners, just puts us all in harms way. More needs to be done when there is a shooting. Stiffer punishment needs to be carried out when there is a gun incident. Guns don’t aim at a target and shoot by themselves. There is always a person pulling the trigger. Go all out after anyone involved in mass shootings. The “old west” was a rough life, but I think they had the right idea about folks doing crimes…. an eye-for-an eye.
      **** You can all boo me now !!!!!!!

  49. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Paul says:  “Semi-automatic rifles and shotguns are extremely common hunting rifles, have been for a long time now.”

    > This is news to me Paul as I don’t hunt. Since it has been brought up….why would anybody need such firepower to hunt deer, or whatever, anyway? I know! Because we want to get there yesterday! Because we do not wish to be fair sports! Because we do not wish to exert our energy towards aptitude…. to doing things the old-fashioned way when practicing our skill in our crafts whatever they may be.  In thinking about this these moments for the first time….this only makes sense! That it is in us to kill wild animals with as much firepower as possible, in as brief a period of time as possible, because we have become lazy, or we do not wish to employ too much energy (as the way it used to be) into whatever it is we do, including hunting, in order to survive. We are devolving thanks to the material goods which surround us! And look what comes of that devolution…..that thinking (as much firepower as possible in as brief a period of time to kill wild animals) has morphed into us doing the same to our fellow beings! Shocker!

    “Why do so many people now have a problem with the guns that law abiding hunters commonly use?”

    > Haven’t you been reading the news these years of late? Haven’t you been reading this thread? Because the psyche of society is changing, because of a sudden there is this desire in some of us to go to a movie theater, or a supermarket, or an elementary school…. and kill everyone in sight, or as many people as possible, in as brief a period of time as possible! With those guns!

    • Doug says:

      As you just sit there in the theater totally unarmed leaving yourself and your loved ones to hope and pray because if that wacko does happen to come in with killing intent it doesn’t matter what firearm he has, it will still be more than you have. And the 2nd amendment is not just for hunting, it is for target shooting, self defense snd most importantly a protection from a tyrannical government. So everyone that uses the old lame saying’ you don’t need that gun to hunt a deer’ are really clueless.

  50. Charlie Stehlin says:

    JohnL says: “The governor and NYS legislature absolutely tried to circumvent the Supreme Court decision. That says to me that they (Hochol & Democratic Legislature) have no respect for the Supreme Court decision in Bruen. If that’s somehow hypocritical, I guess I am.”

    Think Donald Trump (whom I suspect you support, or did at one time anyway) and all of his trash regards the law of this land, and the constitution, etc.! Excuse me if I’m wrong on this, and I am not proposing that I’m a fan of Hochul neither, and if she did go against the Constitution I am not for that! Matter of fact I was very against the gerrymandering the democrats recently tried to pull off in this state! I say these things just to prove my non-partisan stance, and yes it did come off as hypocrisy what you said due to what I say above. If I’m wrong on any of this I apologize.

    • JohnL says:

      What I was commenting on was the reaction of your governor to a Supreme Court ruling in 2022. And I stand by those statements.
      Try to stay in the present Charlie. You’ve got to get Donald Trump out of your mind. He hasn’t been in office for almost 2 YEARS. He appears to be living in your head rent free. Doesn’t seem right that you can’t get SOMETHING TANGIBLE from such hatred.
      Your ‘non partisan stance’??? Seriously?
      Merry Christmas Charlie. From your good friends ….. me and DJT (alias 45).

  51. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Susan says: “The legally carrying people are not the perpetrators in almost ALL cases of someone being killed or injured by gun fire.”

    Yes, maybe so, but it is these same people, as a whole I imagine, who are all for legalizing every gun on the market, even these same rapid-fire automatic guns which seemingly more and more fruitcakes employ when they morph into killing machines.

  52. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Greg Boyer says: “The Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Yes, but let it also be required in this amendment that intelligence, the diffusion of knowledge and an understanding of science and truth be had by all who abide by this amendment; that we who pledge allegiance to this piece of paper come to the understanding that we shall accept not having that allegiance encroached upon but only if we come to agree upon these few requirements which should be met by all. We shall also agree, iffin but we we shall accept not having that allegiance encroached upon, that our energies and public resources should be put to good use, without grumbling, towards public education for all, as much, and more, as we put our energies and resources towards men passing balls around in fields so that millions upon millions will gobble it up which desensitizes them, they become complacent, an unawareness of reality sets-in upon them, and makes more for corruptness upon the system. There will be no free state if the citizenry of that state has no familiarity with science, or truth. This should be known, and accepted, by all who ‘pledge allegiance’ to the Second Amendment.’

