New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is calling on President Obama and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney to propose stricter gun control laws following last week's which left 12 people dead and 59 wounded in Colorado, The Huffington Post reports.
“This really is an enormous problem for the country, and it's up to these two presidential candidates," Bloomberg said, according to the Huffington Post. "They want to lead this country, and they've said things before that they're in favor of banning things like assault weapons. Where are they now and why don't they stand up? And if they want our votes, they better.”
According to The Huffington Post, the alleged Colorado shooter, James Holmes, acquired his arsenal of weapons, ammunition and body armor over several months from the Internet and brick-and-mortar stores alike. His purchases did not raise any red flags.
Proponents of gun rights, however, argue that a vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens and that criminals who commit these kinds of massacres aren't obeying laws already in place, so wouldn't obey stricter ones either.
Dudley Brown, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, commented on Holmes' 6,000 rounds of ammunition for an assault rifle.
"If I only had 6,000 rounds for my AR-15s, I'd literally feel naked," Brown said, according to The Huffington Post. Holmes' arsenal included "two handguns, a shotgun and a rifle. That's the average male in Colorado."
What do you think? Should the U.S. adopt stricter gun laws? Take our poll and share your thoughts in the comments.
Gun Control? In 1982 in Kennesaw Georgia, they passed a city ordinance sec.34-21 stating that all heads of house shall have a gun and avilable bullets in the residence. In the psat 25 years NYC has had over 15,000 murders. In 1990 alone they had 2245. While in Kennesaw Georgia they had ONE in 2007 in the same time frame. Maybe some day our leaders (LOL) will finally figure out that it's the criminal that dosen't follow the law and that we need some hard and swift punishment to these criminals. We have more that enough gun laws already that are not enforced and we don't need more feel good laws passed under emotion instead of logic.
I grew up in New Britain CT, in the inner city where crime was routine. Stolen cars, shootings, hit and run, burglary, assault and robbery. Many years ago I was awakened in the middle of the night by someone kicking my front door relentlessly. A large man high on drugs was yelling he needed money and wanted to use my phone. I was afraid if this guy got in the the door he would have killed me or hurt someone. Time was critical and I told him that if he did not go away I had a handgun and would shoot through the door. He left. I did not have a handgun. I had a cordless phone in my hand. I realized that night I was very lucky. I guess people who grew up in the streets have 'street smarts'. Those that live in Stonington bourough leave their houses unlocked.
Yes there can be circumstances where the gun owner is in a situation where he/she cannot get to their gun...and they're up sh|ts creek. I'm not sure of William Petit owned one, but sadly in their tragedy...he was asleep downstairs or on the porch...the bad guys came in the house and took a baseball bat to him before he could wake up. Yes sometimes the odds aren't in your favor. But you know what? Sometimes the odds can be in your favor. And I would prefer to have my right, and my choice, to give myself a tactical advantage. Just because I am a tad over 6'4", and I have a history in law enforcement, and I have a history of working with people that trained law enforcement in various physical restraint, self defense tactics, baton, cuffs, and other non-lethal methods...doesn't mean I don't to have one more option to give myself (and my family) the upper hand. There are circumstances where you DO have the option to better prepare yourself for an impending/oncoming bad situation. I prefer to have that option.
there's lots of unfairness in this society, and its amplified over and over by legislation provided to the masses for the purpose of serving the benefit of the few. no matter how cleverly devised or diligent the system claims to be, humans will find a way to circumvent it. ( i hear multiple gunshots as i write this, over towards western waterford @ 10:01 AM)
Read more: Today in the news: Report: Colorado shooter mailed plans to psychiatrist - Norwich, CT - The Bulletin http://www.norwichbulletin.com/archive/x1914869405/Today-in-the-news-Report-Colorado-shooter-mailed-plans-to-psychiatrist#ixzz21jsMZ1Nt
Your incorrect statement follows: "Yes, it can and my point is that people already have guns and it happens. You are convincing yourself that you are safer with a gun. In Cheshire the perps waited until family was asleep and then bombarded the home. If you were sound asleep you would not be able to locate your gun while they held one to your head." Sorry, Wrong. You make a lot of assumptions about my degree of readiness. Do I have an alarm, do I have dogs, do I sleep upstairs or downstairs? BTW, my firearm is on the night stand right next to my bed. Your argument is based on nothing, not one fact. All speculation. Your comments reflect your own situation, not mine.