They described the attack as having a "machine gun type of shot". I can see the backlash coming already.....

Politician shot dead at City Hall
By Paul Thomasch


NEW YORK (Reuters) - A gunman in the public gallery of New York City Hall's council chamber has shot dead a politician dedicated to stamping out gun violence, striking in the middle of a council meeting.


Officials said the gunman himself later died of bullet wounds. Radio reports said a security officer had shot him.


The officials said the assailant pulled out a gun on the balcony of the second floor City Hall chamber, one of the most tightly guarded buildings in America's most populous city, shortly after 2 p.m. on Wednesday and killed councilman James Davis, 41.


"This is a terrible attack not just on two people but it is an attack on democracy," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. "It is not terrorism. It appeared to be a random act."


Bloomberg was in his ground floor office at the time of the shooting, but he was unharmed. The businessman-turned-politician became mayor in January 2002, just months after the September 11 hijacked plane attacks that killed about 3,000 people and destroyed the World Trade Centre blocks from City Hall in lower Manhattan.


Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. of Queens told NY1 TV that Davis, a black politician from Brooklyn and retired New York police officer, had campaigned to stop violence in black neighbourhoods.


HIGH SECURITY


New York has been on highest security alert since the September 11 attacks and it was not clear how anyone could have passed through City Hall metal detectors with a gun. However, staff in the building said people familiar to security officers can enter without checks.


"How could this have happened at City Hall? You tell me that," Davis's irate brother Jeffrey Davis said to reporters.


Council members described chaos inside the chamber.


"I heard a loud boom and 20 to 30 shots fired," Councilman David Weprin told reporters. "It was a machinegun type of shot. Afterwards it looked like a war zone."


Legislators, their staff, the mayor's staff, visitors and reporters fled the building after the shooting, which took place during a council discussion on whether to approve public pay toilets.


Several other witnesses said a man opened fire into the council chamber from the balcony, which was crowded with about 100 people.


City Hall was evacuated, the surrounding park and streets were cordoned off by police and nearby Brooklyn Bridge and the Manhattan Bridge were closed.

Another load of BS headed our way...

Where have you two BEEN all day?
There are already two threads on this.

oops - didn't see them!

And that gun control politicial had a gun on him when he was killed.  Was his gun legal or not?  Was the shooters gun legal or not?

You guys are missing some of the biggest irony here.

In the heart of a heavily gun controlled city, at heightened security after 9/11, in a building with extreme security, a man smuggles in a gun and kills a politician.

Hmmm.  What in heavens name good are gun control laws if even there people aren't safe?  Armed guards.  Metal detectors at all entrances.  Seems as if they FAILED.  So where are we safe?

Sure hope the rest of the nation doesn't follow NYCs lead on this subject.

now there's another irony for you: An anti-gun politician packing a gun.

The shooter was a political enemy of the council member killed.  They walked in together...council members don't have to go through the metal detectors or be searched.  They both had guns on them.  Were they legal?

Have to wonder if Dianne Feinstein feels the same way?

Of course both of the political figures were armed and legal, they just want to keep the guns away from the little people. One reason they have so much crime in NY is that the thugs know most of the citizens are unarmed and therefore easy prey.

Hypocrisy at it's finest, it would appear.

Jimmy got a point, and that is point I express.

The politician killed was a former cop, he has a CCW for his handgun, the killer walked in with the killed politician and because the killed politician was a council, he and his guess did not have to go throught the detector. the killer did not have a legal CCW.

That's usually the way it goes. The anti-gunners will always(they figure) find a way to have THEIR guns. I remember a few years ago someone broke into the home of a notorious anti-gun editorialist(I think it was Carl Rowan???), and was shot with a ruger 22 pistol by the aforementioned anti-gun columnist. I'm sure Dear old Dianne doesn't catch herself unarmed either.....just wants us to be. [rolleyes]

Councilman James E. Davis of Brooklyn, was shot to death by a gunman, and political rival, he knew.  The political rival, had not been able to file his eligibility for election paperwork in time to run in the next election, and had stated publicly, he would support Davis, in the next election.  Councilman Davis was a retired Police Officer, and as such retained the right to carrya firearm, and did so.
As a councilman he was not required to pass through the magnetometer, his guest was, but apparently as a courtesy, Davis asked that he be allowed to slide.
He was no Feinstein, BTW.  He was "anti-violence" (his term).  One of his key platforms was the marching for police violence, the witch hunts of discrimination, etc.  must stop until black on black crime was s topped.  He felt the inner city communities were responsible for "policing" themselves and cleaning up their own acts before going outside the community to blame others for their problems, when they couldn't even stop each other from killling themselves.  Preety healthy outook I'd say.
He never took a staunch stance on Gun control 1 way or th other.  Its not really an issue often decided at the citycouncil level, and were no votes I can think of while he was in office.
BTW, the Brooklyn Democratic council, did not support Davis in his electio because his views were not strictly along party lines, he was a maverick.
He knew the value of being armed and accordingly, at least philosophically, did not object through personal security though he use of arms.  What he would have done to make poitical allegiances later on, I do not know, nor do you.
I knew James E. Davis.  I know his former partner who is in mourning currently.  The loss of a human being's life can ot be summed up by a news articles paraphrasing of his life.  I just thought, he should be survived, by at least some truth.  For what its worth, a good guy.

Does anyone have a link to a news website where I can read the story?

I'VE HAD ENOUGH!!!! WE MUST BAN TOGETHER AND PUT AN END TO THIS POLITICAL VIOLENCE!

BAN POLITICIANS!!!! FOR THE CHILDREN

Tropic

Ok sulaco...now why did the guy shoot him?

They were aquaintances.
GG

They were acquaintances.  In fact the shooter originally intended to run against Davis.  When that wasn't going to pan out, he claimed to have thrown his support in behind Davis.  Davis, in fact, that very day, after allowing the perp. into City Hall as his guest introduced the shooter to other council members as, someone that was going to run against him, but had changed sides to support him.  The shooter asked to acompany Davis to City Hall as an intro to that world.  Throwing his support behind Davis, he asked if Davis would "show him the ropes", or mentor him even if that meant that at a later time he would run against Davis.  Davis was that kind, he welcomed the competition, in fact he did not consider the shooter a serious "political" threat.  It has been speculated since the shooting that the two had private communications, in fact one "source" has speculated that the question was posed to Davis, if Davis was unable to finish his term, would he allow the shooter to finish it for him.  Apparently the shooter was somewhat unfamiliar w/ the full intricacies of the city council process, as am I.  The two were seen on tape, in a"heated" discussion in and around City Hall.  Unfortunately, the recording was made sans audio.
At this time, motive is still not securely determined.  Unfortunately truely determining motive may prove difficult as the shooter has been described as reclusive.  And anything that makes sense to any of us, clearly, didn't make sense to the shooter.  So if murder, why in public.  If both murder and a quest for fame, OK, but certainly not the elimination of political competition.  Unknown.  But if you'd like I'll watch it locally and let you know.

Given the odd circumstances of their relationship, it will be telling if mental illness &/or substance use/abuse contributed.

Too bad Dianne F. doesn't swing more toward Davis' personal opinion/attitude about guns in modern America. She is most definitely a power-tripping hypocrite, & will surely chime in on the rhetoric that follows this.