PDA

View Full Version : Bloomberg: pass more gun control or we won't protect you"


Texas Boy
07-24-2012, 8:35 AM
“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.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-mayor-michael-bloomberg-police-strike-gun-control-20120724,0,6820833.story

Oh the irony!

JackRydden224
07-24-2012, 8:40 AM
Right, because it's the general public that's shooting at officers not the criminals.

Btw, it's Bloomberg. You missed a "Loser" after the "B1tch" :D

DVSmith
07-24-2012, 8:46 AM
I guess that if cops felt their job was too dangerous because of bad public policies they have the right to find something else to do. Not sure about the whole going on strike thing, but ultimately that could be a strategy to force public policy changes if they felt that would help.

I don't see police unions doing that right now given the fact that they are fighting just to keep pension and benefits from being yanked for new recruits and then dealing with cities going bankrupt to get out of existing obligations.

Just the same, Bloomberg has proven to be quite the out-of-the-box thinker on gun issues. Like sending his investigators into neighboring states looking for dealers that are not following federal laws. I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss his ideas.

OleCuss
07-24-2012, 8:56 AM
“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.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-mayor-michael-bloomberg-police-strike-gun-control-20120724,0,6820833.story

Oh the irony!

The obvious response would be "If you, as our law enforcement officers and agencies, refuse to protect us, we're not going to pay you."

And this kind of threat would tend to point out why we need to be armed. You have elected officials urging the LEAs to refuse to do their duty unless we give up our freedom.

How better to point out that if you want freedom you will have to defend it yourself.

IVC
07-24-2012, 9:23 AM
It's the standard "divide and conquer." Always trying to pit law abiding against the police, while completely ignoring the source of violence. In CA, that's how we lost many gun related issues...

HowardW56
07-24-2012, 9:30 AM
They have no obligation to protect any individual, yet they want to be sure that we cannot protect ourselves...

Sutcliffe
07-24-2012, 9:35 AM
'Nuff said.

ICONIC
07-24-2012, 9:41 AM
I love Bloomberg. Everytime I hear him talk, it just makes me want to go out and buy a firearm just to spite him. Just goes to show you money does not buy everything, especially commonsense or intelligence.

5thgen4runner
07-24-2012, 9:45 AM
Laugh out loud.

vantec08
07-24-2012, 9:46 AM
What bloomie is doing is deserving nothing less than criminal prosecution.

acolytes
07-24-2012, 9:51 AM
Doesn't Bloomberg have anything productive to do? Like ban super sizing value meals?

POLICESTATE
07-24-2012, 10:00 AM
If Bloomberg does not want to do his job then he can resign.

Part of his job is ensuring law and order in his town. The buck stops at the top.

Nick Justice
07-24-2012, 10:03 AM
Fine. You don't have to protect me anyway. The gov't doesn't even have to provide police protection ( CA Gov. Code sec. 845).

Ron-Solo
07-24-2012, 10:07 AM
They have no obligation to protect any individual, yet they want to be sure that we cannot protect ourselves...

Your average law enforcement officer doesn't agree with Bloomberg, so be careful of your use of the word "they" please.

Bhobbs
07-24-2012, 10:07 AM
Oh no, what will I do without my 24 hour police escorts? Oh wait.... I don't have any.

odysseus
07-24-2012, 10:10 AM
If you start to draw a picture of what the world would be like in Bloomberg's ideal world based on the glimpses of things he says, it is a scary place for Liberty and middle class people. He is a wonky little man.

HowardW56
07-24-2012, 10:23 AM
Your average law enforcement officer doesn't agree with Bloomberg, so be careful of your use of the word "they" please.

I was referring to the anti-gun Chiefs & Sheriffs, no offence intended to the cop on the street...

