Bloomberg tells cops to go on strike for expanded gun-control laws

posted at 12:01 pm on July 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Every once in a while, politicians provide examples of cluelessness so compelling that it’s incumbent on us to point it out. Last night, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg went on CNN’s Piers Morgan show to discuss the need for expanded gun control in the wake of the massacre in Aurora, Colorado last week. Bloomberg suggested that police across the country go on strike to demand greater gun control legislation (via NewsAlert):

“I don’t understand why 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 told CNN’s Piers Morgan.

“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.’’

Where to start with this nonsensical idea?  First, we have laws in most jurisdictions that prevent first responders such as police and fire agencies from going on strike at all, because of the public safety consequences.  Bloomberg is literally calling for anarchy in the streets as a way to extort unconstitutional infringements on liberty — by the police.

Perhaps Bloomberg missed a couple of civics lessons in school (which would explain more than a few of his initiatives), but police don’t get to write their own laws and impose them by force on the populace.  Neither do they get to decide whether and when they will enforce the law or let criminals run rampant in order to terrorize our communities into complying with their idea of what the law  should be.  In America, the people create the law, and the police uphold and enforce it.  If individual police officers don’t like the law, they can work through the democratic process to change those laws, or they can find another line of work.

Finally, though, Bloomberg’s proposal would only reinforce the truth that citizens have to defend themselves from crime.  Only in rare cases do police directly “protect” a citizen or keep a crime from occurring.  They respond to crimes in progress or crimes already committed in order to investigate and arrest those suspected of committing crimes.  One key reason for the Second Amendment is to prevent the need for the kind of police state necessary to protect people who refuse to defend themselves properly.  The founders understood that the local constabulary could hardly be expected to prevent thugs, ruffians, thieves, and murderers from committing crimes in the very moment, and knew that an armed citizen would at least have the ability to defend himself.  If police around the nation walked out on strike, that truth would suddenly become acutely apparent — and people would demand access to firearms to properly defend themselves, and not just during the strike, either.

We’ve seen a lot of foolish commentary in the wake of the Aurora shooting, but this may be the most irresponsible yet — and from an official in high office, no less.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

…I’m getting really REALLY really REALLY really REALLY tired of that… B A S T U R D…!!!

KOOLAID2 on July 24, 2012 at 12:35 PM

You had me until

That goes for people like Bloomberg on the far right

… er … What?

Fascism these days is pretty close to the exclusive province of the left. And Bloomberg is of the left.

OneFreeMan on July 24, 2012 at 12:35 PM

You don’t think having a police force, a patrolling police force, is a deterrent? Really?
Good grief….public educated I suppose?

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Wake up, pal. The police have no legal obligation to protect you. The DC Court of Appeals established that 30 years ago. They don’t have to do a damned thing to help you.

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Only New Yorkers could be weird enough to elect this little twit …

Jaibones on July 24, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Given how many times he’s been talked about as a presidential candidate(as an INDEPENDENT, no less), and given how dismal both the Republican and Democrat parties have been at selecting candidates…I wouldn’t get too comfortable. This totalitarian clone of Napoleon needs to be carefully watched.

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Felonious Mayor Michael Bloomberg incites police to become felons, too.

Dusty on July 24, 2012 at 12:36 PM

You can’t fix stupid.

So why do the people of NYC keep voting it back into office?

ajacksonian on July 24, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Bloomie, why don’t you make the NYPD do that for the next week or so to show the rest of us in the US what a good idea that really is. Be a leader!

TulsAmerican on July 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Jaibones on July 24, 2012 at 12:29 PM

THREE TIMES!!!!!

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

This nonsense was par for the course in the ’80s and ’90s. It was state GOP parties along with the NRA which rolled back gun control, to the wailing and gnashing of teeth of the left.

Remember this when some idiot says there isn’t a difference between the republicans and democrats.

Rebar on July 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

What a f*cking a$$clown.

MoreLiberty on July 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ, bastard!

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM

.
.
YES ! ! !
.
(except I think you’re casting undue dispersions upon bastards)

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Don’t you have some 32 oz. soft drinks you should be looking out for?

Cleombrotus on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

I’ll say it again: more dangerous than Barack Obama. Richer, better resume, and often talked about for president.

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:06 PM

I didn’t think it was possible to find a larger idiot than Obama, but we clearly have on on our hands in Doucheberg.

Kataklysmic on July 24, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I think they’re equally dangerous. They share the same beliefs, but one hides it better than the other: Obama uses a teleprompter (TOTUS) and hides what he believes and Bloomberg doesn’t and blurts it out.

What’s scary is the hordes of people who agree with them.

conservative pilgrim on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

“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 making them afraid to arrest minorities less they be called a racist.’’

fifh

DethMetalCookieMonst on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

If NYPD goes out on strike, crime will go down.

Mr. Arrogant on July 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

there’s…….there’s some…….there’s something wrong with him.

GhoulAid on July 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

1) the police cannot and do not protect everyone from crime.
2) the government and the police in most localities owe no legal duty to protect individuals from criminal attack.

When it comes to deterring crime and defending against criminals, individuals are ultimately responsible for themselves and their loved ones. Depending solely on police emergency response means relying on the telephone as the only defensive tool; Too often, citizens in trouble dial 911 . . . and die.

“Police do very little to prevent violent crime. We investigate crime after the fact.”
…Richard Mack, former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona.

It’s not just that the police cannot protect you. They don’t even have to come when you call. In most states the government and police owe no legal duty to protect individual citizens from criminal attack. The District of Columbia’s highest court spelled out plainly the “fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen.”
…Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1, 4 (D.C. 1981)

In the especially gruesome landmark case regarding the “no-duty” rule:

Just before dawn on March 16, 1975, two men broke down the back door of a three-story home in Washington, D.C., shared by three women and a child. On the second floor one woman was sexually attacked. Her housemates on the third floor heard her screams and called the police.

The women’s first call to D.C. police got assigned a low priority, so the responding officers arrived at the house, got no answer to their knocks on the door, did a quick check around, and left. When the women frantically called the police a second time, the dispatcher promised help would come—but no officers were even dispatched.

The attackers kidnapped, robbed, raped, and beat all three women over 14 hours. When these women later sued the city and its police for negligently failing to protect them or even to answer their second call, the court held that government had no duty to respond to their call or to protect them.

CASE DISMISSED!

jaydee_007 on July 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

“I don’t understand why 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 told CNN’s Piers Morgan.

I think I see the problem here.

Cleombrotus on July 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

To think this guy used to be considered a Republican. Just astonishing.

If the RNC ever puts this guy on a ticket, I will never vote Republican again.

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Welcome to “Today’s Republican Party”

Where Bloomberg is a true representative of the Party,

..Sarah Palin, not so much….

Hey RNC, see that finger I’m holding up??

ToddPA on July 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I actually watched this freak show interview last night and was having a hard time trying to figure out what was goofier; Bloomie making the moronic bozo bucket statements he was making with a perfectly straight face, or the equally moronic and completely clueless Piers Morgan acting as if he was in to midst of intellectual greatness at its zenith.

pilamaye on July 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Just to mark the occasion, I should point out that 75-round AK-47 drum magazines are on sale at Bud’s Gun Shop, only $74.99.

If dips**ts like Bloomberg get another AWB through somehow, it’ll be worth six times that. ;)

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Hey, Mikey:

STFU and have a Big Gulp and fries with extra salt.

When is this turd finally flushed from office?

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

You can’t fix stupid.
So why do the people of NYC keep voting it back into office?
ajacksonian on July 24, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Your question answers itself.

Cleombrotus on July 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Yeah, go on strike, take Bloomie with ya, I love it when people raise their hands ofr a pink slip!

insidiator on July 24, 2012 at 12:44 PM

You don’t think having a police force, a patrolling police force, is a deterrent? Really?
Good grief….public educated I suppose?

