New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg advocated police officers going on strike until lawmakers tighten gun-control laws.
With Piers Morgan on CNN last night, Bloomberg argued that President Obama and Mitt Romney need to address gun control because “48,000 people will be murdered with guns in the four years, the next four-year presidential term.”
“I think there is a perception in the political world that the NRA has more power than the American people. I do not happen to believe that,” he said.
When asked why Americans weren’t angry enough to demand stricter gun control, Bloomberg said he would take it a step further.
“I don’t understand why the police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say, we’re going to go on strike. We’re not going to protect you. Unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe,” he said.
“After all, police officers want to go home to their families. And we’re doing everything we can to make their job more difficult but, more importantly, more dangerous, by leaving guns in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them, and letting people who have those guns buy things like armor-piercing bullets.”
Bloomberg said that while the Second Amendment is a constitutional right, “the government also has the right to have reasonable restrictions.”
“Not selling guns to minors or to people with criminal records or a psychiatric problems or drug addiction problems would be reasonable restrictions,” the mayor said. “So you start out with that. That we can have guns but not every kind of gun.”
Mayor Lame Duck is out of his mind. The NRA IS “the people” as much as anybody else. Until the cops can generate a 100% success rate of preventing all violent crime then I think they need to stay on the job and the people can defend themselves. Mayor Out-of-touch would have a bit more credibility if he hadn’t already clowned himself with the ban on Big Gulps. Apparently he feels that guns are just as bad as Big Gulps. Does anybody really think that the same idiot who would make a federal case over 16 ounce drinks would hesitate to expand the gun restrictions if he got his way?
I have been telling the Fire Department for years that they should refuse to keep putting out fires until we have stricter laws for match and lighter fluid control. We should also require background checks for people purchasing frying pans.
Bloomberg is right…
If the Hirelings WE put in place, with the guns WE provided them with, are too scared to do the job, then they should just leave.
But before you do, you must hand back over to the private citizery of your cities and States, every weapon in your posession, because they do NOT belong to YOU.
It is WE, not YOU, who are the lawful owners of every weapon in the hands of every Soldier and Policeman in this land and abroad….So if you ever feel you do not posess the character or trustworthiness to BE responsibly armed with weapons we merely LOAN to you for the duration of your “shift” each day, then by all means, just leave…
And surrender to us what IS, and has always BEEN, exclusively OURS.
Got that Bloomerg?
All the guns belong to US.
None of them belong to YOU
Well expounded.
“Not selling guns to minors or to people with criminal records or a psychiatric problems or drug addiction problems would be reasonable restrictions,”…
Well, that’s already the law and I don’t hear anyone trying to repeal it.
…“So you start out with that. That we can have guns but not every kind of gun.”
Full auto weapons and destructive devices have been illegal since the 30′s so we got that covered too.
Sounds like Bloomberg’s reasonable wish list has already been fulfilled. So why’s he still yapping?
Well, in the orals before SCOTUS in Heller, even the solicitor general arguing for the DC ban questioned whether full auto weapons could be banned given the reasoning in the lower court ruling (DC Court of Appeals which was eventually upheld) which stated:
“That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
Constituti¬on and was premised on the private use of arms for
activities such as hunting and self-defen¬se, the latter being
understood as resistance to either private lawlessnes¬s or the
depredatio¬ns of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
abroad).”
During orals:
GENERAL CLEMENT: Well, Justice Scalia, I think our principal concern based on the parts of the court of appeals opinion that seemed to adopt a very categorical rule were with respect to machine guns, because I do think that it is difficult — I don’t want to foreclose the possibility of the Government, Federal Government making the argument some day — but I think it is more than a little difficult to say that the one arm that’s not protected by the Second Amendment is that which is the standard issue armament for the National Guard, and that’s what the machine gun is.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: But this law didn’t involve a restriction on machine guns. It involved an absolute ban. It involved an absolute carry prohibition. Why would you think that the opinion striking down an absolute ban would also apply to a narrow one — narrower one directed solely to machine guns?
GENERAL CLEMENT: I think, Mr. Chief Justice, why one might worry about that is one might read the language of page 53a of the opinion as reproduced in the petition appendix that says once it is an arm, then it is not open to the District to ban it. Now, it seems to me that the District is not strictly a complete ban because it exempts pre-1976 handguns. The Federal ban on machine guns is not, strictly speaking, a ban, because it exempts pre – pre-law machine guns, and there is something like 160,000 of those.
JUSTICE SCALIA: But that passage doesn’t mean once it’s an arm in the dictionary definition of arms. Once it’s an arm in the specialized sense that the opinion referred to it, which is — which is the type of a weapon that was used in militia, and it is -it is nowadays commonly held.
GENERAL CLEMENT: Well -
JUSTICE SCALIA: If you read it that way, I don’t see why you have a problem.
GENERAL CLEMENT: Well, I — I hope that you read it that way. But I would also say that I think that whatever the definition that the lower court opinion employed, I do think it’s going to be difficult over time to sustain the notion — I mean, the Court of Appeals also talked about lineal descendants. And it does seem to me that, you know, just as this Court would apply the Fourth Amendment to something like heat imagery, I don’t see why this Court wouldn’t allow the Second Amendment to have the same kind of scope, and then I do think that reasonably machine guns come within the term “arms.”
There are certain patterns of behavior that should be red flags that alert the authorities.
We learned the hard way that if a fellow shows up at an airport with no luggage and buys a one-way ticket with cash, authorities should be suspicious.
And now we learned the hard way that if a fellow buys a semi-automatic rifle, gas mask, and body armor, the authorities should become suspicious. I don’t know if right now we’re set up to trace that. Perhaps Homeland Security needs a central database into which all purchases of rifles, gas masks, body armor and ammo should be reported. Then data mining would reveal such coordinated simultaneous purchases.
There is no legitimate reason for an ordinary citizen to be armed like that. None. A rifle by itself? Sure, you can go hunting or go to gun collector shows or whatever. But if you buy enough hardware to arm and armor yourself like a SWAT team member, the cops should pay you a visit.
Well, he didn’t buy body armor- he bought a ‘tactical vest’. That is, a shooting vest with a lot of pockets.
There is a legitimate reason for citizens to have arms. The founding fathers understood it, read my post 16. Or as the DC Court of Appeals in Heller put it:
That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for
activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being
understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
abroad).
We have also learned the hard way that spree killers like this guy seek out gun-free zones. Colorado is a shall issue CCW state. However, the theatre chain this person chose has a policy prohbiting CCW holders to carry on their premises. Kind of like the guy at VT choosing to attack his school, even bolting the doors to ensure nobody with weapons could get in to stop him.
“And now we learned the hard way that if a fellow buys a semi-automatic rifle, gas mask, and body armor, the authorities should become suspicious.”
First of all he wasn’t wearing body armor. He was wearing a tac vest, which is a fancy marketing term that means “a black vest with a lot of pockets”. I know dozens of preparedness-minded folks and survivalists who own gas masks (Israeli surplus ones are inexpensive), and many of them probably bought a mask within a month of buying a rifle. I’ve done that myself, and neither I nor any of them have subsequently shot up a room full of innocent people.
And your assertion that the behavior of one man can be useful as a predictor shows you know as much about statistics as you do about guns.
“I don’t know if right now we’re set up to trace that. Perhaps Homeland Security needs a central database into which all purchases of rifles, gas masks, body armor and ammo should be reported. Then data mining would reveal such coordinated simultaneous purchases.”
So you’re basically advocating a repeal of the 4th Amendment. Sorry to break it to you, but giving the government that kind of power would cause a lot more damage to our society than any armed criminal.
“There is no legitimate reason for an ordinary citizen to be armed like that. None.”
A) You’re wrong and B) it’s not for you to decide what’s “legitimate”. I have no doubt that if I examined your life I’d find a lot of stuff I consider illegitimate, but since you’re (presumably) not breaking the law it’s none of my business.
“A rifle by itself? Sure, you can go hunting or go to gun collector shows or whatever. But if you buy enough hardware to arm and armor yourself like a SWAT team member, the cops should pay you a visit.”