    If the above had been recognized and dutifully practiced by all we wouldn’t have had that recent dark stain on this country’s history….January 6th,2020

    “All science is laid in the nature of things; and he only who seeks it there, can rightly guide others in the paths of knowledge.”
    From: The Institutes of English Grammar… Goold Brown Principal of an English & Classical Academy, New York 1848 page iv

  53. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Dan says: “Actually, all gun owners are as the legislation goes far beyond handguns. But that’s another debate.”

    When I first read the above I thought I was reading, “All legislators own handguns.” The first thing which came to mind in thinking that was….they all have the best health care in this country also! I’m not sure the meaning of the above by the way.

  54. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Doug says: “the 2nd amendment is not just for hunting, it is for target shooting, self defense snd most importantly a protection from a tyrannical government. So everyone that uses the old lame saying’ you don’t need that gun to hunt a deer’ are really clueless.”

    Let us be clear on this Doug. Nobody needs a 50 round clip to hunt deer! Notta one! Unless you’re disinclined towards exerting energy, or fairness, or real sportsmanship. I wholly agree with you on the ‘tyrannical government’ bit, is why I always stress whenever this topic comes up, that ‘nobody’ should have these rapid-fire guns, not even the police. My foremost thought in stressing such is the ‘tyrannical government’ bit you stress! Lame-thinking has nothing to do with being against slaughtering deer with rapid-fire guns! It’s rational, thoughtful thinking. And too…maybe it’s because I have survival-instinct nature in me, and a passion for the old ways, which we have been losing rather rapidly…..and look at us!

  55. Charlie Stehlin says:

    T Nolan says: “the stupid idea that guns cause the problems not the mentally warped person using them for crime.”

    Not every mentally warped person wreaks havoc upon his fellow man or woman Nolan! So let us say that these mentally warped persons had, instead of a 50-clip magazine, or two or three of them, a butter knife instead….what think you the damage would be then? Not the gun hey? Let’s face it you’re in denial due to your evident institutional belief system, which not necessarily references anything near the real world.

  56. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Eric says: “I think a lot of people in a mall food court who are alive today due to the actions of Elisjsha Dicken would disagree with you.”

    Yeah but he had a pistol Eric. We’re talking about eliminating 100-round clips from the public domain.

    • Eric says:

      No, we are talking about the CCIA addressed in this op-ed, the effects it has on lawful gun owners, and the negligible effect it will have on criminals. You want to ban 100 round clips, go for it, doubt they exist anyways.

      • Georgia Davison says:

        Eric, they DO exist. They are for assault rifles such as the AR15′ I have no idea how many individuals own one of these guns, but they are out there, There are even assault weapons that hold belt-fed ammo of 200 and 300 rounds. I just Googled it. Look for yourself. The info says they are heavy and somewhat awkward, but they are out there.

        • Eric says:

          You mean a 100 round magazine? In NY they are already banned. So, legally, no they are not out there in this state. The shooter in Buffalo bought his mags in PA from what i understand hecause he could not get them in NY. So he broke that law, the whole do not murder someone law, and probably others that day. But if only we had ALSO banned firearms from grocery stores, he would have not have gone through with it. Look at the list of charges some of these folks get slapped with after these type of events. So many charges they should be in jail for 7 life times. But yep, one more law to charge them with, that will stop these nut jobs.

  57. Charlie Stehlin says:

    An Adirondack Resident says: “Ergo, the problem is not legal gun owners or concealed carry, and the solution is not to further restrict legal gun ownership, including concealed carry in any location.”

    The problem, at least in this case here being discussed, is automatic rapid-fire, 75-clip, guns which can wipe out, at the very least, 30 innocent little boys and girls in an elementary school classroom, in a matter of minutes. It’s not about taking your legal guns away Adirondack Resident, unless perchance that gun is an automatic rapid-fire, 75-clip…. that’s what we’re talking about here.

