[Red Steel]

Ping

[Darksheare]

Sure, only if it applied ONLY to elected officials.

[43north]

Oops! She let the details leak. Should have just passed the bil so THEN people could see what was in it.

By the way hon, do you know which end of the gun the bullet comes out? I doubt that a lot of your democRAT colleagues do.

[jwsea55]

A Colorado Democrat who wanted to prevent individuals suspected of posing a threat...

A threat to who?

[bravo whiskey]

no mistake. she just got caught. another meaningless explanation from a denvercrat idiot.

[Cowboy Bob]

Democrats pose a threat (to my liberty). Should they be banned from owning a gun?

[mountainlion]

CU shrink told about the danger of the theater killer to def ears. There were many warning signs ignored at Columbine. DemoRATS do posses superior STUPIDITY.

[skimbell]

"A Colorado Democrat who wanted to prevent individuals suspected of posing a threat from possessing a gun..."

Another Democrat! Boy that's a surprise. Ever notice that every last one of these dam gun-grabber bills comes from a slimy phakin' Democrat? The party ought to be outlawed and every last one of the miserable SOB's voted out of office.

The Democrat Party is just plain un-American.

[HOYA97]

Rep. Beth McCann needs to be recalled. I have heard that others are in the early stages of being recalled.

[txrefugee]

Democrat women pose the greatest threat to the nation because they are totally clueless about liberty. They are a walking, talking argument against women’s suffrage.

[DJ MacWoW]

It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it.

Click The Pic To Donate

[familyop]

"Dave Kopel, a law professor and research director at the Independence Institute, a libertarian think tank in Denver, said McCann’s earlier bill raised concerns about due process rights...He said the bill could be 'a really good idea' if it was significantly revised to include 'a fair hearing first with the burden of proof on the government.'"

Thanks, Red.

I disagree with the libertarian law professor. Courts would be highly improper to convict or adjudicate people as being guilty of being suspected of being dangerous in the future or even of being dangerous in the future. And libs complain about others committing the Slippery Slope fallacy.

Presenting a danger in the past would be irrelevant to any such legislative effort. There are already many laws for punishing those who presented some danger or other in the past.

With a law such as that mentioned in the article, libertarian/Libertarian or other fascist/commie groups would be more dangerous and criminal (re. law of our national land) than they already are. But then, that's what they want, isn't it.

[Colorado Doug]

She released it too early. Forgot to include babysitters, school teachers, Democrats and others who would be suddenly “qualified” to have a person’s rights taken away.

[Right Wing Assault]

Of course it was a mistake. They only want to ban guns for people who AREN’T a threat to others.

[edboock]

Can I really load bullets in my magazines more than once? Now you tell me. /s