“Federal laws say you can’t get a gun if you have a drug problem, psychiatric problem, criminal record or [are a\] minor, and yet Congress doesn’t give monies to make sure that we can have a background check,” Bloomberg said on “Meet the Press.”

Criminals seeking guns can take advantage of “too many loopholes,” the mayor said.

“The background database isn’t up to date, private sector sales of guns is something like 40%, and they don’t do background checks,” he said.

The problem with this argument is that it basically blames the loopholes and not the criminals. It also tries to suggest that those 40 percent are 100 percent of the illegal gun problem, and there is no evidence this is the case. Once again it seems clear that Bloomberg isn’t just part of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, he’s a mayor against all guns.

However, the National Review seems to be giving in on the issue a bit. The article notes:

Improving the mental-health database is an unambiguously good idea, and requiring background checks for private sales is at least debatable — a fair number of crime guns seem to come from private sources, and it’s not unreasonable to ask someone who wants to transfer a gun to drive to a licensed dealer first.

We just have to ask where does this line end? Is it unreasonable when a stranger buys a gun from you? This almost makes sense as you don’t know the person, but it becomes a gray area when it could be selling or trading guns to your friend. Is the background check still necessary? And what about when Dad decides to give a family gun to his son? Is the background check still necessary? “Happy birthday son, now let’s go to the gun shop so you can pay to receive your gift.”

And this is where the notion of “reasonable gun control” that so many anti-gun types call for becomes a bit unreasonable, especially as street thugs and criminals NEVER bother with background checks and permits.

“There are too many loopholes in federal laws that let people buy guns when federal laws say they shouldn’t. Federal law says you cannot buy a gun if you have a criminal record, psychiatric problems, or a minor. Unfortunately, the gun background-check system that we have has some flaws in it. Too many people sell guns privately, and while they’re not supposed to sell to those who couldn’t pass a background check, they’re not required to do a background check. And it would be very easy to have reputable gun dealers do that background check for them.”

The question we would like to ask the Mayor is what is his point? Is this really a problem of “guns” or of the flawed medical system? Most gun sales do require a background check, and the background checks do keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t buy them. Further restrictions will only make it harder for the law-abiding – as the citizens of Chicago and Washington can attest. Those cities had even stricter laws than New York City and yet STILL had a gun violence problem.

Bloomberg later stated:

“I don’t think the founding fathers meant to have people to walk around with assault rifles in their hands. I don’t think the founding fathers meant to have people who are on the no fly list be able to go and buy guns.”

This is a common tactic used by anti-gun types. Did the founding fathers intend for reality TV? Did the founding fathers mean for people to have access to pornography on the Internet? It is certainly impossible for the founding fathers to have any opinion on no fly lists when the cutting edge technology in flight of the era of the 1780s was a hot air balloon!

Likewise, as we often state, the guns of the era were far deadlier given the medical treatment today. In the 1780s any musket wound was very likely to be fatal. So this nonsense that the guns are deadlier today is just that – nonsense.

And finally for good measure Bloomberg compares America to the Third World:

“There are more guns than there are people in America. And it’s only America that has this problem. A couple of third-world countries. But you go around the world and they look at us and say, ‘What are you people thinking?’”

No this isn’t true. There are mass shootings even in countries where there are far stricter gun laws. And yes, there are more guns than people in America. So what is the problem? This argument suggests that Bloomberg isn’t anti-illegal guns as he often tries to suggest, but truly ANTI-GUN in all respects. He is mad that people have guns because he doesn’t like guns.

But this is easy for a billionaire to say, one who has private security – who are likely armed. So are the guns really a danger? No, the danger is men like Bloomberg who will spend their vast fortunes to rewrite the laws as they see fit. Maybe he should at least change the name of his group from Mayors Against Illegal Guns to MAYORS AGAINST GUNS and stop the pretext and lying.