    • An Adirondack Resident says:

      No, the root cause of the problem is not any tool that can be used to kill, but rather the breakdown in societal norms. Automatic and semi-automatic weapons were available 50 years ago, but there were almost no mass shootings. Kids brought their guns to school in rural areas. Kids carried pocket knives but no one stabbed anyone. The problem is complex, but part of it is the message the some (liberal progressive) people are sending that you are oppressed, cheated, discriminated against if you don’t have everything other people have, or don’t have the ability that some other people have, that society owes you something. the problem is government policies that have resulted in determination of ‘normal’ two-parent families.. The problem is lack of respect that starts in school because parents defend their little troublemakers instead of supporting discipline in schools. The problem is extending ‘freedom of speech’ and so on to prevent any regulation of the overly violent video/computer games train kids to kill.

      • Steve B. says:

        I question whether the easy availability of rifles and pistols that are easily reloaded with additional magazines becomes the enabling factor for mass murders. Would a mentally troubled kid go looking to shoot up an elementary school if the weapon available was a bolt or lever action hunting rifle that could only carry 5 rounds internally ?.. Did the Buffalo shooter decide to proceed because he could readily get additional large capacity magazines ?. I think we as a country made a mistake allowing weapons with removable magazines into civilian use.

  58. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Dana says: ” It is only a debate if people listen to each other. Shame on us all.”

    > No, not shame on us all Dana. Shame on those of us who deny science, truth…… and justice for all! Including those little boys and girls who will never have a chance to have a say in the matter!

  59. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Christopher Bunyan says: “If you notice most violent crimes or shootings occur in places where no responsible, law abiding gun owner can legally carry a weapon.”

    And look at what happened at Robb Elementary in Texas, a state that bathes in guns which the government is all for; all of those Texans who are legally allowed to carry….to what end! The same government, or political mindset, which is all for law-enforcement, they shout out “Support the Police!” and look at what took place! Those police were afraid to go into that classroom, armed to the teeth that they were. Those poor little helpless children! So much for preaching to the choir, or hypocrisy Texas ought to be ashamed of itself!

  60. An Adirondack Resident says:

    What we should really question is why there are now so many ‘mentally troubled kids’ that are so troubled that they go to the extreme of finding weapon to do mass murder.

  61. Charlie Stehlin says:

    JohnL says: “You’ve got to get Donald Trump out of your mind. He hasn’t been in office for almost 2 YEARS. He appears to be living in your head rent free.”

    > I suppose there is a bit of truth to this as he does float around in my head some; and though he hasn’t been in office two years he is as loud and obnoxious as when he was in Office. He is unable to get over himself! It appears his time is up though which is a great joy to many of us who feel that the light has been being tagged by darkness for too long now! Hope is not lost as yet!

    You know John! One despicable excuse for a human, and his or her rotten ways, can have a lingering effect long after he or she has been ex-communicated. Oftentimes the damage is irreparable. It’s a shame really. History is replete with such, of children being abused in their most receptive years, in those years when they become delicately aware of the environment which surrounds them, when they can be easily hurt or damaged. This is nothing new in society, tis as old as rubbing two sticks together to get a fire going. We’re all children even if we’re at a ripe old age.

    We’ve been talking about this some here in this thread, ie… school shootings, etc. I mean kids aren’t born the hateful, rotten apples they become. They get it from somewhere; and when you have supposed role models, whether they be millionaire sports players, or political leaders, who display abnormal, unhealthy behavior, like fighting each other on fields, or spreading hate and division on political podiums – these have toxic effects…..

    I don’t know where to go with this these moments, but I have questions like everyone else. We continue to go back and forth but never seem to get anywhere. So what to do? Whom, or what, do we go to for relief? What is the solution? Whom do we trust? As I say – one thing is for certain, we’re doing something wrong! Maybe if we started anew and tried something different for a change, a new approach, we’d get somewhere. It’s like that railroad bridge over in Glenville… no matter what those area leaders do to try to stop truckers from slamming into it…big flashing signs, big words on signs, etc.., that bridge is still getting slammed into. I mean we know those truck drivers are idiots but still, you’d think they’d come up with something to snap them out of their idiocy.

    That railroad bridge can very well represent this gun issue in that the same theme keeps coming up and nothing is being done to correct it…..not yet anyway. Maybe we just need more little boys and girls to be shot up before we wake up to a solution to correct these atrocities! We seem to be solely concerned with our own interests generally speaking…..is why our troubles. Of course there’s more to it than this…….

  62. Charlie Stehlin says:

    “You want to ban 100 round clips, go for it, doubt they exist anyways.”

    >100 round, 50-round! What’s the difference Eric after the damage is said and done!

  63. Charlie Stehlin says:

    An Adirondack resident says:
    “the root cause of the problem is not any tool that can be used to kill, but rather the breakdown in societal norms.”

    > Tis this and more..

    “Automatic and semi-automatic weapons were available 50 years ago, but there were almost no mass shootings….part of it is the message that some (liberal progressive) people are sending .”

    > We’re devolving! Television! Disturbing imagery on screens! Accepting and tolerating wars! Making godheads out of dysfunctional, divisive, hateful, lying (conservative) leaders!

    • An Adirondack Resident says:

      The “leaders” on both sides are the aisle of dysfunctional, divisive, hateful, and lying. The practice of routinely vilifying individuals because you don’t like their policies is wrong. It especially weakens your position when you insult someone rather than making a logical fact-based argument against their position.

  64. Charlie Stehlin says:

    An Adirondack Resident says: “parents defend their little troublemakers instead of supporting discipline in schools.”

    Not all parents agree with teachers being abusive to their kids Adirondack Resident. Teachers can sometimes be as dysfunctional and as abusive as those children they enjoy paddling or whatever their pleasures are regards punishment. It’s not the answer. We’re trying to get away from the caveman days…….we have a ways to go as just now we are starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

    • An Adirondack Resident says:

      Extreme cases of discipline such as paddling may still happen, but I’m sure they are extremely rare. That is not what I am talking about. There is a general lack of respect of authority in the schools. Students have rights, yes. But school is not a democracy and there are rules to be followed. There have to be consequences both in school and at home when the rules are broken. There should not be or have to be rewards for just behaving as expected. Children of all ages should not be given everything they want or sent the message that they deserve whatever just because they exist. Everybody gets a gold star just for participating so nobody’s feelings get hurt has not worked out.

      • Georgia Davison says:

        Well said and very true. After elementary school years, school and life sort of come crashing down on our younger kids. All of a sudden, they find out that NOBODY keeps getting gold stars unless they work hard and EARN them. That is a shock for some kids to grasp. It’s like when you learned there was NO Santa, or Easter Bunny, or tooth fairy. I think some kids have a difficult time transitioning from believing in those things, and then finding out they weren’t real. Young kids sometimes find it hard to all of a sudden having to work hard at learning, doing homework, playing a sport where not everyone gets a GOLD STAR. Make believe can bite our kids in the butt, and set them on a path they have no map for. I think it’s time for schools to stop teaching our kids to be able to pass state exams, and teach them the basic subjects that prep them for a productive future and a strong adulthood.

  65. Charlie Stehlin says:

    An Adirondack Resident says: “What we should really question is why there are now so many ‘mentally troubled kids’ that are so troubled that they go to the extreme of finding weapon to do mass murder.”

    We’ve been questioning this. The big ‘Why?’ We all have different answers. Maybe we should start asking more questions? Like, “Why is it a politician can steer money away from public education yet he or she has the best education money can buy? If we look close we shall see there’s a connection to this query and mass shootings. It didn’t just start with Columbine neither.

  66. Charlie Stehlin says:

    “There is a general lack of respect of authority in the schools.”

    There is also a large lack of respect for other living things besides the humankind which I believe is connected to the disrespect we have for each other. We’ve had this conversation before…. I recall someone whom I used to work for, a kid half my age Eric was his name. I knew more about the business than he did. I will never forget him, his small mind. He had the sheetiest attitude and was so small in many ways, couldn’t talk rational to him, nothing deep from him whatsoever…. just a walking timebomb, ready to explode at a moment’s notice over the most insignificant things. He had an attitude problem! I couldn’t figure him out, or how he could be this way….until I met his father. Kids are the way they are because of their parents all too often, or as my dad used to say, “the fruit never falls far from the tree.” I feel sorry for some of these kids but not all of them, as some of them definitely need to be put in their place, though I highly doubt corporal punishment would solve the problem. Surely more than a few of them could use a good whooping, and then we can only hope that snaps them out of their contempt towards others.

    Maybe if we took tv’s away, and electronic devices… and everyone started feeding their heads with good literature like the way it often was before those contraptions started corrupting what is left of our minds!

    We’re never going back to them good old days,
    We’re gonna keep on being who we are,
    There’s no stopping our corrupt silly ways,
    We try but we’re not getting very far.

