Bloomberg anti-gun ad marks second anniversary of Arizona shooting
In the new television ad, Roxanna Green holds a photo of her nine-year-old daughter, Christina, who was killed in Tucson shooting rampage on January 8, 2011.
January 8th, 2013
03:39 AM ET
10 years ago

Bloomberg anti-gun ad marks second anniversary of Arizona shooting

(CNN) – This mother’s passionate plea for gun control will air in living rooms around the country on the second anniversary of her daughter’s death.

“My nine-year old daughter was murdered in the Tuscon shooting,” says Roxanna Green. “I have one question for our political leaders: when will you find the courage to stand up to the gun lobby?”

“Whose child has to die next?”

Her daughter Christina was among the six killed and 13 wounded in the shooting at neighborhood event with then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords on January 8, 2011. Giffords was among those wounded and who eventually resigned from Congress to focus on her recovery. Jared Lee Loughner pleaded guilty in August to 19 counts related to the shooting.

But Green remembers her daughter, the youngest victim of the shooting, and calls for action in a new television ad from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

His group also enlisted celebrities to star in a recent video supporting the effort to “Demand a Plan” for action on gun control.

Green’s daughter was a few years older than the 20 six- and seven-year-olds killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, at a shooting there December 14.

That shooting sparked a new wave of calls for gun control, including from leaders in Washington. President Barack Obama pledged “meaningful action” against gun violence and appointed Vice President Joe Biden to lead the effort.

Bloomberg applauded Obama’s statement and urged him to take “immediate steps.” On Monday, Bloomberg outlined his platform, including strengthening background check requirements and banning assault weapons. The assault weapons ban was enacted in 1994, but expired in 2004, and has not been renewed.

The influential National Rifle Association argued the Newtown shooting made the case for armed guards in schools as a line of defense.

The ad will run on cable in Washington, beginning Tuesday and will air through January 14 – the one month anniversary of the Newtown shooting. Obama set the end of January as the deadline for Biden’s group to report back.

It will run Tuesday only in Tuscon, Arizona, as well as other cities affected by gun violence: Binghamton, New York; Fargo, North Dakota; Roanoke, Virginia; and Waco, Texas; Denver and Milwaukee. In Tuscon, the group says the ad will run around 10:10 a.m. local time, to mark when the shooting occurred.

Also Tuesday, Giffords and her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, launched a new website, "Americans for Responsible Solutions." The new effort will "encourage elected officials to stand up for solutions to prevent gun violence and protect responsible gun ownership," according to the website. The couple further marked the day by co-authoring an op-ed in "USA Today."

"We can't be naive about what it will take to achieve the most common-sense solutions," the op-ed states. "We can't just hope that the last shooting tragedy will prevent the next. Achieving reforms to reduce gun violence and prevent mass shootings will mean matching gun lobbyists in their reach and resources."

Bloomberg’s ad encourages people to sign an online petition on the group’s website.

Christina, the nine-year-old, was remembered at her funeral as the only girl on her Little League team – and one aspiring to the major leagues. She attended the Giffords event after her election to the middle school student council.

“To every mother, we can not wait,” Green says in the ad. “We have to demand a plan.”

- CNN’s Ashley Killough contributed to this report

READ MORE: Bloomberg: Biden no 'shrinking violet' on gun control

soundoff (317 Responses)
  1. tony

    "which is really worse, 20 killed by a deranged monster with a gun, or 700 killed by their own parents who are to lazy to supervise them swimming"

    What you are saying is that 20 extra kid deaths aren't worth preventing? Perhaps we should allow pedestrians on the freeways too?

    January 8, 2013 10:59 am at 10:59 am |
  2. justageek

    @DH – I wonder if you'd be upset at the car bought legally, the alcohol bought legally or the illegally drunk driver if they ran into you?

    January 8, 2013 11:00 am at 11:00 am |
  3. The Real Tom Paine

    -Steve- Illinois

    Libs demand more gun laws, but when a lib "reporter" breaks an existing gun law on national t.v., this crime should be ignored because he had no intention of committing a violent crime. But...........if you are a law abiding, gun owning commoner, you should be viewed as a threat to everyone around you.
    P.S. David Gregory sends his kids to a school with armed guards, but to suggest your kids go to a school with armed guards is complete lunacy.

