NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

1
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/08/opi ... ions.html
NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.
A campaign galvanized by mass shootings and assault weapons will inevitably find itself in a dead end. But there’s a way out.

By Dan Gross
Mr. Gross was the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence from 2012 to 2017 and is a co-founder of the Center for Gun Rights and Responsibility.

April 8, 2021

My brother was critically injured in a mass shooting atop the Empire State Building almost 25 years ago. Every time another such shooting makes headlines it breaks my heart to know that other families are experiencing the same shock, horror and grief that ours has.

It also breaks my heart to see gun control supporters, part of a movement I once helped to lead, repeat the mistakes that doom us all to the unacceptable status quo: tens of thousands of shooting deaths a year.

The pattern is as familiar as it is tragic: In the immediate aftermath of a mass shooting, the main demand of political leaders and gun control groups is a federal assault weapons ban. The news media, which seems to pay attention to gun laws only in the wake of mass shootings, amplifies that call, mostly taking at face value the idea that an assault weapons ban is the best way to prevent “gun violence.” Then, as headlines about the latest calamity fade, so do the hopes of federal policy change.

If this pattern plays out again after the shootings in Georgia and Colorado, no one should be surprised. One of the most common questions I have gotten from journalists has been, “If things didn’t change as a result of (insert previously unthinkable tragedy here), how can we ever expect them to change?”

I believe that is the wrong question and illustrates the problem with the gun control debate in the United States. Though it does not grab national headlines, the daily toll of gun deaths and injuries is just as horrifying as our mass shootings, and more preventable as a matter of policy. The gun control movement should focus on the deaths and injuries that are most common, rather than be galvanized by mass shootings like the one that put my brother in a coma.

Of the nearly 40,000 deaths involving guns in 2019, well under 1 percent were caused by what the F.B.I. defines as “active shooter” incidents. In an average year, around 60 percent of deaths involving guns are suicides and upward of 30 percent are homicides that don’t meet the “active shooter” definition, like episodes of domestic and gang violence. Even unintentional shootings (about 1 percent of the total) outnumber mass shootings.

There are far more effective means to prevent these sadly routine tragedies than by focusing on assault weapons. And that means that it is both wrong and counterproductive for advocacy organizations and elected leaders to use the moments when the public is focused on gun control to push an assault weapons ban.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t disagree with the intent of an assault weapons ban. I led the organization that before my tenure as president helped to pass the 1994 federal ban on assault weapons that expired in 2004, and I believe there is no place in civilized society for guns that are made for the express purpose of killing people.

But the fact is that if one were to objectively list solutions based purely on how much they would lower the number of gun deaths in our country, an assault weapons ban would not be high on the list.

When an assault weapons ban is debated, the conversation inevitably becomes a technical and confusing one. While there is no standard definition of an “assault weapon,” much of the focus in the wake of mass shootings is on semiautomatic AR-15-style rifles. Yet most mass shootings, like most gun fatalities in this country, are committed with handguns.

As important, though, the name of the policy includes the word “ban.” Gun control supporters like to mention the backing of “the overwhelming majority of gun owners” for “common-sense policies.” But calling for a ban of any sort just makes it easy for opposing politicians and organizations to cast anyone seeking policy change as a “gun grabber” seeking to take away the Second Amendment rights of responsible and law-abiding gun owners.

To create real and lasting change, we must end the culture war over guns. Instead, gun control groups are helping to perpetuate it.

No decent human being, whether gun owner or not, wants to live in a country with our level of shooting deaths. The most meaningful way to deal with the problem, though, is not to look at how to keep certain guns from all people, but how to keep all guns from certain people — the people almost all of us agree should not have guns.

I have spent the past two years building relationships with leaders in the gun rights community, and have found that this framing leads us to common ground. And it points to five specific moves that together would have an enormous impact:

Vigorously pursue and prosecute the small percentage of gun dealers who are knowingly contributing to the illegal gun trade (a trade that is disproportionately hurting communities of color).

Identify opportunities to strengthen the background check system by adding prohibited purchasers that we all, including 90 percent of gun owners, agree should not have guns. For instance, federal rules governing privacy for health records could be modified to allow mental health clinicians to identify those who are a threat to themselves or others, so that they could be temporarily added to the National Instant Check System. This would have to include exemptions for private sales that may make some gun control supporters uncomfortable; but in the end, in combination with the other measures listed here, it would result in a significant improvement to public safety.

