A guest post by Darin:

Mayor Bloomberg of New York,first soft drinks,then guns
part 1 of 3-
At the request of our blog host I will attempt to explore a complex subject and how it is tied to various other subjects that effect our lives and freedoms in the western world. As an American perspective I will attempt to shine the light of reason on the dark corners of the gun control debate and hopefully dispel the cloud of rumors and lies that surround the subject both here and abroad. On a separate,but connected subject I will explore the ever increasing expansion of statism into our daily lives.

New York city mayor Micheael Bloomberg, he’s quite a character.Once a liberal Democrat, now a liberal Republican AKA a RINO (Republican In Name Only).
He heads up a city unlike any other in America save one. New York City has banned guns, all guns except by special permit since in or about 1954. It hasn’t made them any safer,and some,quite a few actually would argue it has done the opposite and made the city more dangerous. We can see what the effect of mandatory gun bans have done elsewhere,why should New York be any different?
So as we see from the British example even though there may be a temporary decline in the murder rate,the over all violent crime rate skyrockets.Essentially your chances of getting murdered are less,but of being beaten nearly to death quadruple. Adding insult to injury if you were nearly beaten to death and had anything on your person that could be construed as a weapon you very well likely could end up doing more time in prison than your attacker.
In Mayor Bloomberg’s city,even though they have had some of if not THE strictest gun laws in the 50 states,the violent and property crime rate has seldom ever declined and in most years has increased.The only time there has been a marked decline in recent years was when Police resources were sent into areas with the highest crime rates-who would have thought that increasing Policing in high crime areas would have the effect of decreasing crime in those areas? The wonders never cease! Back to our good Mayor in a moment.

No proper discussion of the subject at hand can be had unless some basic facts are introduced at the start.The basic facts are human nature and interaction in a society and the constraints imposed by social mores and civil code.

It is a simple fact of human nature that anyone- male or female- will undertake any act that he or she feels comfortable with and has reason to believe they can engage in without physical harm.It doesn’t matter if it’s a simple as taking a drink of water, to showing affection to another, to committing murder.If a person reasons they will get away with it history shows they will do it.Humans,modern ones anyway differ from the animal kingdom in that we are (supposed to anyway) capable of reason and not generally driven by instinct alone.It’s our very own internal compass that allows us to rise above in selfless sacrifice or descend into murdering madness.On this subject any reasoning person will agree that it is people who kill people.
The argument over Evolution -vs-Creation is an old one,and one we won’t go into here,but it does have a slight bearing on our discussion.No matter which side we fall on, one thing is likely-the very first murder in human history was most likely carried out with a rock.It matters not if a murder is committed with a rock or a highly refined firearm the victim is just as dead and along with human nature it establishes two concrete facts-1 that each individual is responsible for their actions by virtue of reason and -2 human beings are very good at creating new ways to kill each other.

Now that we have the basic facts down lets return to our Mayor.Bloomberg -for all his upright walking,reasoning way- has arrived at a very simplistic form of logic that continually leads he and others like him astray.That logic is we have too many murders,many of which are committed with guns,therefore if we ban guns the number of murders will decline.He fails to make the connection that only honest law abiding persons will abide by the gun ban laws and criminals by nature will not. His logic has effectively disarmed the honest members of society thereby throwing them to the wolves.Remember the role of reasoning?
Criminals oftentimes aren’t the brightest bunch,but they aren’t stupid either.They know full well that if the odds of their victims being disarmed are high,then their chances of getting away with a crime uninjured are equally high and they are more likely to engage in criminal acts.The crime stats demonstrate this time and again,but these folks are lost in their own flawed logic.
The Mayor coming off of his imagined successes has had all sorts of brilliant ideas as of late.Just in the last few years he has backed a proposed ban on soft drinks larger than 16ounces.Smoking anywhere in public and even the amount of salt in New Yorkers food.Must be nice to have such a wonderful nanny! The problem with liberals is the minute they get wind of power they want to ban things– it’s irresistible to them like an animal in heat.Okay,so they have banned guns in New York,so what, right? Well about that same time they also banned any knife over 3″ long.That rule was later revised since every housewife in the city was in violation everytime dinner was being prepared.Over the years that ban has been evolved to include everything from hatchets,to switchblades to slingshots(I’m not kidding look it up).People laugh and scoff and say yes,sure the old slippery slope argument,blah,blah,blah.Well I am here to tell you my friends,but we are well and truly half way down the slope and rapidly picking up speed.

