Colorado governor: Assault-weapons ban a “tough sell”

posted at 10:41 am on March 25, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Colorado passed one of the nation’s toughest gun-control laws last week, but it didn’t include the one component that its advocates most wanted to see. Governor John Hickenlooper went on CNN’s State of the Union yesterday to explain why he didn’t press for a so-called “assault weapons ban,” which he called “a tough sell.” Left out of that analysis, of course, was the fact that the Newtown shooting which revived the long-moribund gun-control cause was committed in a state (Connecticut) that already had an assault-weapons ban in place, which did nothing to prevent the shooting.

Do note as well that we have yet another entry into the Gun-Ignorant Media Style Guide, courtesy of CNN’s Candy Crowley:

“Semi-assault weapons”? What are those, guns used in a passive-aggressive style? I show you mine and you don’t show me yours? Obviously, Crowley wanted to say “semi-automatic weapons,” a broad class of firearms that includes anything with a magazine of any sort, or perhaps “semi-automatic assault weapons,” which means even less than the meaningless phrase “assault weapons.” Hickenlooper alluded to the nonsensical nature of the term “assault weapons” shortly afterward:

“I think the feeling right now around assault weapons, at least in Colorado, is that they are so hard to define what an assault weapon is – there’s a lot of questions whether the 10 year federal ban was in existence, made a difference,” Hickenlooper said.

Actually, there aren’t a lot of questions about that — it made no difference at all.  That’s because only three percent of murder victims are killed with rifles of any kind, “assault weapon” or not.  In fact, in every year between 2007 and 2011 inclusive, the number of people killed with every class of firearm dropped from one year to the next.

A revamp of background checks might keep some weapons out of the hands of those who would abuse them, although as Jazz Shaw wrote yesterday, there may be an even greater possibility for government abuse of that system.  Hickenlooper argues that this is where legislation can make a “significant difference,” but also suggested that conservative arguments about slippery slopes are on target, pun intended:

For its part, Colorado focused on mental health related issues in their bill to address gun violence. Hickenlooper on Sunday said a step-by-step approach could help build support.

“We focused on mental health first, then universal background checks … which clearly make a significant difference, that’s where we put our initial focus,” Hickenlooper explained.

Making background checks more efficient and reliable would provide a little more security.  However, the “significant difference” point of view relies on an assumption that most criminals buy their weapons from gun stores.  They don’t; they steal them instead, and the Newtown shooting was a case in point.  The shooter tried to purchase his own guns, but a background check flunked his application. He then stole the guns from his mother.  Most criminals won’t be deterred from finding a firearm by more intense background checks, but more law-abiding citizens will have a tougher time defending themselves, especially if those background checks include non-adjudicated findings of unfitness to exercise Second Amendment rights.

And if more robust background checks are the first step in the “step by step approach,” what does Hickenlooper have in mind for step 2? Step 3?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Backpedalling on his own law? Does he really think that doing that will sooth things?

unclesmrgol on March 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM

screen cap: “long conservative Colorado”….

Hardy har har.
Elections have consequences.

Marcus on March 25, 2013 at 10:49 AM

Isn’t Colorado the state where legislators want women to use projectile vomiting and urination as a defense against an attacker instead of a handgun?

I wonder if they’ve set aside any money for pee and vomit training.

darwin on March 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Do note as well that we have yet another entry into the Gun-Ignorant Media Style Guide, courtesy of CNN’s Candy Crowley:

You mean Crowley is more than just a pretty face?

Ironically, the woman that put down the bucket of fried chicken long enough to tag-team Mitt Romney in that Presidential debate isn’t the biggest liar in this thread.

Hickenlooper talks about back background checks making a significant difference. Where’s the evidence of that? Not one child at Sandy Hook Elementary would be alive today with more stringent background checks. Same with Tucson, Aurora, and VA Tech.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM

You’re well on your way down the “slippery slope” when all the wormy little politicians start screwing with the Constitution. Somebody had better speak up . . . loudly, lest your freedoms begin to disappear.

rplat on March 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Governor John Hickenlooper

…STFU potlicker!

KOOLAID2 on March 25, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Isn’t Colorado the state where legislators want women to use projectile vomiting and urination as a defense against an attacker instead of a handgun?

darwin on March 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Oh! The fact checkers would be all over you! It isn’t all about pee and vomit, they also advocate safe zones and whistles.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 10:52 AM

Backpedalling on his own law? Does he really think that doing that will sooth things?

unclesmrgol on March 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Not backpedalling, trying to have it both ways. But, mark my words, there will be political backlash for anybody who signs on to gun-grabbing legislation. Hickenloopy knows that.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 10:53 AM

Just what is an assault weapon? If it’s one that could be used to attack someone, then shouldn’t stiletto heels be banned?

OldEnglish on March 25, 2013 at 10:56 AM

If this has been mentioned before please ignore it. There is a tablet app called Legal Heat that has very detailed information of all 50 states and their gun laws. The app focuses on state firearms laws, concealed carry laws, open carry laws, transporting firearms laws and weighs each state with a scale between 5 cartridges ( being the best) to a headstone (being the worst).

fourdeucer on March 25, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Lousy scummy REgressive-there never was any doubt that he’s a tool of the Gang of Four and would dance to their statist demands-you can lay the disaster in my state in large part to the LIAR Dan Maes, who ran for governor in 2010 and stole the election from Tom Tancredo-his lousy 5% was what Tom lost by to Hickenlooper.

Colorado could have had one of the most conservative governors in the US and instead we have this steaming POS. Maes also caused the down ticket loss by Ken Buck who would have been a fabulous senator, instead we have bookended the Udall idiocy with Michael Bennett-great work Dan, you asshole.

MMinCanonCity on March 25, 2013 at 10:59 AM

And if more robust background checks are the first step in the “step by step approach,” what does Hickenlooper have in mind for step 2? Step 3?

This mention of “steps” is an artifice. It is a rhetorical sop to the gun haters.

When you have a mob demanding action, a weak move can be enhanced by describing it as a beginning, a start, a first step…

Like “increased border security” is used in a parallel manner in another debate by pols who are clueless.

IlikedAUH2O on March 25, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Even though all the talk has been that the new laws take effect 1 July – they have already started charging a $10 fee for background checks.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:03 AM

This is nothing more than damage control.

In addition to the Magpul issue, he knows his state is going to be losing a lot of tourism business. It’s going to hurt him politically, and it’s going to hurt the Democrats in Colorado.

The governors who do this kind of thing never consider how this is really going to affect their futures. They only think of the praise they’re going to get from the MSM and the Dem establishment. Real people will notice the damage that his silly laws will do.

As a perfect example, look at Parris Glendenning. He passed some ridiculous laws in MD in the 90s, had Clinton, Gore and the MSM praising him, and expected that he had a huge future in the Democrat party. Where is he now? I have no idea, but he’s probably sitting in the basement of a run-down mansion in southern MD wearing a dusty, cobweb-covered suit and mumbling to himself about how it’s the party that got small, not him…

Cuomo, Hickenlooper, O’Malley and the others are heading for the same destiny.

PetecminMd on March 25, 2013 at 11:06 AM

So when is he up for reelection? 2014?

AH_C on March 25, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Recall petition process has started on Hickypooper. We need something like 439,000 to get the recall on a ballot. We should have at least that many gun owners in Colorado willing to sign it.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Well, why is it ‘tough sell’? I mean, it’s not like criminals are screaming about having their guns limited or taken away. What this liberal is really saying is that he’s fighting against law-abiding people who demand their God-given Constitutional rights to self-defense as they see fit.

That’s what he’s fighting against. You know — just like a criminal.

Liam on March 25, 2013 at 11:08 AM

So when is he up for reelection? 2014?

AH_C on March 25, 2013 at 11:07 AM

Yup – unless we can get him recalled.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM

Oh! The fact checkers would be all over you! It isn’t all about pee and vomit, they also advocate safe zones and whistles.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 10:52 AM

Oh man … how did I forget that?

darwin on March 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM

Cuomo, Hickenlooper, O’Malley and the others are heading for the same destiny.

PetecminMd on March 25, 2013 at 11:06 AM

We can hope….

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Proven failed stupid ideas should be a tough sell.

Socratease on March 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM

Oh! The fact checkers would be all over you! It isn’t all about pee and vomit, they also advocate safe zones and whistles.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 10:52 AM

Oh man … how did I forget that?

darwin on March 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM

And poop – don’t forget the poop….

It’s all in the rape prevention pamphlet that the University of Colorado system put out for students – and some of the Demtard legislators talked about this crap in the gun control hearings – a big part of why the Dem sponsor of the bill to prohibit concealed carry on college campuses pulled the bill.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM

law-abiding people who demand their God-given Constitutional rights to self-defense as they see fit.
Liam on March 25, 2013 at 11:08 AM

It is never a case where the criminals just might be impacted in any small measure but always the law-abiding citizen that is targeted in every conceivable manner.

fourdeucer on March 25, 2013 at 11:15 AM

You’re well on your way down the “slippery slope” when all the wormy little politicians start screwing with the Constitution. Somebody had better speak up . . . loudly, lest your freedoms begin to disappear.

rplat on March 25, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Per Bloomingidiot – “we (government) have the right to infinge on your freedom”.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/25/nyc-mayor-bloomberg-government-has-right-infringe-/

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:16 AM

My dream of buying an AR-15 and a bag of pot in the same store is still alive.

EricW on March 25, 2013 at 11:17 AM

It is never a case where the criminals just might be impacted in any small measure but always the law-abiding citizen that is targeted in every conceivable manner.

fourdeucer on March 25, 2013 at 11:15 AM

True. Which makes for great comedy and derision when liberals protest against being called criminal-coddlers.

Liam on March 25, 2013 at 11:19 AM

My dream of buying an AR-15 and a bag of pot in the same store is still alive.