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Not too bright yourself. When I lived in a Southern California burb we had 5 officers patrolling a 500 sq mile city during the day. 3 at night and 1 for day and night on weekends. Not much of a deterrent with those numbers. I now live in a rural area of Arizona and the Sheriff’s office has fewer to patrol a larger area. They have also told many of us that they aren’t responding to our areas and to take care of the problems ourselves. The only deterrent where I live is that everybody is armed. Crime rate is actually quite low because of it.

chemman on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Between high taxes and idiotic pronouncements like this; how many NYC residents have decided to move to more fertile ground? When will Fox News wise up and move?

meci on July 24, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Fox News is every bit as much a part of the NY/DC corporate propaganda machine as the rest, even if they focus their appeal to a different audience they’re still a corporatist entity of Wall Street that embraces failed Republican faction of the status quo.

FloatingRock on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

You don’t think having a police force, a patrolling police force, is a deterrent? Really? Good grief….public educated I suppose? right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Police patrol every neighborhood of every crime scene.

Akzed on July 24, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Thanks Akzed, I was about to spit my bit for a retort.

right2bright, of course they are a deterrant, however there is still some crime, right, well if you are on the wrong end of that crime you better be prepared or your demise will be an investigation vs protection.

doublee on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

While police MAY want large magazines banned or registry of large ammo purchases, I doubt that a majority would support Bloomberg’s idea of gun bans. I have heard where police actually advised certain people to keep a firearm for protection. What we really need is concealed carry by responsible people who are more likely to be at a crime scene than a police officer.

Maybe, Bloomberg should go on strike and see if the people offer him anything to come back.

KW64 on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

I think for most of the country if the police went on strike no one would notice. Like people would miss that highly trained army of traffic citation dispensers pulling them over for seat belt violations or going 8 miles over the speed limit.

bannor on July 24, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Why doesn’t Bloomberg just go ahead and say the police should go around roughing people up until they get more gun country laws?

pedestrian on July 24, 2012 at 12:09 PM

In the 1950′s when California was a real “open carry” state, LAPD just shot and killed anyone with a gun. No problem, the fix was in.

CrazyGene on July 24, 2012 at 12:49 PM

While police MAY want large magazines banned or registry of large ammo purchases,

KW64 on July 24, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Who gives a crap what the police want? If they don’t want the job they can quit. We have too many people in prison for non violent offenses already and that would suggest that we have too many police already. The government isn’t the solution, it’s the problem.

FloatingRock on July 24, 2012 at 12:50 PM

There were 18 killings in NYC last weekend !! Is Bloomie talking about the NYC police??

Get your own house in order before you start ragging on the neighbors!! Maybe NYC needs 3x as many police. 5x maybe? Let’s keep the people safe — or maybe concealed carry would do the trick and cutting the police force by 20%.

KenInIL on July 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Well, I guess that means we’d all have to enforce the law ourselves. Might work.

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM

The so-called “land of the free, home of the brave” is the biggest police state in the world with spy drones flying over the entire planet. We have more people in our gulags, excuse me, prisons than anybody else in the world.

FloatingRock on July 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM

This is just the kind of rhetoric you’d expect from a person on the down slope for going off the edge. Movie theaters ought to post a pic of Bloomberg for their employees noting, “Do not let this guy on the premises.”

Dusty on July 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Bloomberg’s “You didn’t build that” moment. (I hope.)

Socratease on July 24, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Cut Bloomy a break, he’s suffering from low-sugar levels.

Ukiah on July 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Yeah… all cops go on strike. Law abiding guns owners than are forced to form their own security forces, armed neighborhood watches and so forth. Crime might just drop dramatically.

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 12:56 PM

And to think there’s people who would actually support this guy for president. I don’t say this often, but this is one guy who should spend more time choomin’ and less time talkin’.

Marcola on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Wasn’t the idea of police going on strike addressed in the first RoboCop movie?
C’mon Bloomberg, even Hollywood knows better…

Fartnokker on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

I heard tell of a small town where the cops did go on strike one time. In anticipation, the residents armed up and became became more vigilant. The criminals, frightened of being shot rather than arrested and read their rights and given a lawyer, left town. The crime rate plummeted and the cops quickly returned to work before they damaged their job security any further.

Socratease on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Think of the tax money saved if citizens just killed criminals instead of having cops and judges and trials and district attorneys.

SouthernGent on July 24, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Bloomberg for president ……….//////////

angrymike on July 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Thank you Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson et al for demanding of the Federalists a bill of rights as a price for ratification of the Constitution. So the police can strike all they want and so long as the people are well armed they can easily replace them with new guards.

