SPEAK UP: Do you feel the SAFE Act has been effective? YESTERDAY'S RESULTS: Are you optimistic for the economy in 2015? 51 YES, 164 NO

Poll choices
56 Comments

  • Quiet Man - 5 years ago

    Here is an interesting read from the Gazette that was linked to on a forum that I frequent

    Yes, its pro-gun. Yes it paints pro-gun people in a positive light.
    It also points out the mentality of many gun owners. Not all,
    Just like most car drivers are oblivious to their surroundings some gun owners are as well but it does explain why we feel that carrying a firearm is a good and important thing.

    http://thegazette.com/subject/opinion/guest-columnists/i-carry-a-gun-every-day-20150104

  • Quiet Man - 5 years ago

    Of course the law is ineffective. It does nothing to stop the "bad guys" at all.

    The people affected by the law are ones that, generally, are not a threat to anyone.
    The law does not address mental illness, depression, bullying...things that may have led to the tragedies that caused the knee jerk implementation of SAFE.

    We have firearms. I have never harmed or threatened a person with them. My friends and neighbors are just as innocent.
    I have a 70 year old 22 caliber rifle that has never discharged on its own, never harmed a person although a there are a few less rabbits in the woods but they were eaten. Many cans have holes in them, many paper targets have been shot and much comradery has been shared by my father-in-law and his sons,, and now my son and I, since he has inherited the rifle.
    The SAFE ACT can make it impossible to pass my current rifle to my son/grandson and apon my death could be confiscated by the State due to the bolt on features/color/stock type.. It is a Rugar 10/22 22 caliber semi automatic with a thumbhole stock and a muzzle break. It is considered an 'Assault Rifle". If it were in its factory stock ( no thumb hole) , I could will it to my heirs but it is more comfortable for a left handed shooter to have the new stock instead of the generic one. Doesn't make the rifle any more dangerous, I guess it is "Scary " looking .
    I can also no longer order ammo online due to one aspect of SAFE that may never be able to be implemented ( ammo background check) because there is no system in place to do so. Nor is there any funding to create one.
    Just buy it locally you say? 22 caliber is very difficult to find at any store in the area. Some placed have it available through their on-line stores but will not ship to NY as they do not want to deal with the BS of a non existent back ground check system.

    I am deeply frustrated that laws are passed for appearance's sake and by people that have no idea what they're talking about / dealing with.

    The SAFE ACT is written so poorly and vaguely that citizens do not know what is deemed "legal" features on certain rifle and what is banned. The State Police and the DEA, who are the ones that enforce the law cannot or will not say what features are acceptable and what is a NO-GO .
    For instance, on an AR-15 Modern Sporting Rifle, if the magazine is 'Detachable", it can fall under the " assualt rifle " catagory . There are items that can be replaced on the rifle to disable the magazine release button. The State will not indicate if that is an acceptable modification.
    If the magazine is not removable, users can be put into dangerous situations with misfeeds in where the bullets become jammed in the breach area.
    The normal fix ( in 49 other states) is to remove the magazine, cycle the action to eject the bad cartridge, and you're good to go.
    In NY, we have to poke and pry the live bullets with screwdrivers or other tools to try and remove the hung up round. There is a slight chance that a round could go off. It can be difficult to keep the "shooty end" of the rifle pointed in a safe direction while trying to fix the problem. A BIG safety issue, but hey, don't worry about it . It doesn't affect anyone of importance.

    These are but a couple of problems with a law whose true intent is to get scary, black Army guns out of the State . Guns which are very very seldomly used in any crime.

    Laws that are passed by politicians with no training, experience, know-how or background in anything that they legislate , be it education, environment, social issues, medical issues......

  • Jeff S - 5 years ago

    As of 9:14 pm, you have 47 other friends you can hang out with Anita. The politicians like to tout the "90% believe in more gun control" blah blah blah. This poll as well as that stat must be the common core math.

  • Jim j - 5 years ago

    I a very tired of loosing my rights one at a time in what WAS ONCE A FREE COUNTRY and this giving up rights to a bully is what started the Second World War. I WITH ALL THESE COMMENTS WOULD BE PUBLISHED IN TOMORROWS POK. JOURNAL AS THEY SHOULD BE INSTEAD OF DELETED. thanks, Jim j

  • Jeff S - 5 years ago

    "So much fun riling up the mindless." Why do you do this to yourself than?

    "No one needs your kind of "facts." I guess I asked for this when I gave you the option of ignoring them. Thank you, once again, for proving me right.

    "Get your guns, boys, because your intellect is not the right caliber." Aren't we the clever one. Tell you what. If both you and I God forbid ever come across an evil/mentally unstable criminal looking to do us harm, you may have a more potent weapon than my gun. You can bore them to death.