Here is what we are talking about:

Bloomberg asserted the (recent) shooting (in New York City) made clear the importance of gun control. He added: “We had too close a brush with death tonight due to illegal guns.”

And the figures prove he’s right. Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne told me that about 85 percent of the gun crimes committed in New York City result from gun purchases made in Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, “states with comparatively lax gun laws.”

First question, where does Paul Browne get his information? And more to the point, how do the figures prove Bloomberg is right? This number is widely cited, but without a source. Second, what numbers of those are legal vs. illegal gun purchases? In other words, are these even legal purchases that take advantage of “lax gun laws” in the first place? This point is never made clear and is often very vague. Not exactly the facts now are they?

But the facts get even more twisted:

John Feinblatt, the Mayor’s chief policy adviser, told me that states with tough gun laws are unlikely to be the source of illegal guns. He noted that, in fighting gun crimes, two measures are vital: having universal background checks for gun sales and putting all such data in the FBI files. In the case of the Virginia Tech massacre, in which 33 people were killed, the gunman, Seung-hui Cho, had a mental history that indicated he was dangerous but , Feinblatt said, that was never passed on to the FBI. Some state laws on gun sales, he added “have loopholes like swiss [sic] cheese.”

Again, this is twisting the message and points. Seung-hui Cho’s ability to get a gun wasn’t because of lax gun laws, but rather a failing in the mental health system. But what “loopholes” are like “Swiss cheese” exactly? Would this be private sales? Even in New York private sales are legal, provided both parties have licenses to own the firearms.

But another point we’d like to make on facts. States with tough gun laws may not be the source of illegal guns, but it is hard to know for sure. Illegal guns aren’t exactly tracked the way commercial sales are tracked, so this is somewhat a vague point. It is clear that guns do change hands in New York and Illinois – as there is gun violence. Clearly an illegal black market operates and no amount of gun bans or gun control is going to destroy this black market. But that’s a fact that really pushes the issue – is it Mayors Against Illegal Guns or just Mayors Against Guns, because the way these guys talk it sounds like the latter.

The article, titled, “Brooklyn Sees Lowest Murder Rate Since 1963” offered this passage:

The NYPD/Clergy Gun Buy-Back program, which has been running since 2008, has helped remove 7,600 weapons from the streets.

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said Brooklyn is now safer, and he has statistics to prove it.

We have to ask, does the gun buyback program have anything to do with it? Maybe a tiny small part, but couldn’t it be that many of the neighborhoods in Brooklyn have been transformed by gentrification also in no small part the reason for the drop in crime. There has been a renaissance in many parts of Brooklyn over the past decade.

It is just interesting that this aspect hasn’t been addressed.

“Rapper Cory Gunz – born Peter Pankey Jr. – was arrested in the Bronx Saturday when cops found he was carrying an unregistered Taurus .9mm handgun, police said.

He was arraigned in Bronx Criminal Court Sunday night on charges of criminal possession of a loaded firearm.

His father, rapper Peter Gunz, posted the $30,000 bail.

Here is the part where we are sort of confused… see the quote from Cory:

“This was a big mistake on my part,” Gunz told The Daily News early Monday morning after getting out of jail. “I didn’t have any intentions of harming anyone or committing a criminal activity. So many young people look up to me and I need to fight though this.”

So was the gun part of a fashion or style statement – gun for Gunz? The law isn’t about intentions in this case. The crime was also committed already for mere possession, and Gunz should have known this fact. But it gets more bizarre reports the paper:

Cory Gunz and his dad recently started a campaign called “Gunz Against Guns” where they speak at schools across the Bronx to steer kids away from the deadly weapons, Peter Gunz said.

Now the real question is whether Cory – being semi-rich and famous – will get the same treatment as the two tourists to New York City? Personally we do see a difference in these cases. The tourists in question legally possessed their respective guns but broke the law by bringing them to New York City – believing they could legally carry their firearms.