It seems that many officers who rise in rank quit being cops and become politicians...

sholling
07-24-2012, 10:26 AM
Bloomberg is a hardcore Progressive with a napoleon complex (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=napoleon%20complex). The central core of the Progressive movement is the belief that common citizens cannot be trusted to make good decisions and therefore need to be controlled and nannied by an elite group of experts and Bloomberg took that philosophy to heart.

Does Mayor Bloomberg have a Napoleon complex? (http://www.thefreesociety.org/Issues/Food-and-Drink/does-mayor-bloomberg-have-a-napoleon-complex)
The evidence is mounting that New York City’s Bloomberg is a bully, and an especially pernicious one at that. His latest proposal to ban large cups of take-away fizzy drinks won’t be the last example of his wish to boss people about.

He appears to have a domineering wish for the headlines, a sort of Napoleon complex meets Viagra. The irony is that while Mayor Bloomberg is the same height as Napoleon was, at five feet six, Napoleon was in fact two inches taller than the average Frenchman at the end of the eighteenth century, while Bloomberg’s four inches shorter than Americans at the end of the twentieth. That’s a lot of inches to make up by force of personality.

Mayor Bloomberg: Little Hitler with a Napoleon Complex (http://stevebussey.com/wp/2012/06/mayor-bloomberg-little-hitler-with-a-napoleon-complex/)
But here we are in the Year of Our Lord 2012 with a mayor suffering from a Hitler-esque Napoleon complex banning foods and regulating drink sizes. Nobody has mention the phrase “individual responsibility” and nobody that I’ve seen has recoiled at Mayor Bloomberg’s defense of his actions even though he uttered the phrase “it forces you…”

ptoguy2002
07-24-2012, 10:27 AM
If they actually did that, I think it would have the exact opposite affect than what Bloomberg wants.

cdtx2001
07-24-2012, 10:30 AM
Bloomberg, being the typical politician that he is, is using a tragedy to try and push through another agenda.

His opinions are worth less than two fecal droppings from a rodent.

DannyInSoCal
07-24-2012, 10:33 AM
I left a comment -

It seems to be about 90% against gun control.....

Maltese Falcon
07-24-2012, 10:36 AM
Colorado firearms checks have increased by 41% since the shooting...

From Market Ticker:


Well, I'll Be Damned, America Is Waking Up (http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=209090)

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=84

There's nothing like the whizzing sound a bullet makes as it passes 2" from your head to jolt the average person awake from his government lie-induced stupor -- specifically, the lie that "the nanny state will save you from murderous madmen."
From Fox news: (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/24/background-checks-for-guns-in-colorado-reportedly-jump-41-percent-since-movie/)Background checks for people wanting to buy guns in Colorado reportedly increased more than 41 percent after last week’s Aurora movie massacre. The Denver Post reports that firearm instructors have also seen increased interest in training needed for a concealed-carry permit.
Oh, and I may I politely request that your next stop, after the gun store, be Cinemark (http://www.cinemark.com/), which has a "no gun policy" that they are rather proud of (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/robert-farago/cinemark-theaters-no-legal-firearms-allowed/) -- which means that the shooter knew that his intended victims would, as law-abiding citizens, be unarmed and thus unable to return fire. You might want to tell them that you will patronize theaters that do not tape a bulls-eye to your chest when you walk through the door as part of your admission charge from this point forward.
If you think the shooter did not take this into account when selecting the location for his murderous rampage, ask yourself this question: Would he have chosen to attempt to shoot up a theater full of off-duty, but armed, police officers?

taloft
07-24-2012, 10:42 AM
We're supposed to keep them safe!? Wow, I thought it was the other way around.:rolleyes:

As far as them going on strike, the Police are under no obligation to protect us now. So what's the difference? Bloomberg is a troll with an anti gun agenda.

Slim///
07-24-2012, 10:47 AM
Verbal diarrhea

DonFerrando
07-24-2012, 10:55 AM
We're supposed to keep them safe!? Wow, I thought it was the other way around.:rolleyes:

As far as them going on strike, the Police are under no obligation to protect us now. So what's the difference? Bloomberg is a troll with an anti gun agenda.

