Bloomberg plans a $50 million challenge to the NRA

[RogueBeaver]

An umbrella gun control organization, focused on background checks rather than bans.

[nuclearneo577]

Well, in a plutocracy you have to fight money with money. I hope that this manages to gets something accomplished, but then again he is trying to take on the NRA. I wish him luck with this.

[Zioneer]

Bleh, wish he'd do this for other issues like minimum wage or clean energy.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The NRA, sadly, has moved from a pro-gun rights organization to a pro-gun/anti-liberal organization.  They now seem more focused on opposing Obama and the Democrats under the facade of supporting gun rights.  Look at the NRA's flip-flop on background checks.

I certainly don't support Bloomberg on a lot of things, especially some of more liberal stances on guns, and I think he severely mismanaged Mayors Against Illegal Guns.  MAIG never should have opposed the Thune Amendment or supported the high capacity magazine ban.  That moved the goals of the organization from simply opposing illegal guns to trying to broaden what exactly it was that was made illegal, and that wasn't really what the name of the organization sounded like.

So if Bloomberg wants this to be successful, he's going to have to take it slowly and not get overambitious; if he does, the organization will be labelled anti-gun and liberal, and he won't get independents' support.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Bleh, wish he'd do this for other issues like minimum wage or clean energy.

Agreed.

[AggregateDemand]

Universal background checks are a reasonable procedure, but what's the substance on the back end?

Is it going to stop the mentally-ill? No. Selling to the mentally-ill has been illegal since 1968. Jared Loughner failed a military psyche evaluation, but he did not have his buying privileges revoked by the current NICS system.

Will universal checks stop Adam Lanza from murdering his mother and stealing her weapons? No.

Will universal background checks stop straw purchases like those prior to Columbine? No.

Will universal background checks stop the North Hollywood BOA shootout? No.

The only difference with background checks is that they annoy the gun show militia-types, who have nothing to do with life in NYC. Furthermore, it seems those somewhat unsavory militia characters are rarely implicated in mass killings with weapons.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Universal background checks are a reasonable procedure, but what's the substance on the back end?

Is it going to stop the mentally-ill? No. Selling to the mentally-ill has been illegal since 1968. Jared Loughner failed a military psyche evaluation, but he did not have his buying privileges revoked by the current NICS system.

Will universal checks stop Adam Lanza from murdering his mother and stealing her weapons? No.

Will universal background checks stop straw purchases like those prior to Columbine? No.

Will universal background checks stop the North Hollywood BOA shootout? No.

The only difference with background checks is that they annoy the gun show militia-types, who have nothing to do with life in NYC. Furthermore, it seems those somewhat unsavory militia characters are rarely implicated in mass killings with weapons.

Nobody is arguing that it will stop all killings.  I fail to see why our goal should simply be to stop mass killings.  There is no harm, in my view, in enacting a universal background check requirement.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Bleh, wish he'd do this for other issues like minimum wage or clean energy.

Amen.

Even if Bloomberg wants to focus his post-mayoral days exclusively on addressing crime, at least talk about more than just guns.  The folks who speak as if gun violence is the only, if not the most important, factor in why we have crime annoy me more than the NRA fanatics.

[AggregateDemand]

Nobody is arguing that it will stop all killings.  I fail to see why our goal should simply be to stop mass killings.  There is no harm, in my view, in enacting a universal background check requirement.

I don't understand the obsession with implementing feel-good policy that has virtually no chance of success.

[Horus]

In a perfect world, Bloomberg and LaPierre would both lose out and logic would prevail. Neither of them have much of it.

[Lief 🗽]

In a perfect world, Bloomberg and LaPierre would both lose out and logic would prevail. Neither of them have much of it.

How are background checks for purchasing deadly weapons not "logical"?

[H. Ross Peron]

Bleh, wish he'd do this for other issues like minimum wage or clean energy.

[Zioneer]

Bleh, wish he'd do this for other issues like minimum wage or clean energy.

Amen.

Even if Bloomberg wants to focus his post-mayoral days exclusively on addressing crime, at least talk about more than just guns.  The folks who speak as if gun violence is the only, if not the most important, factor in why we have crime annoy me me more than the NRA fanatics.

If he just spent 50 million to plop a few businesses into Detroit and do job training, he could probably weaken gun crime considerably more than just annoying the NRA.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Nobody is arguing that it will stop all killings.  I fail to see why our goal should simply be to stop mass killings.  There is no harm, in my view, in enacting a universal background check requirement.

I don't understand the obsession with implementing feel-good policy that has virtually no chance of success.

It's not just about reducing violence; it's about enforcing the laws on the books, and background checks would be a mechanism to help ensure enforcement.

We already know that background checks are working to keep guns out of the hands of people who legally can't purchase them.  See the statistics from Colorado.  Is there any way to prove that any of those denials led to the stoppage of a future crime?  No, but that's impossible to prove.  If we can keep guns out of the hands of some (not all) people who have shown they have a propensity to commit violent acts, and we can ensure enforcement of the laws on the books, why shouldn't we do it?

Or look at the numbers from the federal gun background checks.  Just because these background checks wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook or Aurora doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.  Why are you focusing solely on mass shooting events?

[dead0man]

If that's all he honestly plans on doing, more power to him, but

If he just spent 50 million to plop a few businesses into Detroit and do job training, he could probably weaken gun crime considerably more than just annoying the NRA.

this would do much more to lower crime/poverty than background checks would.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Hi, I'm Smalltown Mcleglislator. You've proably seen the barrage of attack ads paid for NYC Mayor and his urban liberal elite. It's clear he doesn't understand how small town America relies on firearms ... Why can't he stick to his urban ...

etc. etc. etc.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Hi, I'm Smalltown Mcleglislator. You've proably seen the barrage of attack ads paid for NYC Mayor and his urban liberal elite. It's clear he doesn't understand how small town America relies on firearms ... Why can't he stick to his urban ...

etc. etc. etc.

Which is precisely why if you had read the article, you'd see that Bloomberg has realized the futility of the advertizing-only approach, and is trying to build up a grass-roots organization.  I doubt he'll have much success, but it should be more than his previous approach.

[Potatoe]

(I know that this may be futile, but eh)

Alright, Mike is still my favourite NYC Mayor, though a chunk of that came from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which was a nice attempt, but I really like the guy for his other attempts against Gun Crime too, as well as the fact that he was a good mayor.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Well, in a plutocracy you have to fight money with money. I hope that this manages to gets something accomplished, but then again he is trying to take on the NRA. I wish him luck with this.

Bloomberg is just as much a part of the plutocracy as the NRA.  You may feel like your views were represented if his efforts lead to tougher gun control laws are successful, but it will be entirely a coincidence that your views on this issue just happened to align with those of enough plutocrats for the legislation to pass.

[Hatman 🍁]

Glad he spent it on this than trying to ban soda or frisking black people.

[Randy Bobandy]

If that's all he honestly plans on doing, more power to him, but

If he just spent 50 million to plop a few businesses into Detroit and do job training, he could probably weaken gun crime considerably more than just annoying the NRA.

this would do much more to lower crime/poverty than background checks would.

This.

If the man has $50 million, he could direct it towards clean energy or raising the minimum wage, as previous posters have suggested. Bugging the NRA isn't necessarily the most positive thing that he could do with his funds.

[AggregateDemand]

Just because these background checks wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook or Aurora doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.  Why are you focusing solely on mass shooting events?

An overwhelming majority of gun violence statistics are generated by suicide (unstoppable) and gang violence or organized narcotics violence. Those problems exist in their own microcosm, and we have special task forces to deal with organized crime. Law enforcement would be happy to explain the futility of piling regulations on the rest of society.

All other gun crimes, including mass shootings, are perpetrated by people who would not be stopped by universal background checks. Mass shootings, in particular, show the failure of DC to enforce the laws that have been on the books for over 40 years, and mass shootings affect a wide variety of US demographics.

Universal backgrounds checks are proposed to right some sort of wrong, but they have no effect. It's like passing a city ordinance to make the owner of a condemned house mow his lawn. Okay, now he must mow his lawn like everyone else. Problem solved? Town beautified?

[King]

The money would be better spent helping minorities get Voter IDs and driving them to midterm polls.

That would kill the NRA swiftly.

[Cory]

Bleh, wish he'd do this for other issues like minimum wage or clean energy.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Just because these background checks wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook or Aurora doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.  Why are you focusing solely on mass shooting events?

An overwhelming majority of gun violence statistics are generated by suicide (unstoppable) and gang violence or organized narcotics violence. Those problems exist in their own microcosm, and we have special task forces to deal with organized crime. Law enforcement would be happy to explain the futility of piling regulations on the rest of society.

All other gun crimes, including mass shootings, are perpetrated by people who would not be stopped by universal background checks. Mass shootings, in particular, show the failure of DC to enforce the laws that have been on the books for over 40 years, and mass shootings affect a wide variety of US demographics.

Universal backgrounds checks are proposed to right some sort of wrong, but they have no effect. It's like passing a city ordinance to make the owner of a condemned house mow his lawn. Okay, now he must mow his lawn like everyone else. Problem solved? Town beautified?

"All other gun crimes... are perpetrated by people who would not be stopped by universal background checks."

Care to give some type of citation for that sweeping statement?  All other gun crimes?  So you're telling me that you honestly think that background checks wouldn't stop one domestic violence gun crime or heat-of-the-moment gun crime?  I'd love to hear your rationale there.