Tripwhipper on July 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM

And to think there’s people who would actually support this guy for president. I don’t say this often, but this is one guy who should spend more time choomin’ and less time talkin’.

Marcola on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM

At least he hasn’t tried to force everybody to buy expensive health insurance from his cronies.

FloatingRock on July 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM

I have heard where police actually advised certain people to keep a firearm for protection. What we really need is concealed carry by responsible people who are more likely to be at a crime scene than a police officer.

Now, granted, I am a police officer in Texas where you train your kid on a gun at, like, five, but yeah, we have definitely talked to citizens about self-protection. Guns in the hands of bad people scare not just officers, but everybody. However, guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens is better for everyone. That’s just my opinion, but in the wake of the killing in Colorado, no one I work with starting spouting off gun control drivel. Bloomberg is an embarassment.

XWing5 on July 24, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Think of the tax money saved if citizens just killed criminals instead of having cops and judges and trials and district attorneys.

SouthernGent on July 24, 2012 at 1:06 PM

More wisdom could not be spoken in fewer words.

nimrod on July 24, 2012 at 1:13 PM

When I got my ccw I asked a few officers who I didn’t know, what they thought. They told me that law abiding citizens with training HELP the police force, that’s good enough for me……..

angrymike on July 24, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Neither do they get to decide whether and when they will enforce the law or let criminals run rampant in order to terrorize our communities into complying with their idea of what the law should be.

Because that is Obama’s/Holder’s job!

airmonkey on July 24, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Floating rock @ 12:50
For the first, and probably only, time I’m in complete agreement with you…….;-D

angrymike on July 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Thomas Sowell cites data that Bloomberg hopes we’ll ignore;

Do countries with strong gun control laws have lower murder rates? Only if you cherry-pick the data.

Britain is a country with stronger gun control laws than the United States, and lower murder rates. But Mexico, Russia and Brazil are also countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States — and their murder rates are much higher than ours. Israel and Switzerland have even higher rates of gun ownership than the United States, and much lower murder rates than ours.

Even the British example does not stand up very well under scrutiny. The murder rate in New York has been several times that in London for more than two centuries — and, for most of that time, neither place had strong gun control laws. New York had strong gun control laws years before London did, but New York still had several times the murder rate of London.

It was in the later decades of the 20th century that the British government clamped down with severe gun control laws, disarming virtually the entire law-abiding citizenry. Gun crimes, including murder, rose as the public was disarmed.

Meanwhile, murder rates in the United States declined during the same years when murder rates in Britain were rising, which were also years when Americans were buying millions more guns per year…

Terp Mole on July 24, 2012 at 1:23 PM

I’m willing to give it a try. Let people protect themselves, their families and property. Of course, the people in Wyoming already do that with the police’s and state’s blessing.

lea on July 24, 2012 at 1:25 PM

What an insane idea. If Bloomberg dyes his hair red, run for the doors!

MaiDee on July 24, 2012 at 1:25 PM

The particularly disgusting part of this abortion of an opinion is that he basically wants people to be butchered, raped and pillaged so that he can prove a political point. Lives mean nothing to the Left.

jnelchef on July 24, 2012 at 1:25 PM

I thought I heard that the Batman shooter was wearing a vest. Is this true?

blink on July 24, 2012 at 12:44 PM

There seems to be some debate about that.

http://minx.cc/?post=331266

a capella on July 24, 2012 at 1:29 PM

First of all, hey Gloomy, who asked ya’? You think you have the right to speak for all of us, and then you really think you do speak for the rest of us? BTW, maybe police disagree with you and that maybe it’s the illegally obtained guns and other weapons that are used to cause most of the havoc.

stukinIL4now on July 24, 2012 at 1:30 PM

The first cops to go on strike should be Bloomberg’s taxpayer funded bodyguards.

RadClown on July 24, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Glad I live in Texas

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Ditto.

Somebody has got to get this out for everyone to see and exploit for laughs – who watches Piers Morgan, after all?

That’s without a doubt the craziest angle for gun control I’ve ever heard.

tru2tx on July 24, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Bloomberg’s proposal would only reinforce the truth that citizens have to defend themselves from crime. Only in rare cases do police directly “protect” a citizen or keep a crime from occurring. They respond to crimes in progress or crimes already committed in order to investigate and arrest those suspected of committing crimes.