Just goes to show with what mindset he approaches his job: the police is here to "herd" the public.

kellito
07-24-2012, 11:01 AM
more like dysentery

LAWABIDINGCITIZEN
07-24-2012, 11:02 AM
“I don't understand why........



He actually said something that's true: He doesn't understand.

heyjerr
07-24-2012, 11:02 AM
I think Police should strike.

They should ask the citizens to pass universal legislature that promotes concealed carry (& removing "gun free" zones) so there are more armed & trained law-abiding citizens out there to deter this type of behavior.

Lifeon2whls
07-24-2012, 11:11 AM
They have no obligation to protect any individual, yet they want to be sure that we cannot protect ourselves...

Yep...and if they are going to take away guns I want a cop standing outside of my door 24/7 and then one to follow me around...but of course they are only there to protect me and not get me for anything I might be doing outside of the law....oh what a world.

1BigPea
07-24-2012, 11:12 AM
This is why the 2nd amendement exists

'Nuff said.

This ^^

Arondos
07-24-2012, 11:15 AM
I will have to agree every time this idiot spews his nonsense on something he doesn't know or understand it makes me want to go buy another firearm.

Since the police aren't required to protect me it seems to be a pretty empty threat.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-24-2012, 11:15 AM
I think Police should strike.

They should ask the citizens to pass universal legislature that promotes concealed carry (& removing "gun free" zones) so there are more armed & trained law-abiding citizens out there to deter this type of behavior.

Question:

While this is all sorting itself out, "What do you think the criminal element in our society will do if and when they hear that the Police are on strike?"

A.W.D.

njineermike
07-24-2012, 11:17 AM
How exactly did this complete idiot get elected? You'd think the people of NYC were Californians or something......

Wiz-of-Awd
07-24-2012, 11:19 AM
Just goes to show with what mindset he approaches his job: the police is here to "herd" the public.

Well, really - they are in fact.

As employed to "enforce" the law, police are in many ways no different than a rancher who enforces his "rule" of the heard throughout his land.

A.W.D.

db.40
07-24-2012, 11:20 AM
Not sure about the whole going on strike thing, but ultimately that could be a strategy to force public policy changes if they felt that would help.

Police agencies are not allowed to go on strike

gobler
07-24-2012, 11:38 AM
Good let them strike. I'll be able to open carry a loaded handgun with out fear of arrest....


Sent from somewhere in space & time...

Dantedamean
07-24-2012, 11:50 AM
If the police went on strike gun sales would skyrocket, then the people would realize just how useless the police really are.

odysseus
07-24-2012, 11:54 AM
If the police went on strike gun sales would skyrocket, then the people would realize just how useless the police really are.

You would woefully be in large error if you think that police work is just tied to the possession and use of their firearms. Obviously if you stick to that assertion, you would then show that you have no idea of what police mostly do in their communities.

Keep in mind there was a time in areas in our not too distant past where most everyone had a firearm and even where carrying them around everywhere they went, and still very much needed a peace officer.

Rossi357
07-24-2012, 11:59 AM
Police agencies are not allowed to go on strike

I think it's called "Blue flu"

radioman
07-24-2012, 12:02 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

mike should read this before opining his mouth.

guns4life
07-24-2012, 12:10 PM
When this azzhole dies I'm going to throw a party...

frankm
07-24-2012, 12:17 PM
“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.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-mayor-michael-bloomberg-police-strike-gun-control-20120724,0,6820833.story

Oh the irony!