Enter- George Soros,that loveable Nazi collaborator,liberal leftist currency manipulator and all around global Communist backer.What does he have to do with this? He- along with Bloomberg- has started a little organization. Well, little if you consider Bloomberg’s $16 Billion and Soros’ $85 Billion dollar backing “little” that is…
Over 600 mayors of cities large and small all across the states dedicated to “gun safety” which is code for gun bans.Some say this is a Democracy and the people are free to decide if they want guns in their community or not.
Well, not exactly.
America is a Republic of elected representatives bound by a body of law known as our Constitution.It is designed to protect Liberty from the excesses of the government and of democracy.In that document is our Bill of Rights:

‘A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’

Our Founding Fathers thought it important enough to list our right to keep and bear arms as the Second Amendment behind only the Rights of freedom of Religion,Expression and the Press.It wasn’t some trivial thing added to a shopping list at the last moment.They understood full well that in order to have a functioning society,a free State,the rights of the people to defend themselves from others,invaders and the government itself must be preserved and therefore SHALL NOT be infringed.
Our Supreme Court has reaffirmed those rights time and again in recent years and many States have returned the right to bear arms to the law abiding citizens of those Sates– and rightly so.But folks like Bloomberg and Soros know better,they want to protect us from ourselves and at the same time take power for themselves.
What they are attempting to do is an end run around the Constitution and around the elected will of the people and enact de-facto gun bans all across the nation.By making it nearly impossible to legally own firearms they have put their own citizens at risk,but that is the intent.Besides human nature and reason there is a third aspect that we must set in clear terms in order to continue the discussion-instinct.
We are Mammals,mammals are such a successful group as a whole because our reasoning engine can be sped up in times of sudden stress.It’s referred to as fight or flight,the ability to slow down and compress time in an instant of mental instinctive clarity so we have the time to decide whether to stay and fight or run away.This same process is carried out at a slower pace in less stressful times and folks like Bloomberg take advantage of it.
The nanny state as in Britain said we all have the right to be protected from criminal harm and therefore it is the government’s right and duty to protect it’s citizens and since they are the authority on the subject we need not have guns.Okay we have had our security outsourced,but are we safer? Most assuredly not.We have numerous detailed examples of murderers,,rapists,arsonists,pedophiles,thieves and robbers who have been through the system,been convicted and sent to prison and been released early most times that have gone on to commit crimes worse than what they were originally docked for.These examples are easy to find,just look at the daily paper in any major city.
The end result of this is fear,normally we would reason and decide it best to arm ourselves as a deterrent to the real possibility of crime,but we cannot now,because even possessing a hammer makes us a criminal, subject to imprisonment so we live in fear.Then the politicians seize on the condition created and use that fear to convince us we need to give them more power.They tell us we need more Cops,more investigators more money.That works,but only until a new equilibrium is reached,pretty soon crime spikes again and we are told they need more,money to buy cameras to put up in public places watching not just the criminals,but us too.
Then pretty soon even that isn’t enough,they need a “higher presence profile”. Soon random searches of subway and bus passengers are the norm,funny,we don’t look like criminals? Then of course we need to cover a bigger area so Drones are built to peer down into our lives and trample our rights even further.Then, one day, you’re walking down the street on your way to get groceries or picking the kids up at school when you are stopped by two Officers on the street and asked where you are going,who are you and papers please!
I’ve been trying to warn people of this world we are waking up in for nearly ten years– and usually have been laughed at or called a Paranoid. Okay,fair enough,but I will leave you with some food for thought.Stay tuned for the next installment-“Figures lie and Liars figure”.
further reading:
and   here    here     here

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to A guest post by Darin:

  1. Mark Hubbard says:

    Great piece Darin. And bloody Bloomberg again. I posted on him as the Food Czar a couple of weeks ago ( http://lifebehindtheirondrape.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/food-czars-new-york-city-is-police.html ): and on top of the list I gave … well no, what am I thinking, of course he’s gun control also.

