PDA

View Full Version : An antigun admission from Bloomberg...


RRangel
02-12-2011, 4:31 PM
Think all the fraudulent attention by Michael Bloomberg and friends directed toward gun shows means the argument ends there? That's hardly the case. Consider that a project of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Michael Bloomberg's front, is asking for an end run.

Fixgunchecks.org is a project of MIAG. On this organization's front page is an email petition which lists two points.

fixgunchecks.org (http://www.fixgunchecks.org/)

1) Get all the names of people who should be prohibited from buying guns into the background check system.

2) Require a background check for every gun sale in America.

What happened to gun shows? Now it's straight background checks for all guns in America. Although this was obvious of you listened carefully. Now there is no pretense. Bloomberg wants this and more.

Spanky8601
02-12-2011, 4:34 PM
I am sure there is a useless tool called a Bloomberg.

G1500
02-12-2011, 4:52 PM
Toss that guy in jail. He is illegally acquiring guns through paid straw buyers, is he not?

G60
02-12-2011, 4:56 PM
No, he was not. Nor was he sending NYPD to AZ with false ID's to make the purchases.

Dreaded Claymore
02-12-2011, 5:14 PM
Personally, I would be A-OK with mandatory background checks for all gun purchases, especially if they weren't slowed down with artificial ten-day waiting periods. However, I oppose the people who back this requirement, because I'm certain that if we give them that, they won't stop there.

RRangel
02-12-2011, 5:38 PM
It's just continual overt disdain for freedom that we get from these people. Anything to further an agenda. The "get all prohibited persons on the list" details mention including those who fail enlistment requirements in the armed forces as it pertains to drug use because of the Tuscon shooting. No mention of due process. Now Bloomberg and his group are proposing disqualifiers for gun ownership. They certainly must have a long list of those.

Jack L
02-12-2011, 5:49 PM
Bloomberg is a devious twisted egomaniac who wants attention. He specializes in reverse psychology tactics hoping to mystify the sheeple. He's up to no good for the country. If the conservatives are able to win big in 2012, constitutional carry may gain ground and hopefully steam roll over diabolical politicians like Bloomberg.

Looks like Wal-Mart fell for it.

WAL-MART AND MAYORS AGAINST ILLEGAL GUNS ANNOUNCE "RESPONSIBLE FIREARMS RETAILER PARTNERSHIP": A 10-POINT VOLUNTARY CODE

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr007-08.shtml

Dreaded Claymore
02-12-2011, 8:05 PM
WAL-MART AND MAYORS AGAINST ILLEGAL GUNS ANNOUNCE "RESPONSIBLE FIREARMS RETAILER PARTNERSHIP": A 10-POINT VOLUNTARY CODE

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr007-08.shtml

I just looked at the ten-point code. Almost none of it looks like more than what is already required by law. The "employee responsibility training" looks like a very minor waste of time at worst, and a good idea at best. The only other "point" that stands out on the list is the one that flags purchasers of guns that have since been traced to crimes.

KWA-S
02-12-2011, 8:14 PM
Personally, I would be A-OK with mandatory background checks for all gun purchases, especially if they weren't slowed down with artificial ten-day waiting periods. However, I oppose the people who back this requirement, because I'm certain that if we give them that, they won't stop there.

If you support background checks for all gun purchases, how would you have them conducted? As you know, not all purchases go through an ffl (C&R longarms in california can be ppt'd cash and carry, for example); would you have everyone go through an FFL to conduct a PPT? What about FFL's charging for the background check (currently $25, iirc) and their time?

How about intra-family transfers? If a father knows his son isn't a scumbag, should he still be required to go through the background check process?

Just curious what you think. :D

gunsmith
02-12-2011, 8:35 PM
blameberg

crackerman
02-12-2011, 11:32 PM
Looks like Wal-Mart fell for it.

WAL-MART AND MAYORS AGAINST ILLEGAL GUNS ANNOUNCE "RESPONSIBLE FIREARMS RETAILER PARTNERSHIP": A 10-POINT VOLUNTARY CODE

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr007-08.shtml

Just read the 10 points too. That is pretty good, take credit for what is mostly federal law now.

Purchaser Declaration. For sales flagged by the trace alert system, participating retailers will ask purchasers to fill out a declaration indicating that they meet the legal requirement to purchase the firearm.

I particularly love this one, because if you have lied to buy the gun and get flagged, you are going to tell the truth on some walmart form.:rolleyes:

GOEX FFF
02-12-2011, 11:40 PM
That site states - "Wal-Mart, the largest seller of firearms in the nation"


Is this really true???.. Every Wally-world that I've been has had like 4-8 rifles for sale. If that.


ETA: I assume it's because of the number of stores?
According to walmart.com are 8,969 stores in the country. I guess Vs. nationwide individual gun shops that may have hundreds in inventory, there are only a few retailer locations compared.