Invest in a large-scale education and awareness campaign on the dangers of owning and carrying guns, and what can be done to mitigate those dangers. It is crucial that these efforts be led in partnership with gun rights groups and public health experts and that they remain free from any judgment about gun ownership or connection with political advocacy. There are many initiatives already, such as public education about the warning signs of mental illness and suicide, which have proved effective and could be models.

Expand on the work of “violence interrupters” and similar programs proved to reduce gun violence in cities.

Clearly define what it means to be a federally licensed firearm dealer, with standards that include sales volume. For years, gun control groups have talked about closing the “gun show loophole.” The real problem is not specifically gun shows but people who are regularly selling multiple guns to strangers, regardless of the venue, without being required to conduct the same background check that a federally licensed dealer must. Not only does this clearly contribute to straw-man purchasing and gun trafficking; it also puts honest dealers at a competitive disadvantage.

When I was considered a leader in the gun control movement, a lot of attention was paid by other groups on how to “rebrand” the pursuit of preventing gun deaths: “Gun control?” “Gun violence prevention?” “Gun safety?”

As a former advertising executive myself, I always found this conversation superficial and frustrating. It takes more than a name and talking points to shape perceptions of any brand, no less such an important social issue. It takes a fundamental truth, a deep empathy for the people you are trying to reach and a disciplined focus on reinforcing that truth with everything you do and say.

The truth is, an assault weapons ban is not the most effective thing we can do to prevent gun violence, and the resulting debate undermines the extent to which the American public agrees on solutions that could bring us closer to what we all want, which is to make our homes, schools and communities safer.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

2
The most meaningful way to deal with the problem, though, is not to look at how to keep certain guns from all people, but how to keep all guns from certain people — the people almost all of us agree should not have guns.


Who those people are that shouldn't have guns opens a new debate, but it's heading in the right direction. I've begun to think that Democrats and Republicans and Everytown and the NRA like things as they are, they know the stimulus and response just like Pavlov's dogs.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

4
I agree that some people shouldn’t have guns. However, there must be a clear cut criteria and court-reviewed mechanism on who can be denied gun ownership. If it’s left at the discretion of government officials, it’s ripe for abuse. It’s “may issue” all over again.

Maybe I’m too cynical, but I think Repub support for this type of initiatives is because they’d like to deny guns to riff raffs and people they deem undesirables. Given half a chance they’ll figure out a way to make gun ownership too onerous and too expensive for minorities, just like voting.
Glad that federal government is boring again.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

6
Stiff wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:31 pm I agree that some people shouldn’t have guns. However, there must be a clear cut criteria and court-reviewed mechanism on who can be denied gun ownership. If it’s left at the discretion of government officials, it’s ripe for abuse. It’s “may issue” all over again.

Maybe I’m too cynical, but I think Repub support for this type of initiatives is because they’d like to deny guns to riff raffs and people they deem undesirables. Given half a chance they’ll figure out a way to make gun ownership too onerous and too expensive for minorities, just like voting.
The Republicans don't need to do it, the Democrats are doing it for them.


Without real due process, all of these "red flag" laws, and other methods of keeping people from owning guns are suspect at best. Our courts are fucked up. I have seen that first hand. By and large, I wouldn't trust them with someone else's constitutional rights.

If someone has been involuntarily institutionalized, that's probably a good line in the sand for gun ownership, but what about the people who have been wrongfully put there, or what about someone like Brittney Spears (not sure if she's actually in good mental health, just that she's definitely being taken advantage of).

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

7
I led the organization that before my tenure as president helped to pass the 1994 federal ban on assault weapons that expired in 2004, and I believe there is no place in civilized society for guns that are made for the express purpose of killing people.
Only nice, old-timey firearms should be allowed for purchase by the rabble.
For instance, federal rules governing privacy for health records could be modified to allow mental health clinicians to identify those who are a threat to themselves or others, so that they could be temporarily added to the National Instant Check System.
Bad ideas du jour: tying HIPPA to NICS and floating the ludicrous concept of someone being "temporarily added" to NICS.
Invest in a large-scale education and awareness campaign on the dangers of owning and carrying guns, and what can be done to mitigate those dangers.
An entire political party, a politically-aligned media, and a healthcare industry already are dedicated to that.
Clearly define what it means to be a federally licensed firearm dealer, with standards that include sales volume.
That's what the FFL system is.
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

