Mayor Bloomberg calls for Gun Control

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Tragedy-shows-need-for-gun-control-3723694.php


Both presidential candidates rightfully mourned a senseless tragedy but offered no solutions to stop this from happening again and again and again. The only major politician who was brave enough to point out the elephant in the room - our nation's laughable gun-control restrictions - was New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who sensibly asked why neither Mitt Romney nor President Obama will talk about the need for gun control.

[donnay]

Right on cue. I would expect nothing less coming from that fascists.

I say we have Bloomberg control!

[Hyperion]

Bloomberg go drink a 32ounce beverage for all I care. Fucking authoritarian douche.

[John F Kennedy III]

Second Amendment Foe Bloomberg Exploits Colorado Shooting

http://www.infowars.com/second-amendment-foe-bloomberg-exploits-colorado-shooting/

[Coolidge/Dawes '24]

Both presidential candidates rightfully mourned a senseless tragedy but offered no solutions to stop this from happening again
Um, maybe because seizing upon a tragedy to score cheap political points would hurt both candidates' electoral prospects? I'm pretty sure American voters are sick of politicians using national emergencies and catastrophic events for their own self-serving ends (advancing their careers and such).


And no, arming more people wouldn't have saved the victims in this massacre - imagine how many more deaths there would have been with multiple people shooting in a dark, crowded theater.
-_- I think he's missing the point about the whole "give more people guns, and criminals will be more afraid to attack people" argument. In states where concealed carry has been pushed through by wide margins, the reason gun-related homicides and woundings are lower is because would-be, trigger-happy ruffians are less likely to even think about trying to blow peoples' brains out in the first place, in fear that their victims will fight back or retaliate if they do. It doesn't matter if other people are caught in the crossfire. You're still at risk in either scenario.

Cracking down on marijuana dispensaries doesn't stop people from getting weed. Making it illegal for kids under the age of 18 to watch porno doesn't stop kids from typing "hot, steamy" you-know-what in a search engine. Forcing people to wear seat belts or bike helmets under threat of state compulsion doesn't mean people will actually abide by those decrees. Bans on the sale and consumption of alcohol back during the 1920s didn't stop bootlegging or Al Capone. Why do the Nanny State prohibitionists think this would be any different?

Progressives seem to understand moral hazards and the law of unintended consequences when it comes to the War on Drugs or the Wall Street bailouts, but when it comes to gun control, all of a sudden those rules no longer apply for some unknown, mysterious reason. I highly doubt a man of this sick, twisted, psychopathic caliber would have obeyed the restrictions had they been in place. He would have just looked for his stockpile of assault weapons somewhere else, like in the black market, where police officers have very little oversight over the folks purchasing firearms. All these laws do is disarm helpless, vulnerable, peace-loving citizens who try their best to follow the rules and get by in this world with as little confrontation as possible (with street thugs, government agents, or otherwise). Criminals, on the other hand, don't give a flying hoot about what the law says. That's why they're called criminals. If they're willing to stab you in the guts, bash your head in, steal your identity, or sneak into banks guarded by high-security devices, ear-piercing alarms, and surveillance cameras (all of which carry heavy prison sentences) - why would they care about some stupid rule that says, "Don't buy a gun, citizen?" I mean, it just defies all common sense.

[Lindsey]

I've been wanting to get a lil' Ruger 380. Guess I better do it while I still can...

[Carlybee]

Some Dem politician was on MSNBC saying "No citizen needs an automatic weapon. Only the police and military should be allowed to have automatic weapons."

Um yeah unless we need to protect ourselves from the police and military. Duh. Beam me up.

[Brian4Liberty]

The US was founded with a set of laws. That includes the Bill of Rights. There is a process to change that Bill of Rights. If politicians like Bloomberg refuse to follow the rule of law, they are nothing but criminals themselves.