Good Intentions Gone Bad: Failure Of The NY SAFE Act

Gov. Cuomo lecturing on deer hunting. Image source: AP

Gov. Cuomo lecturing on deer hunting. Image source: AP

Following the massacre at Sandy Hook, there were good liberals like New York Governor Andrew “Confiscation could be an Option” Cuomo with “good intentions.” Those “good intentions” led the state government to pass more utterly useless gun control on top of all the utterly useless gun control the state already had in place. The Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement SAFE Act. According to Cuomo, the NY SAFE Act includes “the toughest assault weapons ban in the county. Period.”

Governor Cuomo is also the guy who screamed “you don’t need ten rounds to kill a deer.” He’s obviously one of the special few with mutant superhuman vision which allows him to see the invisible “deer hunting” clause in the 2nd Amendment. You know, the one which reveals the whole thing is actually about deer hunting and not self-defense or defense of state.

Yeah. New York. Another Utopian, gun control cesspool. The sad thing is, without the “good intentions” of the NYC metro area and the leftist Borg Collective who nest there, the SAFE Act would never have been passed. Good intentions or not.

Opposition to anti-gun law - SAFE Act

That’s a lot of green. Image source: NYsaferesolutions.com

Upstate New York hates this piece of legislative poo. So much that just about every upstate county passed resolutions opposing it. Many upstate law enforcement officials are pretty brazen about ignoring it as well.

It should come as no surprise that the half of the state who can still think clearly want to repeal it. State Senator Rob Ortt is one of those. His push to cast off the yoke of an offensively stupid law that is excessively restrictive drew the ire of liberal blogger Ryan Dunn.

Ryan seems to think that “the toughest assault weapons ban in the country” is just awesome and  goes on to detail the good intentions of the SAFE Act that set his toes to tingling:

– A requirement for gun and ammunition dealers to conduct background checks. (It’s almost four years later and the ammo background check system still isn’t in place. Yeah, we have universal background check in place but I’m pretty sure a lot of people north of Westchester didn’t get the memo.)

– A mandatory “assault weapon” registry. (With only 10,000 of the million plus “assault weapons” in the state actually registered. Numbers so embarrassing someone had to go to court to pry them out of the Cuomo administration.)

– 10 round limit on magazines, but you’re only allowed to load seven at a time. (Possibly the biggest stupid of the whole law, and a provision that was struck down by the courts early on telling us that the Genius Dunn doesn’t even understand the law he’s defending. But his heart’s in the right place, so it’s okay. I’m going to hug a puppy now.)

What "New York legal" good intentions look like. Image source: Fox News

What “New York legal” good intentions look like. Image source: Fox News

– A two feature test to determine whether a rifle is an assault weapon is now a one feature test. (Which means an AR-15 with no other banned features and the pistol grip switched for a Thordsen Custom FRS stock is perfectly legal even though it’s the same gun. Seriously. If you tried to come up with the stupidest gun control law ever, you’d be hard pressed to beat this baby.)

Right off the bat we can see what a useless piece of legislation this is, but we’re not done. Ryan Dunn goes on to utterly defeat his own argument, which liberals often do without realizing it.

Discussing the murder rate in the upstate city of Syracuse, he reveals that most gun murders are committed with hand guns. The SAFE Act had little impact on handguns, because New York already had a 10-round magazine limit. (Which bad guys were already ignoring.)

A dive into murder statistics for the state shows that a general decline in the murder rate starting in the mid 1990s continues today. We still don’t have a lot of post SAFE Act data, but it doesn’t look like it made much of a difference. Especially when you consider how few murderers use “assault weapons” to do their evil deeds.

So other than being the best sales tool for rifle mods ever conceived, the SAFE Act has produced no public safety benefit. Why would it? You don’t need 10 bullets to kill a deer, and you don’t need an AR-15 to kill 84 people. All you need is a truck and a crowd. Lessons learned from France.

To his credit, Ryan Dunn cops to this. Yes, he actually admits that there’s no way to determine if the SAFE Act made anyone safer. Yet he insists we don’t repeal it, because of unicorns in the form of the good intentions of those who passed it. Either that or he secretly owns a ton of stock in Thordsen Customs.

So let me get this straight. Say that I’m a legislator and I’ve decided that hospital transmitted infections which kill 100,000 plus people per year need to be addressed. So, I pass a law which bans doctors and nurses from wearing Nikes to work. The law will have zero impact on the issue at hand, but I feel so bad for all the people who died that my Anti-Nike law must be allowed to stand, because good intentions!

This is a basic flaw of liberalism, where intentions overrule results. Look at the welfare system. It was supposed to help poor people. Instead, it has enslaved them to government handouts, destroyed the family unit in the inner city and has actually done far more harm than good. Harming the very people it was supposed to help more than leaving them alone to seek help from family, friends or charities. One need only look at the poverty rate in America to see this. It was dropping pretty sharply all the way up to the “great society” with all it’s anti-poverty programs. Then promptly leveled off. The overall poverty rate in 1968 about the time the great Society kicked in was more or less the same as it is today.

The black poverty rate, which was making a huge plunge in the early 60’s, leveled off for nearly 30 years. It is, thankfully, lower than it was in 1968 though it is trending upwards again following the age of Obama.

So, intentions over results. Feelings over logic. Is that why liberals are always dumping useless legislation on us? Or is there something deeper and darker at work?

President Lyndon Johnson, architect of the Great Society has been quoted (though this has never been absolutely confirmed) as claiming that the Great Society would have blacks voting Democrat for the “next hundred years.”

Was the disastrous welfare state the result of a spectacular failure of feelings and emotion over logic? Or was it a deliberate attempt to enslave poor people to government benefits in order to ensure Democrat votes for the rest of their lives?

How about illegal immigration? Are the leftist mobs fighting for open borders because of their compassion for the illegal immigrant (and their need for budget housekeepers)? Or is this just a scheme to import more people to this country who, when they someday become citizens, will be reliable Democrat voters?

Call me cynical, I’m going with that second one.

As far as the SAFE Act is concerned, it’s not even up for debate.

We know that “assault weapons” have always been the low hanging fruit for gun-controllers. They went after handguns in the 1970s and failed spectacularly. Then they set their sights on “assault weapons” in the 80s, hoping to capitalize on the fact that the average citizen was generally uninformed about such firearms. Betting that the scary look of the rifle would convince them they were tools of evil which needed to be banished to the fires of Mount Doom.

Ryan Dunn says keep the SAFE Act, because of it’s “good intentions.” He’s either lying or playing the role of the useful idiot to the hilt. The “good intention” behind the SAFE Act and other useless, idiotic gun control that deep blue states have been passing, isn’t to save lives. Its intent is to take another step down the road towards Cuomo’s confiscation option.

As they say, “The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions.”

 

*********

 

Like what you read here? Then consider supporting the author. No, not a donation, just consider buying my novel and making a mutually beneficial economic transaction.

The book’s called Waypoint, published by fellow patriots at Roots Digital Media. It’s a nifty little thriller which NYT bestselling writer Patrick Robinson, (co-author of Lone Survivor,) calls “Absolutely gripping. Waypoint is tense, twisting and fast-paced. Doesn’t let up until the final page is turned.”

You can find it on Amazon.

 

Matthew Howe

College liberal turned conservative once he started paying taxes, Matthew has been active in the gun-rights and conservative movement for years. The author of the thriller Waypoint, (available on Amazon) he’s proud to live in the one county in downstate New York which went for Trump by 17 points.

About the Author

Matthew Howe
Matthew Howe
College liberal turned conservative once he started paying taxes, Matthew has been active in the gun-rights and conservative movement for years. The author of the thriller Waypoint, (available on Amazon) he's proud to live in the one county in downstate New York which went for Trump by 17 points.

Be the first to comment on "Good Intentions Gone Bad: Failure Of The NY SAFE Act"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*