The Guns Bloomberg Refuses to Control

Posted on January 19, 2013 12:00 pm

[High Praise! to Shakey Pete’s Shootin’ Shack]
_______________

Nanny Bloomberg and Swishy Rham (NTTAWWT) know where the gangs are. They have a pretty fair idea of who they are. They certainly don’t care much about the various Constitutional Amendments about search and seizure and right to property so why haven’t they send their city police out to round them up? Heck, by the time the arrests and confiscation worked their way through the court system most of the gangbangers would be past the most dangerous age and the guns would have been melted down to make Chevy Volts and bird killing windmills. So, why don’t they go after the illegal guns?

The answer is simple, they’d lose a lot of their police officers. And the rest would decide on a different line of work. So, instead of going after the criminals they are going after millions of law abiding citizens and thousands of law abiding businesses. So, what about the millions of brand new criminals? That is what we’ll have if DiFi gets her way. And exactly what percentage of these brand new criminals will shoot?

You smart people in media and politics should consider that question very carefully. A lot depends on it.
_______________

Related, from Burt Prelutsky (via Travelwise42 [High Praise!]

If they were serious about reducing gun violence, they’d quit yapping about guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, and go after the people who use them not for hunting or for defending their homes and families, but to murder.

I’m referring to the black and Hispanic gangs that terrorize inner cities. Rahm Emanuel, the mayor of Chicago, the city in which 506 murders were committed in 2012 – only a handful as the result of assault weapons – doesn’t declare war on the punks responsible for spilling most of that blood. Instead, he demands that the city divest itself of any investments it might have in gun manufacturing firms. Displaying the wisdom for which big city mayors are renowned, he not only does nothing to diminish violent crime in his locale, but he makes certain that the city fails to profit financially from the only growth industry that exists in Obama’s America.

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (8 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

4 Responses to “The Guns Bloomberg Refuses to Control”

  1. Jimmy says:

    Very true. In Seattle, the police have a history of leaving the neighborhoods with gangs and meth houses alone, because, well, who wants to go in ‘there?’ They’d have to put their lives on the line.

  2. TedWade73 says:

    They aren’t willing do their War on Guns on people who might actually war back. Hope they will enjoy the fruits of the incentives they are creating.

  3. Son of Bob says:

    This is not about solving problems, this is about furthering the agenda of world government.

    Even the mentally-challenged libs know that the solution to a problem caused by no guns in the hands of the innocent is not to take more guns from the innocent. They’re just hoping you’re too stupid not to know that.

  4. Snackeater says:

    As the joke goes:
    A man came upon a drunk, crawling around on his hands and knees under a street light.
    “You okay buddy?” the man asked.
    “Yeah, I can’t find my keys,” the drunk answered.
    Feeling sorry for the guy, the man helped him look for the keys.
    After an hour and no luck, the man finally said, “I don’t think the keys are here. Are you sure this is where you lost them?”
    “Oh no,” said the drunk, “I lost them two blocks over–it’s just that the light’s much better here.”

    Bloomie and Rahmadan want to confiscate guns–they’re just going to do it the easy way. Or so they think.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>