Bloomberg Calls for Basketball Control in Wake of Harlem Shootings

Posted by on Jul 26, 2012 at 6:47 am
rucker

Another late night basketball game, another shooting. How much longer must this go on? Earlier this week a 4-year-old boy was murdered at a Bronx basketball game, and now another night of carnage rocked Manhattan Wednesday as five people were shot following a game at Harlem’s Rucker Park.

Five people were shot last night at a basketball game at Harlem’s famed Rucker Park where ex-Knicks guard Nate Robinson was among those scrambling for safety during the chaos, authorities and witnesses said.

The mayhem broke loose just before 11 p.m. at the courts on West 155th Street and Eighth Avenue during the annual Entertainers Basketball Classic, which has featured numerous NBA superstars.

“All of a sudden the game stopped because an argument broke out in the stands,” said witness Rodney Harris Jr., 47, who was five feet from the melee.

“The next thing you know one guy reaches into his pants pocket and pulled out a gun. He fired one shot into the crowd and then another,” Harris said.

Reached for comment behind his armor-plated fortress, a shaken Mayor Bloomberg reacted:

“It’s quite obvious we need a moratorium on late night basketball games,” said Bloomberg, “and I urge our leaders in Washington to begin cracking down on basketball sales. Why does anyone need more than one basketball?”

Bloomberg, under fire recently for suggesting police should go on strike and thirsty New Yorkers be limited to 16 ounces of their choice of beverage, dismissed suggestions that basketball control was the answer.

“Are you stupid? You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see how violent basketball makes people. We really need a federal database of basketball purchases, along with background checks at sporting goods stores.

“What’s more, there were several anecdotal reports of Big Gulps being consumed by the shooter,” Bloomberg said. “It’s obvious caffeine also played a role in this tragedy.”

Here’s a clip of the mayhem in Harlem.

Meanwhile, the NYPD, having refused Bloomberg’s calls to abandon their posts so he could have his way on gun control, arrested a “youth” that could look like Obama’s son if he had one for the murder of the child Sunday night.

A 17-year-old described by neighbors as a “demon” and “f—ing punk” was charged with murder yesterday in the death of a 4-year-old Bronx boy at a charity basketball game.
Rondell Pinkerton “deserves what he got,” said a man who knows him from the same Morrisania housing project where little Lloyd Morgan was shot in the head and two others were wounded Sunday night.

“He is a f—ing punk. He is a bad kid. He has a bad attitude.”

A woman who also knows Pinkerton from the Forest Houses said, “I have no sympathy for him. He is the devil. He is a demon. Some kids are bad and disrespectful — he is one of them.”

Civil rights icon and MSNBC star Al Sharpton was unavailable for comment.

By the way, if it’s not clear enough, we’re being satirical spoofing on Bloomberg, but considering his behavior of late, it’s not really a stretch.

18 Responses to “Bloomberg Calls for Basketball Control in Wake of Harlem Shootings”

  1. huerfano on 26/26/12 at 10:43 am

    Al Sharpton was busy trash talking Chik-Fil-A on MSNBC. Because gay is the new black and he’s looking to expand his audience.

  2. MWR on 26/26/12 at 10:47 am

    It’s so nice to hear neighbors referring to Rondell Pinkerton as a “demon” and a “punk.” I’m so sick of hearing gang bangers and lousy hoodlums described as, “He’s a good kid! He made a mistake!”

    Can I ask, too, why Midnight Basketball exists? I mean, yes, I KNOW why it exists — to keep kids off the streets and give them something positive on which to focus their energies. But my question has always been, what are kids doing roaming the streets at midnight ANYWAY? Shouldn’t the parents make sure they’re in bed?

    HAH! I know, I know. These kids are lucky if they have ONE parent, let alone plural parents, and luckier still if that parent gives a damn about them. Seems to me THAT’S the problem, not the guns.

  3. SouthTexas on 26/26/12 at 11:10 am

    Al Sharpton was busy trash talking Chik-Fil-A on MSNBC. Because gay is the new black and he’s looking to expand his audience.

    Is Al coming out of the closet?