EricW on March 25, 2013 at 11:17 AM

The ultimate bong?

Liam on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

It is never a case where the criminals just might be impacted in any small measure but always the law-abiding citizen that is targeted in every conceivable manner.

fourdeucer on March 25, 2013 at 11:15 AM

What do you mean about criminals not being impacted? The left helpfully puts up signs pointing out where the gun-free zones are located. The Aurora shooter in Hickenloopy’s own state specifically sought out the only gun-free theater for his killing spree. Small measures like putting up gun-free signs are very helpful.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

I’ve also yet to see a valid defense of magazine limits- which by the way will cost Colorado over 500 jobs when Magpul relocates (which they’ve already started to do).

Magazine limits are arbitrary and will do nothing to address the issues which Democrats purport. They will eventually be found unconstitutional because the nature of that law has no basis in fact and is therefore in direct conflict to the Second Amendment.

By the way, people like Hickenlooper should start thinking about life after politics. With the recall efforts keeping this issue at the forefront and Colorado not as “blue” as some might think on the Second Amendment, people with long memories who have been roused to action are pining for the next election.

Marcus Traianus on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

My dream of buying an AR-15 and a bag of pot in the same store is still alive.

EricW on March 25, 2013 at 11:17 AM

But can the sodomites get “married” there?

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM

I’ve also yet to see a valid defense of magazine limits- which by the way will cost Colorado over 500 jobs when Magpul relocates (which they’ve already started to do).

Marcus Traianus on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

I heard talk this weekend that they’re moving to Cheyenne, Wyoming, but haven’t seen any official confirmation of that yet.
I hope they open a big factory outlet store on the Wyoming side of the border for Coloradans to go to for all our illegal magazines.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:27 AM

With the recall efforts keeping this issue at the forefront and Colorado not as “blue” as some might think on the Second Amendment, people with long memories who have been roused to action are pining for the next election.

Marcus Traianus on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

IMO the left, particularly the anti-Second crowd, think they have a stronger hand than they do. They’ve been listening to one another for so long they think everybody thinks like they do when it comes to gun-grabbing and were giddy with excitement when 20 white children in an affluent suburb were killed in a single atrocity because it gets so much more traction than the way little black are killed on the streets of Chicago.

But gun-grabbing opposition is not a red/blue issue. There will ultimately be political backlash to those who oppose the Second Amendment and the casualties will be from both parties.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Making background checks more efficient and reliable would provide a little more security.

Really? How? That’s fairly presumptive- don’t you think?

I reject the entire premise. It has no basis in fact.

If the premise is these actions are directed at events such as Newtown or Aurora, where is the proof that such actions would have been preventative?

Answer; there is none. In fact, to the contrary background checks forced the murderous POS in Newtown to steal guns because he could not acquire one.

Liberals have maliciously and disgustingly corrupted and co opted this entire process to enact political goals. Those political goals have zero to do with addressing any real problem.

Marcus Traianus on March 25, 2013 at 11:29 AM

But can the sodomites get “married” there?

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM

“Civil unions” – yes. Hicky just signed that new law last week as well.
The Dems also officially legalized adultery, so you really don’t need to get married….

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Enjoy your single term as governor… Hick.

I just recieved my 10, 30 round magazines from Magpul. Kudos to Magpul. I wish them the best in their new manufacturing facility. Most likely in Texas.

Meanwhile those of us still in the former great state of Colorado, get to enjoy the benefits of legalized weed, sodmite marriage, and reduced tuition for illegal border jumpers in Colorado colleges.

I think I will set up two businesses on the border with New Mexico. On the New Mexico side I will sell 30 round Magpul magazines, and on the Colorado side I will sell weed and have a marriage chapel for sodomites. Should be a millionaire in about a year.

Kuffar on March 25, 2013 at 11:33 AM

But gun-grabbing opposition is not a red/blue issue. There will ultimately be political backlash to those who oppose the Second Amendment and the casualties will be from both parties.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:28 AM

This^.

Second Amendment issues defy traditional political boundaries and assumptions. There will be enough time to have a lengthy debate and discover facts before the next election. But most people have already been roused to action and are motivated to act.

Marcus Traianus on March 25, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

It is always a pleasure to be corrected in a manner that is not only profound but in a manner that shows the absurdity of the feel good nonsense proposed by the left.

fourdeucer on March 25, 2013 at 11:40 AM

“Civil unions” – yes. Hicky just signed that new law last week as well.
The Dems also officially legalized adultery, so you really don’t need to get married….

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Wow! Is sounds as if Denver and Las Vegas are pretty much America’s Sodom and Gomorrah. Where is a good divine smiting when you need it?

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:44 AM

My dream of buying an AR-15 and a bag of pot in the same store is still alive.

EricW on March 25, 2013 at 11:17 AM

The ultimate bong?

Liam on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

It’ll blow you away. ;-)

Solaratov on March 25, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Wow! Is sounds as if Denver and Las Vegas are pretty much America’s Sodom and Gomorrah. Where is a good divine smiting when you need it?