    The hypocrisy of the libs is astounding.
    Columbine had an armed guard: now, exactly how did that work out again? The ignorance and selective memory of conservatives is astounding, along with their selfishness and arrogance.

    January 8, 2013 11:01 am at 11:01 am |
  4. Larry L


    Major Nadal Hassan killed 16 people at Ft. Hood. Hassan did not stop killing people because he ran out of ammo or killed himself. Base security forces approached and engaged Hassan with their weapons. Hassan was permanently disabled and awaits court-martial.

    It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. If you take the good guy out of the equation, what do you have left?
    Nonsense. He used an FN Five-seven semi-automatic pistol and fired many, many rounds from his extra, pre-loaded magazines. Some of them had 20 and 30 round capacities. In addition to the dead I believe about 29 were wounded. He was coached in a local gun shop by a person you would consider a "good guy". Several other "good guys" were shot trying to stop him – some had firearms. The extreme availability of the weapon, and the capability of the weapon and magazines simply made his crime easier.

    Your tired N.R.A. sound bite doesn't answer the question: Why do civilians need high capacity and high capability weapons? No more mindless sound bites please... If you think they're need for seditious purposes at least have the courage to state that intent. That's all that makes sense.

    January 8, 2013 11:03 am at 11:03 am |
  5. justageek

    @tony – Certainly those 20 extra kids deaths are horrible. Problem is you cannot prevent *ALL* bad things from happening to *ALL* people. You will reach diminishing returns and it is no longer practical to continue as bad as that sounds.

    January 8, 2013 11:05 am at 11:05 am |
  6. NickAnast

    James Flowers - 40% of all LEGAL gun purchases are made without a background check being conducted because of the gun-show and Internet loophole. And to suggest that assault rifles are "very rare" in America ignores the fact that they are used in most of the mass shootings that take place in the country. It is no coincidence that 6 of the 12 deadliest mass murders in the United States have occurred since the assault weapons ban expired in 2004.

    By the way, it would cost $6.5 BILLION to put an armed guard in every elementary, middle, and high school in the country. Who is going to pay for that? (I suggest a tax on all ammunition and gun sales to pay for it.)

    January 8, 2013 11:05 am at 11:05 am |
  7. bs1

    When your politicians try to stand up to the "gun lobby", all 70,000,000+ of us, they will loose their jobs. When you irrationally attack the constitutional rights of a huge segment of the US population, based on the crimes of a tiny handfull of mentally ill people you will never accomplish anything constructive. The "gun control" you advocate is litterally less rational than calling for a ban on cars since a tiny portion of drivers kill innocent civilians each year through their criminal drunk driving.

    January 8, 2013 11:07 am at 11:07 am |
  8. Larry in Houston

    @Kevin @ 10:55 am – – – I agree – wish everyone would read your post . . . also, can you imagine if every teacher had a gun in their classroom in every school in this country ? What if a group of kids ends up surrounding or taking down that teacher in any particular classroom – to get to that gun ? If we armed every school in this country, there would be a lot of "stolen" guns. The answer to "arming" this or that – or him or her, is absurd.

    January 8, 2013 11:07 am at 11:07 am |
  9. enuff_stupidity

    Enuff of this fear mongering about guns! Evil people will still do evil things...PERIOD! We can outlaw evil or stupid, so lets out law the products evil stupid people use...brilliant! Lets outlaw gasoline too...just yesterday a man set his wife and child on fire while they slept...

    January 8, 2013 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  10. The Real Tom Paine


    Wow the propaganda– Does anyone actually think that putting in place the same lock step laws that have done nothing will actually work??? This administration has put more guns in the hands of people who have never owned a gun than the NRA could ever dream of. Do you know why??? We now fear the government more than the criminals- Whay to go progressives!
    Over 10,000 people with felony convictions were caught trying to purchase guns legally while the assault weapons ban was in place. This, while the NRA was screaming about the ATF being jackbooted thugs and defending David Koresh's right to molest little girls. The NRA will defend the right of anyone, regardless of of how sick or deranged they are, to be able to get a gun: only after a slaughter do they pretend to care, long enough for the sales to spike up and they can get more donations.

    January 8, 2013 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  11. justageek

    @NickAnast – I'm not sure I agree with the paid guard at a school arguement the NRA about all the folks that are wanting to do something go and volunteer?

    January 8, 2013 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  12. Rudy NYC

    Joe from CT, not Lieberman

    I hate to say this, but until a Conservative Congressman or Senator loses a child to gun violence, nothing will happen.
    Actually, that has almost come to pass and nothing has happened to do anything about it. I cite the Brady Bill. The POTUS was shot and nearly killed, yet the gun lobbies in this country fought hard against sensible gun restrictions and controls on either the weapons or the owners. The Reagan shooting only gave rise to the argument that the 2nd Amendment grants rights to individuals, not organized militias, that an individual can be be a one man militia. God help us, save us from those who do not wish to save themselves from themselves.

    January 8, 2013 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  13. JIM M


    When your politicians try to stand up to the "gun lobby", all 70,000,000+ of us, they will loose their jobs. When you irrationally attack the constitutional rights of a huge segment of the US population, based on the crimes of a tiny handfull of mentally ill people you will never accomplish anything constructive. The "gun control" you advocate is litterally less rational than calling for a ban on cars since a tiny portion of drivers kill innocent civilians each year through their criminal drunk driving

    I guess the "rights" of those 20 5 & 6 yr olds don't matter as long as you have your guns?

    January 8, 2013 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  14. The Real Tom Paine


    Sorry for your loss, Ms. Green but more children are killed in car accidents in one day than in years by handguns. Should we outlaw cars that are over 5 years old, outlaw cars without side airbags or just simply outlaw cars ? How about fertilizer? That was the weapon of choice for Timothy McVeigh. Should we say tough luck to the farmers and outlaw fertizler? How about knives? If knives were outlawed, Nicole Simpson would still be alive and O.J. would still be doing rental car commercials. Life is hard people. Life is not fair. Although 95% of life is great, there will always be tragedies.......and there will always be people there to capitalize on those tragedies and use them to further their agenda.
    So, roll over and do nothing? Libertarian?

    January 8, 2013 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  15. Anonymous

    These very tired arguments by people who "like" their assault weapons are funny. It's not called a "Defense weapon" its called an assault weapon, and you use it to assault people. If you think you're gunna defend yourself "from the gub'mint" with an assault rifle, remember the 'gub'mint' has trained snipers, drones, and other things to take you and your pea shooter out. Argument invalid. If you think that more guns on the streets only end up in the hands of 'the good guys', ask Mexico how that's going. Argument invalid. This USA-centric thoguht process of gun ownership is laughable. Forget just the USA, think about the rest of the world where our guns go. The Congo, Yemen, Mexico, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria.

    We are arming the world, and gun violence is the highest its ever been. yes, your silly idea that "good guys with guns get the bad guys with guns" sounds really good when you say it, but the reality is you're pretty stupid, or ignorant, or a combo of the two to think that actually works. you're being duped by arms dealers AND the government.

    More kids will die, more mass murders will happen, and you're just going to accept this as "The price of freedom". Nobody EVER suggested banning ALL FIREARMS. We're asking that you exercise some damned tact and admit that you don't need a bloody ASSAULT rifle (again, Assault is the OPPOSITE of defense!). Grow up. Please.

    You do not need it to hunt food.
    You do not need it for home defense.
    You do not need it to be 'cool'.
    You do not need it to fight your own government.
    You do not need it to do anything.

    January 8, 2013 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  16. The Mayor of Medinah

    Children are being slaughtered everyday in our inner cities by senseless gang violence, but our nation refuses to discuss the urban terrorism that is going on over gang turf. Every day in the Presidents home town 2 or 3 poeple are murdered or shot.

    January 8, 2013 11:17 am at 11:17 am |
  17. Wilson

    So making guns illegal will take them off the street? We should make heroine and meth illegal too!!

    January 8, 2013 11:19 am at 11:19 am |
  18. Canuck

    "American priorities. In other words none of Canada or Britions business."

    Whatever, it's your country. It all boils down to what kind of society you want to live in, doesn't it???

    January 8, 2013 11:19 am at 11:19 am |
  19. tony

    Can I assume all the employees of the NRA headquarters (Wash DC?) are carrying concealed loaded handguns, or maybe even semi-automatic rifles? Hundreds of men and women in one building?

    January 8, 2013 11:20 am at 11:20 am |
  20. dd

    Chicago has tough guns laws- tough gun laws. Chicago had 500 murders last year and 500 kids were shot. Gun laws give guns to the criminals and make the innocent watch their children get slaughtered. You want a tough gun law – execute anyone guilty of committing any crime while in possession of a gun.

    January 8, 2013 11:21 am at 11:21 am |
  21. Evilpog

    Face the cultural fact that our founders thought it important enough to grant the right to own arms as the 2nd priority to the freedom of speech and those priorities still run deep to this date in our culture. In addition the majority of American's in general don't trust the Federal government and why should they when considering everything from experimentation on citizens, imminent domain for business, bailing out the banks, subsidized exporting of jobs, and un-necessary wars from Vietnam to Iraq. This distrust only reinforces the demands for arms to protect themselves from improbable, but not impossible threat.
    Regardless of the merit for banning firearms by the gun control lobby and considering our cultures demand the only real result will be “drug war” like affair with arms providers outside the United States smuggling the guns at possibly absurd levels of collateral damage to the countries those illegal arms will pass through. I guess its better that we add to the 48k dead in Mexico if it might keep the occasional mass shooting from happening which by the way statistically isn’t significant compared to how many people are killed with hammers a year.

    January 8, 2013 11:23 am at 11:23 am |
  22. Washington Is Out Of Touch with reality

    just a thought, if guns were not part of the history of the United States, then we would not be the United States but a part of England. There would be no constitution, there would not be any washington dc, there would be no congress or president, just a king or a dictator, just a thought, so take away the guns and guess what happens.

    January 8, 2013 11:23 am at 11:23 am |
  23. Oakspar77777

    (1) Americans NEED assault rifles because that is what our government is armed with and the People should be better armed than the government. Very few Americans, however, own assault rifles because they are heavily regulated, limited in number, and usually cost between 10 and 30 thousand dollars. "Assault Weapons" (a fictional term) are not select (fully automatic) fire cosmetic copies. American citizens need them only because they are denied their rights to arms themselves as the founders intended. So the question is not "why does the citizen need so much gun" but rather "why is the citizen restricted to so little." The default state of America is freedom and trust in the people, not slavery and trust in the government.

    (2) Bloomberg is guarded with armed guards. The President is guarded with armed guards (as is his wife and children in school). These people refuse to give up their armed guards and yet expect us to give up our armed defense (note that they are often guarded by people with weapons forbidden to citizens, like the select fire Assault Rifle and Auto-Pistol). They are not against guns, they are against the People whom they do not trust.

    (3) Bloomberg already abused his power to regulate the size cup your Coke comes in, because his power and money have led him to getting off on controling the lives of other. It brings him joy when his subjects do service to his will. That he will use the emotional death of a sweet child to get his way, only shows the immoral lengths he will go to. What I wonder, however, is why this girl, and not the dozens of children gunned down every year on the streets of America's most gun restricted city (Chicago).

    (4) Bloomberg is the head of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns comission, so obviously, he has tied his brand and power to illegalizing guns. If guns were free (to own, not in cost) as the founders intended, that would be one less place for him to exercise his power over others. There is no weapon that is illegal in the fight to defend your life, your family, and your country from tyrrany foriegn or domestic.

    January 8, 2013 11:24 am at 11:24 am |
  24. Rudy NYC


    When your politicians try to stand up to the "gun lobby", all 70,000,000+ of us, they will loose their jobs. When you irrationally attack the constitutional rights of a huge segment of the US population, based on the crimes of a tiny handfull of mentally ill people you will never accomplish anything constructive. The "gun control" you advocate is litterally less rational than calling for a ban on cars since a tiny portion of drivers kill innocent civilians each year through their criminal drunk driving.
    You need a serious reality check. At least drunk driving is actually illegal, and there isn't a DC lobby out there lobbying for laws that agressviely promotes drunk driving and advocates for more.

    The NRA is not concerned about individual freedoms, but rather selling more guns. The NRA solution to drunk drivers would be to get rid of drunk driving legislation and encourage more people to drink and drive.

    January 8, 2013 11:25 am at 11:25 am |
  25. Shardik

    "When will you find the courage to stand up to the gun lobby?"

    Bears repeating.

    January 8, 2013 11:26 am at 11:26 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13