FORT EDWARD -- Greenwich Supervisor Sara Idleman wished her peers cared as much about the poor and needy as they do about the state’s recent crackdown on guns.

Idleman and Fort Edward Supervisor Mitch Suprenant — the only two Democrats on the Washington County Board of Supervisors — were the only dissenting votes Friday on a ceremonial resolution opposing the NY Safe Act and Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s “message of necessity” that circumvented the bill’s traditional three-day cooling-off period in the Legislature.

“I wish there was this much passion by this board for programs for the elderly, underprivileged children, victims of domestic violence and maintaining our infrastructure,” Idleman said.

The county resolution in opposition the NY Safe Act and Cuomo’s message of necessity passed by a 14-2 vote, with Putnam Supervisor John LaPointe absent.

The Warren County Board of Supervisors passed similar legislation on Friday by 16-3 vote, with supervisors Dan Girard, Bill Loeb and William Kenny, all Democrats from Glens Falls, voting against the local criticism.

Stony Creek Supervisor Frank Thomas said the law infringed on residents’ ability to protect their families. He described it as an act by “an increasingly tyrannical government.”

“This is about taking our right to own firearms,” Horicon Supervisor Ralph Bentley said. “This is just the beginning, not the end.”

Idleman said the almost nonstop criticism of Cuomo’s message of necessity is nothing more than a back-door way of opposing the gun crackdown, the first in the wake of December’s shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

Many of the same state lawmakers who are now up in arms about Cuomo’s move supported legislation during last March’s “Big Ugly,” the several days of frantic late-session bill voting that included the controversial gay marriage bill, as well as GOP-backed legalization of casino gambling, both of which also relied on a message of necessity to avoid public vetting, Idleman said.

“There was no outrage then,” said Idleman, the most liberal voice on the Washington County board, adding that she finds any attempt to avoid public input undemocratic. “To me, there’s a lack of integrity to bring this issue up now.”

Idleman’s argument is gaining traction among other NY Safe Act supporters at the state level and in local governments across New York.

Assemblyman Tony Jordan, R-Jackson, a NY Safe Act critic and co-author of legislation to severely limit a governor’s ability to use messages of necessity, countered arguments like Idleman’s on Thursday.

Jordan said the bill to limit the message of necessity and ban overnight legislating was first introduced after the “Big Ugly” and is not a result of the pro-gun fallout of the NY Safe Act.

Hartford Supervisor Dana Haff, one of the county board’s most conservative members, countered that the NY Safe Act, and its limitations on gun ownership are a different animal than other recent examples of fast-tracked legislation because it is only the beginning of further assaults on the U.S. Constitution.

“The NY Safe Act is the edge of the wedge,” Haff said. “Confiscation is next.”

Members of the Washington County tea party asked on Friday for Washington County supervisors to reschedule committee meetings slated for Feb. 28 so supervisors could attend another pro-gun rally in Albany that day.

Government Operations Committee Chairman Matt Hicks soon after rescheduled his committee for Feb. 25, and Idleman, chairwoman of the Agriculture, Planning and Tourism Committee, said she, too, would adjust her committee calendar.

“I would hope for the same courtesy when I have such a request,” she said to her peers.

Post-Star reporter Don Lehman contributed to this report.

(27) comments

Bob1234
Bob1234

Well said, Sara Idleman.

jummer

I think that our representatives shouldn't vote on anything unless they find out how their constituents want them to vote. I think they vote their own beliefs. Its time this crap stopped.
More gun laws are stupid and will not accomplish a thing except being a money grab. All of the gun laws in the world wouldn't have stopped the tragedy in Newtown. You bleeding heart liberals stop using it as a crutch.

nytoaz9382
nytoaz9382

This is the third article I have read where you state these resolutions are ceremonial. This is not the case. The way our country's government is set up state government is more powerful then federal government, and local government is suppose to super seed state government. For example, County sheriff's do not have to enforce state or federal laws they feel are unjust. State police do not have to enforce federal law they find unconstitutional. Our system of government, A Republic, is not a hierarchy in a traditional sense. Unlike how many would wish to see it, the president is not at the top. We the people, everyday citizens are at the top. Of course like in Rome, there are to many citizens to pack a room, so we elect people to consult with us and vote based on our wants not theirs. Unfortunately not enough people talk to their elected officials, and votes get cast against the wishes of many. Local government is then forced to pass resolutions to be the voice of the majority.

nytoaz9382
nytoaz9382

As for the not caring about the poor. I feel very sorry that people fall into hard times and need assistance from government to get back on there feet. Unfortunately many of these people abuse the system. Social Services were designed to help people get back on there feet and become productive members of society again. Not looking for work, or working for as little money as possible to continue to collect assistance is not what these programs where designed for. You see in this very paper at least three times a month people being charged with welfare fraud, people that work and are making to much money and continueing to collect. How come we don't see people being charged with abuse of the system. Refusing to work, because they are lazy and just want to collect a check. Keep in mind I am not talking about people that have medical issues and can not work, many people are able bodied but don't want to work at Mcdonald's or a gas station.

nytoaz9382
nytoaz9382

The same people saying we don't care about the poor, are the same people that see people with four kids, getting 600 dollars a month in food stamps, cash assistance, medicaid, and housing assistance, and belittle them for getting assistance. Many of whom are trying to better themselves. I've received food stamps, and medicaid. Once i was able to pay for enough food to feed myself, i called and said I don't want the food stamps anymore. When I got another raise and could afford medical insurance on my own, i cancelled the medicaid. You see my fellow american workers helped me in my time of need, and when I was able to support myself, I stopped with the public assistance. Our country was founded on the values of Independence, and having an opportunity to better ourselves by working for it, fighting for it when needed. Now its a you have an opportunity, but don't fight or work for it , let it be given to you.

Reality_Check

These gun laws only penalize responsible gun owners. I'm tired of arguing about it. Like Hitler said, the best way to take ocer a country is to disarm the citizens. All you liberals have fun when the gov't wants to put a barcode and GPS chip in you...

newshound

local smalled minded politicians..cuomo did a good thing and yup the gun laws are the beginning..so hold on and watch.

the only thing these backward looking folks have to say is i need guns to defend my home.

does any of these complainers really know of anyone that EVER defended their home with a gun?? i didnt think so but i bet everyone of us knows someone hurt by a gun.

loneoak

Once again the ignorant rants of the left and the unwillingness of the left to report the facts about violent crimes prevented by law abiding citizens. More people prevent or stop violent crimes tahn the number of people killed by guns. You won't look up that information and you will not see the bias media print it. I am more afraid of the government than a home invasion hence the second ammendment.

loneoak

They all say why no outrage after the necessity card on other issues. DEAR REPRESNTATIVES thats what we pay you for, but you would rather just play the game blame soneone else and keep you cushy job and benefits. The joker is the poltician and the joke is on the people they claim to represent. This is proven by the party line voting mentioned above.

The Bleeb

newshound, I'm a classically-educated double-major in biochemistry and psychology, with minors in philosophy, poli-sci and music. I AM backward-looking because there is no such thing as the foreseeable future.

I have defended my home with a gun, and thankfully its mere presence ended the threat without a shot fired. My neighbor, in his 70's, defended himself and his wife from an attempted mugging by armed thugs in Albany. The event made the local TV news. Two of my close college friends protected themselves, in separate events, with their guns. They were shot at first, and returned fire. They would be DEAD if they hadn't had guns! In all these instances, the police were able to show up later and take notes.

I'll protect my family myself. That is MY job, not the police's. Their duties are to serve and protect the public at large. The government's duty is to protect my rights to do so, not take them away. The 2A is a a restriction on government, not citizens. Hold on and watch us!

country2

Death is part of life. Just as seatbelts and speed limits don't save everyone, neither will gun regulations. However, if the one person they do save is YOUR child or grandchild, I suspect you will feel quite differently about what you perceive to be such unacceptable assaults on your constitutional rights. It must be an unimaginable horror to see ones child placed in a box and put in the ground. I pray none of you ever has to know. God bless you, Sara Idleman. Thank you for embracing our children while too many of your colleagues prefer to embrace their arsenals.

loneoak

Perhaps my arsenal will prevent my or someone elses child from being placed in a box. I would rather havbe the opportunity to protect my family, "with deadly force" if necessary.

The Bleeb

Please learn about your rights. Our rights are not constitutional rights, but rather natural rights enumerated by the Constitution. The Constitution was developed to government and heir elitist power grabs, not us. The government's sole purpose is to protect our rights. You should also be aware that the 2nd Amendment has already been heavily infringed, all the way from machine guns to nukes and everything in between. There has been NO return of safety to the general public, omly a loss of rights. Once majority rule is expressed in law to place "public safety" over the protection of rights, the right ceases, because it has been made superior to it. This has happened with many of our natural rights, not just with the RKBA. I'll protect my family, thank you. The government couldn't protect a hot dog stand.

Jared

Hi Jon;
Can you, Ms. Idleman or Mitch please explain to your readers and I how Gov. Cuomo's emergency passage of the bill will stop or even retard future gun violence? I could support such a drastic Second Amendment violation of our rights if there was some factual or even logical evidence for its success.
Best Regards,
Jared

The Bleeb

That's right Jared. So called "assault weapons" accounted for 0.07% of the gun crimes in NY. The SAFE Act will NOT prevent gun crime. That's why it is clear that this is only a step.

owenscott

isnt this the same mitch who made his living carrying a gun ?

1776-Patriot

Part 3

135.60 - Coercion 2nd degree | A Misdemeanor
150.01 - 5th degree Arson | A Misdemeanor
150.05 - 4th degree Arson | E Felony
178.10 - 4th degree Criminal diversion of prescription medications and prescriptions | A Misdemeanor
178.15 - 3rd degree Criminal diversion of prescription medications and prescriptions | E Felony
220.28 - Use of a child to commit a controlled substance offense | E Felony
240.05 - Riot 2nd degree | A Misdemeanor
240.06 - Riot 1st degree | E Felony
240.08 - Inciting to riot | A Misdemeanor 240.10 - Unlawful assembly | B Misdemeanor
240.15 - Criminal anarchy | E Felony
240.20 - Disorderly conduct | Violation
240.61 - Placing a false bomb or hazardous substance 2nd degree | E Felony
250.45 - Unlawful surveillance 2nd degree | E felony (Hidden cams for sexual gratification)
255.25 - Incest 3rd degree | E Felony
263.11 - Possessing an obscene sexual performance by a child | E Felony
263.16 - Possessing a sexual performance by a child | E Felony

1776-Patriot

Part 2

120.70 - Luring a child | E Felony
121.11 - Criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation | A Misdemeanor
125.10 - Criminally negligent homicide | E Felony
130.20 - Sexual misconduct | A Misdemeanor
130.25 - Rape 3rd degree | E Felony
130.40 - Criminal sexual act 3rd degree | E Felony
130.52 - Forcible touching | A Misdemeanor
130.53 - Persistent sexual abuse | E Felony (repeat child molester, must be caught and convicted in two separate cases before the charges even reach this level)
130.65A - Aggravated sexual abuse 4th degree | E Felony
130.85 - Female genital mutilation | E Felony
135.05 - Unlawful imprisonment 2nd degree | A Misdemeanor
135.10 - Unlawful imprisonment 1st degree | E Felony
135.45 - Custodial interference 2nd degree | A Misdemeanor
135.50 - Custodial interference 1st degree | E Felony
135.55 - Substitution of children | E Felony (switched at birth type of
thing)

1776-Patriot

Part 1

Below is a list of crimes considered to be less offensive than owning certain firearms and accessories in Cuomo's UN-SAFE Act. Maybe Sara Idleman should have done a little research first, or maybe she feels that we should go easier on rapists and child molesters. Weren’t we doing this for the children, I'm confused.

So owning a 30 rnd mag after next year is worse than...

oilheet

Idleman needs to wake up and smell the coffee - taking away rights that were set forth for us by our fore-fathers needs not be tolerated! The guns they spoke of in the 2nd amendent had NOTHING to do with hunting! I applaud the supervisors who are willing to stand up and be counted - I truly hope this snow ball gets rolling !

IWILLNOTCOMPLY

I wish there was this much passion by this board for programs for the elderly, underprivileged children, victims of domestic violence and maintaining our infrastructure,” Idleman said
I'm glad I don't live in Washington county to have her and Mitch Suprenant represent me.
Lets see maybe these two rocket scientist should figure out how much money Prince Cuomo will waste on this new law that will help no one and could be used for the people she complains about needing help. Did anybody ask the prince how much this will cost?????? NOOOO that would be too easy.
(Idleman said the almost nonstop criticism of Cuomo’s message of necessity is nothing more than a back-door way of opposing the gun crackdown) THIS IS ABOUT INFRINGING ON OUR FREEDOMS AND YOU SHOULD NOT BE IN OFFICE IF YOU CAN'T SEE THAT.
It is so surprising to see an elected official so uninformed about a subject, Idleman try learning the FACTS on how little rifles are used in crimes before you make statements about the subject.

NickBottom

Sara Idleman and Mitch Suprenant deserve the respect of all rational citizens. By voting against their fellow Supervisors, they have rejected the fear and paranoia that passes for political discourse in far too many parts of our county. Simply hijacking the Second Amendment to the Constitution with narrowly defined interpretations to serve the interest of the gun lobby is losing its power. Is this law perfect? No, but it is a step in the right direction. Please know there are many, including those of us whose families have resided in Washington County for many generations, who are proud you are our representatives.

loneoak

The second ammendment is very specific in its presentation, you need to read the entire amendment. If you think the gun lobby is losing power then you are just as misinformed as you are with second ammendment. The LAW is very well defined but most including yourself do not know the law.

The Bleeb

Nick - Those two have bought into the fear! The legislation prohibits items that have no statistcal significance in crime, and severely infringes upon the right to armed self-defense and the right to be secure in our private property. These rights exist as our birthright - they existed before the Constitution, and despite it's "interpretation". A such, the government HAS NO ROLE but to protect those rights. What you see here are a lot of people awakening to the fact that no government can exercise any more power than exists in the individuals from whom that power was derrived. I or a group of individuals cannot violate your rights, and neither can the government, They are empowered by the consent of the governed with only that which you and I as individuals can give. That's the basis of our founding. I'm not the problem, and I'm sure you aren't. So why are you accepting the yet another gratuitous encroachment upon natural rights for no gain, other than "feel good".

IWILLNOTCOMPLY

The Bleep - powerful and well written!
To Bottom they showed they were cowards not courage, who forced this law down our throats? It was Prince Cuomo and not letting this law be even read by people. Its not courageous to follow like sheep behind the democrat agenda, it would have been nice if they stood up for the people's rights and said what Cuomo did was wrong. I'm sick of the D'S&R'S voting for only what the party say's to do and not for the people. This law is against the state and fed constitution and they should be fired for standing against the constitution and for party line vote. I will repeat for even you I happen to be part of the gun lobby along with over 4 million people who belong to the NRA and sorry if we believe in our rights and freedoms while sheep like you want to give up your rights away just so yoyu can be a good party line robot. The only ones using fear and paranoia is your bully Prince Cuomo not the people who oppose this violation of our freedoms!!!

Bob1234
Bob1234

We all can feel comforted now that the majority of the Washington County Board of Supervisors has declared its intention to protect county residents from having their 'constitutional rights' abrogated.

NYSUT, the New York State United Teachers, is planning a legal challenge to the constitutionality of the 2-percent cap on property taxes. Since the Washington County Board is such an advocate of our constitutional rights, I'm certain we can expect the Board to pass a resolution supporting NYSUT in this legal challenge.

The Bleeb

Good, they should challenge that if they feel it violates the NYS Constitution and home rule. However, the result would inevitably be higher property taxes, for they do not factor the significant centralized FedGov control into the local school equation. They believe that they must cater to every whim coming out of the NYS and FedGov education departments. The local district folks should set the standards for the schools they support, and therefore control the costs associated with the curriculum. That's the only way to have good education at a reasonable cost.

Welcome to the discussion.

Comments will not be posted if any of the following rules are violated:
- Comments must be contained to the topic of the articles only.
- Comments must be civil in tone and cannot contain personal insults directed toward another reader.
- Profanities cannot be used, including abbreviations or acronyms.
- Comments critical of crime or accident victims are not allowed.
- Comments that imply guilt for those arrested are not allowed.
- Comments that are potentially libelous, including those that contain accusations not supported by facts are not allowed.
- Comments that appear to be taunting others who comment are not allowed.