Nathan Wailes - Blog - GitHub - LinkedIn - Patreon - Reddit - Stack Overflow - Twitter - YouTube
Gun Control
2013.09 - New York (Magazine) - In Conversation: Michael Bloomberg
Interviewer: On guns, isn’t it counterproductive to be going after Democratic senators when their replacements are going to be far more conservative?
Bloomberg: The way that all these single-issue advocacy organizations work—the NRA, Gun Owners of America, the AARP—is they say, “Vote with us, or we’re going to go after you.” And if you say, “Well, my opponent is worse than me,” they say, “We don’t care, we’re going after you. It’s your vote we care about. We’ll deal with him if we need to.” You have to have a counter to that. This, to me, is the most important issue. And incidentally, it is not Democrats we are going after—it is whatever party happens to control the Senate, and if we get legislation passed there, we will go after whatever party happens to control the House. It is not because they’re Democrats. It looks like it would be Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the House, but who knows?These are people’s lives! Twelve thousand people this year will be killed by guns. Nineteen thousand will commit suicide.
Interviewer: Other than guns, what is your policy agenda?
Bloomberg: Immigration and guns are the two big issues at the national level. Health-care costs and pension costs at the local level.
Jefferies says in the stand-up routine the real reason gun owners want guns is just because they like them. That's okay, but it doesn't mean that guns should be legal, he says. Some people like taking drugs or driving at 100 miles an hour, and can be perfectly safe and responsible while doing so, but other irresponsible people have ruined those things for them.
- This reminded me of other things I want to do that are illegal because of the bad behavior of a few people. It's an interesting question; how do you weigh the pleasure of gun owners against the pain of gun violence victims?
- I suppose the ideal solution would be if there was some kind of invisible barrier that separated states, so that people who were willing to live with the risk of gun violence could take on that risk, and people who didn't want the risk of gun violence would be safe from it.
- Maybe you could do that if you had people living in malls, with TSA-style security before people could be let in.
- I suppose the ideal solution would be if there was some kind of invisible barrier that separated states, so that people who were willing to live with the risk of gun violence could take on that risk, and people who didn't want the risk of gun violence would be safe from it.
A study by the Violence Policy Center, a gun control advocacy group, notes that, when guns kill people, they are overwhelmingly used for murder rather than self-defense. In 2008-2012, the report says, guns were used in 42,419 criminal homicides and only 1,108 justifiable homicides -- defined as the killing of a felon during the commission of a felony by a private citizen.