  67. Georgia Davison says:

    Personally, I think there are more troubled kids today, because of being desensitized by violent movies, TV shows, and video games, and in lots of cases, lack of parental involvement in their kids lives day-to-day. Everyone seems busier now days, kids and parents alike. Without daily adult and family interaction, many kids are “raising themselves”. Whatever the reasons for this, our kids are not being looked after and taught life lessons that put them on the path to becoming normal, useful, law abiding adults. Kids NEED lots of good guidance and teaching, to turn out to be responsible adults. Today’s fast-paced lives for many kids, is NOT preparing them for useful adulthood. As parents, we need to better monitor and limit the violence our children seem to be growing up with today. We also need to hold accountable, the ratings of video games, movies, and TV shows. I know that sounds old-fashioned, but OLD-FASHIONED seemed to work better than the way things are today.

  68. Eric says:

    Maybe stop placing some examples of atrocities in this world on a pedestal, and start looking at the bigger picture without isolating a few cherry picked incidents. You have mentioned previously justice for all these kids, but you don’t mean that. Because you don’t even hear about more than 1% of these atrocities of which you speak. You probably didn’t hear about Mateo Zastro, a 3 year old shot and killed while sitting in a car in Chicago. We have a violence problem in this country. Full stop. Guns are accessible, yes, but that will not change easily. Gun accessibility can be correlated with violence, but it is not necessarilt causative. Some of the most restrictive places for guns have the worst gun murder rates. A big deal was made when gun murders eclipsed auto accidents as the leading cause of death for kids, in 2020. Well, it has flipped back to auto accidents this year. Crickets. Justice for all huh?? Are you trying to find justice for 9 year old Angel Salas who was killed on Long Island by a drunk driver? Does he deserve long lasting transformational justice in his honor? This nation does not want to confront the true issues we have, because it would mean admitting that we cannot place blame on inanimate objects, but rather must confront the real issues. Just like a car did not kill Angel all by itself, a gun did not kill Mateo all by itself. Two individuals choose to use those inanimate objects in such a way that lives were lost. Both individuals broke existing laws, laws that in the end, did nothing to protect those children.

    • Boreas says:

      “Guns are accessible, yes, but that will not change easily. Gun accessibility can be correlated with violence, but it is not necessarilt causative.”

      It is absolutely true causation is difficult to prove beyond a doubt!

      IIRC, the causative effect of smoking on lung cancer has never been proven without a doubt. But despite common sense, cigarettes are still being sold, taxed, killing people, and placing a burden on healthcare and taxpayers.

      The major overlying disease here is lack of common sense and the inherent inability of the public to fight profitable corporations.

  69. Charlie Stehlin says:

    An Adirondack Resident says: “The “leaders” on both sides are the aisle of dysfunctional, divisive, hateful, and lying. The practice of routinely vilifying individuals because you don’t like their policies is wrong. It especially weakens your position when you insult someone rather than making a logical fact-based argument against their position.”

    I have very good hearing and perception is not a thing which has evaded me Resident. I see, and say, things as they are, which has nothing to do with me being with this or that faction. I agree both sides of the aisle are a problem, but by far, and the history reveals this…..the one side has divisiveness and hate and lies down to an acute science which you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to become aware of. I’m not here to insult or argue as much as i’m telling it like it is; and my position is not weak in accordance to those I know who have the ability to think clearly. May Santa Clause bring merry to all this season!

  70. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Georgia Davison says: “they find out that NOBODY keeps getting gold stars unless they work hard and EARN them. That is a shock for some kids to grasp….”

    > I recall little Georgie, my good friend’s son’s pal. I sat down with Georgie at curbside one long ago day and I’ll always remember what he told me. He said that he does things his way and that it’s not like he doesn’t want to learn, it’s that he just wasn’t big on the testing thing at his school, and being timed threw him off, as he needed to take his time he wasn’t geared towards being rushed….etc. or similar things to that effect. We’re all different! One child may like blue while the rest of his class, and the teacher, will insist on red, and for a teacher to tell a student, “Little Georgie, you should be like the rest of the boys and girls and color in red!”

    Individuality has never been a thing respected in this society! At least not by the mainstream who just like to go along with everyone else and follow the humdrum course! Despots fear individuality, they like it better when everyone goes along with their oppressive flow. It is no coincidence that the first people tyrants seek to kill when they seek total control are the intellectuals, the doctors, the smart ones, creative types…..the liberals. All the others go untouched.