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:44 AM

The NorKs have offered. Maybe we can get them to target the cities we would like to do without.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:49 AM

And if more robust background checks are the first step in the “step by step approach,” what does Hickenlooper have in mind for step 2? Step 3?

I was just reminded of an example of step 2.

The story out of New Jersey where the police and child protective services were called in because an 11-year-old posted a facebook picture of his birthday gift, a .22 rifle. In other words, demands for warrantless searches by public officials based on “concern” by an anonymous rat who was offended by a picture on social media.

Step 3, of course being the removal of the child and make him a ward of the state because gun owners clearly are unfit parents who present a threat to their children.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:53 AM

The NorKs have offered. Maybe we can get them to target the cities we would like to do without.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Conveniently for the NorKs, my top three are along the west coast.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Wow! Is sounds as if Denver and Las Vegas are pretty much America’s Sodom and Gomorrah. Where is a good divine smiting when you need it?

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Patience, lad. All things in good time.

He has His own timetable.

Solaratov on March 25, 2013 at 11:55 AM

There are a few people who’s mere pictures disgust. His is one of them. May the Earth swallow him, alive, but only afer the ants knaw on him, alive, for quite some time.

The fools of CO voted for the politicians they got.

Too sad for a once great state.

Relatively free people deserve the fools they elect, every time.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:23 PM

May he and McCain end up in the same creche pan, soon. May Ms. Lindsey wash their feet and butts.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Just what is an assault weapon? If it’s one that could be used to attack someone, then shouldn’t stiletto heels be banned?

OldEnglish on March 25, 2013 at 10:56 AM

At a get together a few weeks ago one of my friends was making a feeble attempt to take a liberal stand on gun control. He basically said that no one needs to own an assault weapon. I said “Fine, define assault weapon.” All I got was a blank stare and several uh-uh-uh’s. After a sufficient amount of laughter from the rest of the group I continued “Let’s talk about that Porsche you drove up in this morning. No one needs a car like that, lets ban them.” His reply was “Now just wait a minute there! That’s not the same thing at all.”

Oldnuke on March 25, 2013 at 12:24 PM

The NorKs have offered. Maybe we can get them to target the cities we would like to do without.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Conveniently for the NorKs, my top three are along the west coast.

Happy Nomad on March 25, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Talk about one slippery slope, CO, calling for an even bigger one.

R/Cs never disappoint. God gave them brains, which they misuse, often, because they can’t multi-taks in their thinking.

Imagine, no matter which part of the US NKorea would choose to attack, Obama might welcome them. Imagine that China attacks from the West and Russia from the East…Oh, well, good thing Russia is really mad at Cyprus/Germany now. Otherwise he’d be more focused on the new China alliance.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:27 PM

The ultimate bong?

Liam on March 25, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Wasn’t that in a scene from Apocolypse Now? One guy blew smoke into the chamber while the other inhaled from the muzzle?

freedomfirst on March 25, 2013 at 12:30 PM

After a sufficient amount of laughter from the rest of the group I continued “Let’s talk about that Porsche you drove up in this morning. No one needs a car like that, lets ban them.” His reply was “Now just wait a minute there! That’s not the same thing at all.”

Oldnuke on March 25, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Leftards are not logical, just emotional azzes. They want your airplanes taken away, so long as they fly, privately. They want you to be taxed, so long as they are exempt. Look at this swine, whom Obama exempted from paying taxes.

Equality, liberty, freedom, socialism’s royalties are just for them, not for the.

These are the most tyrannical people on Earth.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:31 PM

“We focused on mental health first, then universal background checks … which clearly make a significant difference, that’s where we put our initial focus,” Hickenlooper explained.

He’s a damn liar. They did nothing on mental health. They went straight for gun owners. Coloradans know it too. Not just the republicans either. There are a lot of independent and even democrat gun owners who are absolutely sickened at how they passed these bills and the language in them that makes it a crime for a spouse to leave his/her magazines over 15 rounds at home anytime he leaves the house for any length of time.

We’re furious.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 12:31 PM

There are a few people who’s mere pictures disgust. His is one of them. May the Earth swallow him, alive, but only afer the ants knaw on him, alive, for quite some time.
The fools of CO voted for the politicians they got.
Too sad for a once great state.
Relatively free people deserve the fools they elect, every time.
Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Not entirely Coloradans fault. He barely got 51% of the vote running against a split ticket against Dan Maes a disgraced tea partier who was exposed for plagiarism and Tom Tancredo. The Republican party destroyed their own chances that year.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The fools of CO voted for the politicians they got.
Too sad for a once great state.
Relatively free people deserve the fools they elect, every time.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Ya unfortunately Denver-Boulder controls the state – for now.

The real story of Hicky getting in is a bit more complex though. The Republican party really screwed up their side of the race with the whole mess about some unknown yahoo against Tom Tancredo, who ran as a third party candidate after losing the Repub nomination, and split the conservative vote – although Hicky still won with 51% of the vote. Tancredo and Maes split the rest 36% and 11% respectively. But if there had been a solid Republican campaign with one decent candidate, it may have been very different.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_gubernatorial_election,_2010

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 12:38 PM

In the early 1920′s the Communists in Russia passed a weapons registration law. Six months later they passed a weapons confiscation law. You cannot trust the government to do the right thing in all circumstances. Especially the current leftist adminstration which lies as a matter of policy. The more control the government gets, the more arrogant and tyrannical it becomes. When I took the oath to join the armed forces back in the day I swore to defend the Constitution, not the government.

kemojr on March 25, 2013 at 12:40 PM

There are a few people who’s mere pictures disgust. His is one of them. May the Earth swallow him, alive, but only afer the ants knaw on him, alive, for quite some time.

The fools of CO voted for the politicians they got.

Too sad for a once great state.

Relatively free people deserve the fools they elect, every time.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Always enjoy your posts! Yeah, given that the population center of Colorado is the “Peoples Republic of Denver” or the “Soviet Socialist Republic Of Denver” they are imposing all their groovy ideas on the rest of the state. Sucks…

yubley on March 25, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Most criminals won’t be deterred from finding a firearm by more intense background checks, but more law-abiding citizens will have a tougher time defending themselves, especially if those background checks include non-adjudicated findings of unfitness to exercise Second Amendment rights.

In practical terms, this means… more people dying at the hands of criminals. Which Hickenlooper and Friends will then use as an excuse to demand still more stringent controls on honest citizens’ guns.

And don’t tell me these b*****ds don’t understand this. They do. Remember, their credo is

Sacrifices must be made in the name of the Cause.

As long as the sacrifices are mere peasants, that is.

I’m past being irritated by the stupidity, cynicism, and megalomania of this lot. I’m into full disgust mode, now.

clear ether

eon

eon on March 25, 2013 at 1:20 PM

First, the laws signed by Hickenlooper are actually worse than people know. Cuomo in New York has had to back down on his magazine limit, because no one makes the magazines he mandates. The new Colorado law bans any magazine that can possibly be modified in any way to be over the limit. Which means all magazines and shotgun tubes. They did not admit that until after the bill had passed both Houses and was on the way to be signed by Hickenlooper.

There is a Recall Hickenlooper movement organizing. We have 60 days once the actual petition is started, and signatures are being lined up ready for the start. Given the level of election fraud the Democrats can now call on here [17 of our 64 counties have more registered voters than voting age people] any election in Colorado is of questionable legitimacy, so we have to beat the growing margin of fraud.

Hickenlooper has another problem that might help get rid of him. The Director of our Department of Corrections was murdered in his home six days ago. It gives every indication of being a possible contract hit put out by a Saudi inmate that Clement had refused an early release back to Saudi Arabia [there is a program where foreign nationals can be incarcerated in their home country, but the Saudi met none of the conditions]. The actual shooter, one Adam Abel who was killed in a shootout with Texas cops, was recently paroled despite a history of White supremacist gang activity in the prison, assaults on staff, and having been in AdSeg-Max custody level. It turns out that the father of Abel is a personal friend of Hickenlooper who has testified before the legislature about how the prison system was persecuting his son, and a major contributor to Hickenlooper’s campaign.

Hickenlooper has denied having anything to do with the parole [the Governor appoints the Parole Board], and so far the Democrat media has taken him at his word.

I would note also, that the shooter was a convicted violent felon. Anyone want to bet that he did not get the pistol [illegal under the new Democrat magazine ban] through a gun store [and go through the new Democrat background checks]; that he used to kill the head of the DOC and used in the shootout with the cops in Texas?

Subotai Bahadur on March 25, 2013 at 1:35 PM

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 12:38 PM

What you are pointing out should be shouted from the mountaintops of conservative politics. If you look at most of the races we thought we should win, we didn’t because the vote was split.

We need to be careful of this, and adjust our strategy accordingly.

dominigan on March 25, 2013 at 1:43 PM

It didn’t include the assault weapon ban because that’s not what he was instructed to pass by Biden et al.

lea on March 25, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Backpedaling like that will not get you re-elected H’looper. You are already out, and you are just now realizing it. Buh bye.

jake49 on March 25, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Yeah, given that the population center of Colorado is the “Peoples Republic of Denver” or the “Soviet Socialist Republic Of Denver” they are imposing all their groovy ideas on the rest of the state. Sucks…

yubley on March 25, 2013 at 1:04 PM

We tried so hard not to get Hickenlooper elected, but that stupid Tancredo decided to run after the caucus and split the conservative vote. I’m sure it was all planned that way.

lea on March 25, 2013 at 2:08 PM

We’re furious.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 12:31 pm

A friend who is a Scout rangemaster (and lawyer) pointed out that the CO law as written now prohibits adult gun-owners from allowing their weapons to be used by Boy Scouts for merit badge requirements while at the BSA ranges.

Overreach, much?