  4. SirIzakNuton on 26/26/12 at 11:19 am

    Jammie: for a minute, I thought you were getting your Mayor Bloomberg quotes from the Onion! Of course, these idiotic statements were NOT from that publication.

    New Yorkers: you sure elected a real winner there, didn’t you?

  5. Rich K on 26/26/12 at 11:54 am

    Is it just me or does that look like one of Hillary’s Villages she used to tout in her book. Yep, thats one civilized bunch of folk that is.

  6. Blue Hen on 26/26/12 at 1:07 pm

    Ifr the very rev Al does weigh in on the violence, it’ll be to pass out more ammunition. He triggered deadly riots in NY.

  7. @PurpAv on 26/26/12 at 1:44 pm

    I thought “midnight basketball” was supposed to cut down on crime. Maybe the shooter didn’t get the memo

  8. John Cunningham on 26/26/12 at 3:32 pm

    If Nanny Bloomberg thinks it is such a great idea for people to go around unarmed, how about if he drops his NYPD bodyguard detail, and his private armed guards, and go around like one of the peons he scorns?

  9. RK on 26/26/12 at 4:24 pm

    I don’t think you should consider a full-time career as a comic; because this is not funny at all.

    However, it is easy to see it as a stunted jab at Bloomberg for suggesting that there is a serious problem with gun violence, and we need to have a national conversation on how to improve life by reducing these violent attacks and resulting casualties.

    I would be surprised if most Americans are not at all comfortable at this kind of commentary about the tragedy of Aurora in this way.

    But I suppose it can make some feel proud, in some unusual way.

  10. whatever on 26/26/12 at 4:54 pm

    RK
    Bloomberg doesn’t want a national conversation on how to improve life he wants to remove people’s freedoms. Do you think thqt the criminals here were in legal possession of their guns? In case you’ve been under a rock, the majority of gun crimes are by people illegally possessing and almost every gun massacre has been in a place that doesn’t allow carrying firearms.

    The extra dipshittery of Bloomberg is suggesting that cops go on strike to somehow teach people a lesson.

  11. RK on 26/26/12 at 5:29 pm

    Its a good thing we’re all entitled to our own opinions.

    I doubt there is any way to factually show that Bloomberg really “wants to remove people’s freedoms”, as you claim.

    Have you considered the difference that might occur if random individuals were not so easily able to acquire massive ammunition stock-piles, and assault-style weapons, that there just might be a reduction in violent casualties?

    Or do you think that either ignoring the problem is appropriate or that resigning ourselves that NOTHING can improve these events are rational responses?

    I sometimes feel like I’m standing in a crowd of the proverbial ostriches, with their heads in the sand, waiting for everything to magically happen without effort.

    I just happen to think that those who are looking to solve this problem are, if not interfered with, going have a considerable chance to improve American life and reduce such violent events.

    BTW, in the interview I saw, Bloomberg didn’t discuss “that cops go on strike to somehow teach people a lesson.” He was appealing to citizens to engage legislators to take steps so that the police are more protected from dangerous situations when they are busy protecting US.

    I can see the logic in the police not wanting to face unnecessary danger, made more so by citizens not looking out for police force safety. Perhaps this doesn’t resonate with others as much, and their opinions about police safety/danger are different.

  12. jukin on 27/27/12 at 12:23 pm

    “I doubt there is any way to factually show that Bloomberg really “wants to remove people’s freedoms”, as you claim.”

    No smokes..anywhere.
    No salt.
    No sodas.
    No guns.
    No freedom of speech.

    No restrictions from Bl00mberg, None at all. Leftists wonder why we don’t think they are intelligent or not telling the truth.

  13. Rob Crawford on 27/27/12 at 12:26 pm

    “I doubt there is any way to factually show that Bloomberg really “wants to remove people’s freedoms”, as you claim.”

    You aren’t that well informed, are you? Bloomberg’s term as mayor has been marked by repeatedly removing people’s freedoms. You can’t use certain forms of cooking oil in NYC, they’re going the same path with table salt, *and* are seeking to ban soft drinks above a certain size. He’s made similar comments about alcohol.

    “I just happen to think that those who are looking to solve this problem are, if not interfered with, going have a considerable chance to improve American life and reduce such violent events.”

    You *believe* that to be true, despite centuries of evidence to the contrary.

    “BTW, in the interview I saw, Bloomberg didn’t discuss “that cops go on strike to somehow teach people a lesson.”

    You saw one interview, so quoting Bloomberg saying something in a different interview is invalid?

    BTW — the police have no duty to protect you; that’s YOUR responsibility. There’s actually a Supreme Court ruling saying this.

  14. RK on 27/27/12 at 2:45 pm

    jukin – Thanks for the reply. As the thread was discussing guns, I naturally applied that context to the whole Bloomberg freedom question, and I believe my comment still makes sense under that scenario.

    Now that the context has been expanded, I can offer my perspective. Apparently the “no salt” issue is not entirely well named by you. “lower salt” might be more accurate.

    As found on CNN, here is something apparently noncontroversial, which seems beneficial to me:

    An excess of salt can also lead to some health problems. In January 2010, Bloomberg unveiled a plan to cut the amount of salt in packaged and restaurant food by 25% over a five-year period.

    Similarly, “no soda” is actually “no BIG soda”. Having a personal soda and weight issue, I see the value in this idea. I might think about a health tax to cover future public health costs due to “big” soda,as an alternative plan. Perhaps other ideas can be found as well.

    “No guns” is unknown to me; the current topic seems to be no big ammo clips and perhaps no assault-style weapons. As a whole topic, it seems that we have a problem with violence and guns, and we will need all of us to come together to find ways to improve this aspect of American life. I’d hope we can all agree on the problem, and move forward towards acceptable changes.

    The free speech item has me at a loss; so I’d need more info to consider that.

  15. RK on 27/27/12 at 2:45 pm

    Rob,

    Thanks for a response. As I just noted to jukin, the point I was making regarding loss of freedom was about guns.

    As far as “repeatedly removing people’s freedoms”, I’m not convinced of the severity or nature of these proposals vis-a-vis freedom. After all, one could simply leave NYC to regain whatever freedom was lost, or even stockpile substances at home for personal use.

    “Centuries of evidence” as a reference point seems a bit vague, and I guess I’m perhaps a bit more optimistic that Americans can improve there lot in life if the vision and effort inspire change. I guess there are “Centuries of evidence” that we’ve already accomplished good things; I expect that to continue.

    If there are competing comments from Bloomberg in separate interviews, that would be a new matter. If anyone had a new link, that would help. Just to be clear, I never came close to mentioning or suggesting anything about invalidating anything. I simply told what I saw.

    Finally, as far as police protection and personal responsibility; remember I was paraphrasing Bloomberg’s thoughts. I must say your comment on police responsibility certainly does intrigue me.

  16. Rob Crawford on 27/27/12 at 5:54 pm

    “An excess of salt can also lead to some health problems.”

    Actually, no — salt’s fine so long as you have healthy kidneys. More recent research has over turned that old conclusion. Sadly, while that more recent research is over a decade old, the old information still gets pushed around.

    “I’m not convinced of the severity or nature of these proposals vis-a-vis freedom.”

    Why should I give a rip how you evaluate the “severity” of restrictions on people’s liberty?

    “I guess there are “Centuries of evidence” that we’ve already accomplished good things; I expect that to continue.”

    By making people less free? By punishing the innocent and law-abiding because you fear what criminals do?

    I think people can improve their lot in life by taking responsibility for things like protecting themselves, by not expecting others to do it for them. If thugs knew they ran the risk of being shot by their victim, they’d be less likely to act on their thuggish impulses — and that would protect even those who don’t want to own a gun.

    “I must say your comment on police responsibility certainly does intrigue me.”

    No doubt; personal responsibility if often a shock to some people.

  17. TomK on 29/29/12 at 2:25 pm

    I thought this was satire, but I had just read about Mayor Bloomberg’s “Latch On NYC” program, which promotes breast feeding by making it harder to get formula, so I wasn’t sure. I wasn’t certain that THAT wasn’t a parody, but it’s being reported at multiple sites.

  18. David Kramer on 1/01/12 at 9:46 pm

    I am glad that murder and gun possession is illegal, whehhhh, that could have been a close call.