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*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 10, 2007 03:51 PM UTC

Monday Open Thread

  • 65 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.”

–Alexis de Tocqueville

Comments

65 thoughts on “Monday Open Thread

  1. on the armed security staff that the new life church supposedly maintains. Why does a church keep an armed security staff? How can they afford it?

    Yes, I brought it up yesterday, but more and more reports are coming out that this was not stepped up security, but the norm for the church. It is one thing for the members to have guns there, it is another for the church to hire security, and finally to  keep on staff guns for hire. How many other mega churchs require hired guns? I reckon this really is just big business in spite of what ppl like  dobson, falwell, haggard, etc say.  

    1. any other church but I know people who are, and I have done work there multiple times. My best guess, and only a guess is that because there are so many people going to this place, and there are so many nutjobs out and about, that they should err on the side of caution.

      I would rather they had an armed guard on site to be able to stop a slaughter, should one occur, than to not have one because of costs or morality concerns.

      Wouldn’t you?

      1. .

        but we have someone (unarmed, I believe) patrol the parking lot during services because cars are regularly broken into without the guard.

        In Colorado Springs, at least 5% of folks walking around the mall, attending church or driving our streets are carrying concealed weapons.  

        I don’t see why they needed an armed guard.  

        It’s a little surprising that the guard was the first to shoot back.  

        After all, isn’t this just the sort of situation used to justify carrying a handgun ?  

        Then none of the concealed carriers takes decisive action ?

        They may as well not carry.

        .

        1. but don’t you think that most CCW holders wouldn’t actually carry into a church service?  Maybe some of them had their weapons locked in their cars.

          How bizarre to be discussing this, eh?

          1. .

            I don’t carry.

            If I wanted to be armed, I’d wear a holster on my hip, open carry, which does not require a permit.  

            But not in a crowd.

            But I’m guessing that half of concealed weapons are in purses, and not taken out just because they’re going to church.  

            Maybe you’re right.  

        2. And if 5% of the population of El Paso county (576,884) had concealed carry permits it would translate into 28,844 permits.  (Colorado Springs with a population of 369,815 would be 18,490 permits at 5%).  According to the Sheriff’s office there are about 7,000 permits that have been issued.  So you are wrong on that account also.  

          1. .

            and if you assume the contrary, that out of 10,000 people at the church service,

            none was carrying a firearm,

            then you have a different understanding of who your neighbors are than I have.  

            Not everyone carrying a concealed weapon does so legally.  

            Some folks are not able to get a permit, or want to get a permit, but still feel they need a gun for self protection.  

            To get a better idea of how many folks carry concealed weapons, ask someone who makes traffic stops.

            You might be confusing

            “I disagree with you”

            with

            “you are wrong.”  

            1. I think you are factually wrong on this count.  I just don’t believe that there are 28,000 people in El Paso County who are carrying concealed guns and only 7,000 of them have a permit.  

              I have talked to Sheriff Maketa before on this very subject and he said the number of people who carry a firearm concealed without a permit, for their own protection, is very low.  

              1. Technically, carrying a weapon in your car does not require a CCW.

                I wholeheartedly disagree on how many cops see concealed carry holders.  

                In my experience (DPD only) it’s almost never.

                1. I thought that keeping a handgun in, say, the glove box meant it was concealed,

                  whereas a rifle in a rack in the back window was carried openly.  

                  Every day, something new.  

                  I love this site.  

                  I think a lot of people have handguns in their car but don’t have concealed permits.

                  Now that makes sense.  

                  And Foghorn,

                  Maketa would know.  

                  That’s the sort of source I was referring to.

                  So I concede that point.  

      1. ..how very non-liberal of you, David.  You’ve made my day!

        Windbourne – how could you possibly have a problem with said armed security when it looks as though it just saved many lives?  Wouldn’t what just happened completely justify any reason they might have had for having a security guard?

        My sister is a priest in the area, and she called me because she was worried yesterday.  What a thing.  It will be interesting to see how this shakes out – I couldn’t imagine they’re not related, but we’ll see.

            1. Regarding your off the cuff comment to David. Perhaps it’s your misunderstanding of what constitutes a liberal? Then again, perhaps it’s just me, but I thought it an odd comment to a serious situation.

              1. I would think that it would be congruent with liberal dogma that the shooter, no matter who he was or why he did what he did to be regarded as a victim somehow.

                I’ll discuss this with you as long as you keep it civil.  

                1. But he is among the dead, is he not?

                  I imagine the reason for this is to report the highest number of fatalities which makes for more eye-catching headlines.

                2. But after the New Year, off come the kid gloves!

                  I’m quite “liberal” i think you’d agree. I never equate a criminal shooter as a victim. In fact, I’m all for the death penalty….on the spot! Especially when the victims are children….or even students for that matter. Well, and old folks, too. Well, truth be told, I’m all for the death penalty when it’s crimes of violence that kill innocent people.

