"I don't think someone with a 100 percent NRA rating should be the next senator from New York," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, who ran for Congress after her husband was killed and son wounded in the 1993 Long Island Rail Road shooting massacre. "The majority of New Yorkers believe in trying to reduce gun violence."
Even I find this kind of rhetoric difficult to take. When Gov. David Paterson announced the appointment of little-known upstate Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand to replace Hillary, I don't believe for a second he wanted someone who does not "believe in trying to reduce gun violence." I find McCarthy's comments quite exaggerated, I suppose to make the point that I'm always trying to make: pro gun people are unintentionally part of the problem not part of the solution.
According to the Yahoo article, Mayor Bloomberg, who is a very strong proponent of gun control, agreed with McCarthy. They say that Gillibrand co-sponsored legislation to deny information to the police that would enable them to track illegal gun criminals. The legislation passed in the House but was never considered by the Senate. I suppose they're talking about blocking some kind of registration laws, but I get the feeling these anti-gun folks are twisting and spinning a good bit. Denying information to the police sounds crazy to me.
A group called New Yorkers Against Gun Violence also criticized Gillibrand. "In fact some of her gun control stances are detrimental to law enforcement and their efforts to prevent crime by going after illegal guns," the group said in a statement.
I suppose my only problem with this is the attempt to paint Gillibrand as someone who is not interested in the same things as everyone else. We all want safer streets, less crime, increased security. What's wrong with simply arguing about the differing ways of achieving these goals? To me, personal attacks aimed at the new pro-gun Senator seem useless. It would be better to question her policies regarding gun control.
What's your opinion? Do you think Ms. Gillibrand would agree with Bob S. when he says that more guns in the hands of the good guys would result in less crime on the streets? Is that what the controversy is all about? Or could it be something else, maybe some gun registration laws? What's a 100% NRA rating, anyway?
What do you think? Please let us know.