Posts Tagged ‘Bloomberg felon’

Bloomberg Felon calls Terrorist a victim…

June 21, 2013

BELLEVUE, WA – Naming an alleged Boston Marathon bomber as a victim of gun violence because he was shot dead by police shows just how morally bankrupt Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun “No More Names” bus tour really is, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

At a Tuesday rally in Concord, N.H., event organizers read the names of shooting victims since the Sandy Hook attack last Dec. 14. Among the names of the dead was Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the marathon bombing suspect. When his name was read, people in the audience declared, “He’s a terrorist,” according to published reports.

“This is so far beyond insulting, I’m not sure there’s a word in the dictionary to describe it,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “It clearly demonstrates that Michael Bloomberg’s gun prohibition effort will exploit even the names of dead terror suspects to further his anti-gun agenda. That’s a new low that I didn’t think was possible.”

Tsarnaev was fatally shot by police a few nights after the marathon bombing. His brother was wounded and is now in police custody.

“If Bloomberg and his Mayors Against Illegal Guns are willing to make a martyr of a terror suspect to push their agenda,” Gottlieb observed, “it raises questions about the legitimacy of their campaign to disarm America, one legislative step at a time. Next thing you know, they’ll be calling Osama bin Laden a victim of gun violence, too.

“Bloomberg is spending millions of dollars to push his vision of America onto the backs of every other citizen,” he stated. “For some reason, he thinks his billions give him the right to dictate how much soda you can drink, what you do with your garbage and how you exercise your Second Amendment rights. Now it’s clear the gun prohibition lobby, with Bloomberg in the lead, has no conscience and no shame. And these people want to dictate morality to us?



Anti-gun Republicans Raising Funds in NYC

December 2, 2011

Birds of a feather sure do flock together.


So it’s no surprise that the country’s most anti-gun Republican mayor, Michael Bloomberg, invited the U.S. Senate’s most anti-gun Republican member up to his New York City residence for cocktails and a fund raiser next Monday.


Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana never met a gun control bill he didn’t like, and his F-rating from GOA is well-deserved.


Bloomberg, of course, founded the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Bloomberg, conveniently, thinks virtually all guns should be illegal. So MAIG is simply yet another gun prohibition organization.


While Bloomberg and Lugar may get along fine, his Republican primary opponent, Richard Moudock, is reaching out to gun owners throughout the state.


The Indiana Republican primary for senate is one of the most important races in the country for gun owners, and we don’t have to wait around for November to hand the anti-gunners a massive defeat.


The May 8th primary features two candidates who are diametrically opposed on the Second Amendment:


Dick Lugar does not agree that the Second Amendment protects an individual right.


Richard Mourdock believes the message of the Second Amendment is clear: “shall not be infringed” is a restriction on federal power to regulate gun ownership.


Dick Lugar doesn’t trust the people with firearms, so he supports banning semi-automatic rifles that he erroneously calls “assault weapons.”


Richard Mourdock understands that gun bans don’t stop criminals, but only hamper the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves.


Dick Lugar believes you should submit to a waiting period before you purchase a handgun, hence “enjoying” a little time to “cool off.”


Richard Mourdock believes that it’s the Congress that should “cool off” and stop passing bill after bill that ignores the Constitution.


Perhaps worst of all, Dick Luger supports UN efforts to pass the small arms treaty, a treaty that could impact every gun owner in America. Dick Lugar was the ONLY Republican Senator NOT to come out in opposition to the treaty.


Richard Mourdock will never vote to hand over any authority to the UN.



This Senate election is particularly important in the event that Barack Obama manages to win another term. If Obama is reelected, Dick Lugar means one more vote for anti-gun Supreme Court justices, the small arms treaty and other anti-gun legislation.


The choice for Senator could not be more clear.


Make no mistake, however, Dick Lugar will be hard to beat. He’ll have almost unlimited money pouring in from the party establishment in Washington, and he’ll be calling in favors everywhere.


But Lugar can be defeated with the help of tens of thousands of gun owners and sportsmen from across the country.


Richard Mourdock, currently the State Treasurer of Indiana, is virtually tied with Lugar in the polls. This is our chance to defeat a politician who has been a thorn in the side of gun owners for more than three decades.


So please visit Richard Mourdock on the web at and chip in a few bucks to help his campaign. Lugar is spending millions of dollars, so please do all you can to help the Mourdock campaign go toe-to-toe with Lugar.


