world

Bloomberg gun plan: Permits, assault weapon ban, age limits

17 Comments
By STEVE PEOPLES

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

17 Comments
Login to comment

Did Bloomberg allow his Bloomberg "news" outlets to report this story?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

That's a good list to start from. I also want to see increased user fees when weapons and ammo are purchased earmarked to partially cover the costs, estimated to be in the BILLIONS, to taxpayers, especially those who don't own a single weapon - i.e. the majority of Americans - of gun violence.

I'd also add increased jail time for anyone caught committing any crime while carrying a weapon. Maybe even special jails for them where they can be with their own kind and do unto others...

0 ( +6 / -6 )

You never go full Beto.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Not gonna happen.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Don't most states already have a 7-day waiting period?

He's trying to do something, but missing a few key items.

Mandatory gun locks or a gun safe with capacity to hold any new firearms.

Mandatory capture of accurate statistics for all weapons used while committing any crime. There needs to be 1 form to capture the data so cities, states, and the FBI all use the same terms in the same way. Hard to know where to concentrate on fixing a problem without solid data.

Mandatory annual FBI report to congress on all sorts of violent crimes, including weapon use breakdown. We don't want the FBI being like the NSA claiming they need years to gather the data. Make it a law. No choice.

Shotguns are seldom used in crimes, regardless of what TV/movies show. The FBI statistic don't back any need for tighter restrictions for that style of weapon.

Banning firearms only keeps law-abidding people from carrying them. Criminals don't follow laws. This is a bad idea, unless there is data to prove the hypothesis. I've never seen anyone with a firearm on campus unless it was at the school's request. Someone with a conceal-carry permit should be allowed to carry their firearms. Many states have reciprocal conceal-carry laws. Get a license in 1 state and it is often valid in the 10 surrounding states.

Licenses alone aren't sufficient. How about having at least as much testing for safety as we require for drivers licenses? A safety written test and practical test on a range for the first license of a specific category of firearm, then different licenses and tests for the other firearm categories.

PTownsend - there are already laws that increase jail time when any deadly weapon is used. Assault vs Assault with a deadly weapon.

Bloomberg isn't wrong on this 1 issue, but this isn't even on my top 20 list of problems I want the govt to work.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

From a Canadian perspective, this is getting interesting. Now, if they could only find a female half his age, with JFK's charisma...God, we're all saved!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

This is why the man will never, ever become President.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Not going far enough, but it's a start. Ban the terrorist NRA & ban those who are members from travelling abroad.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

The NRA isn't terrorist. It is offensive to call a legal organization that term.

Show were the NRA condones killing. Show where the NRA suggests using a firearm in a dangerous manner. Show were the NRA guides members to leave firearms unlocked, available to minors?

The NRA works to protect US Constitutional rights. Exactly the same as people who work to protect freedom of the press or free speech. Or freedom from religion. No different except the biased viewpoints we each hold.

Should people call you a name that isn't true? Wouldn't that be offensive?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Some of what Bloomberg proposes are fine and Constitutional. Much however, is a violation of basic civil rights. All of the rights in the Bill of Rights are individual rights or State rights (ie 10th amendment). There are limits to freedom of speech for example but only very modest restrictions. Bloomberg needs to spend his billions on a Constitutional amendment effort instead of undermining the nations basic organizational document by throwing billions of dollars worth of misinformation around. You should not be able to become King through your bank account.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Toasted Heretic - Not going far enough, but it's a start. Ban the terrorist NRA & ban those who are members from travelling abroad.

Floating statements like this are why Democrats should not be elected to federal office. Democrats can not be trusted to uphold the U.S. Constitution. This is also why Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke's campaign disintegrated before your very eyes.

Bloomberg has been pushing his own form of gun banning for years. That is why it has been so easy for "16oz" Bloomberg to grab such a large segment of the painfully oblivious Democrat voters. Bloomberg had a large, redi-made, ground-force of political operatives pushing firearm registration/confiscation, and supporting firearm-banning candidates. He only had to redirect them to work for the Democrats-want-a-billionaire-for president campaign.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Ban the terrorist NRA & ban those who are members from travelling abroad.

This is where you lose your credibility. I understand and even respect the opinion that someone doesn't like what the NRA stands for. I get it. You don't like guns and don't believe people need to own them. We'll never agree but believe it or not, I respect your opinion.

But when you start to throw words like 'terrorist' around, your argument starts to sound as fanatical as you accuse the NRA of being.

And then to suggest an idea that a member of the NRA should be allowed to travel internationally? Why on earth? That's just ridiculous. What has the average NRA member ever done?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Only Andrew Yang is acknowledging that gun bands are not enough

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bans not bands

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Floating statements like this are why Democrats should not be elected to federal office. Democrats can not be trusted to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

Hah, your team is supporting Trump. Got some cheese for your whine here? Because you people have no credibility whining about anyone not respecting the constitution, when your president steps on it and grinds it into the ground with his heel, all with your team's support.

Why does your team hate the constitution? Why does your team hate America?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Why does your team hate the constitution? Why does your team hate America?

Both 'teams' want to change the constitution to suit their own ends and think that they are doing what's best for the country.

If everyone could just admit that and stop this nonsense of dividing everyone into 'teams', we would get so much more done.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Heck, I don't vote but I will vote against this Bloomberg.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites