Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Gun Grabber Summit -or- Summit of the Asshats

Nothing like having 10 of the biggest gun-grabber mayors in the country getting together.
The mayors of 10 major U.S. cities gathered at a summit on gun violence Tuesday, with organizers saying the federal government is not doing enough to stop the spread of illegal weapons.

"If the leadership won't come from Congress or from the White House, it will have to come from us," said New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who headed the summit with Boston Mayor Thomas Menino.

These two jack-asses make my blood boil. Especially when you get them putting out deceptive statements like this:
"Gun crime is a national problem that needs a national response," Menino said, noting that many guns used in Boston murders last year came from other states.
Yes moron, but most of them came from within your own exceptionally restrictive state and the vast majority were being used by your own home grown criminals. But, it still must be the fault of other states.

The NYTimes at least has a bit more equitable of an article.
Representatives of the gun industry accused the mayor of political grandstanding and asserted this morning that he should focus on enforcement, prosecutions and penalties rather than on gun makers and dealers.

"The policies of the Bloomberg administration on guns reek of elitism," Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said in a telephone interview. "The city hands out thousands and thousands of carry and home permits for celebrities, rich Wall Street executives, politicians and judges. The average citizens are told to take a hike, while the criminals skirt the system."

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry group that represents gun manufacturers and retailers, said Mr. Bloomberg's office had denied its request for a chance to make its case to the mayors.

Nothing like silencing those that have a different opinion. I'm sure they were strategizing on how they can vilify or incrementally cut the gun industry to death.

This quote is just cute:
Douglas A. Muzzio, a professor of public affairs at Baruch College, said Mr. Bloomberg's power may be largely limited to moral suasion.

"The mayor has two things working against him: one is the overwhelming power of the N.R.A. and two is the lack of a perception of a gun crisis," he said, referring to the National Rifle Association. "If gun violence were out of control in the cities as it was in the cowboy days of the late 80's and early 90's, he might have a better chance. That said, it might be good politics for the mayor to hold such a high-level meeting. It could crystallize the opinions of urban constituents who disproportionately suffer from gun violence."

That's quite clever. Urban areas have the most gun control regulations, and the most gun control crime. The math is simple to this guy, 2+2=3. Calling the crime levels a 'gun crisis' is distortive. Crime crisis is more correct. Would he be willing to look at the levels of crime in the urban areas rather than just gun crime? I doubt it. It doesn't follow his bent reasoning. 'Cowboy days' is fascinating as well. But we've discussed that stupidity before.

Alphecca has more in his weekly check on bias. Including this editorial which is just astounding in it's myopic understanding of reality.
What do people even need handguns for? Protection, right? However, if no one could buy or carry a handgun legally, no one would need a handgun to protect themselves. Also, it is a lie for anyone to say he or she needs a handgun in case of being shot at. The shooter would pull out a gun and shoot before the victim ever could get a gun out of his or her pants and shoot back to protect him- or herself. People who buy handguns likely are people who will use them in ways that affect others‚’ safety.
Jeff calls this person a child, I guess I agree, but someone must have dropped this child on their head a couple times too many. The whole editorial is stunningly simplistic. I'm guessing that Granted's and the geekwife's spawn could do this well, or maybe even a touch better.

This part just gives me a headache in the demonstration of a total lack of understanding of federal law.
Minnesota'’s Personal Protection Act, also known as the conceal-carry law, is very controversial legislation that allows people to carry a handgun in public with a permit. This permit is given to anyone who has not been convicted of certain violent crimes or those who have finished a prison sentence 10 years prior to applying for a permit.

This means that someone who killed someone and served time potentially could be given a gun to carry in public legally 10 years later and that the state says this is perfectly fine.

Maybe I missed the change to the federal law. I'm going to bet that the vast majority of violent crimes that get 10 years in prison are considered felonies. Maybe I'm wrong. Anyone know of a prison sentence that long for a violent misdemeanor? So, if it's a felony, then federal law makes it illegal for that person from owning a firearm. And a state regulation can't bypass that law.

Go and give Jeff a visit. The Bias Check is very interesting.

As to the mayoral assholes, I think they are pretty much a lost cause.

1 comment:

Granted said...

Well, you named it. Perfect. And lets face it, my kids, especially The Boy, are pro-gun.