Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Colorado Senate Democrats tackle the best way to undermine the 2nd Amendment

I’ll be watching the live feed much of the day and will add commentary in the thread as I see fit.  For those of you interested in watching how a pre-determined, party-line outcome plays out as if it is the product of rigorous debate and honest consideration — that is, for those of you who are interested in learning how contemporary government, when led by Democrats (whose entire agenda on key social issues is national, regardless of whether they claim ostensibly to represent their state and its constituency), actually functions, I invite you to watch along with me.

It’s a dog and pony show built around trotting out victims of gun violence and using their genuine grief to push for laws that in no way would have helped them or prevented the tragedies the supposedly reactive (but quite obviously pre-planned) legislation on offer claim to address.  It is self-serving politics masked in the preposterous guise of compassion — as if having created the conditions for victimization becomes, down the line,  somehow ennobling, provided you pretend to feel the pain of those very victims that you’ve helped create through your ill-considered policies, and then demand that something be done on behalf of those victims of your own legislative arrogance, having first patted yourselves on the back for essentially enabling and securing their victimhood.

It’s a despicable and cynical game.  And frankly, it makes me throw up a bit in my mouth every time I watch it at work.

But, as I’m a giver, I’ll “cover” this bit of phony theater for all of you dozens of readers.

The live feed is here, but you can also go back and watch the late night/early morning debates.  So far, here’s what’s happened, in what used to be a free state:

Colorado Democrats advanced restrictions on ammunition magazines and expanded background checks as hundreds of gun advocates filled the state Capitol during an intense day in the battle over new firearm laws.

The husband of former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords testified Monday in favor of expanding background checks to include private and online sales. A Senate committee passed the bill on a 3-2 party-line vote.

Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman from Tucson, Ariz., was wounded in a mass shooting in January 2011 while meeting with constituents.

Car honks blared all day outside as lawmakers discussed seven gun bills. All of them passed by the time debate ended late Monday night.

The bills still need votes by the full Senate, which is controlled by Democrats.

A look at the bills and what they do:

BACKGROUND CHECKS: House Bill 1229 would add a background-check requirement for many guns sold in private transactions. It passed a Senate committee in a 3-2 party-line vote. The Democratic-sponsored bill has already cleared the House.

MAGAZINE LIMITS: House Bill 1224 limits gun ammunition magazines to 15 rounds. The Democratic-sponsored bill has cleared the House, and passed Senate Judiciary on a 3-2 party line vote.

FIREARM BAN FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFFENDERS: Senate Bill 197 would expand a ban on gun ownership for people convicted of certain domestic-violence offenses. The bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line 3-2 vote Monday. One more committee vote awaits before the full Senate considers it.

GUN LIABILITY: Senate Bill 196 adds legal liability for gun sellers and owners. The bill faced its first test Monday.

GUNS ON CAMPUS: House Bill 1226 would end Colorado’s unusual law barring public college campuses from banning concealed weapons. The Democratic-sponsored bill has already cleared the House.

ONLINE GUN TRAINING: Senate Bill 195 would require people seeking concealed carry permits to take gun training courses in person. The bill faced its first legislative review Monday.

BACKGROUND CHECK FEES: House Bill 1228 would revive fees for gun purchasers who need background checks. It passed a Senate committee in a 3-2 party-line vote. The Democratic-sponsored bill has already cleared the House.

 

The bills go to the full-Senate Friday, where I suspect all but the unconstitutional liability act will pass and go to Governor Hickenlooper for passage, at which point — mimicking the political leaders of declining and depopulating blue states — he will act in a way to pushes the progressive agenda, at the expense of keeping successful, homegrown businesses in Colorado.

My name for this current assembly can be summed up thus: “How the West was lost.” And with it, a tradition of rugged individualism, struck down with the stroke of a pen from a bunch of effete, cowardly lawmakers riding what they think is a momentous wave of anti-gun sentiment.

Oh, and incidentally, Mark Kelly seems to be just mailing it in at this point, going from state to state making the same arguments. Unfortunately for him, his favorite argument concerns “closing the gun show loophole,” which he went on about at some length.

— The only problem being, Colorado had already done that on its own years ago.

Way to keep it local, Mark! And such studied preparation!

****
More: Colorado Dem tells rape victim a gun wouldn’t have helped her:

…to which the appropriate response should have been, “well, it wouldn’t have hurt — and the first time you’re being raped, I ask that you request your attacker pause his sexual brutalizing so that you can explain to him how statistically he isn’t really much of a threat to you.”*

(h/t geoff B and JHo)

24 Replies to “Colorado Senate Democrats tackle the best way to undermine the 2nd Amendment”

  1. JD says:

    I liked where the legislator bimbo told a rape victim that concealed carry would not have protected her. How did she keep from getting spat upon?