We don’t have to wait until next November to start beating the anti-gunners. Please help to get things rolling in Indiana today!




Tim Macy

Vice Chairman


P.S. Dick Lugar has been voting against gun rights for more than 30 years. His opponent, Richard Mourdock earned the support of GOA-PVF for his strong stance for your gun rights. Please visit Richard online today to make a financial contribution.



MAIG Mimics Brady Campaign’s Misuse Of Tracing Data

October 2, 2010

This week, Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) released a report, similar to earlier efforts by the Brady Campaign, claiming that guns originally sold in states that don’t have the gun control laws that MAIG likes are more likely to end up “recovered in out-of-state crimes.”

As you probably have already deduced, MAIG’s conclusions, like Brady’s, are based entirely upon BATFE firearm tracing statistics, which BATFE and the Congressional Research Service have repeatedly said should not be used to reach broad conclusions about criminal activity with guns.

BATFE says, for example, “Not all firearms used in crimes are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime. Firearms selected for tracing aren’t chosen for purposes of determining which types, makes or models of firearms are used for illicit purposes. The firearms selected don’t constitute a random sample and should not be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals, or any subset of that universe. . . .[S]ources reported for firearms traced do not necessarily represent the sources or methods by which firearms in general are acquired for use in crime.”

Of course, for many years on many issues — “assault weapons,” “Saturday Night Specials,” lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers, and the list goes on — anti-gun groups have resorted to tracing data because crime and other reliable data have not supported their arguments. In this instance, for example, MAIG contends that illegal acquisition of firearms is associated with 10 specific state-level gun laws. But, the 10 laws — some of which are already in effect at the federal level — don’t correlate to state total violent crime rates. And, the 10 states with the highest violent crime rates, and the 10 states with the lowest rates, both have an average of two of the 10 gun laws.

Nor is there a correlation between the states’ violent crime and murder rates, and what MAIG calls their “export-import ratios” — the relationships between the numbers of traced guns that come into the states from other states, and the number of traced guns that eventually go from the states to other states. In fact, each of the 10 states that MAIG singles out for derision, for not having the 10 laws it favors, has a lower percentage of guns sold in the state later traced by BATFE, as compared to national figures.

A number of other factors underscore the limitations inherent in using tracing data in the first place. For example, while BATFE takes the position that illegal trafficking is more likely indicated when firearms are traced within two years of their original sale, the average interim period on traced guns nationally is 11 years. BATFE often does not even attempt traces on older guns, believing they would be unsuccessful or fail to reveal evidence of illegal trafficking. As MAIG pointed out, BATFE was not able to complete traces on 61 percent of the guns for which traces were submitted by law enforcement agencies.

Furthermore, while MAIG’s whole premise concerns interstate trafficking of guns, 70 percent of guns that BATFE traces were recovered by the police in the same state in which they were originally sold.

Of course, no comment on the lack of correlation between tracing and violent crime would be complete without mentioning that the vast majority of traced guns have not been used to commit violent crimes, but were rather taken into custody by police for possession and other less serious offenses.

Finally, when guns do cross state lines, it is not necessarily because they were illegally trafficked. People move across state lines for a variety of reasons, such as to take a new job, to be nearer family members, or to be in an area with warmer weather and/or a lower cost of living. And, a gun owner may sell a firearm to any dealer anywhere in the country, because the prohibition on interstate sales of firearms only applies to sales between two non-licensed individuals.

Thus, not by coincidence, guns that are recovered in one state, but originally sold in other states, typically come from neighboring states. For example, “out-of-state” guns recovered in Kentucky most commonly come from Indiana, Ohio and Tennessee. Those recovered in Ohio typically come from Kentucky, West Virginia and Indiana. And so on.

MAIG’s new “trafficking” report breaks no new ground. And, coming on the heels of FBI data showing violent crime at a 35-year low, it fails to make even a superficial case for gun control. But, considering MAIG’s support of microstamping and restrictions on concealed carry, its efforts to push Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s horrendous “terror watchlist” and “gun show” bills, and its penchant for blaming U.S. gun laws for Mexico’s ongoing war with drug cartels, the new report makes clear that the group’s leader, Michael Bloomberg, intends for it to remain the most aggressive and highly visible threat to the Second Amendment in the near term.


Bloomberg Felon News: Just keep on fibbing…

September 10, 2010

The Straw Purchase felon just can’t seem to get anything right, and on the anniversary of the terrorist attack on NYC at that!

