February 1, 2011
It has been widely reported today that Mayor Bloomberg sent NYC (?) agents/cops to easily buy guns at a private gun show in Phoenix, AZ. As no one wants to see mentally unbalanced/unstable or potentially violent individuals brandishing firearms, it appears that the Mayor raises a valid concern. However, to make it anymore difficult for law-abiding citizens to acquire/bear defensive weapons which they may require does not appear as the solution to end the proliferation of violent creeps attacking innocents in our society. Although, in the end, if these purchasers of the fire arms were in fact agents for Mayor Bloomberg, we likely can be sure that they were not mentally unbalanced/unstable or potentially violent individuals. For that matter, maybe the individual selling the items in question knew these individuals were acting for Bloomberg and wanted the sale nevertheless. I don’t know as I wasn’t there.
“Undercover at an Arizona Gun Show,” by Michael R. Bloomberg, May of NYC
108th Mayor of the City of New York
Posted: January 31, 2011 12:47 PM
“...The investigation sought to answer two simple questions:
First, how easy is it to buy a gun without a background check?
It's easy. At the gun show, an investigator bought - with no background check - a Glock… Unfortunately, under current federal laws, that sale was legal.
The second question we ask was would private sellers sell guns to people who said they probably couldn't pass a background check?
Again, the answer was yes. An investigator bought two handguns from two different private sellers, even after they said they probably couldn't pass a background check.
This fits the pattern of illegal activity at gun shows that we uncovered in 2009 - and it's all the more frustrating that it's happening just a little more than a hundred miles away from Tucson. …
…As I said after our first investigation in 2009, the vast majority of gun buyers at gun shows are law abiding citizens. Requiring background checks on all gun sales will not detract from anyone's Second Amendment rights. What it will do is send the message that we're no longer going to make it easy for criminals to get around the law.”
I would merely respond with:
What would have surely ended with the beating of another citizen by violent creeps, had he not been armed:
Man, 72, fights back, shoots teens in home invasion
Look..., to be sure..., I would not prefer “…criminals, the mentally ill, and drug abusers to buy guns…” either. In fact, I would prefer no one ever need to turn a gun against another human being. However, it doesn’t appear as though such an idealized world will ever come to fruition in our times. Criminals will always get guns if they so desire. I mean…, merely look at the ‘drug war’ as an example of making something illegal to keep it beyond the reach of the citizenry. We have seen how poorly that worked in end. Therefore, I say to make things more difficult for law-abiding citizens to acquire/bear defensive weapons does not sound like the solution to diminish the number/level of violent creeps/attacks in our society.
Also possibly worth noting: