Originally Posted by priell3
Now if they were called "Mayors Against Guns USED ILLEGALLY" and that was their true purpose, I'd have more respect for them.
I agree the "title" of organizations and laws are important.
To John_deer's comment:
Originally Posted by John_Deer
The entire concept of mayors against illegal guns is flawed. Many mayors jumped on board with Bloomberg because they are much like us, they don't like illegal guns either. But they want no part of making all gun owners criminals. Even people that don't own guns can see the need for guns. Mayors see the police blotter unfiltered. They see where a woman used to gun to stop a mean drunk, even though she never fired a shot. Mayors can't see the point of disarming the public. Unlike Bloomberg most mayors try to serve their community.
I think it is very important to recognize and distinguish the intent in comparison to the solution and approach. They aren't nearly as focused in fixing the problem as evident to some of the "stupid" ways they are trying to accomplish such. But then they bury "false" solutions by promoting a solution of taking guns from everyone. Even their own know that won't fix any issues.
All good reads - take your pick.
Mayors Leave Bloomberg's "Gun Confiscation" Organization in Droves
MAIG membership down 15% in past year.
John Tkazyik - Mayor of Poughkeepsie, NY, NRA Life member.
Mayor: Nationwide Gun Confiscation Is Goal of Mayors Against Illegal Guns
Bloomberg’s Anti-Gun Group Imploding as 50 Mayors Leave