We’ve seen a lot of foolish commentary in the wake of the Aurora shooting, but this may be the most irresponsible yet — and from an official in high office, no less.

If Woodrow Wilson had a son, he’d look a lot like his majesty, the Mayor.

PappyD61 on July 24, 2012 at 1:33 PM

We’ve seen a lot of foolish commentary in the wake of the Aurora shooting, but this may be the most irresponsible yet — and from an official in high office, no less.

I find Senator Lautenberg’s more offensive and foolish-

“No sportsman needs 100 rounds to shoot a duck, but allowing high-capacity magazines in the hands of killers … puts law enforcement at a disadvantage and innocent lives at risk,”

First, if it takes an individual 100 rounds to shoot a duck, they are not a sportsman. But more importantly, sportsmen practice gun safety unlike the gang bangers in Launtenberg’s state who will get weapons whether or not this anti-gun bastard gets his way or not.

Secondly, and more importantly, we should be asking Lautenberg just what the bastard has against the 2nd Amendment and why he isn’t doing more to get the administration to fess up about the guns they provided to the Mexican drug cartels. Hundreds of Mexicans have been killed thanks to Obama and Holder and this bastard says nothing. It is utter hypocrisy.

BTW- The Brady Campaign is equally offensive. Passing faux-sympathy for the victims before they politicize the Aurora shooting for their own commmie agenda….

This tragedy is another grim reminder that guns are the enablers of mass killers and that our nation pays an unacceptable price for our failure to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.”

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no reason why Holmes should not have been legally able to purchase guns. Apparently the commies of the Brady campaign can divine “dangerous people” by merely looking at them or something. I hate these traitors not because they want to ban guns outright but because they make no pretense that what they advocate is unconstitutional and anti-American.

Happy Nomad on July 24, 2012 at 1:33 PM

New York City should go on strike until Bloomberg resigns! Treasonous SOB!

Winghunter on July 24, 2012 at 1:37 PM

For the first, and probably only, time I’m in complete agreement with you…….;-D

angrymike on July 24, 2012 at 1:20 PM

People here used to agree with me all the time for many years until the primary season started. A lot of the new members here who support big-gov hate me for obvious reasons and may have given you a biased view.

FloatingRock on July 24, 2012 at 1:39 PM

See this is why I can’t help but think of liberals as absolutely beyond help. They are unbelievably stupid. NYC is a case in point. The people there CHOSE Bloomberg to lord over them and threaten their very lives with lunacy AND THEY KEEP DOING IT!

Un-frikkin-believable

HotAirian on July 24, 2012 at 1:39 PM

They’ll have to pry the salted, buttered popcorn popped in coconut oil and big gulp from my cold, dead hands.

scrubjay on July 24, 2012 at 1:40 PM

The man has lost it. How many 32 oz soft drinks is he having each day?

SC.Charlie on July 24, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Please remember to recycle this post if Bloomberg ever decides to run for President. It will show the majority of Americans that he is nuts.

Bloomberg is literally calling for anarchy in the streets as a way to extort unconstitutional infringements on liberty — by the police.

Boggles my mind.

matthew26 on July 24, 2012 at 2:06 PM

You don’t think having a police force, a patrolling police force, is a deterrent? Really?
Good grief….public educated I suppose?

right2bright on July 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM

I live in a rural county; and we have sheriff’s deputies patrolling 24/7/365 — and the response time to a 911 call can be 20 minutes or longer.
Since you imply that you are ‘privately educated’, I suppose you have some absolutely wizard ideas of how one should entertain a home invader until the deputy arrives…since the “patrolling police force” seems to have failed to deter the criminal.
Even in cities, criminals know that they have enough time before the “patrolling police force” arrives in which to do their work.

Solaratov on July 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

So Drudge is reporting the shooter was on a government grant? I guess that means the government funded his shooting spree?!

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

That blow-hard Bloomercricket must be partaking in excess the evil-making sinful extravagance of salt and big, big soda-pop binges.

Good grief, how can the Big Apple stand the Big Buffoon?

hillbillyjim on July 24, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Ah, an idea from Bloomberg I can get behind.

Yes, police, go on strike. The crime rate would plummet as would infringements on our rights.

Don’t throw me in the briar patch, please!

Dante on July 24, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Boy, the Lefty Tin-Horns are full of advice for O’JugEars.
First, Chavez, then Calderon, and now Bloomberg.

Is it time for a Beer Summit yet?

socalcon on July 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Bloomberg tells cops to go on strike for expanded gun-control laws

Thankfully I think many cops (at least most around where I live) would have the opposite opinion.

A couple years ago when my home security system was set off, luckily not from an actual intuder, the police arrived at the house a while later. My wife was rather upset by the false alarm and asked the police officer what he would recomment, beyond the home alarm system, that she could do to better protect the house. He was very frank about the reality that police are not able to respond in time to protect from from a potential attacker, and would most often only arrive after an initial confrontation to deal with the aftermath. He told her she should get a gun and learn to use it.

Scrappy on July 24, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Ya gotta hand it to him; at least he’s consistent. About as subtle as a sledgehammer. What a control-freak. But this is what politicians do. Give them the power over you, they will gladly take it — and use it. He must wake up every morning, thinking: “What else can I ‘fix?’ ”

Poster child for term limits (see Pelosi). Keep these control-freaks on a very short leash.

RobertMN on July 24, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I find Senator Lautenberg’s more offensive and foolish-

“No sportsman needs 100 rounds to shoot a duck, but allowing high-capacity magazines in the hands of killers … puts law enforcement at a disadvantage and innocent lives at risk,”

The idiot Senator doesn’t know Federal Migratory Bird hunting laws or any hunting laws to begin with.

RickB on July 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM

The so-called “land of the free, home of the brave” is the biggest police state in the world with spy drones flying over the entire planet. We have more people in our gulags, excuse me, prisons than anybody else in the world.

FloatingRock on July 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Hysteria is rather unbecoming in a (supposed) adult.

Check your assertions and get back to us.

Solaratov on July 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Respecting the police in general, I am aware if someone bad is in my house set on doing me harm, I am going to have to deal with that situation and/or that person alone, by myself, for at least several minutes. The police may or may not show up in time to stop harm from being done. Though, they will be there to draw a chalk outline around my body if I’m killed.

limmo on July 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM

So Drudge is reporting the shooter was on a government grant? I guess that means the government funded his shooting spree?!

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

My first thought, too, seeins how he got the grant, then quit the uni.
Hey, the feds actually financed mass murder ?
Where have I heard that before ??

pambi on July 24, 2012 at 2:28 PM

So Drudge is reporting the shooter was on a government grant? I guess that means the government funded his shooting spree?!

Truly, this is a gift from the Almighty. Let’s run with it — a “teachable” moment.

RobertMN on July 24, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Does idiot Bloomberg understand how many guns THE COPS own, privately? It would be hilarious if they would be forced to surrender their own private stashes if the only guns they can ever carry are department issued ones. Did NYPD chief made this clear to the moron?

riddick on July 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

At the bottom of all these calls for gun control seem to be two things. The progressives think they can control bad people and crazy human behavior, if they just get the formula right, the right laws, prohibitions and regulations. Plus, the collectivists don’t really trust those they consider their lessors to be good people and do the right thing, so they have to regulate them too even if they’re not doing anything wrong.

limmo on July 24, 2012 at 2:33 PM

So Drudge is reporting the shooter was on a government grant? I guess that means the government funded his shooting spree?!

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

This was Manchurian’s idea and one of the first things he enacted, all college loans can only be issued by the government these days (most likely to be able to say who goes to college and who doesn’t, yet another bad idea back firing).

And I pointed this out back on Friday, victims should sue Manchurian and Harry Reid/Nancy Pelosi for being complicit in the crime.

I would also like to know where that 100 round mag came from if one was used in the crime.

riddick on July 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

So Drudge is reporting the shooter was on a government grant? I guess that means the government funded his shooting spree?!

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

He certainly didn’t do it all on his own. There are plenty of smart, hard-working people who could have done it.
And don’t forget the roads and bridges – all government built – that enabled his travel to the theater.