                  I’ve often thought I must be from feudal Japan in a past life. You know, when Ronin would….with those fine Japanese swords… take the heads off a person for violating the cultural norm against violence that resulted in serious harm to another?

                  I’m not kidding.  

                  1. But I think the devil is in the details as it pertains to this:

                    violating the cultural norm against violence that resulted in serious harm to another?

                    It seems to be getting stretched in many places (particularly in the Islamic world) to include ‘apostatic’ behavior like driving, voting, speaking, shaving, teaching, dating, reporting, praying, etc…

                    1. None of….‘apostatic’ behavior like driving, voting, speaking, shaving, teaching, dating, reporting, praying, etc… …results in serious harm to another.

                    2. Nor in my ‘conservative world’.  

                      I was just saying that not everyone is as common-sense oriented as geniuses like us.

          1. You’re thinking is just not very diverse.  OK, Actually you’re ignorance is showing…their are Episcopal priests you know, and many of them are female. Just an FYI.

        1. I am wondering why a church feels it necessary to have guards? That is a big difference. I have seen churches around here using security/cops to control traffic. But when a church needs an armed guard for service, well, it really makes me wonder what is going on.

          But I can guarantee you that by tomorrow a lot of papers will be asking about that. They will wonder why a church needs an armed security particularly, when you KNOW that a number of folks are packing.

          Out of curiosity, What religion is your sister? Methodists or Episcopal? My last priest was female (I am Episcopalian).

          1. They always have security, but they beefed things up after yesterday’s shooting.  What reports are you seeing that’s different?

            With a church that size, it makes sense.  Churches typically have cash on hand after Sunday services, and members could have issues where someone might violently confront them (such as a battered wife trying to get away from her husband, goes to the church for safety, idiot husband follows…).  There’s a million reasons why there should be security there.  Armed security.

            That security gaurd is a hero.  He probably saved a lot of lives

            1. This person was on a rampage. She did the right thing. But you do not see armed guards at malls (well you did not until this latest incident occured in NE). Likewise, you do not have armed guards at restaurants, even though some of them have 200-400 ppl there, and a LOT more money.

              But lets see what shakes out in press on this.



              Boyd says his head of security came to him Sunday morning after the news of the shooting at Youth With a Mission in which two people were killed and two were injured and the gunman fled the scene. The head of security suggested ramping up security for the day, according to Boyd.

              He says the armed guard, who has a law enforcement background and was dressed in plain clothes, is a regular worshipper at New Life Church and generally attends one service to worship and then provides security at the second service. He says she is normally assigned to defend him as his personal bodyguard during the service.



              Apparently, It has started.
              The church is disavowing any relationship with the gunman, but that has slim chance of that since he hit both places. It was an obvious targeting.

              BTW, sad about the 2 daughters. It is hard to lose 1 child, but to lose 2….. I feel for that family.

              1. How can a person do that – to kill 2 children. I don’t think someone who does that can even be considered human. Senseless and awful.

                And yes, both the head of security and the security guard are heroes. We all owe them our thanks.

              1. Didn’t economic liberalism lead to the “free market” invisible hand theory? I don’t know if this is a discredited or respected theory….haven’t heard of it in awhile!

                1. He was really brilliant, although I don’t know if you’d dig his books.  He wrote The Fatal Conceit about the evils of socialism.

                  I have all of his stuff if you’d like to borrow anything.

                  Oh, wait – we weren’t talking about Salma Hayek, are we?

                    1. Although Einstein himself admits he’s not an economist in the beginning of his piece.

                      Here’s an interesting talk on the Austrian school of economics, and I really like this site a lot, too.  I don’t think you’re going to agree with it, but it’s not a political site per se, and the shrillness level is way down.

    2. for New Life to have armed security guards. It makes sense to me that this particular church has armed security because, being Haggard’s old place, it’s nationally known as a center of evangelical politics. That would make it a target for more pathologically inclined people who might take issue with those politics.

      There are all kinds of sick people out there. High profile places need to take appropriate measures in this day and age, unfortunately.

    3. I am pretty sure I heard a news report (Colorado Public Radio?) that the security guard was a volunteer.  I don’t remember anything other than that, except that the guard was a woman.  My thought was that perhaps she was an off-duty police officer or other public safety officer who is a member of the church.  Regardless of paid or not, I think it would be an unacceptable liability for any reputable organization to use armed guards that weren’t trained, licensed peace officers (pardon if that’s not the precise terminology, but you know what I mean…).

      1. ..if she’s not an off-duty officer.  The douchebag doing the shooting had a kevlar helmet and body armor on, and most likely a much more powerful weapon than she did.  It looks like training won this one.