Bloomberg, you stupid, commie, s.o.b. You are such an a-hole!!! Eff u. U don't like it, come here and kick my behind, if you can. Wuss boy.

killathrilla
07-24-2012, 12:23 PM
^^ Word.

xrMike
07-24-2012, 12:30 PM
I put Bloomburg in the same category as Fienstein and Boxer. Whenever one of their faces or voices pops up on TV or radio I immediately switch stations because if not, it's bad for my blood pressure.

vantec08
07-24-2012, 12:42 PM
If they actually did that, I think it would have the exact opposite affect than what Bloomberg wants.

uh huh. Political "solutions" to non political problems accomplishes NOTHING.

otalps
07-24-2012, 12:44 PM
Since when has that idiot given a flying' f about the law. He should be indicted for his illegal MAIG gun "stings".

aklon
07-24-2012, 1:04 PM
Bloomberg may be on to something here. I can see three things happening if the cops do what he wants:

1) many more people will arm themselves, which means more of "us" and less of "them"

2) there will be a lot fewer criminals as people simply shoot the bad guys rather than hold them for the pooice who will never come.

3) municipalities will win when they realize that the cops don't protect anyone, and with the citizens armed and ready, they won't need to hire as many as before. Less police salaries, less pensions - a monetary win for the tax payers. Plus, all those dead criminals won't be clogging the courts and sucking up the resources needed to keep them in prison.

So yes, Mayor Mike: let's have the cops go on strike. Let's see what happens ...

Paul S
07-24-2012, 1:10 PM
I was referring to the anti-gun Chiefs & Sheriffs, no offence intended to the cop on the street...

It seems that many officers who rise in rank quit being cops and become politicians...

You understand perfectly sir.

Thank the dear Lord not all of our Law Enforcement leaders are like that.

stix213
07-24-2012, 1:12 PM
If officers went on strike nationwide then they would have to give us all LTCs.

Untamed1972
07-24-2012, 1:22 PM
You must always remember what is at the basis of liberal/progressive/socialist/communist ideology.....and that is the personal arrogance, a self-deification based on their belief in their own intellectual superiority. The belief that somehow THEY are the supreme beings, supreme to the point of having power over deciding who lives and who dies. How many millions have died and continue to die under Communism? How many die in this country via abortion, only now for the seeds of "post birth abortion" to be planted. Death panels under Obamacare. Disarmed Jews being rounded up in Germany.

There is a reason the liberal elitests want the public disarmed.......it's because they cannot fully put into practice the full weight of their plans knowing we have the power to resist. Can you imagine what would happen if the they tried to perform a forced abortion on an American citizen on American soil? Yet it happens everyday in China and there is no one to stop them.

Constantly remind yourself of that. Do not for one second let yourself believe that they have your best interests at heart of some great benevolent desire to make everyone happy and safe. Millions upon millions have been murdered in the last century by the hand of benevolent liberal/pregressive/communist agendas.

Untamed1972
07-24-2012, 1:23 PM
If officers went on strike nationwide then they would have to give us all LTCs.

You wouldn't need one because there would be no one to arrest for carry :D

Ripon83
07-24-2012, 1:26 PM
No, sorry, I disagree with this whole heartily. If officers went out nationwide we'd all be carrying and not worrying about the law, not worry about the government, but seriously worrying about the thugs that would own our streets. Remember the story on Chicago - 100,000 street gang members. It'd be just like Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood was the only "organization" so they took over. The gangs would have the upper hand.


If officers went on strike nationwide then they would have to give us all LTCs.

heyjerr
07-24-2012, 1:27 PM
Question:

While this is all sorting itself out, "What do you think the criminal element in our society will do if and when they hear that the Police are on strike?"

A.W.D.

Possibly adding strength to our argument. :43:

To be serious, obviously this whole situation would never occur but I'm working within the confines of this particular thread. It is very easy to find a counterpoint for this discussion to begin with.

mag360
07-24-2012, 1:32 PM
Officers please oh please fo on strike. You will all but guarantee massive fun purchasing and carrying by the sheep. Sheep dog scarrrry with fun too but he go bye bye guess i better protect myself from the wolves.

NoJoke
07-24-2012, 1:38 PM
Boomberg: pass more gun control or we won't protect you

That's just funny.

Anybody here - at any time - walk up to an officer and ask him if he's there to protect you. :rolleyes:

So, the translation to the thread title is, "We don't protect you, so we won't protect you"

Spin, spin, spin.....I'm dizzy with all the spinning going on.

werd

sholling
07-24-2012, 1:42 PM
How exactly did this complete idiot get elected? You'd think the people of NYC were Californians or something......
It's New York City where the public likes having a nanny. Someone like Giuliani to protect them from guns and porn or Bloomberg to protect them from from sugar, salt and guns. The home of the "there outta be a law" mentality.

Untamed1972
07-24-2012, 1:47 PM
It's New York City where the public likes having a nanny. Someone like Giuliani to protect them from guns and porn or Bloomberg to protect them from from sugar, salt and guns. The home of the "there outta be a law" mentality.

So much for the old sterotype of the "tough New Yawka" aye?

And what has any of that done to keep that place from becoming and continuting to be a filthy, crime ridden crap hole?

SilverTauron
07-24-2012, 3:50 PM
Challenge Accepted.

Let us send hundreds of trained men and women home instead of them protecting the unarmed and the meek from the ravages of criminal behavior. The outcome of that experiment will be a city full of liberals getting an upfront and personal introduction to the "urban ute" they're so committed to rehabilitating.

Street cops aren't dumb, and in fact know more about the job than the political Gumby police cheifs kissing their Mayor's behind for another appointment.

SgtDinosaur
07-24-2012, 4:33 PM
Bloomberg, you stupid, commie, s.o.b. You are such an a-hole!!! Eff u. U don't like it, come here and kick my behind, if you can. Wuss boy.

Well said. My sentiments exactly. I haven't seen so much gun control hysteria in a long time. We're being bombarded by it. I hope it backfires and some politicians lose their jobs like back in '94. Can't imagine police officers would listen to this douche. His comments should be a scandal, but that's not how the libs roll.

VAReact
07-24-2012, 4:46 PM
Police are not obligated to protect ANYBODY -just clean up the mess after the fact...:mad:

shark92651
07-24-2012, 5:01 PM
Police have no obligation to provide us protection in the first place. Lawyers have successfully argued that in court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

"By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police because no special relationship existed. The court stated that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a special relationship exists."

Mendo223
07-24-2012, 5:06 PM
wow some of the things bloomberg says just make me brain want to melt out onto the floor...

this guy is such a total ignorant power hungry idiot..

tonelar
07-24-2012, 5:10 PM
The true obvious answer is that the rank and file LEOs are pro-2A.

CLEOs (in taking their appointments) cross into the realm of politicians.

My email to bloomberg:

"You're a sorry excuse for a human being Mayor Michael Bloomberg. NYC needs to recall you for playing games with the perceived safety of your electorate. Your little threat doesn't intimidate people who know the truth about police protection in the US. Besides, most of the rank and file law enforcement officers wouldn't play into your hand in the first place. Take your elitist agenda and shove it."

njineermike
07-24-2012, 6:05 PM
So much for the old sterotype of the "tough New Yawka" aye?

And what has any of that done to keep that place from becoming and continuting to be a filthy, crime ridden crap hole?

That would require the correct application of thermonuclear sanitizing agents.

gazzavc
07-24-2012, 9:35 PM
The response is quite simple.

Dear Mayor Baloonhead,

By all means encourage the police to go on strike. We the people will arm ourselves and take it from here. Thanks.

BTW, just remember what Reagan did to the striking Air Traffic controllers............

bernieb90
07-24-2012, 10:54 PM
Police have no obligation to provide us protection in the first place. Lawyers have successfully argued that in court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

"By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police because no special relationship existed. The court stated that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a special relationship exists."

I think this should be required reading for every anti-gun liberal. Every time I hear the line "nobody needs a gun they can just call the police" I should give them a copy of this.

