Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
:laughing: NYC Tax dollars at work...

Arizona Attorney General Criticizes New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Gun Sting

Arizona’s attorney general came out guns blazing when he learned that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg authorized a sting operation at a Phoenix gun show.

Attorney General Tom Horne said Bloomberg overstepped his power by not informing authorities in Arizona about the plan to send undercover investigators to gun shows to test how easily a gun can be purchased, MyFoxPhoenix reported.

Horne called the investigation a “public relations stunt,” and went further. In fact, Horne did his own sting, aimed at Bloomberg’s job performance, reminding the mayor, who's still trying to dig his approval ratings out of record amounts of snow, that crime statistics show major crimes have increased the past year in the Big Apple.

A spokesman from Bloomberg’s office did not take the criticism sitting down, and pointed out that New York is the safest big city in the U.S. Hard pressed to miss a parting shot, the spokesman made clear that New York City, at least per capita, appears to be two times safer in major felonies than Phoenix.

Bloomberg has been known to deploy similar stings involving guns across the country.

The sting, which was disclosed Monday, involved investigators hired by New York City to buy semiautomatic pistols after claiming that they probably couldn’t pass a background check, reported MyFoxPhoenix. Two separate sellers apparently sold the investigators 9-mm. guns despite the warning.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/02/arizona-ag-criticizes-bloombergs-gun-sting/#ixzz1CtwFTknJ
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Mayor Bloomberg's Arizona Gun Show P.R. Stunt

New York City's murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault rates rose last year according to preliminary FBI data, with murders alone increasing by more than 12 percent. But instead of concentrating on crime in New York City, Mayor Bloomberg just spent $100,000 of the NYPD's budget sending police to Arizona to buy guns at a gun show.

The "sting" was a waste of money that misleads Americans and did nothing to reduce crime. Talk about an aggressive publicity stunt. Arizona officials had not been informed of the operation, which meant that any potential crimes uncovered by the New York City officers could not be prosecuted.

But, instead of spending $100,000, Bloomberg could have learned what he did for the price of a phone call or an Internet search. Arizonans, like residents in 31 other states, can buy guns from private individuals without a criminal background check, just an Arizona driver's license to demonstrate residency. However, if they sell a gun to someone who they suspect will use it to commit a crime, they risk becoming liable for that crime.

John Feinblatt, a Bloomberg adviser, asserted: “The background check system failed in Arizona, it failed in Virginia and it fails in states around the country. If we don’t fix it now, the question is not whether another massacre will occur, but when.”

Nevertheless, background checks on the private sales of guns would have failed to stop the Tucson, Arizona shooting because the killer, Jared Loughner, passed his background check at a gun store. He had never been convicted of a crime, never been adjudicated as being a danger to himself or others, and he had not been involuntarily committed for mental illness. Thus, he would have been able to get a gun in any state, including New York, where he had been a resident.

Background checks do not stop bad guys from getting guns. Instead, the Brady Act background checks for gun purchases, in place since 1994, are a problem for law-abiding citizens. Hardly ever do background checks deny guns to criminals. Over 99.9 percent of purchases initially flagged as being illegal under the law were later determined to be misidentified.

Take the numbers for 2008, the latest year with data available. The 78,906 initial denials resulted in only 147 cases involving banned individuals trying to purchase guns. Of those 147 cases, prosecutors thought the evidence was strong enough to prosecute only 105, and they won convictions in just 43. But few of these 43 cases involved career criminals or those who posed real threats. The typical case was someone who had a misdemeanor conviction for an offense he didn't realize prevented him from buying a gun.

It is hardly surprising that not a single academic study by economists or criminologists has found that the Brady Act or any state background checks has reduced violent crime. Even those who aren't prevented from buying a gun face delays in getting approved. Eight percent of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System checks are "not resolved immediately."

Five percent of those checks take up to 3 business days, and 3 percent take even longer, though these further delays can't stop one from obtaining a gun at that point.

For gun shows, such background checks would be more than a nuisance because gun shows usually only last for a single weekend. Preventing the sale for that long often means that the transaction will not be able to take place.

According to my research, imposing this requirement cuts down the number of gun shows by about 20 percent. The incorrect denials and delays could be a real safety problem for those who are being stalked or threatened and need protection quickly.

Contrary to public perception, very few criminals obtain their guns from gun shows. This was shown in an extensive survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 1997, with interviews of 18,000 state prison inmates. Only a trivial 0.7 percent indicated that they had obtained their guns at a gun show. Including flea markets, the total rises to just 1.7 percent.

Instead, the overwhelming majority of guns that criminals obtain come either from "friends and family" (40 percent) or "on the street or from illegal sources" (39 percent).

The undercover operation run by Mayor Bloomberg also plays into the entire mythology that has developed around the 33 round magazine based on the claim that Loughner only had to reload because he ran out of bullets.

In fact, the killer’s gun jammed precisely because he used such a large capacity magazine. The long spring used in this high capacity magazines simply didn’t have enough force to properly push the last couple of bullets into the gun. Given that it can take just a couple of seconds to replace a magazine, the killer would have likely been able to fire more rounds if he had brought several smaller magazines.

Mr. Bloomberg makes a big deal about the guns purchased at the guns shows as having characteristics desired by criminals: great stopping power, light weight, concealable. But those are all characteristics that law-abiding citizens value. A small, 120 pound woman will value stopping a 200 pound male criminal before he can grab her.

The 6.2 million Americans who legally carry concealed handguns value light weight concealable guns.

Mr. Bloomberg's P.R. stunt did nothing to stop crime. Wasting $100,000 is bad enough. Today he demanded that the federal government itself spend even more money enforcing these laws.

Hopefully, Americans won't follow his policies and end up wasting lots more money on policies that divert police resources and time from things that do work.

John R. Lott, Jr. is a FoxNews.com contributor. He is an economist and author of the just released revised edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press, 2010).

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/02/02/mayor-bloombergs-arizona-gun-pr-stunt/#ixzz1Ctx2rwPh
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,410 Posts
Mayor Bloomberg's Arizona Gun Show P.R. Stunt
...
John Feinblatt, a Bloomberg adviser, asserted: “The background check system failed in Arizona, it failed in Virginia and it fails in states around the country. If we don’t fix it now, the question is not whether another massacre will occur, but when.”
...
Mr. Bloomberg's P.R. stunt did nothing to stop crime. Wasting $100,000 is bad enough. Today he demanded that the federal government itself spend even more money enforcing these laws.
...
Who does this John Feinblatt think he is? He's just another 'appointed' bureaucrat, with a progressive agenda. He wishes to enforce his personal beliefs on the rest of America because of his 'feelings'. In this case, outrage, frustration, fear, loathing, and greed. Add a heaping helping of self-aggrandizment and we have the classic progressive. Falls right in line with Bloomberg, changing the term limit law so he could be mayor for another term, then changed it back after he was 'elected'. They seek to subject the rest of us with their will using 'public safety' and 'social justice' as the reason they and thier agenda are too important to ignore. This is just anotther example of government going too far. All it ended up doing is wasting money.

It's about time somebody shines the light on these cockroaches.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,241 Posts
$100k? For a couple plane tickets, a couple hotel rooms, and some spending cash for guns and meals?

Really? $5k per person, tops. Anything more is lining someone's pockets.
 

·
Grey Squirrel
Joined
·
22,780 Posts
$100k? For a couple plane tickets, a couple hotel rooms, and some spending cash for guns and meals?

Really? $5k per person, tops. Anything more is lining someone's pockets.
Don't always believe everything you read
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,611 Posts
For a couple plane tickets, a couple hotel rooms, and some spending cash for guns and meals?

Really? $5k per person, tops.
Never went on a business trip I see. When you travel for work, usually you travel flexible business and sleep in comfy hotel rooms. Not to mention that you eat in restaurants you don't usually eat in.

Final tab ain't going to be 5k$ unless you send a grunt over and he travels in eco and sleeps eco.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top