        1. http://www.gazette.com/article

          They had beefed up security after the Arvada shooting.  She is not currently in law enforcement, but has training.  15-20 church members work security on the 38 acre(!) campus.  She is normally his personal security guard(!!).

          I guess when you’re leading thousands of people in worship, it’s necessary to have personal security?  Maybe after the Ted Haggard episode, they decided the pastor might be personally vulnerable?

          1. the security guards are volunteers:

            “Boyd said 15 to 20 volunteer church members regularly work as security guards on New Life’s 38-acre campus. The church has had an emergency response and evacuation plan in place for several years, he said.” – Gazette

            So they don’t get paid.  

  2. I think that churches should be given wide latitude in how they protect their congregations. At a time like this, the criticism posted here is untoward.

    As far as the victim terminology, it was not clear at all, initially, who was killed and who was in custody and who was in the hospital.  I heard reports as late as ten o’clock news that there were two gunmen and one was in police custody.

    The one piece I don’t understand is why we don’t have a name of the shooter.

  3. Doesn’t it indicate that the church took the right action to have armed guards there considering what happened?  I am having a little trouble following the logic of anyone criticizing them for taking protective actions especialy now.  I guess had this not happened and it came out that New Life had armed guards it might be up for debate.  But given that it did happen, shouldn’t the focus of this discussion be on how good New Life’s security was and how much foresight someone there had to have armed guards hanging around?

  4. This is a suck-o day with what happened yesterday. So here’s something to try and bring some laughter to the day.

    Subject: Bear in the Woods

    An atheist was walking through the woods. “What majestic trees”!

    “What powerful rivers”! “What beautiful animals”! He said to himself.

    As he was walking alongside the river, he heard a rustling in the bushes behind him. He turned to look. He saw a 7-foot grizzly bear charge towards him.

    He ran as fast as he could up the path. He looked over his shoulder & saw that the bear was closing in on him.

    He looked over his shoulder again, & the bear was even closer. He tripped & fell on the ground He rolled over to pick himself up but saw that the bear was right on top of him, reaching for him with his left paw & raising his right paw to strike him.

    At that instant the Atheist cried out, “Oh my God!”

    Time Stopped. The bear froze. The forest was silent.

    As a bright light shone upon the man, a voice came out of the sky “You deny my existence for all these years, teach others I don’t exist and even credit creation to cosmic accident.” “Do you expect me to help you out of this predicament? Am I to count you as a believer”?

    The atheist looked directly into the light, “It would be hypocritical of me to suddenly ask you to treat me as a Christian now, but perhaps you could make the BEAR a Christian”?

    “Very Well,” said the voice.

    The light went out. The sounds of the forest resumed. And the bear dropped his right paw, brought both paws together, bowed his head & spoke:

    “Lord bless this food, which I am about to receive from thy bounty through Christ our Lord, Amen.”

  5. “This week has been filled with news of shootings. We had nine people killed in the Nebraska shopping mall, seven people killed in two separate shootings at Colorado religious establishments, and even a fight breaking out that turned into a shooting match at a Columbus mall. Not very festive news for the most festive time of the year.

    All this has had me thinking about the FISA debate when proponents of the warrantless wiretapping were quick to argue it was necessary to give up freedoms for security. Would these same people apply that argument to the second amendment instead of the fourth? I think we all know the answer on that. Perhaps the next time a Republican Senator says that we should give up freedoms for security when it comes to listening in on phone calls, then he should be asked about giving up the right to bear arms as a way to protect us in church or at the local mall. Let’s see how quickly the subject changes then.”

    h/t Jamie @ C&L

    1. From what I gather, the one yesterday was illegal given the description of the gun.  While I disagree with your assertion (as I always do), your argument would not have any basis if the guns were owned illegally.  If they were owned legally, then I guess we would have to debate it.

  6. “In its Action Update today, the Family Research Council (FRC) partially cast blame for the tragic shooting at a megachurch in Colorado yesterday on “the secular media.” In the e-mail, which was sent under the name of FRC Action President Tony Perkins, the group says it’s “hard not to draw a line between” the shooting and “hostility” by “some in the secular media toward Christians”:

    It is hard not to draw a line between the hostility that is being fomented in our culture from some in the secular media toward Christians and evangelicals in particular and the acts of violence that took place in Colorado yesterday. But I will say no more for now other than that our friends at New Life Church and YWAM are in our thoughts and prayers.

    When Perkins can’t explain why this sick young man turned against his church and why God spared some people, but allowed others to be slaughtered, he sloughs it off on “evil secularists.” Tony, do you think that the fact this kid was kicked out of the missionary school he shot up had anything to do with it? Isn’t it possible that this rejection may have driven him to seek revenge? The secular media didn’t reject this young man, nor did it give him access to the gun. Mr. Perkins, you might want to look at the real root causes of this tragedy rather than blaming secularists.”

    h/t C&L

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

43 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!