No one in this country knows better than New Yorkers what “devastation” looks like. On September 11, 2001, the World Trade Center buildings and their surrounding area were reduced to rubble, burying nearly 3,000 Americans. To this day, the images are difficult to comprehend; they show a concentration of man-made destruction unprecedented in the United States and perhaps anywhere on Earth.

New York’s current murder rate pales in comparison to that of 2001, of course. But it also pales in comparison to what it was in other years gone by. Due in part to crime-fighting programs adopted under former mayor Rudolph Giuliani, New York City’s murder rate is only a fifth of what it was 20 years ago.

Presumably, New Yorkers are well aware of the relative safety in which they live today.  However, the current mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has a skewed perspective even though the September 11 anniversary is front and center in every news outlet today due to other controversies.

With New York City’s and the nation’s murder rates lower than anytime since the 1960s, Bloomberg sounded the alarm, saying “Illegal guns and their accompanying violence devastate communities across our country.”

Bloomberg revisited his perennial cause célèbre —gun control—because his anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), has issued an Issue Brief urging Congress to  “close the gun show loophole”—gun control supporters’ Orwellian “doublespeak” for “prohibit private sales of firearms at gun shows and everywhere else.”

Since U.S. crime rates are so low, MAIG invoked Mexico’s war with its drug cartels, repeating the soundbite first heard in 2009, when Attorney General Eric Holder tried to use Mexico’s problem as the excuse for reinstating the federal “assault weapons” ban. “In fact, 90% of guns recovered and traced from Mexican crime scenes originated from gun dealers in the United States,” MAIG says.

Discovering that geography is more than a subject taught in elementary and middle schools, MAIG adds its revelation that “four in ten of the U.S. guns recovered in Mexico between 2006 and 2009 were originally sold by gun dealers in Texas. The three other states that share a border with Mexico – Arizona, California, and New Mexico – were the source for another one-third of the U.S. guns.”

Of course, the operative words in the “90 percent” soundbite are “and traced.” The GAO has already reported that most guns seized in Mexico, from cartels or anyone else, have not originated in the United States. For example, GAO noted, “In 2008, of the almost 30,000 firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only around 7,200, or approximately a quarter, were submitted to ATF for tracing.” The others were not submitted for tracing, presumably in many cases because their markings indicated that they were not traceable to the U.S.

For all their effort, Bloomberg and MAIG got scant coverage by the news media. But the debate will likely continue over how many guns are smuggled from the U.S. to Mexico, what percentage of the cartels’ guns originate in the U.S., and from which countries the cartels obtain their machine guns, grenades and other weapons that are unavailable in the United States.

One thing is sure, however: Americans have greater access to U.S. guns than does anyone in Mexico, and our murder rates pale in comparison to those of our southern neighbor. For example, the murder rate of Juarez is nearly 100 times higher than that of El Paso, just across the border. If anything, that’s a criticism of Mexican laws, which prohibit honest people from getting guns with which to protect themselves.


Straw Purchase Felon Michael Bloomberg better get this one correct :)

June 11, 2010

The Mayor of New York City had better be looking a bit south and paying some attention to what is happening there. This is a States Rights issue and it really should have been written to cover more issues than firearms. But? West Virginia shines this day. Basking in the bright light of liberty and justice!

Fairfax, Va. — Today Governor Joe Manchin (D) signed NRA-supported Senate Bill 1005 into law in West Virginia. He had vetoed the original version of this bill (SB 515) earlier this year due to a drafting error. Recognizing the importance of this measure, Governor Manchin added SB 515 to his agenda for the 2010 Extraordinary Session and it was renumbered SB 1005. Both bills, introduced by State Senator Jeff Kessler (D-2), will make it a crime to knowingly solicit illegal gun sales and to conduct illegal sting operations like those conducted by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

“I would like to thank Governor Manchin and the West Virginia legislature for taking the necessary steps to prevent these illegal entrapment schemes,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA-ILA. “We hope that governors and legislators around the country follow in Virginia and West Virginia’s footsteps and make this the law of their respective states.”

This measure passed out of the West Virginia House of Delegates on May 14, 2010 and will take effect 90 days from its passage. A similar piece of legislation was signed into law in Virginia in 2007.

“Any elected official who wants to truly have an impact on reducing crime knows that the way to do it is to focus law enforcement resources on prosecuting crime,” concluded Cox. “Our hardworking federal, state and local law enforcement officials should be able to do their jobs without having to worry about out-of-state politicians and their political agendas.”


