Mayors Against Illegal Guns’ Website Still Hosted by the City of New York

Well over six months ago we pointed out that Mayors Against Illegal Guns was using NYC resources to host their website. Now that it’s December and the mayor is on his way out the door, you’d think that Bloomberg would have stopped using taxpayer funds and resources to further his personal political campaign against a constitutionally protected civil right. But three seconds of looking into the issue proves otherwise . . .

The DNS for the Mayors Against Illegal Guns website (mayorsagainstillegalguns.org) uses New York City’s nameservers to redirect traffic. Still. Here’s the dig +trace output for anyone who’s interested:

mayorsagainstillegalguns.org. 900 IN A 161.185.30.92
mayorsagainstillegalguns.org. 900 IN NS vwall3a.nyc.gov.
mayorsagainstillegalguns.org. 900 IN NS vwall4a.nyc.gov.
mayorsagainstillegalguns.org. 900 IN NS vwall2a.nyc.gov.
mayorsagainstillegalguns.org. 900 IN NS vwall1a.nyc.gov.
;; Received 221 bytes from 167.153.130.13#53(vwall4a.nyc.gov) in 68 ms

For those who don’t speak DNS, the NS records indicate that the mayorsagainstillegalguns.org domain is using servers hosted by NYC.gov to direct people to the main website (161.185.30.92). As for who owns that IP address? Three guesses . . .

OrgName: The City of New York
OrgId: CNY
Address: DoITT
Address: 2 Metrotech Center 2nd Fl
City: Brooklyn
StateProv: NY
PostalCode: 11201
Country: US
RegDate: 1993-08-02
Updated: 2013-07-09
Ref: http://whois.arin.net/rest/org/CNY

Yep, the IP address for the server where MAIG’s website is hosted is owned by the city of New York.

I can’t say I’m surprised that Bloomberg believes that his subjects should foot the bill for his campaign to eliminate private firearm ownership in the United States, since that’s just kind of authoritarian stance he’s show such a penchant for. What does surprise me is that no one has pointed out how disgusting it is for a billionaire to continue to use public money to advocate for a political position that at least some of his constituents don’t agree with.

Would the city of New York be OK with their mayor using public resources to wipe out the scourge of free speech? Homosexuality? How about if he was arguing against a woman’s right to choose? But apparently it’s OK to use public funds and resources to advocate against the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights. Huh.  [h/t SS]

comments

  1. avatar Chris_From_NY says:

    Given that the yearly traffic for the MIAG main site is likely lower than TTAG’s monthly numbers, Bloomberg wouldn’t even notice the expense if it was added to his next meal. You’d think he’d get it fixed just to avoid the publicity, let alone the risk of legal action.

    1. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

      Correction, MAIG’s annual numbers are lower than TTAG’s daily traffic!
      Other than that, spot on.
      He hasn’t left office yet, if I am correct, but it will be interesting to see if they are kept on there after he is officially gone.

  2. avatar Ralph says:

    I don’t know what you’re complaining about. It’s Bloomberg’s city. He bought and paid for it and he can do with it what he wants.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      He only rented it. His lease expires in a few days.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        It’ll be interesting to see what DiBlasio does with it. He could quietly continue it; quietly transfer it; or do something legal to it. Difficult choice for him. January will be interesting – pass the popcorn.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        just because the title goes away doesn’t mean anything changes.

      3. avatar 9MOONDRAGON says:

        TRUST ME. HE OWNS IT!! EVEN LONG AFTER HE’s [not] GONE!!

  3. avatar Nine says:

    I HATE that smug little bastard so much.

    I’m not saying that I want it to happen, but were he to take a baseball bat/brick/warhammer/car to the face, I would be happy.

    1. avatar Nigil says:

      +1 for war hammer.

  4. avatar PeterC says:

    He didn’t get rich using his own money.

  5. avatar SAS 2008 says:

    If I were to use my work DNS and webservers to host MAIG I would be fired and possibly sued for misuse of public funds.

    This is so wrong and appalling.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      But then, you are NOT the monarch of New York City.

  6. avatar mirgc says:

    Isn’t there a law, or a way to sue him/MAIG/NYC for using government facilities to promote the political interested of a lobbying group?

    1. avatar SAS 2008 says:

      I think the odds of doing anything about this are pretty low.

      I believe this would be covered under the misuse of resources. The NYC Conflicts of Interest Board is responsible for the rules and enforcement. In their FAQ they have a link to a “plain language” leaflet on the misuse use of resources. The leaflet is here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/conflicts/downloads/pdf2/leaflets/misuse.pdf

      The very last item is a question about the use of city resources for non-profit/volunteer work. The answer to the question is this:
      “Under a new Conflicts Board Rule, you may be able to use City resources, equipment, personnel, and supplies (but not letterhead) for certain private activities, but only if you obtain the prior approval of both your agency head and the Conflicts of Interest Board. The new rule is intended for situations similar to the one described above, where the private activity is a volunteer or charitable one that is determined by an agency head and the Conflicts of Interest Board to “further the purposes and interests of the City.””