AesopFan on March 25, 2013 at 2:13 PM

We tried so hard not to get Hickenlooper elected, but that stupid Tancredo decided to run after the caucus and split the conservative vote. I’m sure it was all planned that way.

lea on March 25, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Really, it was a mess from the start. The Republican establishment didn’t really support Tancredo because they didn’t think he could win because he’s extremely un-PC and tends to be a bit too direct – not wrong, but VERY direct (un-PC). So in the primary, Republicans ended up picking Maes, a total unknown who looked semi-ok up front with tea party support, but ended up being a poor choice. And then of course Tancredo went third party (and getting 3 times the votes as the actual Republican nominee), and helped to further make the conservative side look like a 3 Stooges routine.
All Hicky had to do was pretend to be a middle of the road businessman and let Maes and Tancredo destroy each other.

I sure hope the Colorado Repub party gets their act together before the next major election.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM

A friend who is a Scout rangemaster (and lawyer) pointed out that the CO law as written now prohibits adult gun-owners from allowing their weapons to be used by Boy Scouts for merit badge requirements while at the BSA ranges.

Overreach, much?

AesopFan on March 25, 2013 at 2:13 PM

Very possible.
I do know that beyond 1 July, if my son wants to borrow one of my guns for a weekend to go target shooting, I’m supposed to pay $10 to run a background check on him. And if he borrows my AR-15 and takes a 30 round magazine with him, we are both instantly criminals for illegally transferring possession of an illegal (though grandfathered for me) magazine.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:26 PM

A friend who is a Scout rangemaster (and lawyer) pointed out that the CO law as written now prohibits adult gun-owners from allowing their weapons to be used by Boy Scouts for merit badge requirements while at the BSA ranges.

Overreach, much?

AesopFan on March 25, 2013 at 2:13 PM

I’m fairly certain that’s a feature, not a bug.

How else can you wean the public off their dangerous love of firearms if you can’t prohibit children from having these weapons of mass destruction be a fondly remembered part of of their childhood?

makattak on March 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM

(And just in case people cannot tell, that’s a representation of the liberal thinking, not my own.)

makattak on March 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM

A friend who is a Scout rangemaster (and lawyer) pointed out that the CO law as written now prohibits adult gun-owners from allowing their weapons to be used by Boy Scouts for merit badge requirements while at the BSA ranges.

Overreach, much?

AesopFan on March 25, 2013 at 2:13 PM

It depends on what kind of guns they use and where they get them.
When my son got his rifle merit badge at a summer camp, BSA used a batch of rented (or owned by the camp) single shot bolt action .22LR rifles. That situation is probably not affected, since everything takes place on a supervised shooting range where the kids never really “take possession” of the gun – just use it for their 10 shots then get up and leave the gun for the next kid. If other camps used guns on loan from BSA employees and/or parents, that could be a problem – due to the background check requirements.

Still bad any way you look at it.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM

A friend who is a Scout rangemaster (and lawyer) pointed out that the CO law as written now prohibits adult gun-owners from allowing their weapons to be used by Boy Scouts for merit badge requirements while at the BSA ranges.

Overreach, much?

AesopFan on March 25, 2013 at 2:13 PM

Yup, the bill is a mess. My hope is that since its written so sloppily it should make the law easy to overturn. Three major problems with the bill are:

1. It bans the “transfer” of any magazine of any size if it doesn’t have a welded base plate(readily convertible)to anyone, including family members and spouses. As I said above it makes it illegal to leave my 16rd magazine that came with the 9mm XD I bought for my wife 5 years ago for home protection with her when I leave the house for any length of time due to the must maintain “continuous possession” language. This also creates a problem were if a CCW holder is stopped for a traffic stop and the police officer takes possession of the firearm as they are allowed to do, when your ready to be one your way, he cannot give the magazine back because of the “continuous possession” language. By handing him the magazine, you have up your “continuous possession” of that magazine.

2. It bans virtually ALL magazines that don’t have a welded plate because they can be “readily converted”.

3. There is absolutely no way to enforce it as there is no way to prove the magazine was bought preban.

And that’s just the magazine ban. This “universal background checks” is a carbon copy of the NY law that makes ZERO sense in Colorado and clashes with the Colorado constitution. It requires that I get a background check on my wife for each one of my firearms before I leave the home for more than 72 hours then we have to get one done on me when I return in order to retake possession of them. Also if a corporation takes possession of a firearm for any reason that corporation must get a background check done on every single employee before that single weapon can be obtained. And of course WE now have to pay for it as he also signed a bill that levies a tax on gun buyers to cover the background checks. Also the dealers who would be doing the background checks on private “transfers” aren’t allowed to change more than $10. Well it costs the dealer $50 a pop so they will lose money on every check. What will happen is they will simply refuse to do them thus effectively banning private sales.

These anti-gun bigots have kicked a sleeping giant me thinks.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:35 PM

I’m fairly certain that’s a feature, not a bug.

How else can you wean the public off their dangerous love of firearms if you can’t prohibit children from having these weapons of mass destruction be a fondly remembered part of of their childhood?

makattak on March 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM

makattak on March 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM

I got it – FWIW.
I agree – these libtards certainly don’t want little kids learning how to safely use guns of any kind. Best way to ensure society goes that way is to make sure kids can’t do things like shooting BB guns in cub scouts or get a rifle or shotgun merit badge in boy scouts.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:37 PM

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Yup on all that.
My son just brought back 3 of my guns that he’s had up in Fort Collins for almost a month to go target shooting with friends. Given that those guns included several 17 round and several 30 round magazines – How many different ways can you count of these new laws that we just broke (if this had been after 1 July)?

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Why bother? He banned them all anyhow.

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2013a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/7E6713B015E62E6F87257B0100813CB5?Open&file=1224_enr.pdf

(2) (a) “LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE MEANS:

(I) A FIXED OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE, BOX, DRUM, FEED STRIP, OR SIMILAR DEVICE CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING, OR THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE READILY CONVERTED TO ACCEPT, MORE THAN FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION;

Can you remove the base plate from your magazine for cleaning? Yes, they’re pretty much all designed that way. For cleaning if nothing else.

Could you add an extension to put more rounds in once removing the base plate? Yep, that’s how you’d install one… not too tricky from what I’ve seen.

Therefore your magazine, regardless of initial size can be “reality converted” to accept more than 15 rounds; and is a “large capacity” magazine under the law. All magazines are defined as “large-capacity” under this legislation.

Is there an “assault weapon” by any definition under the sun that doesn’t use a magazine? Not that I’m aware of… therefore ALL assault weapons (or I guess, just their magazines) are banned.

Why bother to ban “assault weapons” when you can ban every magazine sold in the US… as Colorado just did.

gekkobear on March 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Coloradans needs to keep their eye on 2014 and remove these gun grabbers. In the meantime the Independent Institute is going to sue.

http://youtu.be/_MiE3RTfO9M

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:43 PM

3. There is absolutely no way to enforce it as there is no way to prove the magazine was bought preban.
jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Also no way to enforce it because there is no way to prove who actually owned the magazine to start with.

Next step – state or national registry of all guns AND magazines.
That’s the only way they could conclusively (beyond reasonable doubt) prove in court that there was an “illegal” transfer of a gun or magazine.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Is there an “assault weapon” by any definition under the sun that doesn’t use a magazine? Not that I’m aware of… therefore ALL assault weapons (or I guess, just their magazines) are banned.

Why bother to ban “assault weapons” when you can ban every magazine sold in the US… as Colorado just did.

gekkobear on March 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM

I would suggest that by banning essentailly ALL magazines, you have effectively banned all guns that use magazines.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:48 PM

gekkobear on March 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM

That language should make this law easy to overturn in court. It’s the same logic as trying to ban bullets. It’s still unconstitutional to ban anything that makes the gun useless. Arms and their accessories “in common use” are protected.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:48 PM

gekkobear on March 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM

Funny enough, Dave Kopel when testifying warned the legislator of this language and even told them it would be harder to litigate if they remove the “readily convertible” language and upped the limit to 30rds. He was also on the phone with HickenGunGrabber’s staff just hours before signing telling them why these bills are flawed and that they should be sent back to be redone, but he ignored him. HickenGunGrabber, his staff and the legislator were well aware of e implications these bills would have, but they didn’t care. Hick had to release a signing statement to explain what he wants the law to mean instead of it actually says. Proves who idiotic these laws are and shows a clear violation of the14th amendment as well as the 2nd.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:54 PM

Coloradans needs to keep their eye on 2014 and remove these gun grabbers. In the meantime the Independent Institute is going to sue.

http://youtu.be/_MiE3RTfO9M

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 2:43 PM

I just sent a message to the NRA asking if they will be joining any of these lawsuits against Colorado.
How they answer will determine whetehr my wife also joins the NRA and whether I renew later this year.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:55 PM

I just sent a message to the NRA asking if they will be joining any of these lawsuits against Colorado.
How they answer will determine whetehr my wife also joins the NRA and whether I renew later this year.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 2:55 PM

I thought Kopel said would in that interview though I may have misheard what he said.

jawkneemusic on March 25, 2013 at 3:09 PM

We tried so hard not to get Hickenlooper elected, but that stupid Tancredo decided to run after the caucus and split the conservative vote. I’m sure it was all planned that way.

lea on March 25, 2013 at 2:08 PM

Wasn’t Maes only polling at about 10% and that’s why Tancredo decided to run? Maes had no chance.

Hat Trick on March 25, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Wasn’t Maes only polling at about 10% and that’s why Tancredo decided to run? Maes had no chance.

Hat Trick on March 25, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Yes. As I recall (memory fading) Maes was a total unknown and not properly vetted (same as Obumble) prior to the primary, and once into the campaign it turned out he had some job history problems, and possibly some other problems – I don’t remember all the details. As the Republican candidate, Maes ended up only getting 11% of the vote – Tancredo got 3 times more votes as the “Constitution Party” candidate.

