Posted on 05/08/2021 5:31:57 AM PDT by real saxophonist
Weld commissioners oppose gun control bills presented by state Democrats
By TREVOR REID
PUBLISHED: May 7, 2021
The Weld County commissioners this week announced their opposition to three gun control bills presented by state Democrats late this past month in response to the mass shooting this year in Boulder.
The commissioners reaffirmed the county’s “Second Amendment Sanctuary” status, according to a Friday news release, first proclaimed in March 2019 in response to the state’s Extreme Risk Protection Order bill.
State Democrats in late April introduced three bills meant to curb the state’s “gun violence epidemic,” according to a news release from the General Assembly Democrats. The bills included a local preemption bill, SB 21-256, allowing local governments to implement laws around gun ownership that are broader than state statutes. Such laws could not be less restrictive than state laws.
“What is proposed under the gold dome in Denver is dangerous for all Colorado residents,” Commissioner Chairman Steve Moreno said in the county news release. “The most dangerous of which is SB 21-256, which proposes local governments (cities and counties) may enact their own ordinances regarding the sale, purchase, transfer for possession of firearms.”
The county release indicated the bill’s passage would create a patchwork of inconsistent rules and regulations across the state, an apparent departure from the commissioners’ stance regarding local control in a variety of other areas.
“By giving local governments the authority to implement community-driven gun violence prevention measures, we’re doing things the Colorado way,” said Rep. Lindsey Daugherty, D-Arvada, one of the bill’s sponsors, in the Democrats’ news release.
Another bill would create an Office of Gun Violence Prevention under the Department of Public Health and Environment. The office would conduct public awareness campaigns about gun violence prevention and educate the public about existing state resources and laws, including how to file an Extreme Risk Protection Order, how to access mental health resources and how to store firearms securely.
The office would also fund community-based violence intervention programs focused on interrupting “cycles of gun violence,” according to the news release. Finally, the office would research and present on gun violence prevention tools and resources, as well as create and maintain a database of research on gun violence in Colorado.
The bill passed the House Judiciary Committee on Friday by a vote of 8.5.
“More government is never the answer to any problem,” Commissioner Scott James said in the Weld County news release. “There is a problem in this country with gun violence and there is a desperate need in this country to have an honest conversation about mental health. These bills do nothing to address either of those issues.”
The bill creating the Office of Gun Violence Prevention would cost the state about $3.1 million each year over the next two fiscal years, as well as possibly increasing state and local revenue on an ongoing basis, according to the bill’s most recent fiscal note.
“As elected officials for this county, it is our responsibility as a board to make sure we protect the rights of our residents and by speaking out against bad legislation and speaking up for our residents’ rights, I believe we are doing just that,” Commissioner Perry Buck said in the release.
The third bill, HB 21-1298, would expand background checks by prohibiting a person who has been convicted of specific violent misdemeanor offenses from purchasing a firearm for five years. These offenses include charges such as child abuse, hate crimes, animal cruelty, sexual assault and third-degree assault.
The bill also closes a loophole allowing an individual who may not have otherwise passed a background check to obtain a firearm if the results of the check take longer than three days to process. The bill would create a state requirement for a firearms dealer to receive approval from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation prior to transferring a firearm. The bill recently passed the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 7-4.
“Weld County is a Second Amendment Sanctuary County because the Board of Weld County Commissioners honor the Constitution of the United States and the rights of individuals to defend themselves and their families,” Commissioner Lori Saine said in the county news release.
The board will not adopt any ordinance which would abridge or restrict gun rights, the release states. The board also supports Sheriff Steve Reams’ discretion not to enforce any such law.
“The Second Amendment is pretty self-explanatory,” Reams said in the release. “They (legislators) need to stop this nonsense.”
Three arrested in connection with deadly double shooting at Arlington McDonald’s
All three of them have been charged with second-degree murder, reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, employing a firearm with intent to commit a felony, and possession of a controlled substance with intent to manufacture, deliver and/or sell.
Hollingsworth has also been charged with being a convicted felon in possession of a handgun and tampering with evidence.
Memphis Police Officer, ATF agent SHOT.
No race given. Police say the incident happened just after 2:30 p.m. According to Memphis Police, officers with the Violent Crime Unit were searching for a carjacked vehicle that had been involved in a crash in the area of Alabama and Mosby.
https://wreg.com/news/atf-investigating-possible-shooting-in-north-memphis/
I’d like someone to name just one gun control bill that worked.
“The bill also closes a loophole allowing an individual who may not have otherwise passed a background check to obtain a firearm if the results of the check take longer than three days to process. The bill would create a state requirement for a firearms dealer to receive approval from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation prior to transferring a firearm. The bill recently passed the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 7-4.”
The gaslight media falsely represents a legal carve-out as a “loophole” in need of closing, namely, that if law enforcement can’t determine the lawful status of an individual in several days, the transaction must be allowed to proceed. (This provides an incentive for LE to not delay adjudications.) If the amended law is passed, closing this “loophole”, then LE will be able to delay a purchase for a week, a month, a year without any consequence that I am aware of. (Am I wrong? Does something bad happen to anyone if a person is wrongfully delayed for some great length of time?)
Some possible remedies might be to pay the wrongly delayed person, say, $1000 per day of delay past three days, or possibly have the LE officer responsible for the delay be held legally culpable for the harm or death of a wrongfully-delayed person, if the latter comes to harm or death as a result of a violent crime against which they were unable to defend themselves as a result of the wrongful delay. (So, if an ex-wife tries to buy a gun to protect herself from her estranged ex-husband, her purchase is wrongfully delayed, then the ex-husband comes and murders her during the delay, the officer who had authority over the delay gets charged with her murder.) Fair?
I definitely noticed that word ‘loophole’ when I posted.
Another aspect of the “loophole” is that the carve out - transactions must be allowed to proceed in the event of no response from LE after three days - was a concession originally made to enable passage of the legislation. “Don’t worry, if there’s no response, the transaction will be allowed to go through anyway, so, don’t worry about that, it’s specifically written into the law.”
But now that specific item is being maliciously called a “loophole”, in need of closing. So much for the “good-faith” concession made to enable the original passage of the background check law. We can see now how much good faith there really was.
No, they're meant to push totalitarian government with Democrats in charge.
No, local yocals can't override the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment.
Hey, if "violent misdemeanor offenses" are sufficient reason to infringe someone's gun rights, they're definitely sufficient reason to take away that person's right to vote, as well. If legislators started adding voting rights restrictions to bills like this, as well as proposed "red flag" legislation, fewer of these idiotic laws targeting gun owners would get passed...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.