"This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake."

Via Ravenwood comes this NY Times article (registration required) on the New York City Coucil's at least six new gun control measures formulated in response to the death of Coucilperson James E. Davis who was shot in the council chambers last month. Here's what they're considering:

The proposals include holding gun makers, dealers and importers liable for damages if their weapons are used to kill or injure people in the city, as well as prohibiting gun dealers from selling more than one firearm to the same person within 90 days. Another proposal would require gun owners in the city to obtain liability insurance.

So the first thing they want to do is place the blame on everybody but the guy behind the trigger (in direct opposition to the bills in Congress that would prohibit such liability.) The second is, unsurprisingly an extension of the "one gun a month" idea to "one gun every THREE months." Shortly to be followed by "one gun every TWELVE months," to "Gun? You don't NEED a gun."

More quotes:

There was no urgency prior to the shooting," said Peter Vallone Jr., chairman of the Public Safety Committee, which is holding next month's hearing.

"But now there is a sense that we all want to move as quickly as possible on these bills in his memory."

Why? Not one of the ideas presented would have prevented his death. Again, they're just useless, knee-jerk reactions.

The city's renewed focus on gun control is also expected to open the door for broader state legislation, in much the same way that the city's ban on smoking in restaurants and other public places did.

Right, after New Yorkers were told that the increasing legislation against smoking would never result in a ban on it. Just like we're told that the increasing legislation against gun ownership will never result in a ban on it. Go ahead, pull my other leg.

"I think it would be a good thing if the city did it, and showed the state the way," said the Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, who represents the Lower East Side.

That's because you're a useful idiot, Mr. Silver.

This reminds me of a favorite quote:

"The ruling class doesn't care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake." - former U.S. Sen. Malcolm Wallop (R-Wy.)

It also reminds me of Riss v. New York which I covered in "Is the Government Responsible for Your Protection?"

How about the City Council consider a law that would make the City of New York liable for not protecting its citizens? I'd like to see the liability insurance bill for that.