Bloomberg - Terrorists are gun violence victims.

Status
Not open for further replies.
This sort of thing has utterly killed his chance at the POTUS.

Really, anny opponent would just have to pull it up and run a commercial. "Bloomberg counted these men as 'victims of gun violence.'" They wouldn't even have to be pro-gun, just point out that lie.

I don't think he's gun truly bonkers, just power-mad. And using the names of people shot by police just to pad numbers, because looking them up easily pulls up their name, death, and even cause. But not the circumstance.

So, crazy? Only partially. Not a chance I can say anything else high road about it.
 
MAIG spin said:
“Rather than debating whether some of the 6,210 people who’ve been killed since Newtown deserved to be shot, we are focused on the actual issue: 33 people are murdered in America every single day with a gun. Our focus is on educating the public about the toll of gun violence and the need for common-sense laws to combat it.

Umm I don't have a Masters degree in math, but according to the FBI 8,583 people were victims of homicide by firearm in 2011 (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc...s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8). 8583 / 365 = 23.51.

Where in God's name are they getting their crime stats from? Or have they now turned even the simple word "murder" into a buzz phrase that doesn't really mean criminal homicide? :confused:

Edit to add: I think I know what they're doing, they're running with homicide numbers from 10 years ago. Josh Sugermann did the same thing in his book Every Handgun is Aimed at You. I've noticed the tendency to do that from several of these groups, probably an attempt to not acknowledge how far the homicide rate has fallen.
 
smalls:

I agree 100%. My question is why his lust for power and tighter control over Anything which belongs to US citizens can justify such huge personal expenses.

The amount spent on this issue by both Bloomberg AND mega-billionaire George Soros should grab the attention of any Pro Second Amendment people who feel that the NRA always has more than enough money to oppose the efforts of these two "gentlemen". Their craving to control everything has no limits nor price tags.
 
It all boils down to what is left for Bloomberg to accomplish in his life? He is already one of the richest men in the world. At his age, he doesn't care much about skeletons since they would have surfaced with his NYC tyranny. At his age, only a run for president could soothe his ego and he won't rest until he gets it or dies, whichever comes first. He is a scary man with nothing to lose.
 
smalls:

I agree 100%. My question is why his lust for power and tighter control over Anything which belongs to US citizens can justify such huge personal expenses.

The amount spent on this issue by both Bloomberg AND mega-billionaire George Soros should grab the attention of any Pro Second Amendment people who feel that the NRA always has more than enough money to oppose the efforts of these two "gentlemen". Their craving to control everything has no limits nor price tags.
It's all about power, 200 years ago he would have been a plantation owner in Georgia.
 
According to this article. New York City Taxpayers have been paying for Bloomberg's Gun Control Group. Is this unethical? Or worse?



NYC Taxpayers Help Sponsor Bloomberg’s Gun Control Group

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...sor-bloomberg-s-gun-control-group_736932.html

"Reports surfaced earlier this week that the webpage of Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) appears to have been purchased and hosted by City of New York."
 
The group, a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization, was co-founded by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston mayor Thomas Menino to “share best practices, develop innovative policies, and support legislation at the national, state, and local levels that will help law enforcement target illegal guns.”

So, he wasn't audited. Thanks for the link.
 
...but we live in a complex world where...

[translation]

"Shut up and let me do what I want to do, you infant. I know better. I know my decision is the right one"

Obama's been real bad lately (and always) about obfuscating his questionable decisions behind an inscrutable *and unquestionable* veil of "complexity." As though we can't know whether to come in out of the rain unless we've "been in the Situation Room" ourselves. I suppose they believe we're like lazy children who can be scared into looking away from a problem if a grownup says "it's too hard" and that they'll take care of it for us.

*shudders*

TCB

So, he wasn't audited. Thanks for the link.
Sheesh. Why would he be?
200 years ago he was a young plantation owner in Georgia
There. Fixed it for ya :D
Umm I don't have a Masters degree in math, but according to the FBI 8,583 people were victims of homicide by firearm in 2011 (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...e-data-table-8). 8583 / 365 = 23.51.
I guarantee they are rolling in suicides by firearms. Granted, that's correct, since they are technically against all "gun violence" and suicide does fall under that heading. But passing them offhand as murders like they so often do is simply duplicitous.
 
Last edited:
In ref my post #64

MAIG mayorsagainstillegalguns.org domain name is registered to the New York City Department of Information Technology & Telecommunications ("NYC DoITT"). So maybe the MAIG Mystery Tour bus is not solely on Mayor Bloomberg's 270 billion dimes after all.

I don't think he's gun truly bonkers, just power-mad.
Please he's Mayor of New York City, Sullivan Act, Big Tim Sullivan, Tammany Hall and all that.
 
Last edited:
In ref my post #64

MAIG mayorsagainstillegalguns.org domain name is registered to the New York City Department of Information Technology & Telecommunications ("NYC DoITT"). So maybe the MAIG Mystery Tour bus is not solely on Mayor Bloomberg's 270 billion dimes after all.
Isn't using city funds for a political pet project somewhat improper? It isn't like he used city funds to try to bring jobs to New York City. I'm sure no one would have an issue if he used city funds to go state to state to bring tourists and jobs to the city....but he isn't....


He is (allegedly) using (according to the article) city funds to influence politicians and the public on a national level in other states against a right guaranteed by the constitution. Maybe I'm just a hick in the sticks, but it doesn't seem proper.....legally speaking.

.
 
I brought that up in this thread, We will never know I guess?
 
If Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev was listed as a victim of gun violence, and he was shot by the police, doesn't this mean that the one thing Bloomberg can do immediately is remove guns from police?
 
Bloomberg and Soros are essentially socialists. They have made their millions using our system and now condemn or want to control the system which includes the second amendment. They are simply protecting their butts. They may be worth millions but all it takes is a $0.05 round of 22LR from some idiot to terminate their little party.
 
Terrorists are not "gun violence victims".

At worse, terrorists may be politically manipulated tools by those in power over them. They may be "victims" in that manner, because they are either forced or manipulated into committing acts of terrorism. One such example would be people who are forced into such utilitarian uses through threats to family members.

But they're NOT "gun violence victims".

Interestingly, though...once you disarm a population of a country, what does that make the armed factions in charge of the government?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top