Acts of Defiance

noun: defiance
open resistance; bold disobedience.
“the demonstration was held in defiance of official warnings”


resistance, opposition, noncompliance, disobedience, insubordination, dissent, recalcitrance, subversion, rebellion

The country has been watching an act of defiance in Nevada for the last week. That confrontation between citizens and members of the federal government has subsided…for now. There was another act of defiance occurring in New York. That one received little attention from the media.

The state of New York requires gun owners to register certain firearms. Compliance to that law, known as the SAFE Act, has been low. Protesters to that law met outside the office of State Senator Mark Grisanti to protest the act.

Shredding SAFE Act Registration Forms In New York

Caleb Howe (Diary)  | 

On Tuesday in upstate New York, outside the office of State Senator Mark Grisanti, gun owners gathered in protest. Together they shredded their SAFE Act registration cards to signify their non-compliance with the controversial new law. Grisanti is a Republican who helped to pass the SAFE Act, including by offering up changes to the bill to make it bipartisan.

Human Events wrote last week about a recent SAFE Act protest that had a huge turnout, and involved many of the same people and groups as the rally on Tuesday, where gun owners intend to shred their registration forms as a form of protest. One of the organizers, Rus Thompson of TEA New York, was recently interviewed about this event, and discussed in depth the reasoning behind the shredding.

Gun owners across the state have been speaking out and protesting the SAFE Act from the beginning. As Bearing Arms reported yesterday, as many as one million are refusing to register their weapons.

Non-compliance of the ban is expected to be between 90%-99%, but a provision in the NY SAFE Act prevents registration data from being shared with the public.

Non-compliance in the neighboring state of Connecticut is thought to be in excess of 85%, with an estimated 80,000-100,000 gun owners refusing to register their firearms. Connecticut State Police have made no move to enforce their law four months after their registration deadline, fearing possible armed resistance.

Conservative estimates are that at least 300,000 and as many as one million New Yorkers will likewise practice civil disobedience and refuse to comply with the registration requirement.

The Shredding Registration event has a Facebook page here, and was covered live by a local Buffalo talk radio station here.

The defiance in New York isn’t limited to gun owners. Some officials—county Sheriffs, have declared they won’t enforce the law, either.

Despite deadline, protesters ‘will not comply’ with SAFE Act

Registration deadline for law was Tuesday

on April 15, 2014 – 8:30 PM, updated April 16, 2014 at 2:04 AM

Rus Thompson, a tea party activist, shreds the state assault weapon registration form during a rally Tuesday outside the Mahoney State Building.

Rus Thompson, a tea party activist, shreds the state assault weapon registration form during a rally Tuesday outside the Mahoney State Building. Harry Scull Jr. /Buffalo News

Owners of assault-style weapons were supposed to have registered their guns by Tuesday.

But there is no way of knowing exactly how many of these weapons there are in the state and how many were registered under the NY SAFE Act.

The state refuses to say how many were registered, claiming it is confidential information protected by the law.

Gun-rights advocates estimate compliance will be less than 10 percent.

And in Erie County, the sheriff says he will not force his deputies to enforce registration.

“Theoretically, any law enforcement officer who encounters anyone with this type of gun at a minimum is supposed to record the serial number and the individual’s identity and report it to Albany,” Sheriff Timothy B. Howard said.

But will his deputies do that?

“I don’t know. I am not encouraging them to do it. At the same time, their own consciences should be their guide. I am not forcing my conscience on them. That is a decision they should make,” Howard said.

The sheriff’s opposition sits well with roughly 70 opponents of the law who gathered outside the Walter J. Mahoney State Office Building in downtown Buffalo late Tuesday afternoon to shred State Police registration forms for assault weapons.

It was seen as a form of civil disobedience to a law that opponents say was hastily drafted some 16 months ago in response to the December 2012 massacre in Newtown, Conn., where 20 elementary school children and six adults were slain by a heavily armed gunman.

But rather than make the public safer, opponents contend the law’s main accomplishment has been to create a new classification of criminals – individuals who out of conscience refuse to register their assault weapons because they believe the law overstepped their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

The column continues at the website. The Erie County Sheriff echoes the sentiments of many law enforcement officials across the country. “Will…shall I comply with a law that is clearly unenforceable and does nothing more than make criminals out of formerly law-abiding citizens?”

The New York Sheriffs Organization has examined the SAFE Act and has found a number of flaws and inconsistencies. They noted these flaws on their website and point out that a number of the Act’s provisions are unenforceable and produce undue burden of their offices and other agencies and institutions.

Three acts of defiance with days of one another: the Bundy Ranch vs. the BLM, gun owners of New York vs. the SAFE Act, and the NY Erie County Sheriff versus that same SAFE Act. When you add the defiance of many states against Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, the refusal of those same states to create state exchanges, a person could reasonably expect more acts of defiance to occur at any time, any where.


CARE: Children’s Act for Responsible Employment

The libs are attacking the family farm once again.  CARE, or the Children’s Act for Responsible Employment, HR 2234, sponsored by democrat Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34), is an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. That 1938 law limited child labor to those fourteen years of ago or older. Agriculture, however, was exempted.

This exemption allowed the children of farmers to work on the farms, to learn the skills needed to operate the farms, and to learn how to be farmers and later inherit and continue farming successfully.  The libs are outraged.

The libs claim that the exemption allows children to work long hours, in hazardous conditions among toxic chemicals.  All that is true. Farming is not clean, farm animals product large amounts of non-sanitary wastes, fertilizers, like ammonia nitrate, are toxic, and operating farm equipment can be dangerous.

Yes, farming is dangerous and always has been.  When I was growing up I was plowing a field and hit a pipeline. The presence of that pipeline was not known. There were no records of it but there is was.  When I hit that pipeline I was thrown off the tractor.  If the tractor’s engine hadn’t died on impact, it would have run over me.  There was nothing that could have prevented the mis-hap.  A neighbor down the road from us was killed when his tractor, on a hillside, rolled over on top of him.  Another neighbor was thrown off his tractor and was severely injured.  Farming is not safe.

What makes farming safer is teaching children how to farm safely at an early age until it becomes second nature.  The CARE bill, ignores all of these factors. They want to impose an age limit of 16 to prohibit farm children working on the family farm…with one exception.

That exception negates all their liberal arguments.  The exception is that children can work farms owned by their immediate families, i.e., their fathers and mothers.  It prohibits the children from working any other farms. No working for their grandparents, no working on farms owned by aunts and uncles, nor farms owned by cousins or neighbors.

If the danger and working conditions is so severe, why the exemption.  The danger and conditions are what they are and are no less for the farms of the immediate family that it is for others.

One reason for this bill, if you look at some of the so-called farm labor forums, is an indirect attempt to unionize the family farm.  If children do not learn the skills needed to farm, those skills must be hired. 

The great failing of this bill is that it’s been written by those who have no real knowledge of farming.  It is based on hearsay and anecdotes.  The proponents claim that 100 farm kids are killed every year.  That may be true. But how does those numbers compare with the number of deaths in auto accidents?  Far, far less I believe.

If the libs were truly outraged by the death rate why don’t they address the issue of auto deaths?  Perhaps because they would lose their supporters?  Why not one and not the other?  Politics.

The reality of this bill is that it is another attempt to impose the nanny state and expand governmental control over our lives.  I grew up on a farm. I know well the dangers involved in farming.  Technology and engineering has reduced some of the day-to-day risks of farming but not all.  Agriculture is too important to the survival of our nation to be left in the hands of idiots with an agenda.