Ford8N
02-13-2011, 5:54 AM
Again, this is a canard to stop criminals from getting guns. Blame the inanimate object. And what they are trying to do will not stop straw purchases. This group really needs to focus it's energy on correcting the penal and judicial system. Focus on the scumbag rather than the inanimate object. They are not blaming the car used in crime, a car was used to transport the scumbag to the scene of the crime. It is an inanimate object too.

I think there is a reason this group is going after the inanimate object. It's much easier to blame a gun as the cause of crime rather than the elephant in the room. I will be a bit non "PC" here and say certain racial groups will start crying racism if they start focusing on the criminal rather than the inanimate object.

vantec08
02-13-2011, 6:27 AM
I will be a bit non "PC" here and say certain racial groups will start crying racism if they start focusing on the criminal rather than the inanimate object.

. . . . . . along with a major political party who's constituents include criminals. Doesnt have anything to do with PC - - has everything to do with simple honesty and truth.

smtimelevi
02-13-2011, 8:52 AM
HAHA, does anybody even take this guy seriously? I herd he has a ccw

N6ATF
02-13-2011, 9:45 AM
1) Get all the names of people who should be prohibited from buying guns into the background check system.

2) Require a background check for every gun sale in America.

3) Put the names of all non-victim disarmers and their bodyguards into the background check system.

4) Criminals reign.

taperxz
02-13-2011, 10:00 AM
After yesterday, I am sure Bloomburg will be requiring the same for butcher knives also. Not to mention his final victim was killed with his car.

Dreaded Claymore
02-13-2011, 4:13 PM
If you support background checks for all gun purchases, how would you have them conducted? As you know, not all purchases go through an ffl (C&R longarms in california can be ppt'd cash and carry, for example); would you have everyone go through an FFL to conduct a PPT? What about FFL's charging for the background check (currently $25, iirc) and their time?

How about intra-family transfers? If a father knows his son isn't a scumbag, should he still be required to go through the background check process?

Just curious what you think. :D

I wouldn't say I support background checks for all gun purchases, because I don't think it would do nearly as much good as reactionary soccer mom types think it would. However, if (hypothetically) people were pushing for it, and that was all they were pushing for, I wouldn't fight it very hard. Compared to the other burdens that the 2nd Amendment suffers right now, universal background checks seem pretty tame.

In real life, however, I don't want this to happen and will fight it, because the real goal of those who support it is victim disarmament, and this is a step toward that goal. :mad:

dfletcher
02-13-2011, 7:57 PM
I wouldn't say I support background checks for all gun purchases, because I don't think it would do nearly as much good as reactionary soccer mom types think it would. However, if (hypothetically) people were pushing for it, and that was all they were pushing for, I wouldn't fight it very hard. Compared to the other burdens that the 2nd Amendment suffers right now, universal background checks seem pretty tame.

In real life, however, I don't want this to happen and will fight it, because the real goal of those who support it is victim disarmament, and this is a step toward that goal. :mad:

The problem is that gun control stops crime like door locks stop termites. By accident or design, the folks who push gun control never figure this out or admit it. They follow up with more door locks, better door locks, stronger doors or heavier doors - all delightfully misdirected and ineffective. It's nothing more than "waist deep in the Big Muddy" applied to guns.

KWA-S
02-13-2011, 9:06 PM
I wouldn't say I support background checks for all gun purchases, because I don't think it would do nearly as much good as reactionary soccer mom types think it would. However, if (hypothetically) people were pushing for it, and that was all they were pushing for, I wouldn't fight it very hard. Compared to the other burdens that the 2nd Amendment suffers right now, universal background checks seem pretty tame.

In real life, however, I don't want this to happen and will fight it, because the real goal of those who support it is victim disarmament, and this is a step toward that goal. :mad:

Alright, fair enough. I'd agree with you there. There's a lot worse than just background checks, and the check really isn't the hassle. It usually is the 10-day wait, or in my case, the $25 associated with it. Being a starving college student sucks, between rent, tuition, and ammo, its really ripping me a new one, heh.

Dreaded Claymore
02-13-2011, 9:11 PM
Alright, fair enough. I'd agree with you there. There's a lot worse than just background checks, and the check really isn't the hassle. It usually is the 10-day wait, or in my case, the $25 associated with it. Being a starving college student sucks, between rent, tuition, and ammo, its really ripping me a new one, heh.

I feel you there.

N6ATF
02-13-2011, 11:17 PM
The problem is that gun control stops crime like door locks stop termites. By accident or design, the folks who push gun control never figure this out or admit it. They follow up with more door locks, better door locks, stronger doors or heavier doors - all delightfully misdirected and ineffective. It's nothing more than "waist deep in the Big Muddy" applied to guns.

It's worse than having no effect. Gun control increases crime and they know it, they just act like idiots to cover for their evil.