NYC Mayor Bloomberg says cops should strike to force gun control legislation

“I don’t understand why police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say we’re going to go on strike, we’re not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe,” he said on CNN.

Bloomberg was on CNN's "Pierce Morgan Tonight" discussing the shooting in Aurora when he made this comment saying that "we shouldn't let people who shouldn't have guns have them and people shouldn't be able to buy things like armor piercing bullets".

It seems that Bloomberg hasn't learned from the crime rate in his own city that banning guns does nothing to deter violent crime. He has been on the anti-gun bandwagon for years now and NYC still has an extremely high violent crime rate.

Since Mr. Bloomberg thinks so strongly that cops are here to protect us then why isn't he speaking out and asking where the cops were when the wackjob in Aurora was killing people? Cops are not there to protect us, they are there to investigate crimes that have already happened and to generate revenue through traffic stops.

His idea of cops striking is ludicrous as far as public safety is concerned, however since the crime rate would soar since the criminals would know there were no cops patrolling the streets it would serve the anti-gun agenda well. I think his comments speak volumes about the mentality of most of the anti-gun lobby, institute gun control at all costs. I guess this is like Obama's "don't let a good crisis go to waste" attitude.

Here are some more links to his statement:
www.huffingtonpost.com... 2/07/24/bloomberg-gun-control-police-strike_n_1697708.html

m.nydailynews.com...

says it best

at the time the 2nd was written, everybody had guns, they had just fought a corrupt government committing terrorist acts against their own people.

No one there wanted gun control, the 2nd at the time did nothing it was not needed.

They put it there just in case Americans ever faced such a government again.

As I have stated in another thread, the police have no obligation to protect any individual. The US Supreme Court has determined that. If the police were to do what Bloomberg wants, the only places that I see having a problem are places that have strict gun control laws, like New York City. Don't worry about it. It will never happen. The police unions can't take the chance that we might find out that we don't need them.

reply to post by Nucleardiver

“I don’t understand why police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say we’re going to go on strike, we’re not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe,” he said on CNN.

I for one don't give a damn if cops are safe or not.

I care if 'I' am safe.
Guess who is in charge of making sure 'I' am safe??
Any takers?



Cops are for writing tickets,reports, and taking statements.
Not for defending your sorry ass.
The gun they carry IS NOT FOR the other guy.
IT is for YOU if you should get out of control!!

I swear to god with all my heart and soul I am not being a smart ass when I say,

People who honestly believe and think this way (which he doesn't, he is a well paid and controlled shill)
are mentally ill. If unbridaled fear can ever be declared a mental illness then we can begin to get these people the help they need.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


Bloomberg is nothing more than a Zionist TOOL!!! I guess he wants NYC to fall to the level of Chicago eh? Watch what happens if the popo goes on strike in NYC! What a douche!

Gun control if done incorrectly actually increases the likelihood of illegal guns in the market and in turn probably the violent crime rate.

If you make something illegal, you open a black market for it. Simple as that. In some cases the black market is so small or in such little demand that it barely registers on the list of social problems.

However, with guns, it is already evident that a large black market exists. And increasing demand in the market is not a good idea.

Not a gun owner, don't plan to own one unless I retire on a ranch (?). But I will say that instead of everyone beating their heads on this one, people should take part in educational programs when they are young to learn and understand that guns are nothing more than sporting equipment and a tool.

The whole "empowerment" culture is absurd.

Safety first. Reality second..

It seems that Bloomberg hasn't learned from the crime rate in his own city that banning guns does nothing to deter violent crime. He has been on the anti-gun bandwagon for years now and NYC still has an extremely high violent crime rate.

And it's getting higher and more random everyday. Two stories about kids in the crossfire (4 year old killed, 10 yo hurt) in NY where guns are "strictly regulated":

articles.nydailynews.com...
cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com...

I would love to hear his answer to this - "Do you think if someone in that theater had a legal gun, they could have shot the perpetrator and saved lives?"

reply to post by Nucleardiver



All that would happen if they took our guns is the normal citizen wouldn't be able to protect them self from the criminals that have the guns and the cops would be in the same predicament they are in now because the criminals would still have the guns.

reply to post by Paradox1121


Ask a cop if he were in a shootout with an armed perp and his back up hadn't arrived yet if he wouldn't mind a little extra firepower from an armed citizen.

