Bloomberg Businessweek Offers Take on Supreme Court Ruling
While mostly an unbiased story, the report from Bloomberg Businessweek does seem – at least to us – to have a slightly annoyed take on the Supreme Court ruling. The piece even has a headline that shows a slight tinge of anti-gun bias: “States Must Honor Gun Rights, U.S. High Court Says.” While maybe we’re nitpicking, we do find that the word “must” to be used negatively in this instance.
Don’t agree with our take on Bloomberg Businessweek’s take? Let’s look at a few examples where the wording suggests that the writer isn’t exactly entirely unbiased:
“It will open a new front in the fight over gun rights, setting the stage for courtroom battles over the constitutionality of weapons restrictions around the country.”
Is it necessary to use the words “front” and “weapons?” While firearms can be weapons, so too could be a baseball bat or a kitchen knife. And the word “front” along with “battles” implies a hostile intent. But let’s also examine some other passages a bit more closely too:
“Chicago has been the only major U.S. city with a blanket prohibition on handguns. The ban was challenged by four Chicago residents, including Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old homeowner in the Morgan Park neighborhood on the city’s South Side.
“McDonald, who says his home has been broken into at least three times, says he wants to keep a handgun by his bed for protection.”
What the author of this piece failed to mention is that Mr. McDonald actually shot an intruder into his home. As written, this piece offers McDonald’s statement as unsubstantiated. In fact, he’s been a victim who had to use a gun already in self-defense.
But the whole point of our post is that we see this type of just slightly anti-gun bias all too often in the mainstream media.
Firing Back: Does Supreme Court Not Matter To Daley? Does This Guy Think Before Speaking?
In a blog post for The Chicago Tribune it makes it perfectly clear that the rule of law doesn’t matter to some gun-hating mayors around the country. Apparently men like Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago is just such an example, notes the post:
“Mayor Richard Daley today rejected the idea that the Supreme Court is likely to overturn the city’s gun ban, but said that he will be ready to act quickly to put in place restrictions on gun ownership if it does.”
The post further quotes Daley, almost suggesting that he hopes something bad will happen to chance some minds:
“You have to have confidence in the Supreme Court, Maybe they’ll see the light of day. Maybe one of them will have an incident and they’ll change their mind overnight, going to and from work.”
So we’ll ask the question, no one else seems to ask… does Daley think before he speaks? The Tribune blog post also quotes him saying this choice statement:
“Whatever the details of the court’s ruling will be, we will always find new ways to keep guns off our streets.”
The sentiment is good. The possibility of this statement being true is ridiculous. Daley can’t possibly believe he can keep “guns off the streets.” What he can do is make it harder for law-abiding citizens to own guns. Of course, this comes from the guy who just days ago told a reporter that Chicago’s gun laws were effective with the choice statement:
“If I put this up your butt, you’ll find out how effective it is. Let me put a round up your, you know.”
So does Daely think before he speaks? He sounds like a very dangerous man to us, and there is an old saying about where good intentions take you. Let’s hope that men such as Daley, or New York’s Michael Bloomberg don’t do too much paving.
Firing Back: No Vote of Confidence for Bloomberg
As a resident of New York City I feel less and less like a New Yorker with each passing year. While this is where I have lived for more than 17 years, it also feels less and less like a home. The reason is simple, Michael Bloomberg. His policies on firearms border on Fascist, and he is unwilling to budge. The laws are draconian and only getting worse.
But beyond what Michael Bloomberg does in New York City is really not the issue. Nearly my entire collection of firearms is housed out of state, because I fear that Bloomberg will change New York City gun laws and require me to “hand in” my guns. There is no grandfather clause in New York City. If the laws change, you change with them or you leave. I’m hoping I can leave, and the sooner the better.
Again, what Michael Bloomberg does in New York City is really not the issue. It is that Mr. Bloomberg is trying to change the laws in other states, and on the national stage. I find it ironic because many “lifers” as those who were born and will likely die in this city, complain that much of the old New York City is changing, that too many outsiders are coming in, and that New York City looks too much like the rest of the country.