Tancredo has a tendency be very non-PC – he says things that can easily be twisted and used by the media against him, but he was a known conservative quantity having served awhile as a Colorado Representativeat the national level. In fact I voted for him – in the Repub primary AND in the actual Governor race.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 3:44 PM

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 3:44 PM

I still remember it fairly well.

1) The favored candidate was Scott McInnis, former Congressman in the 5th Congressional District. I’ve known Scott since before he was first a Congressman, and was supporting him. Note that up until I quit in disgust January 2, I was very active in the Republican party, I’ve run a successful presidential campaign in my county, and was regularly a delegate to all conventions up to State for decades.

I supported Scott, but he was the one who got caught up in plagerism problems involved in his work for a legal client. He had to drop out. That left Dan Maes, who was TEA Party.

2) Maes won the nomination, fair and square, at the convention and primary. This really hacked off the Colorado State Republican “leadership”. Immediately after the nomination was final, there was a meeting in Greeley, where they tried to force Maes to resign the candidacy so the Central Committee could name a new, non-TEA Party candidate. That did not fly, and there was an interesting stand off. The Republican Central Committee would rather lose the race than elect a TEA Party candidate.

3) When Maes would not drop out, a different deal was cut. The Constitution Party was what is called a “minor party” under Colorado law. They could use any method that they wanted to nominate candidates, but they had to petition to get each on the ballot. Major party candidates have some restrictions on how they can nominate, but their candidates get on the ballot automatically.

Tancredo and the Republican leadership went to the Constitution Party. In return for them dropping their already nominated candidate and naming Tom Tancredo as their candidate for governor, Tancredo would switch parties and the State Republican party would send large donors to the Constitution Party. The statutory marker between Major and Minor party status is getting 5% of the vote in the Governor’s race. Something the Constitution Party never could get by itself.

4) It happened. The Republican Party gave the bare legal minimum of aid to Maes. They sent donors to the Constitution Party and Tancredo, splitting the vote. Hickenlooper won. Maes lost, which the Republican party considers a victory. Tancredo lost, but the Constitution Party now has major party status. The day after the election, Tancredo re-registered as a Republican and now sits at the right hand of the Central Committee.

This is one in a long series of reasons that I left the Republican party and believe that we now need a SECOND party.

Subotai Bahadur on March 25, 2013 at 4:26 PM

SHALL

NOT

BE

INFRINGED

TX-96 on March 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Subotai Bahadur on March 25, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Ya – like I said earlier – it was a mess. The whole thing made the Colorado Republican party look like bumbling amateurs.

Too bad what happened to McInnis. Now that you mention him, I vaguely recall he was my first choice until he dropped out. From what I remember, the plagiarism deal was not even close to the kind of crap Dems and media “elites” across the country get away with all the time.

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 4:36 PM

Yes, I understand how he got in.

Stupidity is not exclusive to the leftists.

Schadenfreude on March 25, 2013 at 5:05 PM

How can a guy named hickelgruber get elected. Is that like shickelgruber? Well we have dayton, franken et al here in Minnesota. Guess a hindenberger or hinkelgruber isn’t that far fetched…His should be renamed to gungruber…….

crosshugger on March 25, 2013 at 5:13 PM

crosshugger on March 25, 2013 at 5:13 PM

LOL!!

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 5:31 PM

crosshugger on March 25, 2013 at 5:13 PM

You vant anozer schnitzengruben?
15 is my limit….

dentarthurdent on March 25, 2013 at 5:53 PM

Making background checks more efficient and reliable would provide a little more security.

No they would NOT.

The universal background check law does NOT make background checks “more efficient and reliable”. Current background checks are ALREADY efficient and reliable. Before the hysteria caused by the gun grabber, most background checks here, which go through both the CBI and the Feds, only took a few minutes. After Sandy Hook, that went up to 9 days but was down to about 2 hours last week.

As most gun owners know, most transactions at gun shows are subject to the same background checks as gun stores. They ARE the gun stores who go and display their wares at the shows.

The only transactions that were targeted by this law are private sales. For a private sale, they want you to go to a FFL dealer and pay to do a background check through them. Many FFL dealers have refused to participate. ALL 62 sheriffs came out against every one of these bills/laws because the are NOT enforceable. The only way to enforce them is to have registration.

Background checks in general are unconstitutional. They are the epitome of guilty until proven innocent. There are many other dangerous products sold today and none of them require a background check or are protected in the Constitution. At the very most, names could be checked against a public list of felons but even that would do little good.

Criminals don’t get background checks, only law-abiding citizens do.

Most of the people I know are now buying their firearms in Wyoming or Utah. Colorado has pissed away at least two companies, over $100 in revenue from those companies, hundreds of jobs, untold tourism dollars, and funds to support the Division of Wildlife. And no one will be any safer.

Lawsuits and recalls are already underway. Hickenlooper will be a one-term governor which will hopefully spell the end of his political career.

Common Sense on March 25, 2013 at 9:00 PM