No, sorry, I disagree with this whole heartily. If officers went out nationwide we'd all be carrying and not worrying about the law, not worry about the government, but seriously worrying about the thugs that would own our streets. Remember the story on Chicago - 100,000 street gang members. It'd be just like Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood was the only "organization" so they took over. The gangs would have the upper hand.

Back in 1992 during the LA riots police were so impotent they were practicaly gone from the equation. The Korean store owners on ther rooftops with their AK variants did what the police could not. More often than not it is immigrants from countries that have oppressive governments that come to America, and embrace the constitution as the founding fathers envisioned it (they were in the same boat). Lots of people born here have the luxury of being liberals because of all the other people with guns (soldiers, CCW holders, LEOs) watching their backs. My buddy had liberal coworkers calling him in the middle of the riots asking to borrow a gun (he politely refused). Some ran out and bought guns right after. After time passed some have grown comfortable again, and sold them.

Police protection is a thin line that gets wiped away the second something major happens. Where do you think the cops will be during a major disaster. Many will be protecting their families, and friends.

stix213
07-24-2012, 11:16 PM
You wouldn't need one because there would be no one to arrest for carry :D

Damn right, good point

DannyInSoCal
07-24-2012, 11:16 PM
No, sorry, I disagree with this whole heartily. If officers went out nationwide we'd all be carrying and not worrying about the law, not worry about the government, but seriously worrying about the thugs that would own our streets. Remember the story on Chicago - 100,000 street gang members. It'd be just like Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood was the only "organization" so they took over. The gangs would have the upper hand.

Soooooooooo - All the thugs and gangster wannabe's would be out in the open -

And there is nobody to arrest anyone who "takes out the trash" -

Sounds like a winner...

And let's make the strike a year long.

Those of us with firearms will protect our families.

Those that do not will FINALLY realize why we do have firearms.

"Yes - That mismatched Mosin is for sale. $2,500 please. Did you need ammo for that? It's on sale for $4 a round..."

creampuff
07-24-2012, 11:35 PM
Has there been a LEO in the U.S. shot by armor piercing ammo?
I can understand worrying about getting shot, where there isn't any body armor (head, major leg artery etc), or getting shot by a rifle caliber that body armor can't protect - but really, is armor piercing ammo very prevalent out there????

I know it was on Lethal Weapon II, but other than that, is it really that much of a plague on society that Bloomberg claims it is? Watch Bloomberg will start showing videos of how armor piercing bullets can shoot through the heavy plate of a back hoe - oh wait... that was Lethal Weapon again...nevermind.

bernieb90
07-25-2012, 12:02 AM
Has there been a LEO in the U.S. shot by armor piercing ammo?
I can understand worrying about getting shot, where there isn't any body armor (head, major leg artery etc), or getting shot by a rifle caliber that body armor can't protect - but really, is armor piercing ammo very prevalent out there????

I know it was on Lethal Weapon II, but other than that, is it really that much of a plague on society that Bloomberg claims it is? Watch Bloomberg will start showing videos of how armor piercing bullets can shoot through the heavy plate of a back hoe - oh wait... that was Lethal Weapon again...nevermind.

None of this has anything to do with officer safety, it has everything to do with getting people worked up, and emotionaly invested in gun control. You tell the average person that armor piercing bullets can kill cops (many saw Lethal Weapon), and they can be persuaded to go along with banning whole classes of ammunition, and weapons based only on that.

It is the same B.S. with the lead ban for hunting here in Kalifornia. "we must save the Condors" they say so they ban lead for hunting, and the stupid birds still die from lead poisoning. They don't care about the Condor they want to make it harder, and more expensive to hunt.

Falconis
07-25-2012, 1:29 AM
Except for the few that have mentioned or eluded to it here, anyone else keeping in mind this is coming from Bloomberg and not the cops?

