CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 23, 2012 07:31 PM UTC
55 Comments
Loading ...
Is he’s clearly willing to go against very well funded interests. He’s proposed legislation that as sent Wall St into conniptions and now this. In all cases it’s legislation that serves his constituents. Speaks very well of him that he puts the voters ahead of the money.
Forced to choose unsure/other but meant other as in no change.
I chose usure/other because it does nothing to change my stand about gun control.
then I have to agree.
you mean “soldiers,”. . .
then I’m not going to argue with you, either.
did I misspell “soldier ?”
My point would be that while it is legimate and even desirable for soldiers to have access to this level of self armament at any given moment, non-soldiers maybe not nearly quite so much?
for a guy representing a suburban swing district and facing a strong challenger.
All rural areas gone from the district. Suburbans more likely to support assualt weapon ban, especially given that Columbine occurred here any anyone who had kids in Jeffco Public Schools at the time (I had two in high school) remember it well. Don’t think it hurts him politically.
Perlmutter is jumping up and down, and we don’t even know if the guns would have been banned. Why isn’t that being condemned? He doesn’t know if reinstating the ban would have helped anything.
When Republicans “jump the gun,” you call them on it. Why not now?
because right now you sound like a stammering dumbass.
YES, an AR15 with a collapsible stock and other military-related modifications would’ve been on the Assault Weapons ban list. In fact the AR-15 was listed BY NAME.
The Remington 870 may have been banned as well, if it was the model with the collapsible stock, pistol grip and had an internal magazine that could hold more than 5 shells. (The news organizations are lazy, and have posted a variety of images.)
In addition, the 100-round drum magazine was illegal under the Assault weapons ban, as the largest capacity magazine allowed was 20 rounds.
So, if we managed to have some moral courage from our Congress and they avoided listening to the NRA’s Million Dollar Man LaPierre, a ban would’ve taken 2 of the most devastating weapons this kook used.
Dumbass.
If bombs are outlawed, then only outlaws will have bombs.
Since the US Government possesses nuclear weapons, then even the most uninformed citizen should realize that the Second Amendment guarantees anyone cheap and easy access to nuclear weapons if they so choose.
As has been proven time and time again, there is no reason to place undo burdens on law-abiding Americans (e.g. bans, taxes, security checks) in the futile attempt to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of crazies and criminals. Laws won’t stop them, and any sufficiently motivated (and funded) criminal or crazy will find the way to get them anyway!
.
U wouldn’t believe the hassle that I, as a private citizen and registered gun dealer, have to go thru just to buy a small (4 kT) nuke today.
At least its easier than trying to get the NRC to issue a Design Certification for a Romawa Pebble Bed Reactor, let alone getting them to issue a license letting me build and operate one in my backyard.
But seriously, like many others, I grew up in rural areas, and had my own Daisy air rifle as a 10 year old sending thousands of BB’s into targets pinned to trees in my backyard (10 acres with the nearest neighbor far away), graduating to shooting my brother’s .22 rifle and pump shotgun.
I grew out of it by the time I was about 20.
Let’s read that Second Amendment again. There’s gotta me a way. Have you tried the Fourth? Search and Seizure? It’s your backyard, isn’t it?
Here’s another fact, guns don’t kill people, but people with lots of guns and lots of ammunition and assualt-rifles kill a lot of people at one time. You people are so stupid and those of us who have bought this bull shit for so long, have to quit taking it. Guns don’t kill people, but people with guns kill people. That’s my response from now on.
I think I’ll use that response from now on too.
kill a lot of people.
Lots and lots and lots of people. Deer? Not so much.
Thank you, Congressman Perlmutter.
A ban on assault weapons is the best response to this tragedy. If the gunman’s automatic weapon had not jammed, the toll would have been even worse. Just imagine.
The assault rifle the gunman acquired legally would have been illegal just 8 years ago. The primary function of government is to protect its citizens. There is no reason for any citizen to own an assault rifle. I am sure that a poll on that specific question would find overwhelming support.
Now, let’s get it done!
But the 100-round drum magazine probably would have been.
Not being a terribly gun-savvy person, could someone please tell me what use a 100-round drum has:
… for target shooting?
… for hunting?
… for self-defense?
… for protecting yourself from your government?
It’s apparent the things jam regularly. In what circumstances would a 100-round drum be superior to a bunch of pre-filled clips?
(heavy weapons specialist in a Colorado National Guard outfit,)
if the 100-round contraption had a reputation for jamming, then it was only good for display and parades.
Back in the early part of the Viet Nam War, the Army took the heavy-but-reliable M-14 out of soldiers’ hands and replaced it with the easy-to-jam, requiring-constant-cleaning M-16.
I guess tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground just assumed that soldiers wouldn’t mind cleaning their weapon several times a day, the way they don’t mind changing socks frequently.
That’s a joke, son.
NCO’s (Sergeants) actually have to go around and inspect feet and witness sock changes, in some situations. We infantrymen didn’t get the nicknames “Sad Sack,” Doughboy” and “Grunt” for nothing.
In other words, the first M-16’s quickly developed a reputation for not working after less than a day into a foot patrol.
Colt made a bundle by replacing them with the new and improved M-16A1, which had a “charging handle” to manually reduce most jams without disassembling the receiver, or even opening the chamber.
It was an improvement, but a lot of ground pounders still sought and got M-14’s to carry, necessitating S-4 to supply 2 different types of ball ammo to the troops.
For some reason, soldiers want their weapons to fire every time they pull the trigger.
I should have mentioned the “forward assist,” too. I think the two items were added with the A1 version.
Both are for clearing jams.
but I don’t think it was actually an “automatic weapon” in the sense I am familiar with.
That classification has to do with the sear, and the cycle of function repeating itself continuously as long as the trigger is held.
But if that 100-round magazine worked as intended, the distinction becomes less distinct.
The largest magazine I’ve ever used for that family of weapons is the 30-round banana clip.
If I squeezed and held the trigger, I’d burn up all 30 rounds in maybe 5 seconds or so.
Although the M-16 design sharply limits the recoil, usually only the first couple of rounds would go where I wanted, if I was aiming. The rest only go in that general direction. Unless the weapon was sandbagged in, which is sometimes done in an improved fighting position (foxhole.)
With a 100-round mag, which I have heard is 2 50-round drums joined into one unit, if working properly, I imagine I could squeeze the trigger 30 times in 15 seconds.
Fairly similar results.
Technically, I think the AR-15 is classified as a semi-automatic weapon.
It’s the least I/we can do.
And, Gov. Hickenlooper can take me off his email list. What a worthless “leader”. His view that nothing needs to be done about automatic weapons because the gunman would have used a bomb instead is complete chickenshit.
Hickenlooper is a huge disappointment. He cuts education to shreds while granting tax breaks for the wealthiest Coloradans. Those tax breaks enjoyed by the richest among us include: property taxes for wealthy seniors; pension income exclusions; and, tuition contribution deductions regardless of income. And, he still allows millions of dollars of capital gains to be untaxed.
He is truly a “do-nothing to shake the boat” governor. I’m embarrassed to have helped his campaign.
…He called the shooter a “son of a gun.”
Flicking to auto was full automatic. M16A2 auto set to 3 rounds per trigger pull.
We would tape magazines together so change was fast and easy
AR15 is semi-automatic unless modified. Which is easy to accomplish.
some politicians will say anything after a tragedy to get elected. Perlmutter has every right to his opinion and has my respect but banning guns will never pass congress let alone prevent tragedies like this. Remember Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing? No guns were used in that terrible incident.
I believe the problem is not guns, it’s the people who buy them who are mentally unstable and/or criminals. I think a far better use of Congressman Perlmutter’s time would be to brainstorm ways to enact some sort of psych evaluation / medical records background check to prevent mentally ill people from purchasing guns over the counter. Maybe require all persons to have two or three friends/witnesses sign, date, and acknowledge someone’s gun purchase?
What possible reason do you have to be against that?
Sure, that wouldn’t have stopped this guy, but it would have minimized the deaths and injuries if he didn’t use an assault rifle!
I mean, get a freakin clue!
placed on the sale of some quantities of some fertilizers after the OK bombing. I never did hear anyone stupidly say “Fertilizers don’t kill people. . .”
You can’t even buy a more-than-5-lb. bag of blood meal (high N) for your garden without a background check. Ask the guys at your local Feed and Seed place.
What a terrible tragedy this whole thing is…I feel so bad for the victims and their families.
On the topic of banning assault weapons, it is well documented in various news reports that the AR-15 “assault weapon” used by the shooter in this tragedy jammed before all 100 rounds were fired forcing the shooter to switch to another “non assault weapon” gun.
And by the way, there are plenty of low cost aftermarket accessories that allow a standard semi-automatic handgun (like the Glock used by the shooter) to hold and shoot 20+ rounds of ammunition. Banning assault weapons might sound good and make lawmakers feel they are accomplishing something but in practice it would do absolutely nothing to prevent people from buying and shooting other guns that could hold and shoot just as many rounds of ammunition.
No one needs a gun that can shoot hundreds of rounds. Is that so difficult to understand?
We shouldn’t try to stop people from driving drunk.
that the main goal of the assault weapons ban was to eliminate the sale and manufacture of large capacity clips. The elimination of the weapons that used them as standard issue was kind of a byproduct. It also handily created a market for collectible weapons that quickly bid prices up much higher than your usual mass murderer is prepared for.
People firing indiscriminately into crowds should ideally have to stop to reload.
Ok, I can understand that actually.
But, “Less likely” — come on, really? Please make your case, because I’m clearly missing something.
But, if it’s anything like: . . .
. . . well, just save it. No one can argue with that kind of logic.
Analysis: Why gun controls are off the agenda in America
I’ll leave it to the gun nuts to explain why we need this level of armament compared to the rest of the world.
I see the Guvs say that Holmes’ AR-15 may have been illegal under the AWB which expired in 2004. Have the specific features on his weapon been described? It looks to me like simply being an AR-15 isn’t enough, it needed to have a folding stock, flash suppressor etc.
I support Ed either way, but if this weapon would have been unavailable to Holmes under the AWB, he’s definitely got a winning issue.
It has been heavily reported by the news media that these guns (two Glock semi-automatic pistols, one Remington shotgun, and one AR-15) were purchased at Gander Mountain and Bass Pro Shops in the Aurora/Stapleton area which leads me to believe they were 100% legal for the shooter to purchase.
I respect the passion of people who want to ban or severely restrict guns in this country but let’s be realistic… the ability to buy, own, and shoot guns is enshrined in the constitution and is heavily protected by powerful lobby groups, the supreme court, numerous elected lawmakers, and large section of the US population. Trying to outlaw guns is simply not going to happen in this country.
On the other hand…someone like Perlmutter could accomplish incredible things if he instead chose to spend his efforts into improving the depth and quality of criminal/psychiatric/employment verification background checks for people who apply to buy firearms.
Not a valid criteria for anything other than “can you afford this”, IMHO.
And yet, people kept working to end it. And eventually they did. Hard problems rarely get solved immediately and in a single step. But with a strong ongoing effort, hey can be resolved over time.
The real problem is unstable people walking among us like ticking time bombs. It doesn’t take an “assault” rifle to kill lots of people, 9/11 was perpetrated with box cutters and our roads are filled with multi-ton missiles, you can buy all the ingredients to make bombs off the shelves of your local stores, even poison gas can be made by any school child.
Until we address the mental health needs of our citizens these massacres will continue regardless of the availability of “assault” rifles. Blaming the gun is like blaming the automobile for drunk drivers – the responsibility falls on the operator.
that right.
. . . some minimum gun owner testing and licensure requirements, including periodic renewal . . . maybe some private liability insurance requirements to compensate any injured parties . . . annual use taxes . . .
Actually a little bit further than I might be willing to consider, but what the heck? . . . you go, guirl!
PS to both you and sloanslake: Good luck getting those “mental health” issues past the NRA, truly. If you ever do, I suggest you might want to start testing with Colorado’s very own Dudley “If-I-only-had-6,000-rounds-for-my-AR15s-I’d-literally-feel-naked” Brown.
Traffic deaths are at historic lows due to tougher enforcement, safer roads, and the amazing progress in safety equipment innovations. Society has made the conscious decision that through prudent laws and regulations, the benefits of mobility outweigh the price we pay in deaths and injuries caused by the automobile.
OTOH, guns have become more powerful, reliable and accurate. And relatively cheap too.
The point of pursuing tighter regulations and other gun control policies is to prevent future tragedies. There is no justification to stop that process just because there are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation today, and thousands of gun deaths and injuries each year. We need to look forward to a rational and civil society – not a return to the wild west.
It was at one of the Academy stores, a big sporting goods chain in Texas in May. I was with my grandson getting some fishing stuff.
And there on the shelf with the hunting rifles were two AR’s. What floored me was the cost. One was $1500 and the other $2000, IIRC.
How the hell does any typical struggling middle class person – or grad student – afford something like that? I’ll bet the ammo ain’t cheap, either.
which he had no intention of ever paying off.
Aren’t bullets something like a dollar apiece?
(too lazy to use the google).
…that people who spend all this money on these non-hunting, non-defense arms hate those high socialistic taxes?
Definite proof that the public isn’t always the best segment to decide how to spend their own money.
“Hey, honey, now that we got Mom in the nursing home on Medicaid, I can afford that sweet AK-47, a big magazine, and 6000 rounds!”
I will be joining the fight to restrict assault weapons, including large capacity magazines, and the ammunition for them. There is no need for these weapons for anyone other than the military, and now the police due to the sale and presence in civilian homes now.