“Moms” March Over Brooklyn Bridge for Gun Sense Next Saturday

The New York chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense invites their neighbors to join them Mother’s Day weekend for the 4th Annual Brooklyn Bridge March.  Saturday, May 7th at 1:00 pm Moms, Dads, survivors and supporters will gather at Cadman Plaza Park to march over Brooklyn Bridge towards a rally at City Hall.  Attendees are encouraged to bring a home-made sign.

RSVP online here or text BRIDGE to 644-33.

Moms Demand Brooklyn Bridge March Flyer

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America is a grass-roots organization that advocates for common sense gun laws, in particular criminal background checks for all gun sales and anti-trafficking laws.

 

Share this Story:

, , , , ,

  • HereToStay

    SO tired of all the ridiculous rallies in Cadman Plaza Park. It’s like one day a few years ago EVERY ‘organization’ known to man has to have a march there… And walks over the Bridge… Ugh. Yeah, that accomplishes a lot.

  • Concerned

    Heretostay: “Bah! Humbug!”
    C’mon Heretostay, this is a great cause and hopefully raises money and awareness.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    Agreed, these types of protests are mostly ineffective, especially for national level issues.
    About all they do is annoy people and make them less sympathetic to “the cause”.

  • awalker1829

    If they were for gun safety, they would be pushing for gun safety classes in every school. Unfortunately, they are not for “gun sense”, they are for gun control. History has proven that gun control does not work any better than the “War on Drugs” has. Both are utter failures.

  • Concerned

    Riiiiiiggggghhhhhhttttttt!!!!!!!! Are you looking at the history of all the other countries in the world who have effective gun control, or are you looking at the Fox News “video history” of gun control. And PLEASE, PLEASE don’t try to bring up some screwed up disgusting argument like “gun control caused the holocaust”!!!!

  • awalker1829

    Actually, there is now a significant pushback going on. Australian gun control has not decreased the number of firearms in private hands-it’s actually increased them. Same goes for European gun control which is unenforceable as there are now no internal border controls. If they were for true gun sense, they would promote safety, education and reasonable access laws.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    I doubt you have done much, if any, independent research on the issue. So then, what media source do you think is delivering the unbiased “truth” on Gun Control?
    Also, The Holocaust connection is a low blow on your part, as most 2nd amendment proponents do not make that claim.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    True, When I was 12 and a Boy Scout at local Troop 1, we would go once a month to the Brooklyn Navy Yard’s firing range to shoot .22 rifles. It was not only fun, it taught us strict firearms safety, respect and responsibility. It also got the curiosity of firing a gun out of a city boys system. So much safer and productive than the fear and ignorance approach of today.

  • Concerned

    These are stupid arguments. Gun safety classes in every school???? SO now guns have to be a part of every child’s upbringing? Give me a f%%%ing break!!! You guys are delusional!!!

  • Concerned

    Actually, many idiots who are pro-gun bring up that argument. So the low blow is by them, not by me countering that delusional and disgusting argument.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Not to be anti-dialogue but it strikes me that this is hardly the forum for a debate about guns/2nd Amendment. This seems it should be more about the protest and its effect on local life, although I’ll offer that none of you have substantiated your assertions with empirical data, and for what is probably a good reason: none seem to exist that unequivocally point to either the proliferation or prohibition of firearms among the American public.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    Perhaps some of the
    “pro gun” idiots do, but most of the intelligent, pro 2nd amendment rights, activists know that even though it is a fact; The Nazis did make it one of their first priorities to confiscate firearms from all those they deemed “unfit” to possess weapons, the Holocaust would have still occurred.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    No Not a “stupid argument”, It is historical fact. You may not be comfortable with it, as it goes against all the emotionally driven “beliefs” you seem to have inserted into your head. The reality, it was a good educational experance for me and my friends. Ignorance is never the answer.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Here I go, disregarding my earlier comment…

    The fallacy, as I understand it, is that the occurrence of the Holocaust and any alleged confiscation or prohibition of firearms were two entirely unconnected phenomena, much like the obsolescence of the idea that American individuals with guns would be capable of thwarting some kind of unwanted military action by the US (or other) government, or of overthrowing the government. If every Jewish family in Europe had been armed with rifles they’d have been overpowered with tanks, bombs, aircraft, etc…and the Holocaust was a systematic rejection of the humanity of several groups by many others, not a battle between one side with arms and one side without.

  • Concerned

    Lol! You got sucked in by their ignorance. These gun control nutters can’t help themselves. Even when they deny an argument, they still have to try and loop around to justify it.
    As a response to your other post, I think discussion of the topic at issue is fine on the blog. The issue of gun control is relevant to the theme of the blog post. And as far as empirical data, I don’t need any more than my common sense, and this:
    http://www.bradycampaign.org/key-gun-violence-statistics

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Look, to be candid, I don’t like guns, and I don’t approve of violence as a method of conflict resolution under virtually any circumstances. But that’s a privileged position I hold; I don’t live in a violent place, in fear for my life, without the ability to deescalate conflicts verbally. I’m not well versed in Krav Maga and if I was I still wouldn’t be bulletproof.

    Gun violence also isn’t just one phenomenon that regulation can solve or even alleviate. It’s more like three or more separate phenomena, and regulation can only hope to address one or two of them. Better, more long-lasting solutions, if they exist, would be economic, cultural, educational. E.g., close the income gap, de-schedule narcotics, propagandize guns as a shameful taboo rather than as a symbol of masculine autonomy, etc…

  • Concerned

    I agree with everything you said.
    The Krav Maga was a nice touch. Lol.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Would be the first time Krav Maga has been described as a “nice touch”!

  • Banet

    Your statement above contradicts pretty much every statistic and study done on Australia… as detailed here:

    http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia

  • awalker1829

    Actually, the problem is in the reporting. Numbers of licensees is always smaller than the number of weapons as generally, multiple weapons may be held on one license. Also, please note that the number of rifles has not significantly declined. Also, please note that if you insist on labeling law abiding gun owners as idiots or other names, we will be less inclined to negotiate. Firearms ownership in the United States is a right.

  • awalker1829

    The people who are delusional are those that insist on making their children ready made victims. Any parent who refuses to teach their children safety around firearms should be prosecuted for criminal child endangerment. My parents are not pro-gun, yet my father bought a rifle (.22 cal) and taught both me and my brother to gun safety. He knew that there was no way that he could totally insulate us from guns and that it was better for us to know how to act around them. Also, children’s curiosity about guns is often piqued by the fact that they are kept locked up. Plenty of responsible gun owners allow their children to handle guns of every description: from muskets to machine guns under adult supervision.

  • Banet

    First, I didn’t use the word “idiot” or any other name so I don’t know what you’re talking about.

    Second, even if there’s a problem with the reporting of ownership — a fact I dispute — there’s no rational way there would be a reporting problem with the number of gun deaths. And the number of gun deaths dropped about 65% pretty much overnight in 1996 when they passed their new gun laws.

    So the way I see it, there are most definitely rational laws one can pass that allow for gun ownership while still making a substantial difference in the carnage caused by gun owners.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    Well said, though I don’t agree with all you say, I admire your individual point of view, not simply defaulting to some prepackaged ideal. Keeping an open mind on the issue, bravo.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    You should know I only eat locally grown, artisanally sourced ideals.

    Just curious, what didn’t you agree with?

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    It is you who is ignorant, spewing canned thoughts and sophomoric insults.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    see below

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    This “propagandize guns as a shameful taboo” I know what your getting at but don’t think that’s a good way to get there.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Why not? If a valid pro-gun argument involves defense then I don’t see why guns should be any sexier than airbags or seatbelts, and from a non-proliferation standpoint it would benefit everyone if they were as socially acceptable as child porn.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    The difference, “child porn” is illegal and immoral. gun ownership is a constitutional right and there are many legitimate reasons for owning them. Law abiding gun owners should not be vilified. Murder is illegal and immoral, that is what needs to be demonized, the action of misusing a gun. It goes into a much larger conversation of why we have this social malaise of glorified violence in the first place and what can be done to cure it.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Just because a fledgling American government, their ears still ringing with the traumas of colonial rebellion, decided to write into law a provision that reinforced one (very chronologically specific) means by which they achieved their independence, doesn’t make gun ownership—and especially the prevalent culture of masculine autonomy now associated with gun ownership—any less immoral than child porn; and as a side effect of even the most lawful pockets of gun ownership, certainly many more lives are destroyed per year.

    To extend the analogy, the camera and the computer are tools primarily used for creating, processing, and distributing forms of information (in fact you and I, in having this discussion, are using the same tools as the child pornographer). The gun, on the other hand, is a tool designed with the sole purpose of causing death. If a tool was introduced whose sole purpose was to temporarily disable—without killing or seriously injuring—someone, then I’d say everyone absolutely should have a legal right to possess such a tool in order to defend themselves. But I don’t think you can make the argument that everyone, by divine right, should be allowed to run around with instruments of instant death while simultaneously making the argument that such a circumstance is a moral imperative and may not be regarded with disgust.

    Taking a life is a shameful act; even when done in self-defense it perverts the course of justice and creates years or decades of psychological trauma for both the assailant and the victim, if s/he is so lucky as to survive the incident without serious bodily harm. When one’s finger is on the trigger of a firearm every choice is a Hobbesian one. And what I never seem to hear from proponents of proud, lawful gun ownership is the dread of ever having to make that decision, but instead an eagerness to skip it entirely and bravely kill the bad guys with the twitch of a finger.