SilverTauron
07-25-2012, 1:44 AM
Soooooooooo - All the thugs and gangster wannabe's would be out in the open -

And there is nobody to arrest anyone who "takes out the trash" -

Sounds like a winner...

And let's make the strike a year long.

Those of us with firearms will protect our families.

Those that do not will FINALLY realize why we do have firearms.

"Yes - That mismatched Mosin is for sale. $2,500 please. Did you need ammo for that? It's on sale for $4 a round..."


Id imagine some of you guys would be getting some panicky knocks at the door if this happened.

***thumpThumpTHUMP!!!***

"I need a gun man".

Its illegal. The law says we have to go to an FFL for a private transaction.

"Come ON man! There's a mob at my door and the cops are on strike!I know you have a gun I can use!! Help me".

Its 2am. Ill go with you to a gun store to do the PPT paperwork, assuming the place isn't looted by then.Not that it matters since you'll have to wait 10 days to use it anyway.

"WHAT!! I NEED IT NOW! Who made that law up?"

A guy you voted for said it was reasonable.U mad bro?


***a window breaks in the background***

mossy
07-25-2012, 2:06 AM
no cops and a bunch of thug's out in the open. it will be like shooting fish in a barrel.

TacticalPlinker
07-25-2012, 2:15 AM
So aside from investigation and getting criminals off the streets through making arrests as a result of said investigation, I really don't think cops "protect" us very well in the first place. Why? Because generally speaking for a situation in which a citizen would require protection to any degree, the cops arrive after the fact, after the crime has already occurred.

They arrive after the home invasion, after the murder, after the rape, after the drive by shooting, after the robbery or burglary, after the car jacking, so fourth and so on...

But that's just my opinion on the matter.

As for Bloomberg, go **** yourself, you communist cretin!

The War Wagon
07-25-2012, 3:52 AM
Who will protect America from more of BloomINGIDIOTberg's lunacy? :confused:

There's the LARGER question... :o

Jack L
07-25-2012, 5:40 AM
Bloomberg is pissed because with all his money, he can't change the mindset of the population of the USA. He can't buy enough politicians and is jealous of the NRA. And, he is a hypocrite as he is well guarded by his police force while trying to make sure the common law abiding citizen is unarmed.

db.40
07-25-2012, 5:55 AM
If the police went on strike gun sales would skyrocket, then the people would realize just how useless the police really are.

This is the most ignorant comment I think I've ever read on this site. Being a cop is more about having a gun. Just because there may be a few bad cops out there doesn't mean those men and women as a majority don't put their lives on the line daily to make society a better place. Judging cops and the job they do based on a few bad ones is the same as the Brady bunch judging gun owners based on mall ninjas.

taperxz
07-25-2012, 6:15 AM
Except for the few that have mentioned or eluded to it here, anyone else keeping in mind this is coming from Bloomberg and not the cops?

I thought you started this idea. Are you supporting a strike cause you're out of vacation days?:p

I actually find it hard to believe that anything said by Bloomberg is even worthy of a thread on CGN.

He truly is "mr. irrelevant" NOTHING he says or does has any credibility nationwide. Seriously.

vantec08
07-25-2012, 6:43 AM
Charles Cooke on bloomie - - http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/312202/disarming-we-people-charles-c-w-cooke

"To outlaw guns with so many in circulation (a fact of life that is not going to go away, whatever government attempts to do: See “War on Drugs”) would be to create a duopoly on violence, held between the state and the criminals, and leave out the one group in American life for whom the social compact was constructed: We the People."

donw
07-25-2012, 6:59 AM
The obvious response would be "If you, as our law enforcement officers and agencies, refuse to protect us, we're not going to pay you."

And this kind of threat would tend to point out why we need to be armed. You have elected officials urging the LEAs to refuse to do their duty unless we give up our freedom.

How better to point out that if you want freedom you will have to defend it yourself.

well said!

Bloomberg is, without doubt, one of the biggest power-hungry, narcissistic, politicians, ever elected by a city. i, personally, believe after all his blunders in trying to regulate what you eat/drink he won't get re-elected; new yorkers LOVE their food

the police, for the biggest part, do the best job they can with what they have. most PD's are NOT under armed and under trained. some, in fact, are well enough trained and equipped to make military style assaults. many have the "Heavy weapons" available if needed, too...

few, citizens, are equipped, and TRAINED, to take on the police at any level. the ONLY advantage a citizen "Army" would ever have a chance of taking on the police, would be with sheer numbers in manpower.

if a citizen "Army" did ever manage to defeat the police...guess what? they would call in the national guard.

the problem is NOT you and i with our AR's and .45 ACP's that we have purchased, and use, legally...it's those who obtain those and use them in a criminal way. you know it...i know it...

Bloomberg, i would believe, lives in fear of his life and in regards to that has an abnormal fear of the private citizens owning firearms.

MontClaire
07-25-2012, 7:10 AM
Your average law enforcement officer doesn't agree with Bloomberg, so be careful of your use of the word "they" please.

They he meant politicians. Read and think before you jump in to conclusions.

YubaRiver
07-25-2012, 7:14 AM
Ron,

You put up with a lot of crap here. Thanks for the dialog.

donw
07-25-2012, 7:23 AM
So aside from investigation and getting criminals off the streets through making arrests as a result of said investigation, I really don't think cops "protect" us very well in the first place. Why? Because generally speaking for a situation in which a citizen would require protection to any degree, the cops arrive after the fact, after the crime has already occurred.

They arrive after the home invasion, after the murder, after the rape, after the drive by shooting, after the robbery or burglary, after the car jacking, so fourth and so on...

But that's just my opinion on the matter.

As for Bloomberg, go **** yourself, you communist cretin!

(the bold is my emphasis)

very fair assessment...but it must also be followed up by the fact they do their best to find, and bring to justice, those who commit those acts.

nicki
07-25-2012, 10:36 AM
Bloomberg wants the police to strike until we surrender our gun rights, I say let's bring it on.

Let's start with the NYPD, let's demand that they strike and continue to strike until America surrenders their guns.

If we don't see the public step up within say "2 weeks", let's get the Chicago PD to do so also so that way Americans can see first hand what happens if they lose the police.

Wonder if Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel would go along with this or would he say this is a "Retarded Idea".;)

Sometimes you just have to love our opponents when they open their mouths, just when I think they can't make any more dumber comments, they find a way to lower the bar.:43:

Nicki

Untamed1972
07-25-2012, 10:41 AM
Does Bloomy realize that his whole "COPs should go on strike or else" sounds a heck of alot like the old Mob "protection rackets"?

Falconis
07-26-2012, 9:24 AM
I thought you started this idea. Are you supporting a strike cause you're out of vacation days?:p

I actually find it hard to believe that anything said by Bloomberg is even worthy of a thread on CGN.

He truly is "mr. irrelevant" NOTHING he says or does has any credibility nationwide. Seriously.

What the hell you talking about? I still have sick days :)

njineermike
07-26-2012, 10:45 AM
Bloomberg wants the police to strike until we surrender our gun rights, I say let's bring it on.

Let's start with the NYPD, let's demand that they strike and continue to strike until America surrenders their guns.

If we don't see the public step up within say "2 weeks", let's get the Chicago PD to do so also so that way Americans can see first hand what happens if they lose the police.

Wonder if Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel would go along with this or would he say this is a "Retarded Idea".;)

Sometimes you just have to love our opponents when they open their mouths, just when I think they can't make any more dumber comments, they find a way to lower the bar.:43:

Nicki

How exactly would anybody notice it in NY or Chicago? Those places are completely out of any measure of control as it is.

MixedMotives
07-26-2012, 12:35 PM
thats why we need guns becasue cops are to scared to do their job