New York Firearms Forum banner

Known Anti Gunner as Monroe SCOPE Meeting Speaker?

5K views 66 replies 25 participants last post by  944turbo 
#1 ·
I just got an email from SCOPE that has me slightly concerned. Apparently the speaker at tomorrow's Monroe chapter meeting will be Gary Pudup. Pudup is running for the Assembly and previously had involvement with the Monroe Sheriff's department, but his real claim to fame (for us anyway) is his famous "resignation" from the NRA, and the fact that he is always talking about how great the SAFE Act is but how it's important that retired LEO's be exempt from it.

I can also cite instances in which he has used the Democrat and Chronicle comment pages to disparage military veterans who disagree with him on 2A.

Whiskey Tengo Fox, SCOPE?
 
#9 ·
!

WOW so 2A is indefensible as a right to defend against tyranny? News too me.

So both the federalist anti-federalist papers didn't address and point out out the need to protected against tyranny! The only difference being one side felt enough was written to cover it and the other feeling MORE needed to be written to spell out every specific instance the right to bear arms would cover.

But 2A has nothing to do with with protecting against tyranny ... REALLY!
 
#12 ·
Erie County is having candidates too. They invited CUomo and everyone. I know that Cuomo won't show but I hope Grisanti and Kennedy do.
The friggin lied to us and I will personally lead the charge but standing up as they speak and simply turn my back on them.
No shouting No vulgarity. Just stand up and turn you back on the anti-american anti constitution lying POS;s

Gary Pudup is a liberal who owns a gun because he is former LE. Other than that he would probably never have touched one.
You guys in Monroe should also be looking forward to voting out that hag Louise Slaughter.

SCOPE can not endorse and does not endorse any candidate. They grade them. Get the media there and some repeal signts. Have some fun with a "I am smarter than you liberal"
 
#13 ·
"This idea that somehow the Founding Fathers wanted us to have guns so we could rebel against the government is historically indefensible".
WOOT! The authors just kicked the arse of the World Superpower's Army with a civilian army and militia.
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 case we have to do it again!!!!!

What a dipstick.
 
#14 ·
I think Mr Pudup is in for a rough evening. I hope the moderators can keep this under control. I think I'll be attending this meeting as well......

I'll probably be wearing my Brown cowboy hat, if anyone wants to introduce themselves.
 
#20 ·
I've got a bunch of feathers, anyone got tar?
 
#25 ·
1) "What reason would you give that you would not want a universal background check...for someone buying a military-style assault weapon?"

Style is image, not substance, fool. You are familiar with "image" and "style", right? It's the foundation of your entire political philosophy.

2) "...from my background and my constitutional studies, and having worked with the New York Civil Liberties Union...nobody has had anything taken away..."

Well, just for starters, I have had $3000 worth of previously legal magazines taken away. They are now being stored in a free state where they no longer threaten the imagined safety of paranoid progressives. How does that reality square with your shameless lies?

3) "...the Second Amendment...really refers to militia..."

Hey, how does that schit taste, you grinning bastard?

 

Attachments

#29 ·
This is a very good question.

It's not just SCOPE that I question either. Some years ago the NRA dinner was scheduled to be at RIT Inn & Conference Center. This was the same location that just months before an RIT engineering student had been arrested for having an assault rifle on school grounds (all charges were later dropped).

I sent an email to the local NRA rep asking just why they would support such an organization as the anti-gun RIT, and received no response.

I have not attended another NRA dinner and in fact dropped my membership for some years.
 
#31 ·
"To make matters worse, many republican candidates for state office have announced they want to repeal the SAFE Act, a law that contains a provision for disarming domestic abusers. The recent slaughter of an entire family in Houston, Texas serves as an example of why domestic abusers should be denied access to a gun. I have yet to hear a reasoned argument as to why anyone would want to repeal a law that does so much to protect women. If someone were to ask that we look at the whole law and amend technical aspects, I'm more than willing to listen. But to repeal a law that has so much meaning to women is not something I can even imagine supporting.

For a politician to boast that he will repeal the SAFE Act, a law protecting women, is to go backwards in time on a women's right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

A woman cannot be a free and equal citizen when a man who has bullied her can possess guns.
I will stand for a women's right to self-determination and safety, and I will not allow a law that protects the very lives of women to be repealed."


This dickbag just does not get it, does he? We need to run him out of town on a rail at the meeting tonight.
 
#32 ·
", I'm more than willing to listen. But to repeal a law that has so much meaning to women is not something I can even imagine supporting.

For a politician to boast that he will repeal the SAFE Act, a law protecting women, is to go backwards in time on a women's right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

A woman cannot be a free and equal citizen when a man who has bullied her can possess guns.
I will stand for a women's right to self-determination and safety, and I will not allow a law that protects the very lives of women to be repealed."


This dickbag just does not get it, does he? We need to run him out of town on a rail at the meeting tonight.
ohhhh...
PudF***ker does get it all too well..
he is giving stupid women a reason to vote for him
this rhetoric is constant throughout all his positions
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top