May 18, 2013

A Full Court Press

The majority of Colorado sheriffs have filed suit to stop the recently passed gun control laws.

Michael Bane is all over it.

The folks over at Shall Not Be Questioned have videos up.

There's an article about the suit that deserves a brief fisking:

"A group of Colorado county sheriffs, angry about two new state gun control laws passed in the wake of last year's mass shootings in Connecticut and Colorado, filed a federal lawsuit on Friday seeking to block the laws from going into effect." (internal links ommitted)

Right off the bat, the Bloomberg operativeObama cheerleader reporter tries to paint a picture of us angry gun owners, being led by emotion rather than reason or logic or duty. Speaking on behalf of the Kettles I would invite Mr. Pot to examine his own complexion before making such accusations.

"The two laws, passed by the state's Democratic-controlled legislature with scant Republican support, ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds and require background checks for all private gun sales and transfers." (emphasis added)

"...scant Republican support..." would only be factual if scant meant none. In the house and senate of Colorado, every Republican voted against both bills, with a few Democrats joining in their no votes. (3 Democrats and all Republicans opposed passage of the magazine ban in the house, in the senate 2 Democrats joined all the Republicans in voting against the magazine ban, and all of the Republicans in the house and senate, along with 3 Democrats voted against the universal background check bill.) But scant means a number greater than zero, so if the first paragraph didn't make you suspicious about this reporter's professionalism, the second paragraph definitely should.

Moving further on down the article:

"The bills were introduced in response to a shooting spree that killed 12 people at a suburban Denver movie theater last July and the slaying of 20 children and six adults at an elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, in December."

Bullshit. These bills, and the others that were passed in Colorado this year, were introduced because of the culture war being waged against gun owners, emanating from D.C. and NYC.. They were not a response to a mass murder in Aurora nor a mass murder in Connecticut. Those were merely the pretexts. None of the bills passed would have deterred or effectively hindered the two murderers in question had they been in place at the time.


Democratic state Senator Mary Hodge, who sponsored the magazine-limit bill, blasted the sheriffs and said the restrictions were reasonable public-safety measures.

'We can't just sit by and do nothing while first-graders and moviegoers are being mowed down in one fell swoop with weapons equipped with large-capacity magazines,' Hodge said in a statement."

Ah, the excuse that something had to be done, with no explanation of exactly how that something would make anyone safer, only inferences to it being "for the children". Arming teachers would have been something. Using tort pressure to discourage movie theaters from banning gun carriers from attending their movies would have been something. Both of those somethings can be logically connected with preventing or mitigating the two mass murders mentioned. But those two actual somethings, which arguably would have been effective, do not fit in with the Eloi culture's agenda, which is to wipe out the gun culture.

Reasonable is nothing more than a catch phrase to these people, devoid of meaning or substance (and that description applies to their comprehension of the word "reasonable" as well).

It is not tell a judge that you possessed the magazine before July 1rst 2013 and see the charges dismissed with not even an apology for the inconvenience or expense.

It is not "reasonable" to be called when you're out of town because your wife is in jail and your firearms are seized because you were away for 27 days and didn't have a background check performed on your spouse of 17 years. Nor is it "reasonable" to be arrested when you arrive at the jail to bail your wife out because you, too, ran afoul of the universal background check law.

On down the article a little more...

"Governor John Hickenlooper, a Democrat who signed the bills into law, is named as the defendant in the lawsuit. His office had no immediate comment."

That's strange his office didn't have a statement. I figured by then Bloomberg's staff would have already drafted something for Hickenlooper to say.

"Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, a Republican, said in a statement that his role 'will be to get court rulings on the legality of various aspects of the legislation as expeditiously as possible.'

'Colorado citizens, and law-abiding gun owners in particular, deserve such clarification,' said Suthers, who did not publicly oppose the two bills when they were debated in the legislature."

As the head lawyer in the state, he's either got the wrong idea about his job description (offering legal opinions before the courts make up their mind being one of his duties), he's incompetent, or he's trying to play it safe.

I covered the legal problems with the magazine ban bill here as well as here. I covered the universal background check bill here (though that was before the final round of amendments).

Jon Caldara of the Independence Institute even did a video on why the magazine ban creates a bad legal situation.

A law degree is not required to see the problems with these laws, nor give an opinion. I'm not, nor ever have been a lawyer (I've always made an honest living), but if I can see glaring interstate commerce issues with the magazine ban as well as flagrant impositions on the respective state and federal Right to own and carry weapons amendments then why can't the guy that's actually getting paid to do legal analysis offer a guestimate on what these laws mean and if they pass constitutional scrutiny?

The state AG should have come out in opposition to these bills from jumpstreet.

"Separately, a Colorado pro-gun group, the Basic Freedom Defense Fund, said it was circulating a petition to recall the president of the state Senate, Democrat John Morse, because of his support for gun control measures.

Morse, a former police officer, said he would likely face a recall election later this year as a result.

'If they are successful in removing the Senate president in Colorado, it will have a chilling effect on anyone who takes them on but if they fail they will be exposed for the paper tiger they should be,' he said."

Ah, Morse. I always meant to do a character assassination of him, but I decided to put that on hold until he actually acquires some character.

That chilling effect he laments is called democracy, which he is purportedly supposed to be a fan of. Some of his constituents (which are the only ones who can sign for and get a recall) are unhappy with him. How many that is I'm unsure of, but it looks like it may be enough to get a recall vote on him this fall.

Morse has advised the senators he presides over to ignore what their constituents say and just vote. This is the result - he'll likely face a recall vote. If the Republicans put up a halfway decent candidate (i.e. one that's not actually wearing a clown suit) he'll likely lose. Of course given how the Colorado Republican party has been the last decade or so that's a mighty big if.

Getting back to the focal point of the article, and this post, I think the legal challenge would convince any decent judge to grant an injunction and ultimately strike down these laws. But Colorado has a lack of decent judges; here they have a tendency to defer to legislative power even when it conflicts with a constitution. So the outcome is iffy and if you're in Colorado I'd suggest carrying on like the bans would go into effect. That means stocking up on any magazines and related parts you may need. It also means looking to move if at all possible. If you're not in Colorado I'd advise against visiting after July 1rst. At that point, if these laws are allowed to stand, we'll stop being part of America, and the risk for those who carry weapons with no ill intent becomes to great.

Posted by Publicola at May 18, 2013 06:08 AM | TrackBack

Massage McHenry

Posted by: Massage Woodstock at March 27, 2014 06:13 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?