8
Stiff wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:31 pm there must be a clear cut criteria and court-reviewed mechanism on who
agreed
NegativeApproach wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:57 pm It's easy to decide who should or shouldn't have guns, until someone is deciding for you.
and agreed. we're in agreement here.
nor do i trust government entities or clinical psychology to make this decision. but if not them, who? so maybe there's no answer, which accomplishes nothing. and yet i keep coming back to the conundrum. the right of the people to... / some people should not have guns. is it pointless to even look for a solution?
i'm retired. what's your excuse?

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

9
lurker wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 3:57 am
Stiff wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:31 pm there must be a clear cut criteria and court-reviewed mechanism on who
agreed
NegativeApproach wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:57 pm It's easy to decide who should or shouldn't have guns, until someone is deciding for you.
and agreed. we're in agreement here.
nor do i trust government entities or clinical psychology to make this decision. but if not them, who? so maybe there's no answer, which accomplishes nothing. and yet i keep coming back to the conundrum. the right of the people to... / some people should not have guns. is it pointless to even look for a solution?
Agreed with NegativeApproach and lurker. The solution as imperfect as it is already exists. Criminal acts with convictions certainly is a point where a right can and should be suspended. Due process needs to exist and an appeals process. The hard part is one can’t determine who should lose a right until they actually commit a crime that indicates permanent removal of a right is in order. In those instances the person is already dead or sitting in jail facing multiple murder charges. There is ultimately no way to create a perfectly safe society and trying to fabricate the means to limit or remove rights only results in a totalitarian society not a safe society. Death cannot be eliminated, we can reduce the incidence by looking at and addressing those underlying reasons for acts of violence. It is imperfect, life is imperfect.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

10
Life is full of compromises whenever the alternative is worse.

Is democracy always great? No. There’s no shortage of examples on democratically elected terrible leaders. But what is the alternative? Absolute monarchy, dictatorship, theocracy. All are worse.

Is the court system perfect? Absolutely not. There’s no shortage of examples on miscarriages of justice. How is it a good idea that 12 random lay persons determine whether you’re guilty or innocent? How can one person (judge) be allowed to hold so much power over your literal life? Because the alternative is jungle law and tit for tat vendetta.

In this case the alternative to not having a better mechanism of prohibited persons is to continue losing lives, or to make everybody carry guns. It’s a tough and complex issue that politicians are scared of, they prefer simple and punchy slogans that don’t work, as long as they signal values expected by their voters.

As horrible as it may sound, a lot of people dgaf when a stranger kills several other strangers. How many people actually care enough to do something beyond offering empty words to hundreds of families losing members every month in Syria? Deep down how many people actually care about the Chinese ladies gunned down in Atlanta? To them no changes are necessary, it’s fine the way it is. Don’t touch muh rights. Over half a million people died of Covid, yet a huge section of our population only care about their freedom to not wear a fucking mask.

If 20 dead children failed to move the needle, then nothing is gonna happen until something even worse happens.
Glad that federal government is boring again.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

12
highdesert wrote:
The most meaningful way to deal with the problem, though, is not to look at how to keep certain guns from all people, but how to keep all guns from certain people — the people almost all of us agree should not have guns.


Who those people are that shouldn't have guns opens a new debate, but it's heading in the right direction. I've begun to think that Democrats and Republicans and Everytown and the NRA like things as they are, they know the stimulus and response just like Pavlov's dogs.
Agree. All bring in a lot of $$$


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

13
I don’t agree with a lot of the authors “policy prescriptions.” But it is by far one of the more nuanced and understanding take by an anti that I have read with out all the shrill calls for a hardware ban. I’d rather talk to this guy, than the other same shrill voices in the NRA or in the Brady bunch.

I think red flag laws are a dangerous president, and there needs to be due process.

There is already such a process. I had to get a protective order (CPO) for my 2 oldest kids from my ex-wife's second, ex-husband. He was an abusive meth head. Nice enough guy - until he would go into drug induced psychosis; then he would become violent and abusive and beat/fight her.

The county took his gun rights away for 5 years. He waived them when he pleaded no contest to the CPO. He could have gotten a lawyer an fought the CPO - but chose not to. He knew he had an addiction problem. He needed to figure his issues out away from my kids.

