Bloomberg Businessweek: Gun Control is Dead. Long Live Gun Control!

Welcome to the Age of Miracles. The media outlet owned by the U.S. Number One Gun Grabber—Mayor Michael Bloomberg—has pronounced TOD (Time of Death) on American gun control. No really. “The inaction, especially President Barack Obama’s passivity on the topic, demonstrates that gun control has expired as a national political issue,” businessweek.com announces. “If Democrats can’t sell stiffer restrictions after a midday attack on a congresswoman, when can they?” I’m thinking never. As in never again . . .

Spookily, Assistant Managing Editor and Glock author Paul M. Barrett has the exact same problem ID’ing the trend responsible for gun control’s demise as Criminologist and UC Berkeley law professor Franklin Zimring. Oh wait, Barrett’s story is based on Zimring’s befuddlement.

Anyway, it’s clear that Barrett and his Bloomberg BFFs are hot to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory . . .

As a component of such an anti-crime package, lawmakers could include improvements to the existing gun laws that Americans tell pollsters they support. Even the NRA agrees, for example, that guns should not be sold to people found to have serious mental problems. Yet many states fail to provide mental health records to the federal computerized background-check system. Twenty-three states have shown “major failures” in complying, according to a Nov. 15 report by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which is co-chaired by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, publisher of this magazine). Four states—Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, and Rhode Island—have submitted no records at all.

Closing gaps in the background-check system would likely have only a modest effect on crime rates. But for gun control advocates struggling to stay relevant, the push for such changes represents a noteworthy shift—and a concession to reality. Having decisively lost the decades-old political and cultural argument over whether Americans should have the right to pack heat, they need to adapt to meet the demands of a public that wants to reduce the number of crimes—not the number of guns.

Adapt or die? When it comes to gun control, I’m going with die. As soon as possible please.

comments

  1. avatar Moonshine7102 says:

    “If Democrats can’t sell stiffer restrictions after a midday attack on a congresswoman, when can they?”
    —–
    More blatant blood-dancing. Observe, if you will, my complete lack of surprise.

  2. avatar GS650G says:

    I agree the media was waiting for the moment when the national outcry would come out for confiscation of firearms. Just like England and Australia. They seem frustrated with the lack of groundswell. The MSM does get bonus points for portraying Jared as a Republican working for Sarah Palin which was soon debunked. The real story was how his mother was able to work the phones to keep Crazy Jared out of real trouble and kept his record clean.
    The Socialist Democrats learned a lesson in 1994 and later in 1998 that gun control loses elections and they should STFU about it.

  3. avatar Skyler says:

    Why should a state provide mental health records to the feds? Are they incapable of making assessments on their own?

    Oh, yeah, only the federal government can be competent. I forgot.

    1. avatar KYgunner says:

      As much as I believe that the mentally incompetent should under no circumstances be wielding guns, as a healthcare worker I feel conflicted on this point of making mental health records federal documents. I can’t enumerate the number of times that my nursing classes have stressed the point that medical records (especially with regards to mental health) are your own business and your healthcare provider’s. Period. Your job can’t request to know your health status, not even your mother can after you turn 18. The government has no business in it, legally or ethically. I know that may seem a little extreme, and I don’t want to support anyone with a uncontrolled mental condition becoming armed during a mental break from reality, but its just a point that I thought I’d bring up as food for thought.

      1. avatar Tom says:

        Yeah, my Wife is going to be a Medical Transcriptionist and also a Medical Technician and people can get fired for leaking patient medical information. People do have a right to privacy.

  4. avatar Ralph says:

    As long as governments exist, they will try to dominate citizens by controlling guns. Gun control isn’t politically popular now, but the government-police-media complex will never stop in their efforts to con, deceive and legislate away our freedoms.

    I’m not advocating against government. I’m pointing out the obvious. Jefferson was right. We can never, ever take our eyes off government, or we’ll end up losing everything we’ve gained.

    1. avatar Tom says:

      I advocate against uncontrolled and unchecked Government. The 2A is a check and balance on Government. So is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

  5. avatar Blinky Pete says:

    It’s funny that none of these articles mention the massive decline in violent crime overall over the past 2 decades despite relaxed gun laws. The Government’s capable of exactly Jack and Shit, and Jack’s leaving town.

  6. avatar joe says:

    Mental health records are relevant only if a person has been committed to custodial treatment involuntarily as a danger to themselves and/or others.
    Many people go to psychiatrists for problems whcih have nothing to do with being “crazy”.i.e.phobias,eating disorders,psychoanalysis,and help coping with evevryday problems.
    I’m not concerned that someone who’s afraid of flying might buy a gun,as an example.

    1. avatar Mikeb302000 says:

      Yeah, but aren’t you afraid of some of the extreme cases buying guns? I mean, there are some people who are so paranoid or suicidal or anti-social that they should not be armed for their own good. What do you propose about them, the ones who’ve not been committed involuntarily yet? Do we sacrifice them for the freedom the rest of us have? Or do we limit our own freedom just a tiny bit, perhaps requiring that everybody have some kind of mental health screening which would pick up the worst of the worst.

  7. avatar Jeff O. says:

    Four states—Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, and Rhode Island—have submitted no records at all.

    Hmmm… I live in Idaho, I’m not sure how I feel about that.

    Oh no, wait, fine.

    1. avatar William says:

      Alaska here…and I feel fine and proud that my state consistently fails the Brady Bunch standards.

      1. avatar Moonshine7102 says:

        Damn. My state is still gray on their map. At least it isn’t blue, though.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      Rhode Island won’t submit records because it doesn’t want to give up its governor. If you think that Cali’s Gov. Moonbeam is not of this earth, check out RI’s Gov. Chafee. His elevator definitely does not go to the top floor.

  8. avatar freeport56 says:

    Maybe it is because since November 4, 2008 firearm sales have gone through the roof? Maybe it is because on December 23, 2011 500,000 firearms were sold in a single day?

    Gee, I wonder!

    1. avatar Jwhite says:

      Gee I wonder!

      Man I love this place… The comments are engaging, the articles interesting and well written. The articles are constantly being updated and new ones added throughout the day. It would be great to see our Cali friends join up on Calguns.net if you havent already! Right now three of my favorite sites are TTAG, CalGuns, and the lighter side of firearms, EveryDayNoDaysOff.com

      Keep up the great work guys!
      Keep it up guys!

  9. avatar Phil H says:

    As much as I love surfing the web to figure our acronyms, can I request using fewer of them on this site? I mean, TOD? We are not all cops, emergency medical technicians, or morgue workers. Who the hell uses that acronym on a daily basis?

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Point taken,. Text amended.

  10. 3 million guns sold in October and November of 2012 alone. Money speaks louder then words. At at average of $600 per gun… that is a lot of money. The average gun costs about what the average person makes in work week.

    If that many guns are being sold for that much money… American clearly want guns.

    What fool politician would stand in the way of what Americans want.

  11. avatar Mckinley says:

    Its not my first time to go to see this web page, i am visiting this web page dailly aand obtain good data from here all the time.

  12. As with the Galaxy Note 8.0, the Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition (yes, it is a tiny mouthful) was
    also a pleasant surprise on the look front.

  13. avatar Franchesca says:

    Soy programador y diseñador web, llevo varios mantenimientos
    weeb fijos, que por mes suponen unos quinientos€ fijos.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email