SAFE Act is an example of politicians following the money
The Empire State’s newly created gun control laws have the fingerprints of the two largest anti-hunting entities in the world — The Fund for Animals and the Humane Society of the United States, which should never be confused with local humane societies — all over various sections of the enacted legislation.
The working budget of $102 million-plus at the disposal of these two major anti-hunting movements was widely used in this latest endeavor. As we all know, money talks in the political area, and legislators walk in the directions they are expected to.
If every grass-roots outdoor sportsmen’s organization throughout New York state had their own in-house political oversight committee, staffed by dedicated member volunteers who maintain a constant watch over their elected representatives’ antics, the gun control legislation would still have materialized, but in an orderly, common-sense manner and not because of the back-room dealings that actually took place.
Outdoor sportsmen’s clubs political oversight committees are still essentially needed because the 2016 elections are not really that far off and because the anti-hunting giants already have selected their choice to occupy the White House — and it’s not Andrew Cuomo.