Thankfully, he didn't have any guns, but he had (unauthorized) access to hers. Not like he couldn't get a hold of someone else gun though --- just shows the futility of those types of laws.


I share this story to say - there is a process. It is not perfect, flawed, and requires someone to intervene & initiate it. A lot of these mass shooters are otherwise (up to the point they go on a senseless, mass murder spree) law-abiding people who choose to get the notoriety that the media will confer on them. Personally, I think as long as we have a “media problem” and other generational social problems we will have a mass shooting problem. So I agree with the author that we should not chase the active shooter problem in America with policy bandaids like AWBs and also red flag laws. We have an ATF —- and they need to go after actual criminals not try and trick up dealers and lawful buyers on technicalities of the law and regulations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

14
I read the column and posted my own comment. Nobody replied and it got a total of 3 likes. Most people who read the NY Times and comment in the comment sections suffer cognitive dissonance when it comes to fact-based analyses of "gun control", which, more importantly, SHOULD mean reducing gun violence.
Yet it still comes back to the usual emotional terms "Nobody should have a weapon of war!" "nobody needs an assault rifle (sic)!" "The 2nd Amendment was from the time of single-shot muzzle loading muskets!" (never could figure this one out). "Ban all semi-automatic weapons!" "Charge $50/round for ammunition" etc etc.

They sound just like the phony "pro-life" anti-abortionists, fact-free, emotional terms, no REAL solutions, just "feel good" things that pull the heart strings but don't answer the brain's questions.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

15
As I recall, the NYT considers itself the flagship newspaper of the American Left. It is based in an urban center widely regarded as the most restrictive and non-permissive environment in the country for gun rights, and the dominant population center in a state with similar reputation.

What did you expect?

People tend to forget or ignore the NYT's convenient pro-business, pro-banking tilt and extraordinary editorial deference to and compliance with authority. Because "it's liberal." Doesn't matter if it was Biden, Trump, Obama or Bush. That attitude bleeds through to the readership, in my experience. I know a great many liberals who do not question something if it's published in the NYT. Appeals to authority and all that.

If you want a paper that will go toe-to-toe with the federal government, look to the WaPo. The Guardian is great fun. Even the LA Times. Can't be arsed with the NYT.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

16
wings wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:56 am As I recall, the NYT considers itself the flagship newspaper of the American Left. It is based in an urban center widely regarded as the most restrictive and non-permissive environment in the country for gun rights, and the dominant population center in a state with similar reputation.

What did you expect?

People tend to forget or ignore the NYT's convenient pro-business, pro-banking tilt and extraordinary editorial deference to and compliance with authority. Because "it's liberal." Doesn't matter if it was Biden, Trump, Obama or Bush. That attitude bleeds through to the readership, in my experience. I know a great many liberals who do not question something if it's published in the NYT. Appeals to authority and all that.

If you want a paper that will go toe-to-toe with the federal government, look to the WaPo. The Guardian is great fun. Even the LA Times. Can't be arsed with the NYT.
That's a rather blanket stereotyping of the paper, the city, and the state. Upstate NY is generally conservative--even Democrats there are about as far right as you can go--not quite Joe Manchin, but close. Staten Island, the 5th borough of NYC is VERY Republican, as is much of Long Island--Peter King represents part of the Island. And, despite its liberal rep, not that many mayors have been Progressives in the last 50-60 years--only David Dinkins and Bill de Blasio (although John Lindsey came close). Before de Blasio Republicans held the mayor's office for 20 straight years--Oozy Rudy, then Bloomberg--and Lindsey, a Republican, was mayor for 8 years as well--28 years out of the last 55 (Lindsey came in 1 Jan 1966 to a transit strike).

While it's been 15 years since George Pataki was Governor, he was elected 3 times, a protege of Senator Pot Hole, Al DiMatto.

The Sullivan Act has been in place in New York City since 1911. That's so long ago that Bat Masterson, famed as a western law man, later a sports writer, was a major critic of it. So it's ancient, from the Tammany days.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

17
wings wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:56 am As I recall, the NYT considers itself the flagship newspaper of the American Left. It is based in an urban center widely regarded as the most restrictive and non-permissive environment in the country for gun rights, and the dominant population center in a state with similar reputation.

What did you expect?

People tend to forget or ignore the NYT's convenient pro-business, pro-banking tilt and extraordinary editorial deference to and compliance with authority. Because "it's liberal." Doesn't matter if it was Biden, Trump, Obama or Bush. That attitude bleeds through to the readership, in my experience. I know a great many liberals who do not question something if it's published in the NYT. Appeals to authority and all that.

If you want a paper that will go toe-to-toe with the federal government, look to the WaPo. The Guardian is great fun. Even the LA Times. Can't be arsed with the NYT.
I can't comment on NY City or NY State, but I subscribe to the NYT and it's wearing me out with its unquestioning of it's own bias, so yeah, I agree with wings on that aspect. I accept that every source will have its own bias--but a really thorough journalistic organization should continue to question their own biases. I thought this op-ed was a fairly honest small nudge in that direction.

Lately, I'm looking to let this subscription expire. I'll look into the WaPo. Other recommendations?

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

18
My wife subscribed to NYT for awhile. She dropped it a bit back. It definitely caused me headaches when the first perspective she had on any gun related incident was shaped by NYT perspective. That’s diminished now and so have my headaches. Media matters. Even understanding wives sometimes put their gun husband’s views second to news media’s.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

19
The right wing is correct, MSM in the US has a left wing bias there have been surveys. TV networks like CNN and MSNBC give the news with a lot of commentary mixed in, it gets embarrassing and I turn it off. I like NPR and PBS, there is a left bias but it's much less than commercial stations. The wire services are less biased. The LA Times was a better newspaper when the Chandlers owned it, but it had a conservative streak now it has a left wing bend and the journalism has gone way down. Newspapers need subscribers and to get them they go after stories that interest their readers and try not to offend large businesses and interest groups. Newspapers don't have the revenue they used to have and it shows in the quality of reporting. LAT does some in depth stories but they also run wire service stories and fluff pieces to fill their pages and then there is Hollywood.

The NY Times is still the best along with WaPo, even with their left wing biases, I see it more in WaPo than NYT. The Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Philadelphia Inquirer and some other national papers still do some good reporting.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

21
YankeeTarheel wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:02 am Of course the MSM has a left-wing bias.

Because the FACTS have a left-wing bias and the "Alternative facts" have a right-wing bias. Or, as Oozy Rudy put it: "The truth isn't the truth!"
If both sides would just give us the facts without the spin and let us decide, I'd be very happy. Instead I have to read different sources and try to get all the facts. Sometimes local TV stations do a much better than newspapers. However, we have it much better than Chinese, Russian and Iranian citizens.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

23
YankeeTarheel wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:44 am But Murdoch is still poisoning the English-speaking world with lies.
Yes through his multinational newspaper ownership and other media in Australia, the US and the UK. Some are readable, but many are only good for lining the bottom of the bird cage.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

24
YT - I'm a former New Yorker. For reasons. Upstate, even. I know of what I speak. One of the reasons I came to guns later in life. NYC is a very small part of the state, but it has huge influence across the state, proportionate to population. North of White Plains, it's like the rest of Appalachia. To wit - depopulated and post-industrial. Don't get me wrong - also home to the best educated rednecks I've ever called neighbors.

NYT does not speak for upstate. It really doesn't even speak for the left. But they sure AF think they do.

Re: NY Times Opinion: I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

25
wings wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 8:38 pm YT - I'm a former New Yorker. For reasons. Upstate, even. I know of what I speak. One of the reasons I came to guns later in life. NYC is a very small part of the state, but it has huge influence across the state, proportionate to population. North of White Plains, it's like the rest of Appalachia. To wit - depopulated and post-industrial. Don't get me wrong - also home to the best educated rednecks I've ever called neighbors.

NYT does not speak for upstate. It really doesn't even speak for the left. But they sure AF think they do.
Considering I was born and raised well North of White Plains, in a colonial era riverfront town, went to college in The Southern Tier, I certainly didn't grow up in anything even vaguely resembling Appalachia, my brother still lives there, and no, it's not Appalachia. Since the NYC metro area (which includes parts of NJ and CT) has about the same pop as the State of NY, and, of the 19 million, 8.5 live in NYC, almost 3 million more live on Long Island, and 1.3 million live in Westchester and Rockland counties (NYC suburbs), it's no surprise it has an outsized influence on the state--that's nearly 13 million -- roughly +65%.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests