CO Guv: Time to talk about gun control

[Oak]

An article from the Denver Post this morning, before today's tragedy.

In a significant shift from his statements earlier this year, Gov. John Hickenlooper now says "the time is right" for Colorado lawmakers to consider further gun restrictions.

The Democratic governor made his comments in an interview with The Associated Pressthat comes less than half a year after the mass shooting in an Aurora movie theater that killed 12 and injured at least 58. His latest words also follow a shooting in an Oregon mall Tuesday that left three dead, including the gunman, who shot himself.

"I wanted to have at least a couple of months off after the shooting in Aurora to let people process and grieve and get a little space, but ... I think, now ... the time is right," Hickenlooper said in the Wednesday interview.

But his comments to AP are in contrast to ones Hickenlooper made in the days after the Aurora shooting, in which he expressed skepticism that tougher gun laws would have stopped suspected gunman James Holmes' July 20 rampage in the theater. Also, Holmes' apartment was rigged with trip wires and explosive devices, authorities said.

"This person, if there were no assault weapons available, if there were no this or no that, this guy's going to find something, right?" Hickenlooper said in an interview with CNN. "He's going to know how to create a bomb. Who knows where his mind would have gone? Clearly a very intelligent individual, however twisted."

Those comments upset some Democrats and gun-control advocates.

"And, you know, if it wasn't one weapon, it would have been another," Hickenlooper said at the time. "I mean, he was diabolical. If you look at what he had in his apartment and what his intentions were, I mean, even now it makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up."

Potential gun-control legislation in the 2013 session could include bills to ban assault-style weapons, limit magazine sizes, further restrict sales to those with mental-health issues and restrict guns on college campuses. Some Democrats don't favor further gun restrictions.

In the AP interview , Hickenlooper said the issues that merit discussion include "things like 'Do we all need assault weapons?' " Such arms, he said, are "designed for warfare" and "designed to pierce bulletproof vests and body armor."

He added, later, "When you look at what happened in Aurora, a great deal of that damage was from the large magazine on the AR-15 (rifle). I think we need to have that discussion and say, 'Where is this appropriate?' "

Republicans said the governor appeared to be flip-flopping on gun issues.

"The governor's original comments in July were accurate," said Senate Minority Leader Bill Cadman, R-Colorado Springs. "Holmes' commitment to kill would not have been prevented by any laws. The governor now appears to be succumbing to political pressure of extreme elements in his party, and this is disappointing."

Incoming House Minority Leader Mark Waller, R-Colorado Springs, said he applauded the governor's comments over the summer, which Waller said he took to mean that more gun restrictions weren't needed. He said Hickenlooper's most recent comments seem "contradictory" to what he said earlier.

"I'm guessing he got some grief from the far left when he made those comments, and that has caused his shift," Waller said.

Reached while traveling Thursday, the governor told The Denver Post, "I don't think I flip-flopped at all. The AP was asking, 'Should we have that discussion (about gun restrictions)?' I said, 'Sure. This is not a discussion that a free, open society should be afraid of,' " he said.

David Kopel, research director of the libertarian-conservative Independence Institute and a gun-rights activist, said his reaction to Hickenlooper's comments will depend on what legislation is proposed.

"Prosecuting law-abiding people for the crimes of James Holmes is a bad thing," he said.

If the topic of this conversation revolves around mental illness and keeping guns out of the hands of people deemed to be mentally ill, so much the better, Kopel said. However, he said the discussion should not be about types of guns.

"If (Hickenlooper) wanted to ban certain guns for cosmetic reasons, that would be a disappointing step away from his thoughtful and logical approach to public policy," Kopel said.

It was not clear Thursday to what degree next year's Democratically controlled legislature intends to take on gun control, but the debate has begun.

Incoming House Speaker Mark Ferrandino, D-Denver, said the governor's statements come as members of his party are interested in debating gun-control issues.

"I am happy that the governor is willing to have those conversations," Ferrandino said.

However, the speaker said sweeping changes would be difficult to achieve. For example, bans on certain types of guns could be problematic.

"When you look at assault-weapons bans, it's always around how do you define it. Thus far in discussions, it's been difficult to define it," Ferrandino said. "How do you define assault weapons to make sure you're eliminating the true assault weapons while not eliminating the ability of people to own guns for hunting and other legitimate uses?"

Rep. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora, said she plans to present at least three pieces of legislation that deal with gun control.

She said the bills will look at closing loopholes on private gun sales, restricting high-capacity ammunition clips and keeping guns out of the hands of individuals with a history of mental-health issues.

"We all know mental health might have played a factor in the Aurora shooting," said Fields, who said the specifics of her legislation are still being worked out.

Fields said she is working with groups such as Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Colorado Ceasefire on the gun-control bills and should have more details by the end of this month.

"There needs to be a serious discussion about gun control in the next session," Fields said. "And that discussion is going to happen."



Read more: Hickenlooper shifts position on more gun control measures - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...ition-more-gun-control-measures#ixzz2F3SOKi5M
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse

 

[jlmatthew]

After the CT school shooting today, the momentum to pass more firearm restrictions will probably kick into overdrive

 

[JohnCushman]

Looks like I'll be spending a pretty penny this weekend at Ft Carson on a few new guns on my Star card

 

[schmalts]

Obama already said today it is time for new bans on "assault weapons" Scary to wonder what he considers what ones are. Also scary to think that if you add up all the murders committed with an "assault weapon" do not amount to a hill of beans compared to those committed without. So far if the news has it correct this shooting today was done with 2 hand guns. a .223 was left in the car, and was not used. my guess is they will go after banning the gun left in the car.

 

[JoseCuervo]

The questions need to be asked, and people have to acknowledge if there is a problem or if there is an acceptable number of funerals as long as the number is "less than a hill of beans".


Then, and only then, cam solutions be discussed.

 

[Mudranger1]

The questions need to be asked, and people have to acknowledge if there is a problem or if there is an acceptable number of funerals as long as the number is "less than a hill of beans".


Then, and only then, cam solutions be discussed.

Have there been enough funerals to get rid of alcohol? What about tobacco? Nah we just added weed to our list. Discuss some of your solutions with us instead of posting up these stupid ass open ended statements

 

[JohnCushman]

Hickenlooper much be gunning for a staff position with Obama to suddenly change his stance on guns

 

[schmalts]

The questions need to be asked, and people have to acknowledge if there is a problem or if there is an acceptable number of funerals as long as the number is "less than a hill of beans".


Then, and only then, cam solutions be discussed.

Let me correct your quote since you always are incorrect
"less than a hill of beans compared to those committed without" Big difference. Your as bad as liberal media

 

[Nemont]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/14/Bloomberg-politicizes-shooting

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/14/Menino-gun-control

Please note I don't share the Breitbart position but I just used the links to link to the comments.

Nemont

 

[jlmatthew]

Hickenlooper much be gunning for a staff position with Obama to suddenly change his stance on guns

In the Post it said he was interested in being the President

 

[Zach]

Any other CO residents find it interesting that Hick didn't talk to his bully pulpit directly(Denver Post) but rather he spoke with the AP? Not sure what his angle is there.

C'mon Jose, just come out and say what's on your mind.

If I've read my statistics correctly, the majority of gun related deaths in the US are contributed to a hand gun. So much for that assault weapons ban doing a whole lot.

 

[steamfitter]

Dont get me wrong when i ask this but why do people need large clips.Do any of yall use one when you hunt and if do ok but why just askin. The assault type rifles look cool but what do you do with it you cant do with a regular rifle i know if they ban these its just the beginning and will want hand guns next im just asking so dont hate on me im not anti gun i dont care if people own one or not.If im out plinking i dont mind reloading the clip so one that holds alot of bullets is really no big deal to me.I dont think banning them or any gun will make a difference but why have them just curious.

 

[DHaffner]

The questions need to be asked, and people have to acknowledge if there is a problem or if there is an acceptable number of funerals as long as the number is "less than a hill of beans".


Then, and only then, cam solutions be discussed.

There is a problem, it lies with society, not gun ownership. After the Oklahoma City bombing should we have outlawed fertilizer? Perhaps increasing restrictions on Heroin or Meth will get them out of the hands of those who would miss-use them?

 

[jlmatthew]

Dont get me wrong when i ask this but why do people need large clips.Do any of yall use one when you hunt and if do ok but why just askin. The assault type rifles look cool but what do you do with it you cant do with a regular rifle i know if they ban these its just the beginning and will want hand guns next im just asking so dont hate on me im not anti gun i dont care if people own one or not.If im out plinking i dont mind reloading the clip so one that holds alot of bullets is really no big deal to me.I dont think banning them or any gun will make a difference but why have them just curious.

Why do we sell Beer in 6 & 12 packs? Or Rum by the quart? If we banned them it wouldnt be a big deal to me. 9,878 people were killed by drunk drivers in 2011, where is the public outcry to ban this evil? How about banning any auto larger than a golf cart to keep us safe?

Guns are the only object that kill all on they're own some how, no human involvement at all

 

[DHaffner]

Washington D.C. passed gun control laws in 1975 that were so restrictive they were ruled unconstitutional and overturned in 2007. What did they get for their 30 year attempt to erode the bill of rights? A yearly competition for the highest violent crime rates in the country! Thank you, I'll maintain my constitutional right to defend myself.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by the General Government; but the best security of that right after all is, the military spirit, that taste for martial exercises, which has always distinguished the free citizens of these States....Such men form the best barrier to the liberties of America" - (Gazette of the United States, October 14, 1789.)

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950])

 

[montanadogs]

A very interesting read. I agree with this 100%.
From 1997 following the Columbine shootings.....
There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness.. The following is a portion of the transcript:
“Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.

“The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain’s heart.

“In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don’t believe that they are responsible for my daughter’s death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel’s murder I would be their strongest opponent"I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy — it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs, Your words are empty air. You’ve stripped away our heritage, You’ve outlawed simple prayer. Now gunshots fill our classrooms, And precious children die. You seek for answers everywhere, And ask the question “Why?” You regulate restrictive laws, Through legislative creed. And yet you fail to understand, That God is what we need!

“Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation’s history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine’s tragedy occurs —politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

“As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA — I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone! My daughter’s death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!” - Darrell Scott

 

[rhomas]

What so many fail to recognize is the inappropriate use of the term "assault rifle". An AR style weapon isn't an assault weapon, regardless of the magazine capacities. A true assault weapon in most cases has a selector switch which allows the user to fire a single shot, a 3-5 shot burst, or go full on auto and empty the magazine with one trigger pull. Those types of guns are already regulated, since ownership requires a special license and payment of a special tax to the Feds in order to own one. Magazine capacities aren't really the cause of any attacks, when you consider that multiple magazine possession of even a 5 shot capacity would still enable psychopaths to fire many rounds in the commission of their psychotic episode.

In answer to the question of why large capacity magazines? First, because they are legal, second, because they are fun. Third, in many instances the semi-automatic rifle is used in predator and varmint hunting, where quick repetitive shots are sometimes needed when multiple targets present themselves. Then of course there is the all important fourth reason which is once one item get's banned, at what point will the antis be satisfied. Will it be a 50 round magazine, or a 3 round that satisfies them????????

 

[Straight Arrow]

As far as AR's, "First, because they are legal, second, because they are fun." Yep and the "fun" part is why we as gun owners and 2nd Amendment protectors are allowing our own ranks to work against us. Certainly there are many responsible AR owners who go to the range and have a good time, however I believe there are far more "fun seekers" who go to public land and enjoy themselves at the expense of others' enjoyment.

I have lost count of the times AR's have ruined the peaceful experience of an archery hunt and have destroyed property where many are recreating. South of Bozeman, MT, in the National Forest, it's not uncommon to hear and see nimrods shooting their AR's as rapidly as they can at garbage they have dragged up into the forest (and abandon after blasting) or at trees they actually fire at until the tree falls.

As a lifetime gun owner and hunter, it just flat angers me. But more importantly, it pushes those voters off the fence onto the wrong side of gun rights, when otherwise they don't have a position on the issue.

The dilema is that it's difficult to instill a sense of responsibility to go along with the right to own and use a firearm. Ya just can't fix stupid ... and unfortunately there's no IQ test that accompanies AR ownership. That's a good reason why there are many folks who support the "assault rifle" ban.

 

[schmalts]

I find the AR ban ideals stupid. First of all, shooting garbage is not killing people, nor are AR's the only guns used for this. I can't begin to try and count the amount of road signs i have seen blasted with a shotgun.
Second, will anyone venture to find the data that shows how many killings in the US are done with an AR vs handguns vs knives? I would bet that knives are used more than an AR15. See that is the problem, your not going to solve anything unless you go after what really is doing the killing. And then after that is all said and done and you think removing the tool the killers use will help, you better look at the reality of what tools are most used instead of going after the ones that just look like they could do the most harm.

 

[rhomas]

SA, in the first place you followed Jose's lead for doing what the MSM does, and misquoted my comment; those words were used to describe the large capacity magazines and NOT the AR. Secondly, once again, even you lumped the AR into the catch all phrase used by the gun grabbers by calling them "assault rifles". Another point I would make, is that I've never been shooting or hunting on ANY public lands, down here or out West; so I'm not familiar with the type of recreational shooting that you described. My family has our own private shooting range on our private property, and if the local archery hunter who likes to trespass and arrow deer on our property gets upset when I'm out there with my mini-14 and my 20 rounds mags., or my M&P 15/22 and my 25 round mags. blowing up targets, then tough sh#t.

The entire point is that if we as gun owners ever concede even one little aspect of our gun rights, we will have opened the gates for other concessions or theft of rights. Eventually even your precious archery equipment could be subjected to their conquests as well. Evidence of intent? Go back to a few weeks ago and the kid who murdered his father's girlfriend, then attacked and killed his father in the classroom with a bow and arrow before finishing the murder and subsequent suicide with a knife. The MSM called that particular bow, a "tactical bow", so how long will it be before those "tactical bows" are placed on some group's ban list???????? I also do not own or use archery gear, but I would defend your rights to your bow as strongly as I stand opposed to those who would take away a single aspect of my gun ownership and Constitutional rights!!!!!!!!!!!!!!