  71. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Georgia Davison says: “I think there are more troubled kids today, because of being desensitized by violent movies, TV shows, and video games…”

    I recall, a few decades it’s must have been by now, when television was introduced to some foreign land for the first time, and within a year there was a report on the particulars of the effects this had on that society. Crime went up, sex crimes inclusive, this and that…. That society had changed due to that instrument being introduced to it. This only makes sense! How about our school shootings (made in America)! Surely they coincided with video games being introduced to our living rooms! But let us continue on with our ways there’s money to be made!

  72. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Georgia Davison says: “As parents, we need to better monitor and limit the violence our children seem to be growing up with today.”

    Parent’s are part of the problem Georgia. I mean there’s people that never grow up, adults who sit around hours on end being watched by a television, absorbed in violence nonstop, or whatever the mindlessness is they’re being drawn towards! It’s all the same! Where do you think the kids get it from!? Light-headed moms and dads! Computers being introduced to the masses sure as heck hasn’t helped matters. They’re being desensitized as you say. This is what we accept as progress.

    • Georgia Davison says:

      Progress can take a flying leap off a high cliff !!! So called progress is what is ruining our future and the future of our children. So called progress has taken the teeth out of TV, video games and movie ratings. At the age of 66, I still cringe and usually look away from bloody movie scenes. When my two kids were growing up, I refused to let them have those hand-held video games that I considered too violent and bloody. They may have felt overly protected and that it was “UNFAIR”, but I was just doing what I thought best for their growing minds. I see my six year old grandson, blasting away at people, animals, police, cars, trains, etc. on his video games. When I ask him if he thinks about what he is shooting at and killing, he says it’s just a game. I think he does know the difference, but think of all the kids, and some adults, who just shoot up everything on the screen. Do any of think about what they’re doing, and realize it IS just a game??? Or do some of them not see the difference between playing or watching violent games, and real life??? Our children and their futures are being desensitized to violent acts, and THAT IS A BIG PROBLEM !!!! Some parents are good at monitoring what their kids watch and play at. But we all know some are not. For whatever reasons, some parents let their kids watch and play anything (as long as it keeps the kid busy), no matter how violent, saying the kids know the difference, when obviously some don’t. Those types are the ones who take a gun to school and start shooting at everything that moves. Or they walk into a grocery store or a movie theater and blast away. Our censorship of movies, video games, TV programs, etc., has gotten so lax, people hardly notice acts of violence in their daily lives anymore. It’s time to tighten the standards, to help our kids re-learn what is right from wrong. If not, I fear the future of the Human Race.

  73. Boreas says:

    I just noticed – why does the picture at the top of an article about concealed carry legislation show a hunter with apparently only a bolt-action rifle? Does the hunter have a concealed handgun? Bolt-action firearms are pretty low on the list of debatable firearms.

  74. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Eric says: “Gun accessibility can be correlated with violence, but it is not necessarily causative…. Just like a car did not kill Angel all by itself, a gun did not kill Mateo all by itself.”

    > Okay, so we know it’s psychoses Eric. So what next? There’s the old adage, “If one walks fifty miles into the woods, one is going to have to walk fifty miles to get back out.” We’re still going deeper into those woods, never mind working our way back out. Evidently monies should go towards mental health treatment but where dost that come from? We’re more interested in spending on arms ($2 billion for Ukraine just yesterday) which have the same effect as mass killers who go into schools or churches or Walmart’s… to do harm unto others, just at a more massive scale. We have leaders in Texas who are spending millions on shipping containers to build a wall to help fend off migrants coming across the border in droves due to being repressed in their own countries. That’s the answer to that problem…shipping containers! And while we’re at it let’s blame it all on the other side!

    Something is surely coming to a head soon. Where do the answers lie? I know! Let’s make AR-15s more available to the masses!

    • Eric says:

      Well, certainly passing another law has not helped. I know, let’s just keep blaming the guns, it has worked so well so far. Let’s just ignore the science, because you know, data science is not a real science.

    • Eric says:

      Charlie, since you are so wrapped up on AR15s, Google “Are AR-15 Rifles a Public Safety Threat? Here’s What the Data Say” which I think you will find speaks directly to those who don’t want to go any deeper than the CNN sensational headlines. This article cites sources and methodologies which is more than can be said about most internet dribble.
      Bottom line,

      it would take almost one-hundred years of mass shootings with AR-15s to produce the same number of homicide victims that knives and sharp objects produce in one year.

      Really wish they linked to official raw data though

  75. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Boreas says: “The major overlying disease here is lack of common sense….”

    > Ah Boreas! This one line! It has such a keen edge to it! If we can just reduce the bible to a few sentences, or one. Think how much further we could advance!

    • ADKresident says:

      Actually, Charlie, Jesus did sum up the entire Bible in a single sentence or 2, when He said, “Love God with all your heart, mind & soul AND Love your neighbor as yourself.”…. on these 2 commandments, hang the entire law and writings of the prophets.
      Matthew 22:37-40

      Pretty simple. Impossible to do without His help.

    • Susan says:

      Charlie Stehlin, you need a new hobby.

  76. Frankly, this argument is tiresome. A question — if you were in the woods and carrying a handgun, who or what would you shoot? Most likely target would be another person, maybe even someone the gun bearer believes should be shot. (Lots of candidates here.) But common sense and decency would oblige you keep your weapon holstered.
    I would urge you to keep it home where it belongs. Thanks and best wishes for a kinder and more sane New Year.

  77. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Eric says: “Charlie, since you are so wrapped up on AR15s, Google “Are AR-15 Rifles a Public Safety Threat?…..

    “it would take almost one-hundred years of mass shootings with AR-15s to produce the same number of homicide victims that knives and sharp objects produce in one year.”

    > I’m not ‘wrapped up’ in AR15s as much as an awareness has come over me on this matter regards this specific gun as thee choice weapon for misfits to carry off their overly-eccentric behavior when they go into elementary schools and shoot up classrooms filled with little boys and girls. It is a new phenomena and it very well may correlate with all of the other violence we have, whether that violence be by butter knives or fist, or other guns, but still…..it is new, and one cannot help but wonder if such guns were not so readily available to whomever, whenever…how many of those little boys and girls would still be with us! Every life matters Eric.
    Again! Nobody needs this type of gun! And if so for what?

    • JB says:

      This is quite the discussion, covering a lot of different topics: carry concealed, the merits of “assault weapon” ownership, the merits of gun ownership in general, the merits of Forest Preserve in general (note that the administrations that have weakened protections for Forest Preserve the most have passed the significant gun restrictions that we have today), etc.

      Here is a useful resource from New York State illustrating the difference between legal rifles and “assault weapons” (which have not been legal to acquire in our state for years): https://gunsafety.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2020/04/images_of_rifles_that_are_not_classified_as_assault_rifles.pdf

      Essentially, what distinguishes an “assault weapon” from a legal firearm is nothing more than ergonomics and ease of use — pistol grips (which make guns easier to hold), telescoping stocks (which make rifles more adaptable for different-sized shooters), barrel shrouds (which prevent shooters from getting burned), etc. These are not necessarily linked to lethality; they merely make firearms easier to use with less training. What this means is that an untrained civilian defending their home against, for example, armed intruders, may have a better outcome. Will this distinction make a difference for assailants targeting unarmed victims en masse? Probably not so much.

      Since the concern seems to be primarily about mass shootings, I think it is worthwhile to point out the parts of the new law that have at least some statistical basis: raising the age for purchasing semi-automatic rifles to 21, and safe storage requirements to prevent young people from accessing firearms. (Note that this has nothing to do with concealed carry restrictions.) What we should be asking is: Why are mass shooters suddenly becoming so young? (Or at least, younger than we have seen historically.)

      We can speak about the vagaries of the “breakdown of the American family”, but one statement that has a relatively firm empirical basis is that mental illness diagnoses in young people have risen, and therapies do not seem to be counteracting this trend. In fact, young people are now more medicated than they have ever been, disproportionately with medications that have been linked with violent behavior (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psychiatry-through-the-looking-glass/202108/are-children-and-adolescents-overprescribed, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0015337). It’s hard to determine causality (for a counterargument see: https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/aug/16/whats-behind-dubious-claim-psychiatric-drugs-fuel-/ — decide for yourself). But it is possibly even harder to deny that specific types of guns are not the only significant — or even the most significant — part of the problem.

  78. Charlie Stehlin says:

    ADKresident says: “Actually, Charlie, Jesus did sum up the entire Bible in a single sentence or 2, when He said,……” Pretty simple. Impossible to do without His help.