      I would be willing to bet that if he hasn’t already got it, it would be easy for the Mayor to get the approval of the head of the agency (probably him) and the Conflicts of Interest Board to use city resources to host the MAIG website. I am sure he would claim that it would further the purposes and interests of the city. After all NYC and Mayor Mike are all for civilian disarmament. The rule does require prior approval, so if he hasn’t go it already he would be in violation but I doubt anything would come of it.

      Just in case you want to try to do something about this, the conflicts of interest board web site is http://www.nyc.gov/html/conflicts/html/home/home.shtml. If you follow the “ethics iinks” link you can find your way to the department of investigation here http://www.nyc.gov/html/doi/html/home/home.shtml. They have a link for filing a report/complaint.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      I don’t think so. Taxpayers probably don’t have standing. The City probably does, but who’s kidding who? The City will never sue its Little Emperor.

  7. avatar tmm says:

    At first glance of the headline, I thought it read “Mayors Illegal Website…”

    1. avatar mirgc says:

      You would still be correct.

  8. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    For those foolish enough to still live in NYC..
    They got what they deserve in my opinion.
    I just feel bad for those that cant leave and want to for whatever reason.
    I had enough and got out……….almost anyone who wants to can.
    There is no toll on the way out…………..actually there is but its a cheap price to see the skyline in your rear view mirror.

    1. avatar miserylovescompany says:

      Jay, I’ve been thinking.

      Suppose that an amendment to EXPEL the CIty of New York from the United States was introduced, and 37 states passed it (yes, I can certainly see it happening. Even California might ratify it just to spite their hated adversary) and New York City then became its own country. There is precedence for this, by the way. Singapore was expelled from Malaysia in 1965, I believe. Since then it’s certainly become a successful example of a city-state.

      Could – or would – the inevitable movement of population out of/into this new city-state be pulled off? What do you think?

      I think there are actually some merits to the idea. NYC would get to make its own bed after all, and by closing its bridges and tunnels (essentially, everything below the Tappan Zee) it could control all its own imports and exports. Including, of course, firearms. Since the City blames everyone and everything but itself, after all. Albany would have the rest of the state, after sending all it’s riffraff back down the river from which they came, and NY would be able to free itself from that despised City’s political influence and chart its own path.

      If secession isn’t possible, what about expulsion? Yes, I know there are many Americans living in the City that deserve a better life. Why not provide the opportunity?

      Say what you will, but it’s certainly food for thought IMO.

      Tom

      1. avatar Jay in Florida says:

        It could or would never be done for the same reason California would never secede from the Union.
        Too much free Federal dollars.
        They don’t have to be new countries.
        Let them become individual states.Their economies individually are larger then most countries of the world.
        If one wishes to live as they have why not let them.
        I cant speak for California.
        But the majority of the counties in NY despise the city, Weschester LI, and its dwellers.
        They represent no one but themselves.
        Yet due to the cities total population, as NYC goes so goes the state. NYC and its voters control the state.
        California broke as it is has like the 26th largest economy in the world.
        Im not aware how most of Californians feel say of the LA Orange county area..
        But given my choice.
        Id kick NYC and LI along with Westchester out and all of California if I could.

    2. avatar ropingdown says:

      There’s a simply remedy for what NYC has become: Just move the NY Fed to Oklahoma city, along with all its financial wire traffic. Forbid the location of financial trading servers on islands, for security reasons. NYC could then revert to being its inner Baltimore.

      I recommend the same island rule to the EU.

  9. avatar Richard says:

    It’s illegal for a municipality to finance this website. The word illegal means nothing to the rich, the buy off the judicial system like the whores they are.

  10. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    Any residents of NYC out there who’d be willing to sue for misappropriation of tax dollars? Class action, maybe?

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      You’re funny, Henry.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      Henry, I don’t think that the taxpayers have standing.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        Really? I’d think the taxpayers would be the only ones with standing. I guess government doesn’t want to set that precedent though, right? I mean, if taxpayers actually had a say in how their tax dollars were spent, how could government do all the things that nobody wants it to do?

  11. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    Actually. . . . Well, let’s not discuss too much publicly. The walls have ears. 🙂

  12. avatar Marine 03 says:

    Another outrage, however, the citizens of NY need to step up to the plate on this one. If the dismantling of this scam doesn’t bother them I cannot see the people in Florida or Idaho taking the lead. A friend said “We need a revolution!” I answered, “You go first. Maybe we’ll all follow you and they’ll be stamping your image into coins in 50 years. But maybe we won’t and you’ll just die.” Needless to say he didn’t start any revolt. Bloomberg and his minions are the enemy. But other areas of the country view him as a sideshow. Something to watch and chuckle at. I doubt he sees it this way. He is a true believer in gun control. Most people won’t lift a finger until the “wolfs at the door” so to speak. Then they’ll strike at the wolf from 3 directions simultaneously and skin the beast alive before you can get things under control.

  13. avatar Cubby123 says:

    Ethics Violation ,big time,Every state has a State Dept Of Ethics and complaints can be filed from out of staters who believe an elected official is embezzling public resources.Sure seem’s like that’s happening here now doesn’t it?

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