  2. happyfeet says:

    victims of gun violence what try to render people defenseless against gun violence are deeply sick in the head

  3. Gayle says:

    Is it true that a *Republican* told a testifying rape victim that Colorado legislators weren’t interested in self-defense, but only in making sure people weren’t being made uncomfortable by having guns around? (Or something to that effect)

  4. geoffb says:

    I liked where the legislator bimbo told a rape victim that concealed carry would not have protected her

    Link.

  5. sdferr says:

    Glenn Beck just now announced an appearance by Rand Paul, up next, in regard to Paul breaking news on a letter he received from Eric Holder about the use of drones over the United States. Beck made the announcement appear to be shattering news.

  6. sdferr says:

    Now it seems Paul has postponed his appearance until later today on another Beck venue The Blaze.

  7. leigh says:

    Please keep us posted, sdferr.

  8. geoffb says:

    [M]aking sure people weren’t being made uncomfortable by having guns around?

    Or pictures of guns, pastry bitten into an “L” shape, fingers pointing, paper cutouts of guns.

    The Democrats have become an insane cult with an alternative reality they will attempt to impose on all people they have acquired power over. Teacher, legislator, same game. Make everyone live in their nightmare world.

  9. The letters G, N, S and U will be banned from government-run schools any day now.

  10. geoffb says:

    “L”, “F”, and “J” have to go also for their horrific shapes.

  11. Jeff G. says:

    Gayle, it is. Having not seen the testimony, I can’t say for certain if he was being serious or whether he was engaging in a bit of pointed irony.

  12. What do you reckon they’ve got against snug, McGehee?

    Wait. . . oh!

  13. JHoward says:

    Colorado Dem tells rape victim a gun wouldn’t have helped her

    Said Dem’s arrogance is stupefying.

  14. JD says:

    Said Dem’s arrogance is stupefying.

    It should be painful. And visible, so people would know when that level of stupid is approaching.

  15. geoffb says:

    God made men and women equal…and Smith & Wesson keeps them that way.”

  16. Slartibartfast says:

    No more gnus publications, it seems.

  17. Merovign says:

    The next time someone assaults me I’ll remember that.

    “You know, statistically I’m really not that likely to…” BANG BANG

    Maybe they will pass a law requiring rapists to be certified and sign a form before each rape acknowledging statistics and official procedures.

    Or just make it illegal to break the law against breaking the law against breaking the law against breaking the law against rape.

  18. Mike G. says:

    I can see the viability of two of the proposals. The ban on people convicted of non-felony aggravated domestic violence where physical force against one’s spouse is a good idea.

    And the ban against using online training courses as a precursor to getting a CCW is, on the surface, a good idea. Having gone through the training myself, I think actually going to a certified school with trained instructors is the way to go. In an online course, how do you pass the shooting portion of the course? Does the online instructor take your word for it that you scored 100% on your shooting exam?

  19. SBP says:

    There are four states that don’t require any kind of course , license, or registration of any kind in order to carry, openly or concealed.

    It hasn’t been a problem.

  20. steveaz says:

    “Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman from Tucson, Ariz., was wounded in a mass shooting in January 2011 while meeting with constituents.”

    If we jettison the Left’s obfuscating passive tense and add a few verifiable qualifiers, then the facts behind Gifford’s shooting convey the more-damning truth that the Left seeks to hide.

    “Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman from Tucson, Ariz., suffered wounds when, in January 2011, the son of career Tucson civil servants, both registered Democrats, shot her while she met with constituents.”

    No wonder the media shouted, “Sarah Shot Gabby!” “The uncivility!” To look closely at the Loughner household for clues to the shooting would be disasterous to the services’ standing with taxpayers, and would certainly damage ‘The Cause.’

  21. Georgia requires a permit, but no course. Instead they adopted the wildly fantastical idea of making attacking your spouse illegal, and topped that off with the nonsensical notion of not preventing said spouse from having her own weapon for self-defense.

    It’s a wonder the place still exists.

  22. […] frequent commentator over at Protein Wisdom, for comprehends The Horror of it […]

  23. Mike G. says:

    @ McGehee…I have a SC CCW permit. It’s no good in Georgia. Why? Because South Carolina doesn’t recognize Georgia permits because of the lack of training. So in consequence, Georgia doesn’t recognize SC permits. I can send off to Florida for their CCW permit, which is recognized by GA, but why should I have to shell out another $117 bucks just to get coverage in ten more states. Florida is one of the few states that allows issue of out of state permits by mail with documentation. Most states require residency or else the permit has to be applied for in person.

    Either do away with the need for a permit in any state,( my vote), or else make coverage universal in any state with issued permit from your home state.

Comments are closed.