  • CHicken Gumbo - 5 years ago

    I see the anti's are doing the same thing they always do ..... call names and try to belittle instead of engaging in a debate using facts!! Here's how this law is applied:

    Action: Some lunatic decides to use a gun in a crime and kills innocent people.

    Reaction: Pass a law that will ONLY affect the law abiding citizens and do NOTHING to prevent another crime where some nut job chooses to use a gun.

    Using the logic that was used to pass this law (which was written by Diane Feinstein in the 90's) this is what could be done now ....

    Action: 9/11 attacks in World Trade Center killing 2,996 people. (Shall I continue with more terrorist attacks from groups that are of muslim/islamic affiliation??)

    Reaction: Ban all people of muslim/islamic religion in the US and it's territories and destroy all Mosques therein.

    The above could absolutely be applied using the same reasoning used to pass the NYS UNSAFE Act. Why haven't we gathered up all muslims and islamists and removed them from the country?? One act based on their beliefs as set forth in the Koran (alternate spelling) has killed more innocent people wouldn't you say?? How about the 17 dead in France right now because of that religion? If you or anyone else says "You can't blame an entire group for the actions of a few!" you had better take a GOOD look at what you're standing for here in this debate.

  • Jar head - 5 years ago

    Anita c so you tell me what the 2nd stands for?? I'am open

  • Anita C - 5 years ago

    So much fun riling up the mindless. No need to school me on the Constitution. I'm quite familiar with it. I interpret it the way it is written. No one needs your kind of "facts." Mindless armed idiots showing their ignorance and trigger tempers. Get your guns, boys, because your intellect is not the right caliber. Jarhead. Indeed.

  • John - 5 years ago

    Ahhh, I was waiting for the people like Anita. And of course, she relies solely on ad homonym attacks, as any argument using fact or logic would not be possible for people like her. Remember, just say Fox News is for crazy people, and it makes your argument sound legitimate. We all know that's the hallmark of a responsible, mature, intelligent argument.

  • Jeff S - 5 years ago

    Let me know when you are ready for more Anita. I have plenty more factual information for you to ignore.

  • Jar head - 5 years ago

    I am here if you want a education on the CONSTITUTION Anita c

  • Jeff S - 5 years ago

    Republican? Shocking. I'll add you to the list of current RHINO's. Inalienable right. Look it up Einstein. Opinion is one thing. Punishing law abiding gun owners because when it comes to evil and insane people you live in a world of unicorns and rainbows is another. I guess because you have breasts and a vagina you are going to become a prostitute? It isn't the equipment, it is the intention of the person behind it. I guess you are all for banning swimming pools since more innocents succumb to them. BTW, you wouldn't know an assault weapon if it bit you in the ass. Get educated about a topic before you spew your ignorant venom unless you don't need them because you have already made up your mind:

    http://www.netadvisor.org/2012/12/17/an-analysis-of-firearms-and-violent-crime/#.UkAnbVWzKph
    http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
    http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/not-a-peep-from-obama-violent-crime-reaches-42-year-low/#axzz2gZPTrJ17
    http://veniquidveniat.blogspot.com/2013/01/an-analysis-of-militia-referred-to-in.html
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/us/study-gun-homicide
    http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/
    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/congressional-study-gun-ownership-drastically-up-since-94-murder-rate-cut-in-half/
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/newtown-anniversary-what-25-years-fbi-data-show-about-child-f2D11732105
    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/12/foghorn/guns-violence-united-states-numbers/

  • Jar head - 5 years ago

    Anita IF YOU WANT TO BE A VICTIM SO BE IT .DO NOT FORCE ME TO BE A VICTIM. YOU DONT KNOW ANY THING ABOUT RIGHTS OR THE CONSTITUTION

  • Anita C - 5 years ago

    God given rights. Bwahahhahahaha. God didn't give you or any other human the right to own guns. And, btw, I'm Republican. What a bunch of idiots. All it takes is a differing opinion to make you loose what's left of your mind. Don't let the cans fall on your head while you're in your bunker.

  • Jeff S - 5 years ago

    I was wondering when a misinformed individual like you would show up Anita C. Thanks for not letting me down. Chicago, NYC, France, etc., all with the toughest gun laws and actually no guns for the police in France. How's that workin' out? The police officer in France who was shot in the head while injured wasn't allowed to have a firearm. I guess he wasn't good at reasoning with the bad guy, huh? Gun free zones are like fishing with dynamite in a bathtub. I would hazard to guess you have never shot a firearm as well as have no understanding of them also. EVERYTHING you and your kind preach is solely based on emotions, PERIOD. You don't like guns? Good, you can choose not to defend yourself and your family. What you don't have is the right to take away my God given rights. Maybe you can stock up on some canned goods and throw them at the criminals like some schools recommend around the country in case of an armed CRIMINAL shooter. Another example of the disease of liberalism.

  • Joe d - 5 years ago

    Anita c sounds like any good democrats, give up your rights one at a time until they are gone..

  • Anita C - 5 years ago

    Not effective because it didn't go far enough. Background checks. Assault weapon ban. No firearms for DV offenders. We need better gun control. Too many unlicensed, unregulated, illegal guns on our streets. Too many innocents dead. All these "constitutionists" ought to brush up on their reading compretension skills and turn off Faux News. Armed idiots.

  • Ed - 5 years ago

    It was so effective at alienating us that i moved out of the state. The recent election is proof that with around 35% of voters getting out to vote no one really cares if NY strips their rights or not.

  • J dolan - 5 years ago

    Move to VERMONT AND LIVE IN THE ONLY FREE, TRULY FREE STATE IN OUR AREA OR ARIZONA. this state suck. Taxes out of control, etc. Do something good for yourself, move out,!J dolan

  • Dave K - 5 years ago

    If by "effective" you mean "alienating almost every voter North of Westchester", then yes, it has been effective. But due to the population density of NYC, LI and Westchester and the fact that they are Democrat strongholds, what the rest of NY wants simply doesn't matter. Cuomo could have stood up at a debate and said, "screw everybody upstate except Albany. I hate them upstate" and he'd still have been re-elected by about the same margin.

  • GINO - 5 years ago

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."- Adolf Hitler

    Nine (9) genocides that have occurred where dictators and repressive regimes have killed millions when guns were taken away.The United States is on a spiral down to where dictatorship or a virtual dictatorship of legalistic control will dominate and will come after you if it is believe that you pose a threat to the nation or will not cooperate with those in power.

  • J Krauer - 5 years ago

    AFTER CUOMOS SO CALLED SAFE ACT I VOWED NEVER TO VOTE DEMOCRAT AGAIN AS DEMS ARE KNOWN AS "constitutional rights thieves" and although I ONCE VOTEDFOR JOEL TYNER I NEVERWILL AGAIN AS "I AM THE N.R.A. AND I ALWAYS VOTE EVEN IF I HAVE TO CRAWLTHERE" j.k.

  • Ken krauer - 5 years ago

    the so called "SAFE ACT" passed without debate under cover ov night by mostly dems and our SLEEZY "governor Andy" makes it safe only for criminals and puts a big burden on hunters, sportsmen, shooters, gun dealers and home owners wanting to protect thier property and is a big money maker for the state as previous pistol permits were GOOD UNTIL REVOLKED and now have to be renewed at great cost every 3 years for EACH GUN....IT STINKS, MOVE TO VERMONT, A FREE STATE, ONLY 100 miles away. Ken Krauer

  • frankcoluccio - 5 years ago

    If every gun owner in N.Y.got out and voted cumo would not have the title he has today.
    And one other thing I'd like to add it took three days to pass the safe act and two hundred years to try and change the illegal school tax law, which hasn't been done.
    Frankie

  • Andrew Cuomo - 5 years ago

    I wish everybody would stop making fun of my law! You guys are really hurting my feelings! I am going to pass a law that says it is illegal to make fun of laws I pass if you don't stop! I mean it!

  • Leave NY - 5 years ago

    The SAFE act is ridiculous to the core.Creating laws that mostly restricts the law abiding citizen by definition will have no effect on a criminal. Criminals have no consideration for the law.If one goes to the FBI website and gets real homicide data it is clear to see that this country is having a decrease in gun related deaths for starts.One of the main tenants of the law is that one must register particular types of rifles based on the attributes they have like pistol grips and magazine capacity.Rifles account for about 430 deaths( this number includes accidental shootings as well.) per year in a country of 320 million.Your odds of being shot with a rifle are clearly quite low.The 10 round ban on pistols was overturned as it should have been.The dopes in Albany even forget to make an exception for the police thereby making them a criminal of sorts when the law passed.I agree with one portion of the bill and that is locking up any weapon you own ,But that was my choice prior to the law.But I do not think this should legislated though.This law was not allowed to be debated nor were the great people of this state allowed to have any input.We are supposed to have a representative government.To push a measure of necessity down our throats is not a way to govern it is political grandstanding.

  • Anonymous - 5 years ago

    The safe act was not designed to reduce criminal behavior. It's only purpose is to put more nails in the coffin of the second amendment. It succeeds only in garnering votes for the NY Governor who uses it to pretends he is acting on the will of the people. If it was the will of the people, it would have survived due process, but alas it was ramrodded through in the eleventh hour. Truly the act of a desperate and dishonest man!

  • Ed - 5 years ago

    Yes, it's been very effective.

    At pissing off law abiding citizens.

  • Phil - 5 years ago

    By definition, criminals do not obey the law. So with that in mind the unSAFE act does absolutely nothing to deter crime. All it did was make more criminals out of previous law abiding owners.