The right to bear arms isn’t about hunting. You know what it IS about? It’s about giving people the ability to not live in fear of people, people like you in fact, who think the cops should have virtually unlimited authority to “pay visits” to people.
I know lots of people who could turn out armed and equipped just as the shooter was, and several, myself among them, who could turn out MUCH better armed and equipped. If I needed to turn out for a “social occasion,” I have the same vest but in ACU cammo and with a shotgun sleeve on the back. I can carry six 20 or 30 rd. .223 magazines, an extra 20 rds. of 12 ga., and six extra 7 rd. mags for my pistol. If I needed it, I have a real ballistic vest and helmet. My Mini-14 uses the same ammo as the AR platform weapon, has the same rate of fire, and maybe is more reliable – but it isn’t all tacticool like the black and scary ones, no picatinny rails and crap hanging off of it. My Mossberg 500 12 ga. is equivalent to the Remington 870 and that one does have piccatinny rails, a light, low-light sights, recoil absorbing stock etc., and it is black and scary. And if the occassion looks REALLY social, I can trot out my Saiga 12 ga., which is essentially an AK-47 in 12 ga. I have a good stash of 10 rd. magazines for it, but unless you have your falsies on, it tenderizes your shoulder. Well, it still tenderizes your shoulder, but it isn’t as bad with some padding. It gives black and scary gun all new meaning.
So, I guess maybe you’d have the cops drop by to see me, but that’s OK as long as they knock and identify themselves. Anyone who tries any other form of entry to my house is probably going to die.
Sorry to point this out, but you are still under dressed for “social” occasions.
You completely forgot to include a 1911 in .45ACP as part of the ensemble!
Next thing ya know, the color of your shoes and your belt won’t match!
“Perhaps Homeland Security needs a central database into which all purchases of rifles, gas masks, body armor and ammo should be reported.”
Perhaps we need a registry in which we track the names and addresses of everyone who advocates totalitarian “solutions”.
You know, just in case.
Good idea. And lets make these goose-steppers verify that they are using their real names too. No more hiding in anonymity. If they have a point to make they should have the stones to make it with their real identity. And keep a central database of their names, locations (updated from their cellphones), work places, and comments, just in case they violate some law sometime.
The vest is irrelevant … it wasnt body armor, it was a carrying device. Should we also ban diaper bags? They’d do the job about as well, especially if they had a shoulder strap.
Fully automatic weapons are not banned…they could not BE be banned in the (1920′s?) because of that pesky annoying Second Amendment.
So they are, *ahem* merely “taxed” by the Federal Government, which has the power to tax all things that COULD, but dont HAVE to, cross a state line.
And, as they are subject to such high and precicely accounted for TAXES at each transfer, extremely detailed and complex requrements are needed to account for evey detail these “taxes”…such as finger prints, diagrams of storage of said ‘Tax Reciepts”, compliance visits by Federl Agents to ensure the “tax reciepts” are never too far from those taxed “things”.
States my add additional “requirements” for those good citizens wishing to PAY such Federal taxes.
You may Apply in any State of the union to “pay” for a machine-gun tax, and thus by pure coincidence be in posession of one…
But MANY states (New Jersey for instance) require such things as a letter from a Judge..or several, or the unanamous agreement of the State Supreme Court attesting to, and specifically and enumerating, the various and plentiful Public Good to be arrived at by allowing YOU to pay such a tax, and (again, by mere coincidence) posess such an unstrument.
Fully automatic weapons are NOT banned…they could not BE banned in the (1920′s?) because of that pesky annoying thing called Second Amendment.
So they are, *ahem* merely “taxed” by the Federal Government, which has the power to tax all things that COULD, but dont HAVE to, cross a state line.
And, as they are subject to such high and precisely accounted for TAXES at each transfer, extremely detailed and complex requirements are needed to account for every detail these “taxes”…such as finger prints, background checks, and diagrams of storage of said ‘Tax Reciepts”, plus yearly compliance visits by Federal Agents to ensure the “tax stamps and receipts” are never too far from those “things” which are taxed. Oh yes, and in 1986 they decided no NEW tax revenue was needed, so no NEW fully automatics were to be made available to the public at large. Perfectly constitutional, because nothing was “banned”
You may lawfully, in any State in the Union, apply to “pay” a machine-gun tax, (or Short Barreled Rifle Tax, Short Barreled Shotgun Tax, Sound Suppressor Tax, Destructive Device Tax, or Any Other Weapon tax) and thereby, by the purest of unintentional coincidence, thus find yourself in possession of one of these things…
The only problem is, States, under the 10th amendment, may indeed add additional “requirements” for those good citizens wishing to PAY such Federal Taxes, and do so WITHOUT infringing upon their 2nd Amendment rights.
MANY states (New Jersey for instance) require such things as a letter from your Local Law Enforcement Representative (Police chief) to a District Judge, attesting to and specifically enumerating, all the various and plentiful Public Good to be arrived in your community, by allowing YOU to PAY such a tax, and (again, by mere coincidence) happen to then possess such an instrument. This Judge, duly convinced of the public benefit to be obtained, would then submit this letter indicating such opinion BACK to the Police Chief, who would then include such unanimous approval as required in the “State packet” to obtain the FEDERAL STAMP for which the TAX would then be collected. A high but NOT IMPOSSIBLE threshold for a private citizen to (theoretically) meet.
You see, even the Government knows they don’t have a Constitutional leg to stand on when it comes to “banning” any kind firearm…that’s why that “paper dance of impossible complexity” exists under their TAXING Authority…
And why they never want to address local “assault weapon/magazine bans” as Second Amendment Violations. They are afraid, like with “Heller”, their house of cards will implode if they do.
They are just waiting, biding their time with obfuscations, loopholes and tripwires, for the Second Amendment to be “with precedent”, re-interpreted as not a right, but a government controlled activity.
Sorry for the double post. Hit submit before I was done.
My Bad
Glad I live in a state and county where the CLEO has a set time every week where he will be at the front desk (Tuesday Mornings) to sign the paperwork for such weapons.
And it’s one of the reasons I vote for him
Howard,
I hope you are the Good Doctor with that “MD”
Otherwise….Maryland?
You get Class 3 stuff in MARYLAND?
Are ya sure?
I thought they were like Jersey and New York…a snowballs chance in hell to get any full auto stuff.
Which is why I moved to my current, Class-3 friendly location
And here we have yet another example of liberal minds advocating something without considering the logical ramifications of what they are advocating.
Suppose, in a parallel universe, Bloomberg got what he wanted and all cops all across the country go on strike – what do you think is going to happen when ‘the people’ discover the cops will no longer intervene in crimes, either to stop them while in progress or to apprehend the criminal after the crime has been committed?
First thing ‘the people’ will do is arm themselves. Those already owning guns will be at an immediate advantage, those who do not will be running around trying to beg, borrow, or steal a gun for their own protection.
The end is a much more generally armed population.
Next result, vigilante justice. If the cops – and by extension the judicial system – will not apprehend murderers and rapists and thieves, I fully expect large segments of the civilian population will decide to take matters into their own hands and dispense a little bit of justice on their own.
The end result is a much faster, though perhaps less thorough, trial and punishment procedure.
Take the case of the murderer in Colorado. Under this scenario, he probably would have been shot dead at the scene by numerous civilians bearing their arms in defense of themselves and their loved ones.
If he had not been shot dead on the spot, but instead was apprehended and then tried by a hastily self-organized posse, then odds are he would already have been swinging from a rope when the sun came up that morning.
Hmmmm….maybe Bloomberg is on to something here without realizing it…
I like your way of thinking. It’s not like the majority of cops actually prevent anything from happening anyway.
Hehe…imagine Bloomberg & Co. trying to roll THAT situation back afterwards!
If people realized they could take care of matters a bit more succinctly themselves without fear of the heavy hand of the state coming down on them for (gasp!) possessing a weapon, and that they could ward off the criminal element themselves – and even mete out a bit of justice themselves in situations so obvious as the Colorado case without spending years feeding and housing this jerk in prison as his case wound its way through the criminal justice system – I have a feeling society in general would not want to go back to the same old way of doing things once the strike was over.
“First thing ‘the people’ will do is arm themselves. Those already owning guns will be at an immediate advantage, those who do not will be running around trying to beg, borrow, or steal a gun for their own protection. Not just guns, either. Those that can’t obtain guns will arm themselves with whatever they can to protect themselves – tasers, knives, bludgeons, pepper spray – even things like spray-on oven cleaner, nunchuks, brass knuckles, and pellet and BB pistols. Heck, we might even see the return of home-made “zip guns”. It’s like when Great Britain imposed their draconian gun ban, reports of stabbings shot up.
So did formerly great Britain’s incidence of actual gun violence….
Don’t forget to include a wasp/hornet killer spray can in your arsenal. They shoot a stream several yards, and I’m told the stuff plays nearly as much havoc on the eyes as pepper spray.
As for armed citizens shooting the Colorado gunman, they’d have been thrown in jail instead. Turns out CCW is illegal in Aurora and many other CO cities. While the state has a good CCW law, apparently it has no “pre-emption” statute that prohibits cities or counties from enacting their own restrictions. Florida has had pre-emption since 1987, but until last year it had no teeth — no penalties for violation. As a result, several cities and counties had flouted the law and imitated Aurora. Now that those elected officials face civil and criminal sanctions for their defiance, those illegal laws are being repealed.
The Tucson police did stike in the 1960s. Violent and all other crimes dropped through the floor. Why? Several serial robbers, burglers were interviewed and asked why they weren’t out haveing a field day. They answered that they were not even going to leave there homes! Again, why? Well their resoning was that normaly if they did something illegal the victims would call the police and they would either get away of be out on bail in no time. If there was no police to call the victims were likely to shoot the criminals dead! Yes, they depended on the police to keep them safe.
Thread winner.
If the police went on strike, then decent, honest, law-abiding citizens would be free to take matters into their own hands, without having to worry about PC nonsense. The crime rate would plummet as the criminal element was removed from the gene pool, with extreme prejudice.
Bloomberg seems to be under the impression that the citizenry would beg for the police to come back, and would be willing to do anything to make that happen. I don’t think he has the first clue how events would really play out.
Bloomberg, the American people want guns… they don’t want an unsafe, crime-ridden city like you seem to want.
I wonder if the little pipsqueak uses any armed bodyguards.
As the Mayor he’s directly protected by a detail from the NYPD, and it’s reasonable to assume that as a billionaire he has some private security as well.
So yeah, he advocates disarmament from behind a wall of armed men. Typical liberal.
I laugh whenever he brags about riding the subway. He’s got a detail everywhere he goes.
And the only people riding in the car with him are pre-cleared.
But how often does he ride the subway? There was a news report a week or two ago about his aides using a (home) room air conditioner and a long extension cord to keep his limo comfortable while it was parked (since he’s banned idling cars).
I wonder who paid for the AC, the aides to hold it and the electricity to run it?
OK, they can go on strike…..that will help city budgets considerably.
I’ll be responsible for my own protection (just as I am now). Seems a win-win to me.
Of course, Bloomberg is condemning his serfs to death, since they are not allowed to have the basic human civil right of self defense.
I don’t really care – as long as they blow the bridges up (that goes for DC, too!) so the maniacs can’t cross into civilized territory!
Always said John Carpenter had the right idea 30yrs ago.
Yeah…got to keep them out of the United States…
Bloomberg is beginning to display symptoms of phobias; irrational fear of firearms, big gulps, salt, trans fats. Since Bloomberg was first elected with term limits, then those limits to his continued service as mayor were eliminated, voters of NYC should be concerned that they will be re-electing a mentally unbalanced individual to a lifetime rule over the city.
He was unbalanced when they first elected him….too bad he’s screwing up the rest of the United States also.
If they were interested in lowering crime vice controlling people they would be pushing for the one type of gun law that actually has shown a correlation with lowered crime rates.
Shall issue concealed carry permits.
The Cinemark Theaters were a gun-free zone by company policy in a shall issue state. I believe that was more of a factor to the shooter than the movie that was playing there.
(The Joker has green hair, not red)
Most cops actually support armed citizens. It makes the streets safer and their job easier. They, more than anybody else knows that when seconds count they are minutes away.
Maybe in “flyover territory” they do…
Most urban, east coast BLUE Boys in Blue I trained with, were closet Facists. Lots of free ammo and range time for the ones who “liked guns”, but nothing but contempt for any private citizen who might ever be (lawfully) armed.
They were “the law” so naturally they should have them.
But the peons, expecting to armed in His Lordship’s presence?
How DARE they.
They would march us all into Mass Graves if the order was ever given.
Count on that.
Mike Bloomberg, the modern Calvinist, mayor of Geneva-on-the-Hudson, and He who is not to be denied.
So Mayor Assistant Village Idiot advocates that cops do something reckless, irresponsible and unsafe and endanger their communities? I would like this overbearing insufferable cretin to take a swan dive off the Empire State building.
I think the people should go on strike until we get a better class of leaders. Police should strike until we vote into power mayors who do not contribute.
There is one glaring problem which thinking people should gather together; it is the recognition, and societal response to evil. Why will it take a decade, or more, for society to sanction the person who killed a dozen people and shot two score more? There should be an intense, short term effort to determine if he, and he alone, destroyed other people’s lives. Once that is done, we should demand justice, not vengeance, or rehabilitation. We should not debate endlessly, the technical subtleties of executing him. If he dies within a few minutes, that meets the Constitutional requirements on just punishment. Justice demands that he not live a long time,years, after his guilt is determined.
There is another issue which people should ponder: a societal defense, under our basic law of self defense. It is the means to identify unstable personalities, and withhold their right to legally obtain weapons. This has three issues: how to do it, how to prevent our legal system from cheating, and how to prevent clever people from circumventing it. It may mean a tiered approach to weapons. Some may use single shot weapons, others pistols but not rifles (range related), some others have wider rights. In the sudden event of combat, those who carry need instant identification, or they risk being targeted by police, and other armed citizens. “Friendly fire” is a real danger. Police address this by badges, and today, ubiquitous phones. It would not be a great difficulty to design a weapon to call 911 with a safety release, trigger pull, or weapon draw. And/or carry a visible identifier.
The conflict between government control, and personal freedom should exploit modern technologies. Concrete heads, on all sides, do not help.
Accept that we cannot prevent Murders.
There is simply no way prevent, but with like violence in self defence at the point of contact, the actions of the evil or the deranged.
The greatest mass murder in New York City was done with a mere dollars worth of Gasoline, at the Happy Land Social Club. Evil.
We must concentrate rather, on the abject FAILURE, since at least the time of Charles Manson being crowned a “celebrity”, to appropriately DEAL with the ones who DO commit these horrible crimes…
Since we do NOT justfully administer to them in the way the OVERWHELMING number of citizens demand, one cannot then speculate on the effectiveness of any Deterrent Effect rendered by Capital Punishment. We cannot honestly call swift and certain “Justice” anything but UNPERFORMED, for the 50 years or more.
And what, in these instances, IS our “Constitutional Obligation” before depriving these killers their Lives?
Due Process.
And what is the aim of a Due Process?
To reveal, as best as can be determined, The Truth.
And we can all agree, Truth is never “ unfair”, and it is never “wrong”.
It simply IS.
So then, Truth revealed, IS Due Process, completed.
Prudence demands this be done honestly, openly and in public. In this case, and all others like it, a summary of the uncontestable factual information can be presented within days. No defense allowable other than True Innocence if the crime. Let his Mother say he was with her, and not in Colorado. Let him say he was plucked at random from the crowd, and the “real” villain still at large. The Truth is something other, and in this case, it is crystal clear.
He did in deed, kill all those people. That is The Truth.
And we can therefore, morally and Constitutionally, be done with him this very week
Even IF HE IS emotionally “not responsible”, or in any way “incognizant” of the nature of his actions. Such malfunctioning of mind is clearly a continuing mortal threat to us all, in light of the previous line innocent people killed by his his instability.
He needs to be put down like a diseased animal, and save the Taxpayers, and the Prison Guards the costs in treasure and the years of emotional stress, warily guarding him for the next 70 years.
Present The Truth, and be done with it.
All else is insult, and injustice.
Every day this animal lives, is a further crime against The Republic, and her injured, weeping citizens, who need Justice to be done.
NOW.
Good. Let the badge punks go on strike. The sooner the productive people in this country realize what a waste of skin the modern cop represents, the sooner all police and sheriff’s departments can be disbanded. Once the ex-cops and sheriffs are permanently blackballed, new departments can be established with strict contractual codes of conduct enforced (contracts should, of course, specifically waive “qualified immunity” for criminal acts committed under color of authority).
““After all, police officers want to go home to their families. And we’re doing everything we can to make their job more difficult but, more importantly, more dangerous,…”
Despite all the “professional” myth, most cops start out with a GED or a HS diploma and bring the same qualifications to the job as any other unskilled or simi-skilled entry level job candidate required to pass a background check and pee in a bottle. In many jurisdictions the background check is not very rigorous and often is non-existent if the candidate is well-connected or is a minority. Not all jurisdictions require a pre-employment drug test and very, very few employ random drug testing.
Cops receive a few weeks or a few months of “academy” training at employer expense and then a few weeks or a few months of field training in which they work with and at the direction of a more senior officer who usually gets paid a premium for being a Field Training Officer. Almost all their training after they complete academy and field training is at employer expense and much of that training, like almost all training for government employees, is much more like a paid junket than an activity to impart new skills and knowlege. Many jurisdictions pay for college courses for them and give them time off to take the courses then pay them more if they get a degree, 5-7% pay premiums are common for cops with law enforcement related degrees. Just like other college courses paid for by employers or required by employers and which result in more pay for the employee, the colleges are well aware of what is going on and rest assured if your employer is paying for you to go to school, if you show up from time to time, you will pass the course and wind up with that degree and more pay.
The reality is that the cop usually brings about the same knowledge, skill, and ability to the job as the janitor hired the same day – and often the janitor has to pass the background check and drug test too. The reason the cop gets paid twice as much or more than the janitor is the consequence of his errors and the fact that we expect him/her to be exposed to danger. The danger is priced in and one tires of guys making $100K/yr. or more whining about it especially since their qualifications wouldn’t get them half that much pay if it weren’t for the danger and the fact that we give them dangerous tools to deal with that danger, tools that they sometimes use inappropriately.
The interesting irony for the archtypal nanny-state do-gooder, Bloomberg, who likes to make everything illegal, is that I don’t think there is a jurisdiction in the US in which it is legal for cops to strike. So, Mr. “There Oughtta Be a Law” is urging cops Nationwide to break the law.
My grandfather, father, brother, five cousins and scores of family friends all worked in NY laaw enforcement, mostly the NYPD. Their combined experience on the job would be centuries. I grew up in a cop household.
Based on that experience I have to say that everything Art says here is basically correct.
Bloomberg’s problem is he is a small-minded man with no appreciation for history or the careful consideration of the founding fathers in crafting the constitution. The founding fathers saw the government as being as much of a threat to individual freedom as anything else. Which could only be countered by assuring the citizinry certain freedoms, access to firearms being one of the most important.
In the grand scheme of things, governments have killed their own citizens in far greater numbers than criminals. The number killed by spree killers isn’t even roundoff error compared to the millions killed by the governments of Germany, Cambodia, Vietnam, China, USSR, Rwanda etc. etc. etc. Spree killers are the unfortunate side affect of the insurance policy against the potential slaughter of millions by our own government. It can happen here. Our leaders and citizens are just humans, we are not fundametally different creatures than others around the globe.
The Problem For Democrats Is The Gun Lobby Is The Majority Of Americans
…..Charles Krauthammer
In Washington State there was a “Common Sense” Gun Control initiative (I-676 as we called it) that was voted on. (Washington is a Deep Blue State!)
The Initiative was on the General Ballot not a special election, yet there were over 100,000 ballots cast with nothing other than a NO on I 676 voted for.
The final count on Initiative 676, the so-called “Handgun Safety Act” in Washington state, was:
FOR 496,633 29.4%
AGAINST 1,193,720 70.6%
The NO vote carried EVERY county in the state, even King County (56.7% NO), the most heavily populated, urbanized county in the state. Only one county east of the Cascades voted below 80% against the initiative (Whitman, at 78%). Even largely urban Spokane County voted 83.2% against. Only four counties west of the Cascades voted below 70% (San Juan, 54.9%, King 56.7%, Clark 65.8% and Clallam 67.5%).
You won’t hear the I-676 vote mentioned in the national media for one reason: it refutes the politically correct myth that “the people want more gun control.” As in Massachusetts in 1976 and California in 1982, Washington’s electorate rejected this gun control measure overwhelmingly.
Interestingly, before the election I-676 was described as a moderate, simple gun safety measure. After the election, and the surprising (to them) turnaround vote, the few media pundits who mentioned it at all excused its defeat by calling it a “harsh gun control law.”
Despite whining about “the NRA buying the election” and “lying to the people,” in fact the only lies were by I-676 proponents. Their own speakers guide instructed activists to “avoid getting bogged down in details,” “stress concept over content,” and “avoid the truth where it doesn’t support your argument.”
The NRA, who provided 2/3 of the $3.3 million collected to defeat I-676, spent about $28 per member in Washington, as opposed to $127 per member by Washington Ceasefire, the state’s Handgun Control affiliate.
Billed as a “grassroots movement,” I-676 proponents had a contributor list of about 1,000 individuals. 90+% of their money came from within a 20 mile radius of Seattle. WeCARE (Washington Citizens Against Regulatory Excess), the PAC formed to oppose the initiative, had a contributor list of more than 11,000. Who had the grassroots movement?
Law enforcement opposition to I-676 played a critical role in the election. While I-676 proponents claimed to have l/e support (1 sheriff and 6-7 police chiefs), 33 county sheriffs came out in opposition to the initiative, and more than 7,500 of the state’s 9,000 police officers opposed it as well.
The pro-I-676 side bragged about their endorsement by the Washington State Medical Association, but declined to mention that WeCARE was not even permitted to make its case to the WSMA (I guess they feel 1st Amendment rights are as subject to restriction as 2nd Amendment). If you examine the number of physicians and other medical professionals listed with the state’s Public Disclosure Commission as contributing for/against I-676, you will see that WeCARE reported more than twice as many doctors and health professionals than Washington Citizens for Handgun Safety (Washington Ceasefire’s cover name for the election). (PDC data is available from file 06.txt at http://www.washington.edu/pdc)
Whoever runs against him next time needs to make this an issue: “Your own mayor thinks your police department should go on strike to make a political point.”
So…the mayor wants the city’s defense to go on strike until the people willingly give up their guns? I’m sorry, but I am beginning to doubt this man made his own money. If there would be a cry for people to buy MORE guns it would be when the entire police force decides it wants to go on strike.
Besides, how many police did James Holmes kill? That’s right, he didn’t kill ANY.
Sheesh, did New York City ever make a mistake amending its charter to allow him to run for a third term.
Why don’t policy officers go on strike to demand the repeal of the 5th amendment to the constitution? Thay way the could do their jobs unencombered by any silly notion that the people have ‘rights’. Bloomberg once again reveals himself to a not so closseted facist. Why again did the citizens of New York elect him?
“I don’t understand why the police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say, we’re going to go on strike. We’re not going to protect you. Unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe,” he said.
Let them strike! Let them ALL strike. They don’t protect the public anyway. I’m of the opinion we have a standing army in defiance to the Constitution anyway. Get rid of them all and we’ll think of something else! Hire Blackwater, maybe….
I’m all for gun control. Like the man said, a fairly quick hit is far better than a lightning-fast miss.
Position yourself comfortably, bracing the weapon well and holding it steady. Breathe normally, hold it on an exhale, keep the target in the sights, squeeze (don’t “pull”) the trigger. Exhale.
That’s gun control.
Bloomberg, I’ll give up my guns when you can convince me that any law will keep guns out of the hands of the bad guys.
Nice!
Thats a good start for Target Shooting and Weapons Familiarization…repeated muscle memory will allow you to get the muzzle out, sights automatically aligned right at at where its pointing, every time without thinking…
After you master that, comes this….you need to grab that thing like its a club…death grip strong, and rip it from your holster with (practiced!) violent authority….Death grip strong, no fancy “high thumb” nonsense because you just MIGHT have to fight over it, or eventually use it as a bludgeon.
Both eyes open, focus on the threat…you dont EVER NEED to look through the sight plane because its automatically square and level at the target from all that “practice”, right? You can “present” forward into a “traditional” stance with support hand and fire on instinct, but that takes time, and risks a grappling match if he’s close in or charging.
If he’s REAL close (like, up in your face close?), keep your gun close, jacked up near your armpit like you’re shooting arm is in the “bottom of a knuckle push-up” position, so he cant grab at it too easily. Support hand is anywhere it NEEDS TO BE (pushing family away, already reaching for that extra mag, maybe pushing his weapon away?) anywhere but NEAR your own muzzle.
Dont worry, the slide on an auto has plenty of room to move. The “locked meat pocket” its in will contain recoil and minimize muzzle flip. CONVULSE on the trigger as FAST as you can. Forget the flash. Screw the noise, worry about hot brass later. Rounds out, fast as you can, and fall on top of him if you have to, to contain this guy and protect vulnerable others in the area from him…
If he still offers any resistance at all, shoot him again, or my personal favorite muzzle thrusts (not swings!) to puncture/crush his face and eyes if you’re out of rounds by now. Short stumpy revolvers are best for that, but any auto work too, the slide compresses only so far before you have some good crushing/grinding wound ability…Think VIOLENCE and SPEED, anything to keep him occupied and unable to use his weapon, to buy you some time to reload and shoot him some MORE if need be, or keep him down till he bleeds out….whatever it takes so that HE dies, or is so massively f’ed-up, that he cant continue to hurt you or anyone else present.
Practice single handed shooting damn near EXCLUSIVELY, and throw in a bunch of “other hand” one-handed shooting in too. One handed reloads and immediate action drills are possible, there are many techniques that work. If you’re an Ace Shooter right handed, for gods sake, work on “plan B” to draw and USE you gun safely and effectively with your OTHER (left) hand. Bad guys tend to play rough, and you MIGHT get hurt BEFORE this thing is over.
Basically, you can regularly empty a magazine with a into a 6-inch circle with a 2-handed grip at 20 feet, thats great…now its time to “up your game” and prepare your self for a real Gun (slash) Fight, because not every lethal encounter is an (all-one-word) “Gunfight”.
One minor quibble…do NOT shove a semi-automatic based upon Browning’s designs INTO a body.
As the muzzle and slide are forced backwards on the pistol frame as you shove into the perpetrators body, the disconnect ends up partially activated which prevents the pistol from firing.
Only shove the gun/use it as a club/pistol whip the SOB AFTER you are certain you are out of ammo.
It’s actually a great idea:let’s replace the inept,hamstrung,and ineffectual police “forces”-good only for giving traffic tickets and intimidating the law abiding, with a people’s militia .Bloomberg’s demented proposal will lead to a doubling of the number of gunowners in the US.This should be subject to one condition though: the shrill and hysterical nanny boy mayor must first give up his bodyguards.
I can see why he has gotten all you conservatives upset. The last thing conservatives want is the ability to discuss something in an intelligent manner. Just look at the responses here.
Bloomberg does not want to get rid of guns he wants to get rid of the collective insanity in which a society says it’s ok for an individual to be able to buy magazine rounds that hold 100 rounds or have a gun that holds 30 rounds. The collective insanity that says it’s ok for State’s not to supply the national database the names of disturbed individuals because the NRA doesn’t like it. The collective insanity that says it ok to not have background checks on everyone that buys a gun. The collective insanity that says it’s ok for someone to buy 20 semi-automatic weapons at a time with no reporting of that purchase. The collective insanity that states I can then sell those weapons without ever having report who I sold them to.
I do not want to take your precious guns away. I do and I will try to bring some sanity to what appears to be an insane discussion by what appears to be disturbed individuals who have no idea of what a functioning society in a socially conscious world should be.
Like most progressive ideas we will win in the long run as stupidity gives way to reasoning and a much better society.
Oh yes, encouraging the police force to strike is just brilliant.
I think it should start in Boston.
Well Rob Mitt Romney did sign into law an Assault weapons ban when the law expired in 2004. Of course that’s just for the state of MA which will do nothing as we have a mobile society where just over the border people can buy guns at gun shows by just flashing a wad of bills.
And he knows in the current era that he had better tread lightly on the subject.
You notice neither he nor Obammer have come charging out of the gate demanding more gun control? There’s a reason for that, they both know it’s a loser for them.
I have no trust in Romney not to try to stab gun owners in the back when he gets a chance, but for the time being he is our weasel so we support him. The second he promotes gun control he knows he loses a lot of support.
Non sequitor.
You’re not the clearest-thinking person, are you?
Why do you insist on demonstrating to one and all that you are both stupid (which I suppose can’t be helped) and ignorant (which can)?
It is a violation of federal law to purchase a firearm in any state you are not a resident of, if owning that firearm in your resident state is illegal. So, your strawman is already a criminal….just like anyone who commits a crime with or without a firearm.
You claim that you have been the victim of violence…..I doubt it: Every victim of violence I’ve ever encountered (and as an emergency physician I see quite a few) has wanted to have the means to defend themselves in a future encounter. Even ‘liberals’, pacifists, and others who are short-bus candidates. Somehow I think that you’re just trying to buff up your ‘street cred’….or the only knife you ever had at your throat was made of rubber and in a school play.
Finally, criticizing others for pointing out the sheer idiocy of Bloombergs comments simply demonstrates how totally clueless your ideology is. Admit it, you’re a troll.
Howard you must be the most naïve MD who works in an ER that I’ve come across. You must think that all those guns that are illegally on the guns in big cities were purchased illegally. There weren’t as people can purchase many guns at guns show legally and then poof they find themselves on the streets. Maybe you should ask yourself why the NRA doesn’t want those gun show loopholes closed or limiting how many guns a person can buy – it’s because the gun manufacturers don’t want them too.
You get all giddy because you think well they are criminals so what can we do about it we’re helpless – you sound like a fool. We can and should limit and regulate how many guns a person can purchase but obviously you don’t. Is it because you need the business? If you’re a ER physician you should have some brains and understand how all those people get shot and with what type of guns? Legal or illegal?
Well, we aint talkin bout Romeney, are we?..
Were talking about a Public Servant, threatening the populace with potential violence, if the Public doesnt get behind his plan to erode of the very Rights said Public Servant is SWORN to uphold…
I cant think of anything MORE despicable THAN that, FOR an Elected Official to do.
Its absolutely…..Treasonous
In your response to MD, you claim the pistols are purchased legally and that is how they get onto the street.
Exactly how does this work in NYC, when as far as I know NYC residents cannot even attend a gun show in that town – and Lord help them if they even try to go through the paperwork to purchase one.
Yet, I think we all can agree that NYC is awash in illegal firearms….
I’m pretty sure he was using a metaphor or maybe he might have been to nuanced for you
I no, mes bakwuds hillbilly soo stoopid, me not no wut hes talkeng bout.
On those ocassions when you win, you do it by lying about your actual positions and by relying on the fact that the leftist controlled schools have made the res publica progressively more stupid.
Stop whining
Another argument in favor of the Totalitarian Registration Act.
The instant background check has been in place for year (it was supported by the NRA).
Those 20 weapons would have been reported, as they have been for years, via the BATF 4473 form.
The NRA and other groups have opposed additional firearms registration because:
1. The people going through the permit process rarely commit crimes. For evidence, see the percentage of concealed carry permits in Florida that are revoked (FL posts this info online). It is a fraction of a percent.
2. Gun registration has historically been used to facilitate confiscation later on.
As for the magazine restrictions: Big mags = a lot more weight and much more prone to jamming. Please provide evidence where a ban (NJ has magazine size restrictions) has had any effect on gun crime. You won’t find it. Again… the people who are buying guns legally are not the problem.
Let’s stop going through metal detectors or taking pour shoes off when flying. Very few people have hijacked plans and we haven’t stopped to many using those methods so why keep them going.
As for the instant background check – both you and I know that’s not used in all cases so stop playing these games. Let’s close the gun show loophole that we can drive a truck through. Let’s start to report to the central database people who have mental issues. Let’s stop selling guns to people who are on the no fly list until after being checked out. Is that to much to ask?
What “gun show loophole”?
The “no-fly” list is notoriously inaccurate, membership is by bureaucratic fiat with no court review, AND 95% OF THE PEOPLE ON THE NO-FLY LIST AREN’T ALLOWED TO POSSESS A FIREARM IN THE US ANYWAY, AS THEY ARE NOT CITIZENS.
Just stop — your ignorance is embarrassing you.
Poor rob I wish you were half as intelligent as you think you are. There have been many case where any individual can go into a gun show and purchases weapons without any background check or even showing an ID- do you doubt that is not happening – please do so you can display your ignorance for all to see.
I don’t care how inaccurate the list is -m let’s work to make it more accurate. But the amazing thing is the NRA doesn’t want funding to go to make the list more accurate just like they don’t want the state to update the database for mentally disturbed individuals. Maybe because some here might land on it ya think?
@ BostonLib…
At every gun show I’ve been to for the past 30 years or so, they make you go through the (increasingly high) paperwork to purchase a firearm.
You show just how full of it you are by making such assertions when it’s clear you have no idea what you are talking about.
“Let’s stop going through metal detectors or taking pour shoes off when flying. Very few people have hijacked plans and we haven’t stopped to many using those methods so why keep them going.”
Actually, those x-rays and TSA grope and search operations they carry out in the airport lobby have not stopped a single terrorist in the past 12 years.
However, fellow passengers have converged en mass and subdued would-be terrorists.
Guess that just continues to make our point that the private citizen is the best positioned to deal with those who would inflict pain and death on others.
“As for the instant background check – both you and I know that’s not used in all cases so stop playing these games.”
Incorrect, every public sale of a firearm manufactured after 1898 via FFL MUST go through a background instant check system.
“Let’s close the gun show loophole that we can drive a truck through.”
What “gun show loophole” are your referring to? If you by a gun at a gun show you have to go through the same steps as if you were in a gun store. (pssst…your ignorance is showing.)
“Let’s start to report to the central database people who have mental issues.”
Agreed. We’ll start by registering all libs.
“Let’s stop selling guns to people who are on the no fly list until after being checked out. Is that to much to ask?”
Except the no fly list is notoriously inaccurate and a person can be placed on a no fly list without knowing it, without knowing why, and with no recourse to correct any errors.
Why are you so comfortable taking away civil rights of the individual without due process of law?
Oh, that’s right – you’re a liberal….
Of course he’s a liberal (idiot). Doesn’t know a thing about firearms thats from first hand experience, probably never been to a gun show, certainly has never tried to purchase a firearm.
BTW, how is it that Mad Mike got off a federal conspiracy charge when he sent private detectives to southern states to make ‘strawman’ firearms purchases? He must have a special, double-secret loophole that let him commit federal firearms felonies.
Or maybe he was doing it as part of the Fast and Furious crime spree.
@ Howard Bowman, MD, didn’t you get the libtard memo? The laws are only for the little people.
On a more serious note, we truly are fast becoming a nation of the whims of the national leadership instead of remaining a nation of law.
Fine, lets do away with TSA. Good idea, who did you get it from?
And as far as instant background checks not being used in all cases, so? The right to own firearms is a basic right in the United States. It’s in the Constitution, and the USSC has affirmed that.
If you have a problem with the Constitution, too bad. I have taken an oath to support and defend it, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And it seems that you and Blooming mad mike fall into the domestic category.
Howard you can stroke your gun all you want – I don’t want to take it away from you. I just want some sane regulations but I understand insanity about this issue is widespread – seek help. If your happy about 100 round magazines being ok or 30 round clips needed for some to have their jollies good luck to you. Most of those who wrote the constitution took their guns seriously and getting the thrill of shooting 100 rounds was not high on their list as they had no idea. You want guns available to every dickhead on the street with the emotional stability of a pinhead well that will certainly fill your er. Is this a jobs plan for you?
” A functioning society in a socially conscious world” where the mayor of the most dysfunctional city on earth,calls for a national police strike,to impose his personal phobias on the nation? You’re a genius BLIB!Thanks very much for exposing Progressivism on this forum, as an ideology of fatuous state lickspittling,uninformed condescension and outright lying.BTW: BLIB,Progressivism has triumphed in Europe hasn’t i?t Those superior intelligent european progressives sure can produce prosperity,protected by gun control! Ever hear of a norwegian called Breivik? Ever hear of Jefferson, who for your information, was an gun enthusiast and would have been an enthussiastic member of the NRA had it existed in his lifetime?
We go through metal detectors and take our shoes off before flying because of muslims, not because of guns. None of the muslim terrorists on US flights has used a firearm.
“Like most progressive ideas we will win in the long run as stupidity gives way to reasoning and a much better society.”
Actually, you are winning because for the last 60 years your people have controlled what is taught in schools. In fact, the teachers of today are so dumb they couldn’t reason their way out of a paper bag. But they are masters of indoctrination as they themselves were indoctrinated.
The bottom line is the only reason progressives want a populace dumber than a bag of rocks is to control them. Dumb, disarmed people are so much easier to control than a well informed and armed electorate.
You’re absolutely right! That’s why the progressive states invest in education because we don’t want to be like say Mississippi or Georgia or S Carolina or Arkansas or Texas – where they invest in education and have the high academic result from their children. Or that we invest and practice family values with lower divorce rates and view porn at lower rates.
Yes we would be a much better country if we followed S Carolina and worshiped the confederate flag where they celebrate the Southern lifestyle of slavery. Where is was ok to rape black women, sell off their children, hang black men and beat them to a pulp. Yes Lolly we all want to be so well informed like you
You revel in your bigotry, don’t you?
Did I say anything that isn’t true? Hey some of my best friends are from the South. I do love going to Clemson games
I hate to break it to you but CA and TX have near identical public education statistics. CA actually spends a tiny bit less at the moment, but graduation rates are about the same. Minority achievement is actually slightly higher in TX. College readiness is about the same. To my shock, TX spends less on administration and more on teachers than CA.
Norm those test scores, income stats, crime and divorce rates and such by removing a prominent Democrat constituency and those states do quite well.
Pssst….you’re showing your ignorance again. Slavery was ended down here some 147 years ago.
Of course, it also lasted longer in the Union states than it did in the Southern states, and took a constitutional amendment to end there which forced Union Gen. U. S. Grant to finally free his own slaves.
His response when questioned about it was, “Good help is so hard to find.”.
The public education industry in California, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts is doing a hell of a bad job, compared to (say) Montana, all right. Got to watch out for those progressives….a dangerous bree d.
Yeah,jackass,like Progressive New York City,where Progressive schools spend $ 17,000 per student to produce a 50%drop out rate, and widespread ignorance and incompetence among non dropouts.That’s why businesses leave NY for the “backward” southern states,where home schooling and businesses educate a competent workforce,and low taxes produce prosperity.
You liberals up North are investing in your teachers unions more than in education. For the last 50 years the more you invested, the worse the results. The NEA folk are the stupidest professionals in America. It’s a sin to trust them with our children.
Most of your response is nonsense, but I will note one item: the 100 round magazine.
The Thompson sub-machine gun routinely was available throughout it’s history with large capacity drum magazines. That was just under a century ago, and it was decades before the federal government managed to squeeze in, by very questionable means, a SCOTUS ruling allowing them to tax that and other weapons to the point only the wealthy could afford them.
Prior to that, you could mail order a Thompson sub-machine gun, in full auto configuration, with a case holding both stick and drum magazines and it would be delivered straight to your home with zero paperwork as long as you had the cash to pay for it, no questions asked and no records kept.
Yet, during this time frame, I don’t recall hearing or reading about a lot of shooting sprees like the one in Colorado. The only ones shooting each other up were gangsters – in which case it was good riddance.
As for the AR class weapons system having a 100 round magazine, they have been built for this weapon almost since it’s original design became available – which was about a half century ago. Currently, you can get what is known as a “Beta Mag” that fills this role nicely. Other standard magazine capacities are 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 rounds – and likewise have been readily available for decades.
Dwelling on the technicalities does no good – you can be murdered with one bullet just as dead as you can be murdered by a hundred bullets.
This nonsense about technical specs of this or that weapon or magazine does nothing to address the mind that seeks to use this for murderous purposes.
The shooter actually switched weapons because his AR jammed – probably BECAUSE of that extra large capacity magazine!
Claiming he could not have killed or injured as many people as he did if only he had not had such a large capacity magazine ignores the very basic fact that he DID switch both weapons AND magazines during his shooting spree with no apparent loss in effectiveness on his ability to murder.
Then there is the AWB that sunset back in 2004. For a decade private citizens could not legally purchase new manufactured magazines over 10 round capacity.
That AWB prohibition did NOTHING to stop at least 3 similar shooting sprees during this time frame, and pre-ban magazines remained readily available for the entire decade this joke of a law was in effect.
A later investigation by the federal government found no evidence the law had reduced crime at all during it’s decade of enforcement.
What HAS had a demonstrable effect in reducing crime is……drumroll please…..concealed carry by private citizens.
So if you want to reduce crime, enough whining about what the private citizen has the right to purchase, and start promoting concealed carry.
What a moron NYC elected.
Cops should never be allowed to go on strike, that is an extremely irresponsible thing for a mayor of a major city to advocate, even FDR knew the dangers of this that is why he was against public employee unions. Remind me to never again travel to NYC and spend money as a tourist, I would hate to be there on the day that Bloomberg’s dystopian nightmare becomes reality; striking cops and no legally armed civilians, a free for all for criminals. What a fool Bloomberg is.
I don’t think there is a jurisdiction in the Country where cops can legally strike. Which doesn’t mean they can’t strike or engage in other illegal concerted activity, e.g., Blue Flu epidemics, and get away with it where there is a feckless or complicit management. If cops did, say, a Blue Flu, over some issue like this, so long as they kept enough guys working to avoid anything really embarrassing, most any Democrat weenie mayor would let them get away with it, and unfortunately, so would some Republicans who wouldn’t want to take the heat for disciplining or dismissing them.
“9. styrgwillidar
If they were interested in lowering crime vice controlling people they would be pushing for the one type of gun law that actually has shown a correlation with lowered crime rates.
Shall issue concealed carry permits.
The Cinemark Theaters were a gun-free zone by company policy in a shall issue state. I believe that was more of a factor to the shooter than the movie that was playing there.
(The Joker has green hair, not red)
The killing in the mall in Salt Lake by a muslim was also done in a gun free zone. It’s a good thing an off duty cop was there or more people would’ve been killed.
Funny how these libs don’t understand that the only people who obey these zones are the good guys. The bad guys must study which ones are gun free zones before they commit murder/mayhem/terror so they might get out alive.
I’ve resisted the urge to make fun of Nanny Bloomberg to this point but now it’s fair to say he’s out of his mind. As several posting above have so aptly pointed out why not urge the cops to go out and strike against the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments? All of this search warrant baloney and right to counsel during interrogation is just keeping the cops from doing their job.
I have a lot of friends who are cops and some of them share undoubtedly share the opinion expressed here by the little Il Duce of Gracie Manor. (Nearly every cop I know however has his own very extensive gun collection.) In such cases I remind them that nobody forced them to become cops and that they all volunteered for the job. They do not get to pick-and-choose the laws that they enforce as much as they would like to. U.S. citizens have a right to bear arms – Get used to it or find another line of work.
All of this is moot anyway since Mayor Bloomberg is well aware that public safety personnel, by statute, cannot go out on strike for any reason. It’s just tin-eared chest-thumping by a man desparate to prove that he’s “tough and in charge.”
How did he ever become a billionaire? He is tone deaf, and not really smart!
“He didn’t do that! Someone else made that happen!”
So, Bloomie, @ 12,000 people will die of gun related violence each year? Does that include when Gangsta A ices Gangbanger B? Cause I would consider that Gangsta A was doing a public service and as such should not be included in any accounting of gun related death; tough love maybe. Anyhow, Bloomie, if you’re serious about reducing carnage, consider regulating the behaviour responsible for the AIDs epidemic. Do you get my drift, Mr. Mayor?
You know, we could fix that 12,000 or so deaths a year simply by doing away with drug laws. We traded perhaps 200 accidental overdose deaths a year for 12,000+ drug related murders with that one.
And the $billions spent on incarceration could better be used on finding a treatment for substance abuse, mental illnesses, etc.
But no, no. The totalitarian SOB’s like Mad Mike insist on telling us what is best for us.
Bloomberg is losing is every loving mind. There are already laws about gun possession by minors as well as purchase. It is already illegal for a felon to possess a gun or purchase one. It is already permitted for state agencies in charge of mandatory background checks to deny the sale of a gun to a person with a psychiatric history.
And just to annoy him, few citizens can own a “gun” defined in the US international Traffic in Arms Regulations as a having a caliber greater the .50. Everything .50 and below that is a firearm. And you cannot own every kind of firearm. Many require a federal firearms license to possess much less own.
Also, the police make it safer for criminals. No police, you shoot the guy breaking in. With police, you call the police to arrest him. If the police are on strike or unable to provide adequate protection, the people have a right to defend themselves and their property. Government fails, it falls to the People to pick up the slack.
The people in New York City have been disarmed, by a century of racist gun control (the Sullivan Act was specifically designed to disarm immigrants from eastern and southern Europe so the Irish gangs wouldn’t have to worry about getting killed).
So, they won’t be shooting anyone.
Well, first of all, the police cannot legally strike, a minor problem for Bloomberg who was a democrat before he was a republican–which is sort of like observing Romney was for Obamacare in Mass. before he was against to big to fail Romneycare for everyone. Secondly, since the individual businessman doesn’t build Home Depot without the state’s collusion, the democratic left’s propaganda position, then that individual joker and former PHD candidate Mr. Holmes doing the first real life movie massacre didn’t do that actual creative destruction. It was really the government’s doing by enabling the million or so imported Glocks and Sigs from such European bastions of gun control as Switzerland, Austria, and Germany. Of course, just about every Swiss male has a fully automatic, GI issued assault rifle at home in the closet. The same Europeans that turn up their noses at the American’s “gun culture” and its cowboys have no qualms over building those weapons and making money on the small arms trade to the Americans. Curious, in a country with much stricter gun control but with an epidemic of rapes caused by Muslims refusing to assimilate but being multicultural with the Danish ladies, apparently the government created an individual Brevik, the proverbial Euro-cowboy as it were, to massacre the children of that government’s cadre in a fit of cosmic what goes around comes around for allowing Muslims to run amok with their fun guns humping the Danish ladies with premeditated force. Meanwhile back on the American range, just think of Fast and Furious as official state controlled gun running south of the border with Presidential executive privilege over that gun control. The Mexican drug cartels didn’t do all that killing, it was really the American government.
All the Police do is attend the criminal after the crime. My Aunt called the police after her estranged husband kept sitting in the road in front of her house with a pistol, the police told her that’s not illegal and he had to commit a crime before they could act.
Her ex then stormed into her house, shot her five times in the face and stabbed her 25 times with a pair of scissors and raped her with a broomstick.
She went to the hospital and did survive, the ex did 9 months in Prison.
Then he was released, she had to leave town to get away from him. He stayed and got a job driving a Taxi.
A Police strike would make the courts less populated with criminals though the morgue would be full.
I think you are full of it
LOL, that the best you can do?
Do you also think that we should ban pickup trucks? More people died in a pickup truck accident this week than died in Aurora…..by your reasoning, it must be a good idea. If we only save one life………
They were illegals, exploiting our (federally Enforced) porous border…
Liberal Policies always kill the most people, but boy they sure can talk a good “its for the CHILDREN” game cant they?
There is no legitimate reason for an ordinary citizen to be armed like that.
Unless someone else armed like that is attacking me. my family or my fellow citizens. Then there would be a legitimate reason for me to be armed like that.
If someone is shooting at me and trying to kill me, I want a gun “that’s only designed to kill people”. Because in that instance, I want to kill the person trying to kill me.
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
Those who say the people should not be armed intend to do something to the people.
Precisely.