Spelling Treason: Lautenberg, King, Bloomberg

May 9, 2010

Since September 11, 2001, it’s been clear that terrorists who hate America will exploit our weaknesses in order to destroy us. This week, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg exploited Americans’ fear of terrorism to push their latest anti-gun proposal, and in doing so showed that they’re willing to destroy other parts of the Constitution, to choke its Second Amendment.

On Tuesday, as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Lieberman held a hearing to give Lautenberg and King the opportunity to promote their bills S.1317 and H.R.2159, to prohibit the possession of firearms by people on the FBI’s “terrorist watchlist,” and Lautenberg’s S. 2820, to maintain records of approved instant background check transactions for a minimum of 180 days. The watchlist bills further propose that a person seeking relief in court  from these new restrictions would be prevented from examining and challenging “evidence” against him, and that the judge deciding whether the person had been watchlisted for good reason be limited to summaries and redacted versions of such “evidence.”

Joining Lautenberg, King and Bloomberg to speak in favor of these patently anti-American and unconstitutional bills was Bloomberg’s police commissioner, Ray Kelly.

Claims made by the bills’ supporters during the hearing bordered on the frivolous. Lautenberg cited the failed attempt last Saturday to set off a homemade gasoline-propane bomb in an SUV near NYC’s Times Square — even though his watchlist bill would only regulate firearms and commercially made explosives. Lautenberg then brought up an even more irrelevant incident, the 2008 attack by a terrorist group in Mumbai, India, saying “That’s why we need to change the law” in the United States. A “fanatic” in his own right when it comes to gun control, Lautenberg continued, “Nothing in our laws keeps fanatics on the terror watchlist from purchasing guns and explosives.”

Lautenberg was lying, of course, and Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) called him on it. Knowing that the Government Accountability Office has reported that about 95 percent of people on the watchlist are neither American citizens nor legal residents of the United States, Sen. Graham pointed out “there are 400,000 people on the watchlist.” He then asked, “what percentage of them are American citizens?”

Lautenberg and his allies sat silently, dumbfounded, for what seemed an eternity, until Kelly, dutifully taking the punch so his boss wouldn’t have to, sputtered that he was unable to come up with a figure. Since it was obvious that the anti-gunners didn’t get the point, Sen. Graham clarified it for them: “The law prohibits the purchase of a gun unless you’re an American citizen or a legal resident alien.”

Lautenberg tried to justify his bill by saying “From 2004 to February of this year, terrorists tried to buy guns and explosives 1,228 times. In 91 percent of those cases, they were given the OK to buy the guns.” The claim was misleading, in that the 1,228 checks were accounted for by about 650 individuals, according to the GAO. But Sen. Graham seized upon a more important flaw in the statistic when he asked how many of these “terrorists” were dangerous enough to have been brought up on terrorism charges. On this point too, the Lautenberg team had no response. That led Sen. Graham to question whether the watchlisted gun buyers were as dangerous as the Lautenberg team want people to believe.

King falsely claimed that his bill was justified by last year’s Ft. Hood murders, “where individuals [sic] suspected of terrorist activity legally obtained weapons that were used to kill innocent Americans.” The truth is, the one person (not multiple individuals) accused of the Ft. Hood crime was not “suspected of terrorist activity.” Months before the accused killer bought his gun, the FBI had completed an investigation of him, concluding that despite some suspicious e-mails between the accused and an anti-American Islamist overseas, he was not a terrorist threat. At the bottom line, even if everything that Lautenberg, King and Bloomberg are proposing had already been federal law, it would not have affected the Ft. Hood crime one whit.

Speaking against the proposed legislation during the hearing was Aaron Titus of the Liberty Coalition.  “Senate Bill 1317 goes too far,” he said. “The bill should be titled, ‘The Gun Owners Are Probably All Terrorists Act,’ because it strips citizens of their constitutional right to [keep and] bear arms without any meaningful due process. And Senate Bill 2820 should be called, ‘The National Firearm Registry Act’ because it creates a national firearms registry. . . . a massive database of names and detailed personal information of each law-abiding citizen who purchases a gun.”

Titus’ point laid Lautenberg’s, King’s and Bloomberg’s intention bare. While S. 2820 would allow the FBI to retain NICS records on all NICS transactions, 99.999 percent of the people documented in those records would not be persons on the watchlist. “The bill disingenuously purports to target terrorists,” Titus said, “but in fact only one ten-thousandth of one percent of these records will belong to people on watch lists. Every year, only 200 new watch-list records will be created. But the system will generate more than 14 million new records on law-abiding citizens. Once collected, there’s no limit on what the information may be used for, and no legal requirement to ever delete it.”

Later, Sen. Graham summed up the reason that should motivate every American — regardless of personal feelings about individual gun ownership — to oppose the Lautenberg and King bills. “I think you’re going too far here,” he said. “There’s a huge difference between losing your gun rights based upon a felony charge that was proven by a court of law and appealed, and is a conviction on the books, and being on some list that is, at best, suspect.”  NRA members in South Carolina and around the nation owe Sen. Graham their thanks for getting to the heart of the issue.


Straw Purchase felon Bloomberg: Use fatally flawed list

May 6, 2010

New York’s felon Mayor is back at it again. That guy just can’t seem to figure out that when something is broken you don’t promote it as something to be admired… I just happen to have a problem with taking away peoples rights without a trial…

New York City officials on Wednesday seized on the attempted terror attack in Times Square to urge Congress to tighten counterterrorism policies.

In testimony before the Senate Homeland Security Committee, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly called on lawmakers to close a loophole that lets individuals on the federal government’s terrorism watch list buy firearms and explosives.


“The problem I have is that [the] watch list, when you look at the numbers, has so many problems with it that I think it’s not appropriate to go down the road that we’re going because a constitutional right is involved,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told Bloomberg during questioning.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) strongly opposes the proposed changes, claiming that the terrorism watch list is full of errors.
Andrew Arulanandam, NRA’s director of public affairs, pointed to the well-publicized 2004 incident in which the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) was temporarily prevented from boarding a flight because his name was mistakenly on the list.

“There are innocent people who are not terrorists whose names are on the list,” Arulanandam said in an interview. “It is wrong to deny law-abiding people a constitutional right if they are innocent.”

But Bloomberg claimed that national-security concerns take precedence over any Second Amendment arguments.

Full Story

Gun-Control Activists aka the losers Bloomberg and Menino

April 21, 2010

Backed by more sheer propaganda the New York straw purchase felon and his cronies are set to assault the rights and freedom of Americans everywhere yet again. More states need to assert their authority and simply arrest these people for being the treasonous goofballs that they are. I’m sure that Bubba would rather enjoy their company…. Read on.

Gun-control proponents, outspent and outmaneuvered on Capitol Hill, are pushing back this week using the anniversaries of two high-profile tragedies to make the case for legislation that would close gun show loopholes.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a group led by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino (D), is expected today to unveil a lobbying blitz to prod Congress to approve legislation that would require background checks on all firearm sales at gun shows.

The group will launch a six-figure media campaign that includes both national cable and selected state advertising spots as well as an online petition drive.

“The truth is the conventional wisdom is just wrong that you can’t do a gun issue,” said John Feinblatt, Bloomberg’s chief adviser for policy and strategic planning. He cited polling that shows support for closing the loophole and added that both President Barack Obama and his GOP opponent Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) pledged to close the gun loophole during the 2008 presidential campaign.

“The mayors are ready to say, ‘Now is the time to do it,’” Feinblatt said. “This is not a gun-control issue. It is a crime-control issue.”

The announcement comes on the 11th anniversary of the Columbine High School shootings in Colorado and days after the third anniversary of the shootings at Virginia Tech.

Lori Haas, whose daughter was killed in the 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech, said requiring the background checks is a “middle-of-the-road position to take,” one that has already been approved by 17 states.

Haas, a spokeswoman for the victims’ families, said that even though the killer at Virginia Tech, a university student, did not buy a firearm at a gun show, “the connection to Virginia Tech is we know what happens when guns get in the wrong hands.”

The group Virginians for Public Safety sponsored an ad this week in the Richmond Times Dispatch that urged the state’s Democratic Sens. Mark Warner and Jim Webb to back legislation. Haas also said she is scheduled to talk to Warner about the issue this week.

In Colorado, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, which also helped in the Virginia media campaign, underwrote an ad in the Denver and Boulder newspapers calling on Sen. Mark Udall (D) to sign on to the gun show bill. The state’s other Democratic Senator, Michael Bennet, has already agreed to co-sponsor the legislation introduced by Sens. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.).

In the House the measure is co-sponsored by Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), whose husband was killed and son severely injured in a shooting on the Long Island Rail Road.

