Posted on 02/08/2013 3:43:09 PM PST by Red Steel
Newly blue state could see red with proposed gun laws
Colorado's state legislature is the stage where one of nation's fiercest gun debates will unfold.
A state with a strong tradition of sport shooting and hunting, Colorado is also home to two of the country's deadliest mass shootings.
Recently state legislators have introduced bills on everything from universal background checks, to limiting high-capacity magazines over 10 rounds, to holding gun manufacturers and dealers liable if their products fall into dangerous hands—a bill that actually runs counter to current federal law, which protects gun makers and sellers.
"It's going to be a hard fought and nasty battle," says Tom Mauser, a gun-control activist whose son Daniel was killed at Columbine High School. "The linchpin is that Colorado's been home to two of the worst massacres and the demographics of the state are really changing."
[PICTURES: The Gun Control Debate, in Plain English]
In 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 13 at Columbine High School. In July 2012, James Holmes allegedly wounded 58 and killed 12 at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater.
In the more than a decade since Columbine, activists on both sides of the gun debate, say the political landscape of the once-Republican state has shifted dramatically. After Columbine, Colorado voters saw one new piece of gun legislation. Residents voted to close the gun show loophole in the state. But after a year where a movie theater and elementary school shooting shook the nation, it looks as if the state could be on the verge of passing a more sweeping collection of gun-control bills.
Colorado is a swing state now—President Barack Obama won there in 2012 and both state houses and the governor's mansion are controlled by Democrats.
The state's Hispanic population—a constituency that tends to favor stronger gun-control laws—has steadily climbed from 17 percent in 2000 to nearly 21 percent in 2010.
[ENJOY: Political Cartoons About Gun Control]
And out of staters have fled to Denver, one of the country's fastest growing cities.
A Denver Post poll in January showed more than 60 percent of Coloradans supported background checks, limiting high-capacity magazines and banning some types of semi-automatic weapons. While residents still back the National Rifle Association, with 56 percent saying they still see the group favorably.
The state's mixed feelings on guns trickle into the Democratic Party, which will choose just how far the state goes on controlling come semi-automatic weapons. Many Democratic lawmakers hail from suburban or rural swing districts where gun rights are still important to constituents.
And the Democrats are not yet on the same page.
"The Democratic party has tried to avoid the gun issue in Colorado for quite some time. They tinker on the margins," says Dudley Brown, the executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, a pro-gun group that opposes semi-automatic weapon bans and universal background checks. "They are not a monolithic group."
[READ: How to Protect Yourself in a Mass Shooting]
Democratic Colorado State Rep. Rhonda Fields of Aurora is at the forefront of the fight to curb gun violence. The legislator, whose son was gunned down in 2005, introduced a new series of gun laws this week.
But some, like Democratic Colorado State Rep. Ed Vigil, opposes new gun bills that limit military-style weapons, telling the Denver Post that he did not believe they would stop criminals.
The best bet here is to launch a recall drive of the weakest of the Democrat state legislators. The Democrats got control with in their house with five freshmen who are likely very nervous about keeping their seats.
So those are the first five to challenge in a recall drive. Then select several others who won only by slim margins.
If five of them defect and refuse to support anti-gun laws, then the whole ball of wax melts.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2984162/posts
The LEO in this story could have turned and walked away, but instead charged the guy with 5 felonies. Don’t be too comfortable in your belief.
According to some I’ve talked to, they “don’t care about morality.” They “only enforce the law.” Not like the police of the past. Quite a few of their political organizations, BTW, are much of the influence behind gun control, but they do like to appear to political conservatives to be conservative. Some of them even like to ask veterans if those veterans are “like Tim McVeigh.” Our country has changed.
If this is signed into law, before the ink is dry the gun banners will be back demanding a tougher law.
AW laws are just an attempt to get their anti-gun foot in the door so they can go after their real target. The same target they have been after for the last fifty years, handguns.
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest.
Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.
My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered.
And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
Latinos by and large embrace socialism. I don’t know why, but they do, and it is an historical reality. And they are not going to change.
Let’s face it, folks: the United States is fast becoming Venezuela. So, “let ‘er rip,” and let the chips fall where they may.
In exactly three words: nullification and secession.
Too many Catholic priests embrace socialistic views.
Too many Catholic priests embrace socialistic views.
I just say to Colorado: Go ahead, pass it, and watch what happens.
Hispanics are a strongly leftist voting block and one that is growing at an astounding pace. These are people that largely supported collectivist government in Mexico (returning the socialist PRI to power for 70+ years straight) and are simply voting the same way here.
If (or I should perhaps say when) the STHF, based on the demographics described above not only in CO but also in TX, AZ, and a number of other state, I predict that civil unrest & violence will be along both ideological lines (libs/socialists versus conservatives/patriots) AND along ethnic lines.....Black liberals/NAACP types/leftist Hispanics/Muslims versus Whites/Asians.
As Thomas Jefferson so accurately predicted, the tree of liberty will be watered with the blood of tyrants & their supporters, along with the blood of patriots. Who will win in this epic battle is still uncertain.
Good to know. Everyone’s going to have to choose sides. Whether they want to or not.
“There are just not enough white people moving to the GOP fast enough to offset the explosive growth of minority populations. We see the result in Colorado, and we will soon be locked out of Nevada, Virginia and even North Carolina because of this.”
The Incredible Shrinking Party...
As I’ve mentioned in a few other posts, the Republican party has now become a “regional” party rather than a national one. There are some states that are “forever lost” to the Pubbies, and others “on the verge”, such as the ones you mentioned above.
Republicans will continue to have influence in D.C. for a while longer — enough to block some legislation, but not enough to again assume the reigns of power. Kind of like the Republicans fared in California for the last 15-20 years before last November’s election which all-but wiped them out.
The best hope for conservatives is to congregate themselves into the remaining red states, in enough numbers so that their strength therein will be secure, at least for the next few decades.
After that...?
“Too many Catholic priests embrace socialistic views.”
There is much truth in that statement.
The best hope for conservatives is to congregate themselves into the remaining red states, in enough numbers so that their strength therein will be secure, at least for the next few decades.
Sadly, this is about how I suspect things will play out.
After that...?
I think if this scenario plays out it spells the decline of America. The country will remain, but the great experiment will be over. Asia would likely be the future - China and India in particular. Who knows, they may copy some of what America did right and continue to shed the socialist polices that kept those countries down for so long.
In many ways the best hope is that the left oversteps sooner rather than later and causes an uprising of traditional and conservative people. Maybe such a thing would capture the imagination of the greater public and change the course of history. I doubt that will happen though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.