    If it was so simple how come we’re so complicated ADKresident?

    While I am here I would like to clarify a ‘thing.’ I know it sounds as if I am anti-religious by what seemingly are eccentric ideas, or thoughts, which I throw out here and there on a whim (not that it really matters to anyone what I think anyway), but I will have you know I am not…. anti-religious that is! While I don’t consider myself religious, I do find it a curious thing and who knows….maybe a glorious light will overwhelm me one day and I will be saved (if it is there is any saving to be had with me to begin with!) though I have my doubts. I truly believe the only thing which will save me will be me. I am a believer in ‘mind,’ that if there are answers they will be found in that substratum which each and every one of us possesses.

    Saying that…. I collect, and read, old sermons, some of which date back to the mid 1700’s. An awakening of sorts has overcome me since doing so. I have come to find that those old-time religionists were very intelligent, philosophical, and had a high regard for not only morals, but science too, and there were some clergymen from that era who had a high regard for nature. Probably because there was so much more of it back then. Our own Rev. John Todd (who wrote the earliest book on the Adirondacks) was one of those. His sermons were/are very impressive to say the least. An intellectual he was! He had a deep admiration for the woods and the natural world, is what surely drove him to Long Lake on numerous occasions back in those rural days nearly 200 years ago.

    By ‘awakening’ I mean to say there is an intimacy in me which leads me to value, what I deem, to be the good things in life, things which have real meaning (again…to me real meaning)…. things which seemingly most aren’t even aware of! There are so many possibilities yet society seems to me to be stuck in a rut; and when I come off as if I am anti-religious, it is not that, as much as it is the hypocrisy which glaringly comes from too many of that holier-than-thou segment of our society…. which, to me, is a poison. Of course there is the history also which is nothing to be proud about. The same goes with our political arena, and other branches of our social institutions. We seem to be grievously affected by mental impairment when it comes to values and what has real-meaning in life; all of which leads to what we’re talking about above…violence.

    A major part of our dilemmas are most certainly due to our getting away from “simple,” getting away from “nature.” I know this sounds cheesy, or is ‘far out’ anymore as we have drifted way past such thinking, in part due to all of our weight, or the things which weigh us down, but there it is. There is nothing simple about us ADKresident! We are a complicated species outright! A little enlightenment can go a long ways. And while I’m on ‘old sermons here’s one from one of those old religionists:

    “The testimony of nature is not all obvious; it lies in the far distant heavens, and in the embosomed secrets of the earth – in the mysteries of vegetable and animal life; and philosophy alone can fully unfold it. Much, indeed, is obvious, but much more is not. To the student of nature, however, are opened and unfolded, on every side, infinite depths and wonders of design.”

    From: “On the Nature and Province of Natural and Revealed Religion” by Orville Dewey September 1842 page 8

  79. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Susan says: “Charlie Stehlin, you need a new hobby.”

    To which you are implying what Susan? That I should silence myself because your thinker is on a different course than mine?

  80. andrew says:

    The craziest part of the bill is in the details of pistol permit classifications,. The ‘premises permit’ only allows you to have your pistol on your property. No exceptions. Meaning you could never bring the pistol to a range to actually develop the basic skills to own and operate it. If you want to know how to safely use your pistol then you could apply for a conceal carry permit. The conceal carry application process is difficult, requiring you to prove a “special need”. These two vastly different classifications alienates almost all gun owners in the state. They want to be able to operate their weapon safely and competently, but have no need to carry the pistol in public spaces. Politicians have an uncanny ability to break everything they try to hold.

  81. Charlie Stehlin says:

    “Politicians have an uncanny ability to break everything they try to hold.”

    Yes! This is what happens when one puts self, or party, or politics first.

  82. Ted Dorman says:

    I lived in the park for almost 20 years. I did not need a concealed carry permit. Instead, I wanted my pistol ready, on my hip. I did not need it on main street Old Forge. I needed it in the woods, walking, hiking, exploring . If you don’t understand this, please stay home,Dorothy. The Park is a special area, specifically set up so that it will remain “Forever Wild”. Some humans wish to be there. You do not need to take my special place. This is one of those unique choices. We offer different realities for different people. It is not for everyone. Wish that we could offer such different realities in other areas of life…. but we can not. Enjoy!

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Wait! Before you go:

Catch up on all your Adirondack
news, delivered weekly to your inbox