Ask the same cop the same question after he's been shot and bleeding out in the middle of the street and the perp is walking straight towards him.

Am I making too much sense?
Or will someone and answer my questions with more questions??

Hmmmm.

The attack on our 2nd amendment as well as the rest of our Bill of Rights is going to continue until we are forced to do as our founders, revolt and through off an increasingly oppressive government and again insure our freedom from tyranny.

The excuse for every infringement of our rights is always the same, "Its for 'safety'". Well the cops knew they were choosing a job that had inherent dangers and that one of those dangers is the risk of being shot. For them to say they want to feel safe would be like me saying I wanted to go into special ops when I joined the Navy, but only if it was safe. Besides, its nit like the threat to the police is the law abiding, CCW carrying citizen, its the criminal element of society; the same ones that us that carry guns lawfully are defending ourselves from.

Gun control has nothing to do with safety of police and making guns illegal does not mean there will be no guns in society, drugs are illegal also but there are millions of Americans that use and posses drugs everyday. The issue of gun control is about just that, control. Gun control equals people control because only an armed society ever really stands a chance of remaining free. When a society is left defenseless against its government tyranny and oppression will run rampant

reply to post by benrl


Our Government today makes King Georges government look like a sweet innocent child throwing a hissy fit. More than ever the second amendment is needed to keep up safe .... particularly from people like Bloomberg.
Rich powerful men wanting you unarmed and defenseless should be more than enough to convince you it's a horrible idea.

If New York cops went on strike the crime would plunge down to almost nothing. Not to mention the cities revenue.

This is pretty typical from the ambitious politicians who have no regard for the rights of individuals. Bloomberg is advocating lawlessness in order to get his way with more lawlessness. There is plenty Bloomberg does not understand, but his advocacy of lawlessness, as an elected official who has taken an oath of office to protect and defend those he serves, as well as the Constitutions that grant him the Office of which he inhabits, is inexcusable.

All people have the right to speech, but Bloomberg's words are perilously close to inciting a riot, and he is no doubt, and on record for advocating lawlessness.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


he's already back pedaling

in new york it's illegal for the police to strike
[credit goes to Lady Skadi for pointing that out on the other thread]

lol as Jean Paul Zodeaux points out this DOUCHE is advocating breaking the law

When seconds count, cops are minutes away.

Go ahead and let them all go on strike, not like we really can count on them most times anyways. It will force people to stand up for themselves and not wait on the boys in blue to come rescue them.

Geeze, third times a charm with this thread....lol My post a few closed threads ago.

Yes, go on strike - perhaps the military can go on strike as well, then the people can finally take care of all the corruption that is killing the country.

They want to strike? Fine by me. Police do very little for me that I am incapable of doing myself. ALL cops are bad. The thugs are bad for doing it and the so-called good ones are just as guilty for allowing it to happen. That statement probably won't earn me any friends but law enforcement nowadays are no different that King John's Tax Collectors. The only differences are the technology and the methods.

Once again, I hate my mayor! I have never owned a gun and probably never will, but it is and should stay my right in case I ever want one.
Bloomberg has sucked the life out of nyc and now he wants to sterilize the rest of the country too.
I think violence would escalate 10 fold if they go across America and try to take everyone's guns. That might be the tipping point for a revolution.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


I agree with you 100%, he can back peddle, or say what ever he wants but he is in fact advocating lawlessness which is contradictory to his oath as mayor. Personally I think he wants lawlessness so that he can use it as an excuse to tighten down even more on the citizens of NY, and the nation.

How much would you be willing to bet that he has armed security for himself, I wonder if he would be so willing to have them give up their guns? Of course that would never happen, he is of the elite class and what is good for the rest of society is not good for them.

I am growing very weary of the elitist hypocrite we have running our country. They are supposed to be representatives of the people and uphold the constitution, instead they look upon the people and the constitution with contempt.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


The reason they don't go on strike is because it will take a week or so of people fending for themselves abd realizing without the cops to rile things up life is actually more peaceful without them and they would be out of a job.