  2. He’s New York’s own nightmayor.
    Blooming stupid to ban big sodas and weaken rules on having pot!

  3. Diamond Mair says:

    Ummmm, Darin? “our very own internal compass” USED to be known as a ‘conscience’ ……………………….. which has been stigmatized by association with religious thought ……………………………….. :gunner

    Semper Fi’

    • Darin says:

      Yep,I’m getting there soon DM if KG will have me after the”Trollmageddon”that’s probably brewing in the trash bin as we speak :smile:

      • KG says:

        :mrgreen: Damn fine post, Darin. I look forward to the next part. Thank you. :whoop

        • Darin says:

          Thanks for the edit KG,I kept dozing off while writing that and only punctuated it between wakes and nods which explains the grammar gymnastics :oops: :whoop

  4. KG says:

    Don’t worry about the trolls–they only have a 30 second attention span. By the time they get to three minutes, they’re hopelessly confused. :twisted:

  5. Katie says:

    While idiot Bloomberg can take away from the city foods that he believes is bad for you, he will have a hard time taking away the guns. In District of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court decision (5-4) upheld:

    (1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

    (2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

    (3) The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.

    The State (or city) cannot deny a gun to a citizen. And cities ruled by liberal idiots are still going crazy.

    • Darin says:

      Correct,however like I pointed out they can require a permit or license to do so and they can and do make that piece of paper very difficult to get.So much so it is cost prohibitive in places like D.C. for many people to do so.

      The poor working family living in the bad part of town because that’s all they can afford is left stranded.And those folks are usually the ones who need the ability for self protection the most.The result is the effect of gun ownership is diminished and then the officials can turn around and say “see ,we made it legal and it didn’t make any difference”.

      • Katie says:

        Maybe. They cannot make it very difficult for the purpose of denying guns. That was the meaning of Heller.

        • KG says:

          They can make it very difficult for the purpose of denying guns, simply by claiming the bureaucratic hoops are for other reasons.
          Which is exactly how it works here in Australia.
          It is really irrelevant what the Constitution or the laws state–our liberties are being stripped from us at a frightening rate by politicians and bureaucrats, often with the connivance of the courts. There are more liberties lost by bureaucratic fiat than by any other means.

  6. The Gantt Guy says:

    Seen this one? Mayor Doomberg’s Food Gestapo already have milk and popcorn in their sights…


    • Katie says:

      He doesn’t have much longer as mayor. The city is ready to throw his and his cronies asses out of office.

  7. HarvardPotatoHead says:

    !!!HolyShitosky!!! Whilst my opinion is increasingly evolving on this issue, yrs trly did attend a gun and knife show recently where the crowd seemed quite friendly – might it haveth been because there were so many guns and knifes about? And OMG people were sipping 24 ounce Cokes!! Might Yrs trly say that if Grand Dragon Bloomburg bans hot fudge sundays, my opinion will resolve to evolve most rapidly. Well you see as a classmate at Harvard Law with Berry hence later meeting his Diplomatic Pouch and being run off my Martha’s Vineyard 46 bedroom 56 bathroom property by Berry a while back that !!!OOOPPPPSSS!!got a beep tata Yrs Trly HarvardPotatohead

    • Diamond Mair says:

      In case ya hadn’t noticed, HPH, an armed society tends to be a polite society ………………………………….. :gunner

      B’sides, don’t you know, if a populace has a right to arms, they are citizens; if not, they’re subjects ……………………. :twisted:

      Semper Fi’