Cory Gunz however has not only spoke out against guns, but must have known that he was in possession of an illegal firearm in the first place.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCPrlRiZzFM

Cam Edwards talks to Dave Bruce, a Boston lawyer and Former Marine who is trying to help Ryan Jerome, a fellow Former Marine who was arrested in New York City for his concealed handgun

But anytime one sleazy politician calls out another we think an angel get wings!

January 23, 2012

President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama:

When you last reported on the state of our Union, you expressed the nation’s hopes and prayers for Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the other victims of the Tucson shootings.  This week will mark Congresswoman Giffords’ last days in Congress before she steps down to focus on her truly inspiring recovery. We hope her departure from public life will be temporary and her return will be swift.  And we hope that you will take the opportunity to address her departure, and the causes of it, in your State of the Union Address tomorrow.

Last year, 12,000 Americans were murdered with guns.  To put the death toll in perspective, imagine the entire population of a town being murdered over the course of a year.  Or a university losing its entire student body, each day bringing 34 new murders.  Surely, these events would shock Washington into action.  But the grim fact that guns are used to murder 34 people a day is barely discussed in Washington – even though the tragic reality is that many of those lives could have been saved if the federal government had fixed its broken background check system.

After the Tucson shootings, you called for a new national conversation about guns, saying “we have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to the daily death toll from gun violence in America,” and that “our focus right now should be on sound and effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place.”  To achieve that goal, you said “we should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can’t escape it.”  We strongly agreed.

Many months later, almost nothing has changed.  Criminals and other dangerous individuals are still exploiting massive gaps in the national do-not-sell database.  These gaps facilitate the murder of 34 Americans every day. And they are at the heart of another tragic trend.  Last year, for the first time in 13 years, firearms overtook traffic incidents as the leading cause of fatalities for law enforcement officers. In 2011, 65 police officers were murdered with guns, an increase of 10 percent over 2010.  In at least 35 of these police killings, the shooter was a criminal or other dangerous person who was barred by current law from owning a gun, but slipped through gaps in the background check system.

The more than 600 members of Mayors Against Illegal Guns – representing both political parties and all regions of the country – urge you to address our broken background check system in your State of the Union address.  Our country needs your leadership – and we urge you not to let this issue fall victim of election year politics.  It is too important.  And, as polls show, more than 80 percent of gun owners support the common sense reforms you have proposed to fix our broken background check system.

Tomorrow night, when you speak to the nation about your top priorities for the year ahead, we hope you will remember the debt we owe to the families of police officers killed in the line of duty; to all victims of illegal guns; and to the 12,000 people who will likely be murdered with guns this year – unless we act.

Sincerely,

Thomas M. Menino                                                                      Michael R. Bloomberg

Mayor of Boston                                                                          Mayor of New York City

Coalition Co-Chair                                                                        Coalition Co-Chair

The Post even offered this passage:

The irony that someone so highly trained and trusted to keep America safe might be thrown into prison — for a .45-caliber Ruger that he had legally registered in his home state and that he was actually trying to check with authorities — has not been lost on his Marine brethren.

Even the comments for this article show that many support Jerome, and blame Mayor Bloomberg. Maybe others have begun to see that Bloomberg is just a loud-mouthed anti-gun zealot who doesn’t care about the Constitution of the United States.

Website Gothamist for example noted:

Who believes that carrying a firearm into iconic, highly secured New York landmarks is a good idea? Metal detectors are designed to expose weapons, not belt buckles, yet clueless tourists keep getting hauled into court for packing heat at the Empire State Building. Now some Marines are claiming that Indiana native Ryan Jerome, himself a Marine who was arrested for trying to check his .45 Ruger with authorities in September, is more equal than others who have made the same mistake.

Is it necessary o describe these people as “clueless tourists,” especially in the case of Ryan Jerome, who was actually in New York City on business. But of course this is par for the course from the New Yorkers.