Solaratov on July 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

This guy spent aLOT on arms and gear. I wondered where the money came from. Did it come from his government grant? I can just here Barackstar now, “Grants don’t kill people….”

limmo on July 24, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Yeah… all cops go on strike. Law abiding guns owners than are forced to form their own security forces, armed neighborhood watches and so forth. Crime might just drop dramatically.

JellyToast on July 24, 2012 at 12:56 PM

+1000

riddick on July 24, 2012 at 2:39 PM

limmo on July 24, 2012 at 2:33 PM

The progs are so sure that Uncle Sugar will provide for them and keep them well — that is, until that 2:00 AM wake-up call that leaves them wishing they had taken advantage of their 2nd Amendment rights.

hillbillyjim on July 24, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Or how about, ‘Guns don’t kill people, grants to buy them do!’

limmo on July 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM

He certainly didn’t do it all on his own. There are plenty of smart, hard-working people who could have done it.
And don’t forget the roads and bridges – all government built – that enabled his travel to the theater.

Solaratov on July 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

What I find even more offensive is listening some lawyers in media argue that he might be pleading insanity. Funny how he killed and maimed all the innocent people,, but when cops arrived he never fired a shot at them, a clear indication of not only that he knew what he was doing, but was also afraid to lose HIS miserable life in the process.

riddick on July 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Bloomberg makes these pronouncements about gun control while he is being protected by at least a dozen well armed members of the NYPD.
Do you think for a second when this nitwit returns to private life that he will not have a well armed private
security detail watching over him. What will they be be using, slingshots?

Thicklugdonkey on July 24, 2012 at 2:45 PM

What will they be be using, slingshots?

Thicklugdonkey on July 24, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Depends on what kind of slingshot :-) Its NY state, after all…

riddick on July 24, 2012 at 2:48 PM

To think this guy used to be considered a Republican. Just astonishing.

If the RNC ever puts this guy on a ticket, I will never vote Republican again.

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Democratic Party (until 2001)
“To think this guy used to be considered a Democrat. Just astonishing.”

Republican Party (2001–2007)
“To think this guy used to be considered a Republican. Just astonishing.”

Independent (2007–present)
“To think this guy used to be considered an Independent. Just astonishing.”

Madison, if another political party were invented tomorrow, Bloomie will want to be one of them too. What some people won’t do to get hold of power.

timberline on July 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM

1/4 of 1 percent of all gun crime is committed with legally owned firearms. That’s why police are such staunch supporters of the 2nd Amendment.

In related news a massively overloaded truck carrying “possible illegals” went off the road yesterday. 23 people in an F250. 14 dead, the rest injured so badly they can’t be interviewed. More dead in one accident while apparently human smuggling, than in the cinema shooting.

Have you heard about it on the MSM?

Nope. Doesn’t fit the narrative.

Bloomberg and the other Communists are hypocrites, Plain and simple. They don’t actually care about human life, they just want to take away individual rights.

KMC1 on July 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Has anyone told Bloomberg about the 1975 Albuquerque police strike? Crime rates went down.

PersonFromPorlock on July 24, 2012 at 3:01 PM

They really are this stupid.

claudius on July 24, 2012 at 3:12 PM

In all honesty…there are times Bloomberg makes Obama look sane. In fact if this election was between Obama vs. Bloomberg, I would have to give serious thought to voting for Obama. The is something about Bloomberg that is more disturbing, to me at least, than Obama. I can’t put my finger on it, but it is there. Maybe because he once proclaimed himself a Republican for a short period, or that some Republicans actually think Bloomberg is conservative!

William Eaton on July 24, 2012 at 3:13 PM

One would think that NY’ers would tire of this phony little tyrant Bloomberg and run his azz out of town.

el Vaquero on July 24, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Given how many times he’s been talked about as a presidential candidate(as an INDEPENDENT, no less), and given how dismal both the Republican and Democrat parties have been at selecting candidates…I wouldn’t get too comfortable. This totalitarian clone of Napoleon needs to be carefully watched.

MadisonConservative on July 24, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Fair enough. But his money is his only real danger. To look upon him is to laugh.

Jaibones on July 24, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3