There’s an op-ed in the Daily News by Richard Aborn, “Make DNA the new fingerprint: N.Y. now fails to collect it from half of all convicted criminals.” He writes:
“… The evidence is clear that violent criminals commit both multiple crimes and nonviolent crimes. It follows then that the more offenders that are required to give DNA samples, the more crimes we can prevent. In the 21st century, DNA should be treated in the same way that fingerprints were treated in the 20th century. That is, a DNA sample should be taken for all offenses and kept in a database in cases once a person is convicted. There’s no excuse. Not only is it now less expensive and faster to test DNA, but there are an ever-increasing number of surfaces from which DNA can be lifted, including guns and bullets. Almost anything a criminal touches has some chance of yielding a DNA sample …”
This is a 180-degree turnaround from what he campaigned on. He’s now actually talking about something that involves finding and prosecuting violent thugs. Perhaps had he made this a central issue of his campaign, as opposed to screwing gun owners, he might have gotten more than 26% of the vote.
“After taking a year off to campaign for Manhattan district attorney, Richard M. Aborn has returned as president of the Citizen Crime Commission of New York City … On the campaign trail and off, Mr. Aborn has continued to press on gun control … During the campaign, he issued a five-point plan that included regional interdiction approach to gun trafficking, more gun buyback programs, and a requirement that pistols sold in New York include micro-stamping technology.”
Yes he did and I gave him a humiliating man-beating on election day because of it.
From the Times Union, “A central lesson in the 23rd“:
“For all the money that national conservative groups poured into the race for the 23rd Congressional District, their candidate lost. That is the undeniable bottom line … all that advertising and support from … a host of other outside … pro-gun groups didn’t make voters think much differently. Those groups could not persuade a majority of voters to believe in a platform that they didn’t endorse … New Yorkers as a whole … They tend to be more interested in sensible gun control than ensuring that every citizen can pack heat …”
Except the gun issue wasn’t an issue in the race. The NRA rated both Doug Hoffman and Bill Owens as “AQ” based upon their candidate questionnaires and the Brady Bunch was nowhere to be seen. Gunnies had nothing to win or lose in that race no matter who came out ahead.
Good commentary from Newsweek on the elections, “The Actual Bad Sign for Democrats from Tuesday“:
“Unlike the New York City Mayoral, or the Virginia Governor’s race, there is a really bad sign for Democrats out of the East Coast … Republicans made inroads in New York’s suburbs … Why does this matter so much? Because the New York suburbs epitomize the new Blue America. Twenty some-odd years ago … Westchester and Long Island represented the success of the Reagan Revolution. White ethnics, often Catholic, whose parents had lived in the city and voted Democratic, were turning to Republicans for lower taxes, strong national security, and traditional family values. But the New York suburbs led the way back to Democratic dominance … Pro-gun control candidates such as Rep. Carolyn McCarthy from Long Island started picked up seats in the 1990s … During the Democrats most recent identity crises, after they lost the 2004 election, NY Senator Chuck Schumer wrote a whole book about how Democrats can and should appeal to voters like the ones in the New York suburbs. He knows just how important they are: traditionally in New York politics the city votes heavily Democratic and Upstate favors Republicans. The suburbs decide elections …”
Gun control clearly wasn’t the main issue in either the NYC or Westchester races. Taxes are what killed off Andy Spano in Westchester, although WCFOA did do a members mailing prior to the election. Bloomberg paid his own way in the City, but where was New Yorkers Against Gun Violence in Westchester? Spano had been their mouthpiece for a dozen years on a bunch of issues, pistol licensing, gun shows at the Civic Center, gun bans, mandatory storage, etc. What they they do for him? Money, volunteers? He got bupkis. Spano is just another example of little real political power the antis have to move elections in the state.
Mayor Bloomberg won re-election. Gee, what a surprise. And he only had to spend $100,000,000 plus of his own money to do it too. In spite of this, all he was able to get was 50.61% of the vote. Still, a win is a win and we’re going to have to put up with him for 4 more years. The Times thinks this slim victory will diminish his political clout. I like this quote:
… “I campaigned for Bloomberg eight years ago,” said David Gibson, 60, a computer worker. “But he changed because of a strange personality shift that took place. He went from being loveable, likeable and amiable to a guy who comes out very defensive and intolerant.” …
I think he’s always been that way. It’s just become that much more apparent to people who don’t usually pay that close attention to politics. As to his antigun agenda, I don’t see how he comes out in a stronger political position because of this. I also don’t see him stopping one bit either.
Elseware, the only MAIG member we specifically targeted was Binghamton Mayor Matt Ryan as being the most vulnerable. He is barely leading his two opponents by 61 votes with 39.86% of the vote to GOP challenger Rich David’s 39.25% and independent candidate Doug Drazen’s 20.88%. The absentee ballots will be looked at and a final vote count will be available on the 12th. Even if he does end up winning, he had to spend tens of thousands of his own money to do it.
The latest polling shows Doug Hoffman leading Bill Owens 41-36%. Fred Dicker thinks Hoffman is going to win and I’m inclined to agree with him. Scozzafava’s endorsement of Owens basically validated all of her critics complaints about her. According to Dicker:
“… A Hoffman win will send shock waves throughout Democratic ranks nationally and in New York, especially among the centrist Blue Dogs, whose moderation usually reflects the presence of a sizeable Republican voting bloc in their districts. “Upstate Democrats are going to be shaking in their boots” if Hoffman wins, one of New York’s best-known Democrats said yesterday …”
That would be good news for gun rights here and nationally.