Well, I say to the old guard in New York, including Mr. Bloomberg, maybe you should keep your old New York City. But keep your hands off the guns of law-abiding citizens, especially those who don’t live in New York City.
And to those New Yorkers, or just residents of New York City, who feel as I do… stay home on Tuesday. Don’t vote. This is a year when Mr. Bloomberg says he needs to see every voter get out. I say instead, stay home and vote by not going to the polls.
Firing Back: Mayor Bloomberg Says “Gun Show Loophole” Not About Second Amendment Rights… Yeah, Right!
Election day is coming up. And I have a problem with my mayor, Mike Bloomberg, and I for one won’t vote him. I won’t vote for his challenger either, so on Election Day I’ll opt not to cast my vote. I need to do this to hopefully send a message to His Honor that he is in fact sending the wrong message when it comes to the issue of firearms. Mayor Bloomberg has released a report entitled “Gun Show Undercover,” and while this report should be taken seriously – especially if criminals are using gun shows to obtain guns illegally, there is a bigger issue at heart. Read more
Kudos to The Kansas City Star for Setting the Record Straight
Here is one of those times we’re happy with what the mainstream media has to say on the issue of firearms. In an editorial The Kansas City Star calls out New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s zealot anti-gun group for what it really is…
”Bloomberg created ‘Mayors Against Illegal Guns’ as a front group to lobby Congress to oppose important pro-gun reforms and support new federal gun control restrictions. And some mayors have joined or been duped into joining this anti-gun Bloomberg crusade.”
Florida’s Mayors Under Attack For Joining Gun Control Group
Forty-five of Florida’s mayors have joined the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Understandably, these men and women have been inundated with mail and phone calls from constituents who are unhappy that their elected leaders are supporting this group. Mayors Against Illegal Guns has around 450 cities nationwide under its thumb. Read more
Bloomberg News Puts Spin on Louisiana Firearms Sale
This weekend Louisiana offered the first-ever Second Amendment Weekend Sales Tax holiday, where lawmakers approved a tax break for those looking to purchase firearms. The story that ran on Bloomberg.com was mostly clear about the facts, but we want to set the record straight on a point or two. Most importantly the author claimed this was to give the state’s 270,000 hunters a break. Again, buying guns isn’t just about hunting, but in fairness this article did run just before the start of dove hunting season, so maybe that’s how the writer put the facts together. The problem with this is that it would be considered lazy journalism in most circumstances, as there is no proof that just hunters were buying the firearms.
The bigger concern is that the writer felt compelled to add this strongly anti-firearm passage:
“Across the country, more than 450 municipal leaders, including Ray Nagin of New Orleans, have formed Mayors Against Illegal Guns to stop the spread of weapons. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was a founding member of the group, which has supported gun buyback programs.”
While it might not seem like much, it has nothing to do with the story, and worse the writer notes that Nagin wasn’t reached for comment. So why include it? Well, with Bloomberg as the name of the magazine it seems that Bloomberg (Mike Bloomberg founded this magazine) would have to be in the story, especially if guns are involved.
Was NYC Mayor Bloomberg Serious?
This week New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg made a very surreal statement while talking to WNYC radio’s Bob Hennelly. When questioned where there was a concern that a gun owner, with a permit, could be too drunk to drive, the mayor responded:
“If you are in a bar and you see somebody intoxicated and think they might have a gun I know what I would do, I’d either leave that bar or call the cops. I don’t want to get shot.”
Read more
WNYC Radio Has Nice Sound Bites, But Few Facts
By the way WNYC radio spun it, it sounds like NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg is really just a mayor with a reasonable gun control policy. Here is a sample of what he said:
“BLOOMBERG: There’s federal law that says that criminals can’t have guns and we should enforce that law and get guns off the streets nothing wrong with the Second Amendment.”