I think it would be better for you to just wear adult depends if you are so frightened that you think someone needs to be armed like that in case the other person is as well. What’s this the shoot out at the OK corral or is that your dream to be involved in one.
So if your life is threatened, you’d offer your throat?
(Or, more likely, that of another person?)
I have had a knife at my throat have you? I just don’t go around quaking in my boots frightened about everything that goes bump in the night as you appear to be.
As your hero George Zimmerman states: It was god’s will that he killed Trayvon
On the other hand, wouldn’t you want you’re daughter armed to the teeth if she faced a real threat, such as a date with a Kennedy?
If I ever am involved in one, I intend to be better armed and trained than the likely Democrat constituent that comes to oppose me. Maybe it will be a group of limpdi*ked liberals like you; that would be fun. You guys have been wanting your Helter-Skelter moment since the ’60s. When you get it, I just want to still be young enough to enjoy it.
I know that’s a wet dream of yours Artie but it won’t be me. I don’t have a gun so you will have to shoot me in cold blood and make up any old excuse that you were crapping your pants and fearful of your life.
Don’t flatter yourself, BLIB,you are not worth a bullet.As a figure of fun and a poltroon,however, you are priceless!
Boston Lib says
“I don’t have a gun so you will have to shoot me in cold blood”
Gee, why dont you post that fact, along with your ADDRESS, somewhere along the Mean Streets of Boston, Mr. “no one needs a gun” liberal?
Put YOUR families life where your Ideology is…
You seem so confident putting OTHERS in that boat….
how about YOU this time, hmmm?
What a sad reply.
So the government will protect everyone right? All elected officials and bureaucrats have the citizen’s best interests at heart and all criminals will give up their lives of crime and become contributing members of society, and all lunatics will be healed as soon as the evil miasma of guns is removed from mother Gaia.
Hmm, well in that case I will start looking for those pots of gold that those leprechauns leave everywhere.
What Blib cannot acknowledge (for doing so would result in cognitive dissonance at a fatal level) is that the police, the government, is not only unable to protect Everyone, or ANYONE, it is under no legal obligation to do so.
Yessirree…we have BostonLib’s observation that we don’t need to go about armed just in case the other guy has a weapon.
Guess in Boston the criminal element is in the habit of going about alone and unarmed as they rob, rape and pillage.
Let’s see here. We are “leaving” guns in the hands of criminals, instead of criminals going out of their way to get their own guns, all by themselves? That’s like blaming the kid for Sandusky’s behavior. Typical liberal stupidity.
Who needs laws when you have unions?
So Mayor Bloomberg is calling for an action that would likely result in an HUGE upswing in gun sales. Probably also an upswing in not only crime, but shootings, as fearful people shot first and asked questions later. Perhaps he should stick with his statements on his immigration priorities.
At least we are getting a clear picture on his ideas so we know long before he actually runs for President, we aren’t going to vote for him.
Curious mindset exists presently in the media and public sensibility in the NYC environs. There is to be an election for mayor of fun city in four months. As of now they’re no candidates no press reports (modestly in the NY Times) just a pleasant political nothingness. Like November is to come and go without a care or any semblance of a political contest. What,s going on? What is going on?
Go to any gun show and you will see a ton of blacks and latinos. Add to that the number of white Democrats who happen to own guns.
This busts the Democrat Coaliton up big time.
Gun owners, more than any other group, tend to be single issue voters.
I recently moved out of New York City. I will miss a lot of things about that place – the food, my friends, the bars, Central Park.
One of the things I will not miss is Bloomberg and his do as I say policies.
How typical of a blue state mentality. The police do not exist to serve the public—the public exists to serve the police and nasty little bureaucrats and politicians like Bloomberg. If the cops are so sensitive and deserving of protection they are unfit to hold their positions and should find another occupation more suited to their talents like male prostitution or garbage collection.
And as far as government workers going on strike they should be terminated with prejudice and all perks like retirement benefits and insurance should be permanently forfeited, and they should never be allowed to work in any government position again.
Government by the interest groups and for the interest groups needs to be stomped out, and stomped down hard.
I AGREE THAT THE COPS SHOULD GO ON STRIKE. THERE WILL BE FAR LESS CRIME ONCE YOU GET THE LARGEST STREET GANG IN AMERICA OFF THE STREETS.
PEOPLE WOULD BE JUST FINE WITHOUT THESE CRIMINALS IN THEIR BLUE MONKEY GESTAPO SUITS. EVERYONE WOULD ARM THEMSELVES AND IF YOU USE FORCE AGAINST THEM, THEY WOULD USE LETHAL FORCE AGAINST YOU.
AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY. COPS ARE NOT YOUR FRIEND….
Wolf you are sooo wrong!! The police are vital! Who else would give confiscatory tickets for citizens going 25 in a 30mph zone,to pay for their own salaries while ignoring gangbangers, rapists, and alien invaders?
Of course they ignore real criminals….Real criminals might fight back and hurt them. And every cop I’ve ever seen has as a first priority going home at the end of their shift.
To expect anything else from them is unreasonable….but since it is unreasonable, to grant them any special authority, power, immunity, or status is equally unreasonable.
Just one more reason that fatuous blowhard Bloomberg will never be elected President.
just one more reason that fatuous blowhard Bloomberg might well be elected president
I do not understand how Boomberg amassed his billions. Some of his utterances such as mounting wind turbines atop New York skyscrapers, for instance, suggest an impaired intellectual capacity. His views on gun control, police strikes, the Ground Zero Mosque, etc, hint at incipient oligophrenia. New York is a great place to visit, but I would not like to live there again.
Ok – wouldn’t have any effect on my town. Doubt New York would fare well though…
Well, we could rid the streets of criminals, if the fuzz went on strike nationwide. The citizenry would be on it’s own, accountable for it’s own protection. Open season on criminals! Bloomberg is such a braying jackass.
Excuse me, but did an elected official just threaten to ‘get’ the citizens who elected him? Because a majority of them disagree with him on a single issue? If the guy thinks that all of the police should all have the day off, he might start with the ones on his personal protection detail, since he obviously finds their services superfluous. NYC is perfectly safe, after all.
Of course NYC is perfectly safe. And so is that other big city with strict gun laws, Chicago….where 25 people were killed last weekend in shootings (despite firearms being strictly outlawed for nearly everyone). Lets thank generations of progressive politics for that safety. Oh, Detroit, too!
DC is becoming less safe since Heller passed….oh, wait: Violent crime is decreasing there.
Somethings wrong with the narrative, somewhere.
Has Mayor ban-it considered banning himself? Maybe EVERYBODY else should go on strike until the Mayor leaves. On a positive note this should kill hiz honors ambition to get elected President. One hopes.
The press will just let him back-pedal, the way they’re letting ZerObama off the hook for his ‘you didn’t build it’ gaffe.
Yo, Bullyberger–if the police strike, we’ll want to *make sure we’re well armed* Ever think of that?
Once again, in the best liberal tradition: Shut up, Bullyberger!
Bloomberg’s statement highlights a public policy shift the last 10-15 years that I find troubling. It used to be that police policy was written with *public* safety in mind. Nowadays, *police* safety is much more of an issue. Where the two things conflicted, it used to be that police safety gave way to public safety. Now, if the cop sees a private citizen holding a gun, even in his own home, he feels free to shoot the guy as many times as he wishes, because he fears for *his* safety…even if the individual has committed no crime. Now someone has put forward gun control as a reason for the public to be disarmed. Never mind what it’ll do to *public* safety, the only issue important here is what it does to *police* safety.
Makes you a little frightened, doesn’t it?
Levin Slams Mayor Bloomberg: ‘Why Don’t You Go Around Without Armed Bodyguards?’
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/07/24/Levin-Slams-Mayor-Bloomberg-Why-Dont-You-Go-Around-Without-Armed-Bodyguards
Bloomie’s really onto something here;
His personal security detail needs to obey that strike and stay home too.
He can really show us how powerful and bulletproof he really is.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if the law abiding victims of violent crime, sued the government where gun control has been imposed. Since the state has removed the ability of the law abiding citizen’s ability to adequately defend her/him self the government is complicit in the crime. Then, of course, the citizens of New York elected these Lib-tards.