  • Jason - 5 years ago

    Not in the least. It's had 0 impact on gun crime. I am a small city police officer and the only ppl this has had an effect on were previously legal gun owners who've now been criminalized in a manner that seems punitive for actions they won't ever commit.

  • stephen - 5 years ago

    As we have read and heard about in the media, the Safe Act has done nothing to stop criminals from the shooting cops and civilians. Honest citizens who have all gone through background checks are considered criminals for once legal magazine capacity. Owners of AR-15's are targets instead of areas like muslimberg, ny where training camps are set up against cops, and citizens. AK-47's are used and no one is policing them. Repeal the Safe Act and go after those who are the real threat.

  • Anthony Morrone - 5 years ago

    As a police officer who works in an inner city environment, I can tell you from first hand experience that the "SAFE act" has done NOTHING but made criminals out of law abiding American citizens. It's had ZERO positive impact with regard to deterring violent crime.

  • Eric - 5 years ago

    Hard to answer this simple yes/no question meaningfully - a lot of folks would answer it wasn't very effective in its watered-down form. They'll just get counted with all the lifetime NRA members.

  • John - 5 years ago

    All it does is hurt the law abiding citizens of New York.

  • John Pizzuti - 5 years ago

    All it does is hurt the law abiding citizens of New York.

  • Jeff S - 5 years ago

    I'm sure the criminals are trembling in their shoes about this insane law. Um, they don't follow laws. That's why they are criminals. I am sure the sheeples feel real swell about it though. Even EVER LEO that I ask feels the UnSafe Act does NOTHING to stop crime. Although we know gun control isn't about violence, it's about control.

  • Bob Dangelo - 5 years ago

    I think the SAFE Act is totally ineffective and should be repealed. Cuomo did this to gain popularity after a truly horrible incident that occurred in Conn.

  • JIM C - 5 years ago

    WAKE UP AMERICA { NEW YORK } WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Bob R - 5 years ago

    Making gun owners feel like criminals, chasing people, jobs and business out of NY... Yet andy boy gets richer and gives away our tax dollars to big business so they don't have to pay state ,property and sales taxes for ten years.. I was born and raised in NY and now looking to get away from this liberal commie state..

  • M - 5 years ago

    Only effective at driving business OUT of NY state!

  • Corde - 5 years ago

    The yes voters are clearly mentally unfit to own firearms. Therefore the SAFE Act is working in their case :)

  • C Williams - 5 years ago

    Why aren't the law supporters arguing their case? Perhaps it's because there is no logical defense, just unsubstantiated emotion.....

  • Daniel - 5 years ago

    How many AR-15 owners have register their rifle? I'm guessing 5% or so. I don't know anyone who has. Cuomo is a nut case dictator.

  • Brad Nathington - 5 years ago

    NY Government has lost all sense of "by the people, for the people". Laws like this are no more than the acts of a dictator.

  • Charlie - 5 years ago

    The only thing it has been effective at is making criminals out of honest citizens.

  • Richard Sandison - 5 years ago

    The State Police should be forced to release the number of arrests and convictions based on the Safe Act. Also, let's see the numbers on actual AR registrations in the state. It's suspected this number is very low compared to actual AR's in the state.

  • Mike - 5 years ago

    Most of the arrests attributed to the "SAFE" Act were already covered under existing laws and the crux of the problem, New York City, already had the toughest gun laws in the nation. And it STILL hasn't addressed the problem there. Cuomo pandered to his downstate liberal power base instead of respecting the wishes of the majority of NY residents. Shame on him and his Democratic allies for subverting the legislative process in a backroom deal. The only good news is that he has blown away any chance of national office by exposing his corrupt nature.

  • Dave D - 5 years ago

    The Safe Act is not about protecting the public, it's about disarming the public. Registration only leads to one thing, Confication.

  • Molon Labe - 5 years ago

    A law has never prevented a crime . You cannot control a criminal mind by legislating what's in his hand.

  • Second Amendment - 5 years ago

    Some true statements to consider: Gun Free Zones allow armed criminals a guarantee of no armed resistance while killing innocent law abiding unarmed citizens; The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun; Criminals don't follow any gun laws, becuase, well, they're criminals!

  • Scrotie McBoogerballs - 5 years ago

    Try as I may, I am unable to find a single incident where theSafe Act has stopped a person from committing a violent crime. Not one. By that standard, the Safe Act is completely ineffectual and a total failure.

  • John - 5 years ago

    Do you think the criminals care about gun laws that target the responsible gun owner?

  • John - 5 years ago

    In disbelief how anyone could vote "yes" for this

  • John - 5 years ago

    In disbelief how anyone could vote "yes" for this

  • John - 5 years ago

    In disbelief how anyone could vote "yes" for this

  • J Bond - 5 years ago

    Only effective in making ALL gun owners feel like sub-par citizens, and seems to be urging more and more residents to leave.

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment