Bloomberg demands Obama make gun control 'number one' issue

Dec 16, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: New York Daily News

Mayor Michael Bloomberg appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday morning demanding that President Obama make gun control his "number one agenda" in his second term.

Comments
21 - 40 of 474 Comments Last updated Dec 30, 2012
Gary

Bellingham, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Your Ex wrote:
<quoted text>
Why so angry?
You and Bloomie have so much in common.
Your both
Irrational
Misguided
Knee jerk
Reactionaries
Irrational, misguided, knee-jerk reactionaries?

Is there another kind?

Besides, you left out lying and hypocritical.

Since: Jan 07

Scranton, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

4

Bloomberg needs to attend to his own domain. Did he not initially refuse to cancel the New York Marathon in the wake of the recent hurricane? Did he have food and supplies for runners while parts of his city were flooded and many thousands of people were without power? It has been reported that New Yorkers who had checked into hotels because their own homes were damaged were evicted by order of Bloomberg in favor of the runners and their fans. Here is a great humanitarian. I hope he drowns in a vat of melted butter.
Responsibility

Burlingame, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

5

senior citizen wrote:
<quoted text>
You also have a double standard.
There is no double standard, my friend, killings are killings but the "standard" is very shocking when a son can pick up his mother's "second amendment rights" weapons (guns/killing machines whatever you want to call them) and use them to kill his mother, other adults and twenty children.

Yes the standard of empathy for folks like you is pretty darn low.
Responsibility

Burlingame, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

4

3

3

No Child Left wrote:
Bloomberg needs to attend to his own domain.
Dear, amerikkkkka is Bloomberg's "domain" and this latest amerikkkkkan mass killing should be the "domain" of us all.
Responsibility

Burlingame, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

6

5

5

Osama Obama wrote:
Hey lets ban alchohol and vehicles also!
Alcohol and vehicles are not designed to kill.

Guns are designed to kill.
Spike

Kent, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
Senioritis, dear, all amerikkkkkans should be "fired up" about 20 children being slaughtered by "one of us amerikkans" and question whether we are a first world country or a third world country.
Ponder it for awhile ....
20 dead?.....Sounds like a normal day at any abortion clinic in America. So whats the problem??
typical

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

5

5

3

I still haven't seen the ban enacted against rental vans, fertilizer and diesel fuel after the OKC tragedy. Why hasn't the government acted on that yet ?
senior citizen

Granite City, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no double standard, my friend, killings are killings but the "standard" is very shocking when a son can pick up his mother's "second amendment rights" weapons (guns/killing machines whatever you want to call them) and use them to kill his mother, other adults and twenty children.
Yes the standard of empathy for folks like you is pretty darn low.
There are numerous things that will and can kill the whole family. Fires, drunk drivers, floods, acts of God and the list goes on and on. When you have a child that has a mental problem you keep your GUNS LOCKED. Gun locks are given to you by the police department to prevent this from ever happening. GUNS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE - PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. You have many more deaths from cars and trucks with drivers driving DWI than you do with people being shot. Guns are also used to trap shoot, target shoot in competition and to hunt for food and for protection for your own safety. Too many people are being hit in the head now days and this is the only means of protection from the THUGS and all states have them - not just Illinois.

Since: Dec 07

Navasota, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone send a memo to Bloomberg
that we can't have too many guns.
The more the merrier.
The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million
privately owned firearms in America, more than
any other nation.
Where is all the security the NRA claims we get
with lots of firearms?
Having more would make us safer?
More and more guns. More and more violence.
Do the math.
New York and Chicago..strict gun laws...most violent gun crimes in nation.

States with concealed/carry......less gun crimes.

Isreal...teachers all have Uzi's on their person...no gun crimes.

Do the math..Jethro.
News Skeptic

Canton, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

While Obama and Bloomberg walk around with armed security details, the rest of us are on our own, and they don't give a ____ what happens to any of us. It's all about them, and what is the best way to subjugate the rest of us.

The gun grabber elites are all hypocrites !!!!!!!

Since: Oct 08

.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

I have seen many people here claim that the purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow citizens to protect themselves from a "tyrannical government", so I'm wondering, how is that defined? What makes a government "tyrannical"?

For example, since Bush has been in office, the government has been granted the following powers:

Listen to your phone calls without warrant.
Read your emails without warrant.
Monitor your internet activity without warrant.
Monitor the books you borrow from the library, without warrant.
Monitor the groups you associate with.
Search your house without warrant.
Search your car without warrant.
Collect "evidence" from those places, without warrant.

On a whim, an American citizen can be declared an "enemy combatant", and:
Detained without charge, in secret.
Denied legal representation.
Denied the right to question his detention.
Shipped to a foreign country for interrogation, in secret.
Tortured, in secret.
Be tried by a military tribunal, in secret.
NOT be granted access to the secret evidence against him.
Convicted based on that secret evidence.

So, if the above is NOT considered "tyrannical", then what is? Where do you draw the line?
A Nnoyed

Tunbridge Wells, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Skuttlebutt, you're making a very good case for fewer gun control laws and more firepower in the hands of individuals.
lolol

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Have Seen It Before wrote:
<quoted text>Yes it's easy to dictate rules for others when you are protected and exempt from them.
.
hey it worked for hitler

“i hope we can change this!”

Since: Aug 08

usa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

6

5

5

Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
Alcohol and vehicles are not designed to kill.
Guns are designed to kill.
so is abortion...
and it kills MILLIONS every year dear, while you're busy saving the whales.
Law

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no double standard, my friend, killings are killings but the "standard" is very shocking when a son can pick up his mother's "second amendment rights" weapons (guns/killing machines whatever you want to call them) and use them to kill his mother, other adults and twenty children.
Yes the standard of empathy for folks like you is pretty darn low.
Why do you refer to her guns as "second amendment rights" weapons? Do you abhor the concept of rights and liberties? It would appear so.
Kiiling machines? Well, of you insist why don't we address the numbers of people killed and injured by automobiles. You know, those 3,000 lb. "assault weapons" as you could call them.
Yeah, I can see why you wouldn't do that. people that die in automobile accidents aren't of much use to you because you an't dance in their blood like you do with gunshot victims.
Cat74

Schaumburg, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Senator Durban wants to have a responsible discussion with Republicans about gun control. Did you ever try to discuss Gun Control with a liberal? Their eyes glaze over, and smoke comes out of their nostrils.
Law

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
Alcohol and vehicles are not designed to kill.
Guns are designed to kill.
No they're not. they're designed to do the same thing that automobiles are. Obviously Physcs isn't your strong suit.
Las Cruces retiree

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone send a memo to Bloomberg
that we can't have too many guns.
The more the merrier.
The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million
privately owned firearms in America, more than
any other nation.
Where is all the security the NRA claims we get
with lots of firearms?
Having more would make us safer?
More and more guns. More and more violence.
Do the math.
I am willing to amend the constitution and give up my guns, if we also change the anchor baby amendment. If we do away with the notion of anchor babies, the result will be substantial cost savings for U.S. citizens.
Law

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Dec 16, 2012
 
Skuttlebutt wrote:
I have seen many people here claim that the purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow citizens to protect themselves from a "tyrannical government", so I'm wondering, how is that defined? What makes a government "tyrannical"?
For example, since Bush has been in office, the government has been granted the following powers:
Listen to your phone calls without warrant.
Read your emails without warrant.
Monitor your internet activity without warrant.
Monitor the books you borrow from the library, without warrant.
Monitor the groups you associate with.
Search your house without warrant.
Search your car without warrant.
Collect "evidence" from those places, without warrant.
On a whim, an American citizen can be declared an "enemy combatant", and:
Detained without charge, in secret.
Denied legal representation.
Denied the right to question his detention.
Shipped to a foreign country for interrogation, in secret.
Tortured, in secret.
Be tried by a military tribunal, in secret.
NOT be granted access to the secret evidence against him.
Convicted based on that secret evidence.
So, if the above is NOT considered "tyrannical", then what is? Where do you draw the line?
Have they started physically attacking the citizens?
And many of those activites predate Bush. Where have you been?
Law

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Dec 16, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Las Cruces retiree wrote:
<quoted text>
I am willing to amend the constitution and give up my guns, if we also change the anchor baby amendment. If we do away with the notion of anchor babies, the result will be substantial cost savings for U.S. citizens.
You can give up your rights if you want, but not everyone is as gullible as you are.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••