The latest lobbying effort, however, comes at a time when the political climate has grown increasingly inhospitable for gun-control forces. The Democratic leadership has not been eager to push gun-control measures that they fear could generate a backlash for lawmakers who represent more rural or conservative districts.

Furthermore, anti-gun-control groups have been increasingly bold in pushing their agenda. They recently convinced the House leadership that the only way they could muster enough votes to pass a bill granting the District of Columbia a voting Representative was to include a provision that would largely gut the remaining gun-control laws in the District.

Other gun-rights groups have become more brazen in their public demonstrations, with one organization encouraging participants to bring their guns to a rally Monday in a national park in Virginia just outside of D.C.

In 2009, anti-gun-control groups spent almost $5 million on federal lobbying compared with the $261,000 that gun-control groups spent, according to a CQ MoneyLine analysis of lobbying disclosure reports filed with Congress.

The top-spending gun-control group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund, spent $123,00 last year, most of which was paid to the Democratic lobbying firm the Raben Group.

The National Rifle Association, the biggest anti-gun-control group, shelled out $1.9 million on lobbying in 2009. It was followed by Gun Owners of America, which spent $1.4 million, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which spent $1 million.

“It is a very powerful lobby. They are very good at what they do. They are good at intimidating lawmakers,” said Tom Mauser, the spokesman for Colorado Ceasefire, whose son was killed in the Columbine shootings.

Even though Colorado voters approved a referendum that closed the gun show loophole in 2000, Mauser said the surrounding states have not, meaning that guns purchased by people with criminal records are still coming into the state.

An NRA spokeswoman said Monday that the group did not want to respond to the latest lobbying effort by the mayors until it had been officially announced.

However, the NRA Institute for Legislative Action has posted on its Web site a rebuttal to what it called “the Gun Show Myth.”

The NRA said official firearm dealers are required to conduct background checks on those buying guns at shows. Only a person who is not a dealer can sell a firearm from his personal collection without conducting a background check. The gun group said less than 1 percent of criminals obtain their guns from gun shows.

“Many legislators have proposed to restrict gun show sales, but their proposals would simply create a bureaucratic nightmare — shutting down the shows while leaving criminal markets untouched,” the NRA statement said.

In 1999, the Senate included a provision to close the gun show loophole as an amendment to a juvenile justice bill. The legislation passed by one vote, with then-Vice President Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote, but the provision died in conference.

While the measure has languished, advocates for the bill say the public is on their side. They cite a survey done last year by Republican pollster Frank Luntz for the mayors group that found 69 percent of NRA gun owners favor the background checks at gun shows.

They also argue that moves by some of the most conservative gun groups, such as bringing guns to political rallies and into Starbucks, could backfire.

“It will actively help our side when people see how extreme it is getting,” Mauser said.


Citing twisted poll numbers and the words of a hopeless hoplophobe do nothing for credibility either…

Mayor Michael Bloomberg: What A Waste of Air

January 16, 2010

The Felon Mayor of New York just can’t get enough of poking his nose into everyone else’s business. The utter failure of “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” is only one example of his warped sense of reality. He knows better then you do what is good for you, yours, and and all of humanity… Yeah right..!

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg envisions a healthy world — one with no cigarettes, trans-fat, or guns — and he is going to make you healthy, doggone it, whether you like it or not.

As the mayor begins his third term (which, to those familiar with New York City term limits, is a whole other matter), he has found yet another menace to his utopia: salt. As with his other nanny state goals, the mayor’s vision goes far beyond his own backyard to cities and states across the nation.

His administration’s new salt initiative calls for food manufacturers and restaurants across the country to cut their salt content by 25 percent over the next five years. They claim that national cooperation is necessary due to interstate sales. For now, participation of New York businesses is voluntary, but this means little to those of us familiar with the war on trans-fat. That was originally voluntary too, but when restaurants didn’t jump on the bandwagon, the city government legislated them into submission.

While the benefits of lowering salt have been well documented in the fight against high blood pressure, not everyone is convinced of the benefits of across-the-board sodium reduction. There has been no large-scale study of the negative effects of cutting salt, and several medical researchers point out that there are too many variables to assume that this measure is good for everyone. Dr. Michael H. Alderman of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, likened the plan to “an uncontrolled experiment with the public’s health.”

Several companies, including Campbell (which has already cut sodium in their products without government strong-arming), will not be joining the plan. They prefer to adjust their recipes according to what the market calls for — at least while they still have a choice.


%d bloggers like this: