Colorado Gov. Hickenlooper signs landmark gun-control bills – U.S. News

 

The state has been scarred by some of the deadliest incidents of mass gun violence in recent U.S. history, including the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School and the Aurora movie theater shooting that killed 12 last July. The state’s gun control bills have gained national attention since they were first proposed, drawing the ire of those who oppose any new restrictions on gun purchases or ownership.

“We’re all in shock here,” state Senator Greg Brophy, a Republican, said on Wednesday. “It turns out this guy who everybody thought was a moderate Democrat is actually a gun-control governor.”

“I think the governor will be replaced by someone who has Colorado values instead of New York City values,” Brophy said. “If Republicans are returned to control we will repeal these bills immediately.”

Source:  Colorado Gov. Hickenlooper signs landmark gun-control bills – U.S. News.

I am heartened to see some common sense legislation from some of the States. Colorado has certainly been hit with more than their share of violence due to too many guns in our society.  Of course no real progress is made without the ranting by those of opposite interests.   I just can’t understand why the country is so split on this issue. Are guns really that embedded in our society?

10 thoughts on “Colorado Gov. Hickenlooper signs landmark gun-control bills – U.S. News

  • “Colorado has certainly been hit with more than their share of violence due to too many guns in our society.”

    In the 20th century governments with guns murdered untold millions of disarmed citizens. The Founders wisely thought that the citizens needed to be armed. Obviously individuals with freedom will do things that are tragic, but the other choice can be far more tragic.

    Freedom is better than safety.

    lwk
    free2beinamerica2.wordpress.com

    Like

    • Welcome lwk. I am not a believer in arming all citizens as a way to reduce violence. I know Archie Bunker suggested that years ago. As far as the founding fathers go we seem to ignore the first part of that amendment “In order to form a well regulated militia”. We no longer need militias now and I don’t think we need guns either. They, like many things, do more harm than good. But that is just me… I don’t know about freedom is better than safety, I would like to think we can have both….

      Like

      • You wrote:

        “I am not a believer in arming all citizens as a way to reduce violence. I know Archie Bunker suggested that years ago.”

        I think it is fair to say you oppose it, but it is unecessary to insult people by insinuating a liberal actor playing “Archie Bunker” represents the opposite view.

        Some 2nd Amendment activists were smart enough to win the District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) case before the Supreme Court which held the 2nd Amendment was an individual right (not a “militia” right).

        And wrote:

        “As far as the founding fathers go we seem to ignore the first part of that amendment “In order to form a well regulated militia”.”

        You need to get up to date. See description of District of Columbia v. Heller:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

        It held that, “[the] Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves.”

        “We no longer need militias now and I don’t think we need guns either.”

        Actually we have a new form of the militia evolving today. It is legal “concealed carry” of a handgun for personal defense and often defense of society against criminals. Some 40 states have “shall issue” concealed carry laws requiring a permit be issued unless grounds can be found to deny it (felony conviction, mental issues), or don’t require a permit at all to legally carry.

        Studies have shown that people who get these licenses are extremely responsible. In fact they are convicted of firearms violations at almost exactly the same rate as police officers.

        You don’t think you need a gun. That means you depend on others to defend you. You may think that the police have a legal obligation to protect you. That is simply not true. You can’t sue them for failing to protect you, even if they are negligent.

        You are the “first responder” to your self defense. If for whatever reason you choose not to defend yourself, or your family, then the consequences are you own moral responsibility.

        lwk

        Like

        • I didn’t know that using Archie Bunker was a direct insult to you. I’m sorry I hit a sensitive spot. But you need to crank down some of the expanded rhetoric here if you want to continue to comment. I won’t have my blog hi-jacked for your causes whether I disagree with them or not. I see from your blog that we are at opposite ends of this debate. Unless we can keep our communications civil we should probably go our separate ways sooner rather than later.

          Like

  • As an outsider (Canadian) I’m also mystified by the whole gun control issue. I think it has as much to do with our (your) societal yearning toward violence whether it be in the movies or in our sports, as in hockey here. While not nearly as extreme an issue violence in sports has people polarized with equal verve on each side.
    Do I think we need guns, No! Do I enjoy firing and using guns, yes. Do I think we as a people have the maturity to handle both views and accommodate each interest, I’m not so sure.
    I often think that humans are like teens, we think we know it all but reality proves otherwise.

    Again I like you posts. I think in particular that they are short and sweet, without belabouring g your point. I will be following.
    Dwayne

    Like

    • Thanks for the comments Dwayne. I have several Canadian friends who follow this blog. We spent a month in Canada two years ago traveling the eastern part. Really enjoyed the site and especially the people.

      I have quit trying to figure out our obsession with guns. I, like you probably, grew up around guns. I did my share of rabbit hunting. Violence is maybe part of it but I don’t think that a a core issue. I must admit that I enjoy “blood and guts” movies but I am a very non-violent person. Always have been.

      I make it a point to keep all my post at 500 words or less. I don’t have patience for long winded stuff so I don’t expose my readers to it either.

      Come back often and leave a comment. Your input is valuable….

      Like

  • I am so tired of the phrase “studies have shown”. Those words are bandied about quite casually, and often without credit to the source…by both sides of the issue. I base my opinions on guns by what I “see” around me and what I read in the news every day. Guns are seldom used in an act of self-protection. They are used in anger against loved ones and friends and neighbors most often. They are used by gangs against each other and the police. SkiDaddy says it well, we have some kind of yearning for violence and attempt to justify it with the 2nd amendment argument. Even if we bought the argument that we have a right to defend ourselves that would not justify keeping more than one or two guns. I see more and more people with arsenals in their basements (my own relatives unfortunately)…and many assault type weapons. It’s some kind of macho power display they enjoy. I don’t get it at all. So, I would just hope everyone uses their own eyes and ears and common sense when they form their opinion on gun control and not automatcally buy into the all the “studies” we hear about.
    It is a shame that all the recent fervor for new gun regulations has fizzled and we’ll be lucky to see much of anything happen. Congress fizzled too..and the NRA has prevailed…again.

    Like

    • Hi Jane, I am like you very frustrated by these gun issues. As we have talked about it before so many on the pro-gun side seem to have a paranoid fear of most things around them. They fear that they will be attacked at any moment and need a ready supply of guns to protect themselves. “Studies have shown” 🙂 that you are 42 times more likely to kill yourself or a love one than to kill an invader in your home. But don’t count on those on the other side to even acknowledge that fact.

      Logic has little or nothing to do with this debate. It is about base feeling of which fear is one of the most basic. I’m sure if I lived with the idea that there is danger and tragedy around every corner I would probably be in the gun camp too.

      Like

Share Your Thoughts..

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s