Lawmakers back secrecy for gun carriers

glockguy45

New member
http://www.denverpost.com/news/leg/leg0322c.htm

March 22 - Gun enthusiasts won again at the Colorado Legislature on Tuesday as senators voted to keep secret the names of people given government permission to carry concealed handguns.

Sen. Ken Chlouber, R-Leadville, told fellow senators the measure is simply a matter of privacy for those who want to carry hidden handguns.

"It's a wish, I guess an expectation we all should have in this country of a right to privacy," Chlouber said.

But Senate Minority Leader Mike Feeley, D-Lakewood, said passage of the bill showed how the gun lobby's agenda is accepted without question by Republicans and even some Democrats in the Legislature.

"Another gun bill passes that's supported only by the extremes,"

Feeley said. "These are people who think they're living in a "Dirty Harry' movie."

Gov. Bill Owens has not taken a position on the bill, said spokesman Dick Wadhams. The bill has passed the House and needs one more Senate approval.

During the debate, Chlouber held up list of Larimer County concealed-weapons permit holders printed by the Fort Collins Coloradoan. He said such articles result in "no public good." The editor of the Coloradoan, Dave Greiling, said the paper has run the list twice because it has been a hot public issue in Larimer County for a long time and played an important role in the most recent sheriff's election. The new sheriff, Jim Alderden, took a less restrictive approach to issuing concealed-weapons permits than his predecessor.

Alderden's predecessor required people who wanted a permit to show a compelling need. Alderden simply requires anyone who wants a concealed handgun permit to undergo a background check, and the Coloradoan found that Alderden had done a good job of screening people. Such background checks have been highlighted by supporters of the bill, HB 1114, when they say that permit holders' names should not be released.

But there is no requirement in state law that requires sheriffs or police chiefs to do a background check before issuing a concealedweapons permit. They could even give a permit to a criminal who is not allowed to possess a gun. They also could issue it to someone living outside of their jurisdiction.

If the bill became law, their constituents couldn't find that out.

The Senate also voted Tuesday to open juvenile criminal records to school officials, saying the Columbine High School massacre showed there needs to be better communication between schools and police.

"The one issue coming out of Columbine has been the need to share information," Feeley said, supporting HB 1119.


Copyright 2000 The Denver Post. All rights reserved.
 
The obvious solution to Feeley's concerns about who is getting a CCW is to support a "Shall Issue" law that is uniform statewide and requires that a CCW holder pass background check. Yeah, that'll happen when hell freezes over. Last year when a CCW bill was up for a vote, which required a background check *and* training, Feeley's big concern was whether the law abiding folks who'd jumped through hoops to get a CCW license would actually be able to carry weapons in schools, hospitals and churches. Face it, no matter what is proposed, short of banning guns, it will be opposed by Colorado Democrats.
 
Feeley said. "These are people who think they're living in a "Dirty Harry' movie."

Isn't that NICE? Look how well the fascists treat us. I'd really like to reach out and "touchy Feeley", if you know what I mean...

Makes me ASHAMED to be a registered Democrat (along with Klinton, Algore, Feinswine, Schumer.... Geez, I think it's PAST time to switch....)
 
Dennis, the only reason I'm still a registered Democrat is with the hopes I can sabotage a vote here and there. Its a small effort, but it makes me feel good. I thought for a long time that the Democrats would come around but they've only gotten deeper and deeper into the socialist mess they've become. I know more than a few Democrats who feel that way.
 
I know I'm opening a can of worms here, but how can you be a registered Democrat and still be pro-RKBA? Is there a pro-RKBA representative at the national level who's a Democrat? I know there are a lot of anti's in the Republican Party, but last I heard gun control was not a campaign issue for Republicans.

Dick
 
Monkeyleg,

I'm a Democrat because of multiple problems that I have with the Republican party. Here's a list, in no particular order:

1) They are an exclusionary party. If you're not white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, heterosexual, and make at LEAST $200,000/year, you need not apply.

2) Business can do NO WRONG. They can pollute as wantonly as they like, engage in illegal and vile business practices, and make virtual slaves of their employees.

3) People (as individuals) aren't as important as businesses. Ever.

4) The far right. (I mean FAR right. You dig?)

-----------------------------

I have always been a Dem because human rights matter more to them. Diversity means more to them. The environment means more to them.

-----------------------------

Now, that being said, the Democratic party bears NO RESEMBLANCE to the one from when I was 20 (I'm 41 now). BUT, *BOTH* parties whine and bicker these days, and only seem to be interested in trying to wrest power from, and slander, the group currently holding it. This as opposed to RUNNING THE F**KING COUNTRY!

The Dems are "tax & spend". The Repubs are "borrow and spend". And NEITHER party gives a SH*T anymore about the PEOPLE they who supposedly serve. So, which party is better? Ummmm....... ???

You see?

--------------------------

BTW, I am a "middle of the roader" for the most part. Some things (like health care for ALL Americans) I am VERY liberal about (except that the plan put forth by the Klintonistas was the worst abortion I've ever seen), some things I am VERY conservative about (RKBA, keep gov't OUT of our lives), and others I'm a moderate on.

However, I feel that conviction of a state or federal elected official on a class A or B felony, which was committed while the person held office, should be a CAPITAL offense, and carry the death penalty. To me, it's treason, and ALL traitors to our beloved country should be KILLED.

I guess that pretty much sums up my political leanings. If I've offended anyone, sorry, and TOUGH SH*T... ;)



[This message has been edited by Dennis Olson (edited March 23, 2000).]
 
I suggest the only exception for this proposed privacy protection would be information regarding the legislators' themselves.

No elected official should have the power to manipulate peoples' rights to self protection and hide behind their own law while they or their friends and family carry in secrecy.
 
Dennis:

It's damn hard being a living contradiction in terms, isn't it :) I'm one too.

Some Rep. policies make me crazy, and some Dems. too. There seems to be too much dogma and too little common sense today. Add to that elected politicos and bureaucrats who care about nothing except keeping their cushy jobs.

The only thing that's perfectly clear to me is: anything associated with, or married to, Bill (Billzebubba) Clinton, has to GO! You hear that, Clinton waterboy AlBore? I will say it here, because some of you are my "friends". I voted for the man once, and I consider it one of, if not the biggest mistake of my adult life. I will never forgive myself, and no insult you can hurl at me will make me feel worse than I already do about it. What a scumbag he is. I truly believe he and The First Bimbo are evil. :(



[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited March 23, 2000).]
 
monkeyleg, john dingell from michigan is a democrat and he was leading the fight against the gun laws this past summer. He is a big hunter and I believe a member of the nra. I think the press kept it quiet, b/c it might have hurt the democrat vote. Even though I am a republican and always have been I would switch party lines if the guy was pro rkba.
 
I've been a life-long, gun totin', Democrat for pretty much all the reasons Dennis mentioned plus a couple of more. I'd add

1) The Republican courting of the *religious* far right. I agree with McCain in his assessment of the Falwell and Robertson charlatans of the group. I have nothing against religion or religious people but I have a great many problems with the "TV preachers" whose interest seems to center more around money and power than spirituality. The founders setup our system to preclude a state religion for very good, historically significant, reasons. The Falwells and Robertsons are just as ignorant of the principals that created this country as the Clintons and Gores.

2) The Republican opposition to abortion. This is not a black-and-white issue but the extremists on both sides will try to make it one. The abortion extremist that scare me the most are in the Republican party.

Like Dennis (I'm 45), the Democratic party I grew up with is not the one we see today. Somewhere in the last 30 years the socialists, statists and politically correct have thoroughly dominated the party taking it from Liberal, as in Thomas Jefferson's definition, to Liberal, as in William Jefferson Clinton's definition. You know, the definition of "liberal" that makes you want to puke.

The Republicans are no better. Many people faced with the two choices choose to opt out and not vote. I, and I suspect Dennis, continue to be involved and continue to vote.
I just can't bring myself to change my affiliation to Republican. There are too many issues I have with the national Republican leadership. However, I do vote for Republicans a lot of the time.
 
Seems we have two somewhat separate topics in the same thread now, with the original topic being Colorado's HB1114.

I do think the secondary topic that we've veered off to is interesting though, and I've enjoyed reading the responses. I'd like to suggest that it gets it's own thread if it's to continue, once again, because I think it'd make for an interesting discussion.

What do you all think? Moderators?
 
I'm not sure it's a "victory" that the bueaugeouis (sp?) are able to keep their CCW licences secret. CO is a "discretionary" state, which means only the politically connected get a CCW, no?

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited March 24, 2000).]
 
Futo, the politically-connected thing really only holds in PRD. Most of the sheriffs are pro-gun to some degree; the problem is that there are no rules to determine who gets a permit.

BAB, if you want to go ahead with the other thread, that's cool with me. :)

------------------
http://pub6.ezboard.com/blibertarian
 
PBash: You said it better than I.

And i do beleive you can be a moderate (on some issues) without being non-committal or weak. Why do people want to drive the debate to one extreme or another all the time?
 
Sorry to disabuse Dennis of his well thoghtout and researched views on the GOP
but I guess I am just not willing to change parties to make Dennis happy. ( but I would be happy to take the additonal 160K a year to fill in another GOP slot for him)

As for your dislike of the "far right"
why not try living in any of the Workers Pardise's of the former easten block
I am sure you will find that the Far LEFT is a warm and fuzzy group to live under.


Oh almost forgot this is my real name.
 
No Nestor,

Neither communism nor fascism is a preferred form of government. I just find certain aspects of the Republicans more abhorant than certain ascpects of the Dems. (That is, the Dems of 20 years ago, NOT the Dems of today. I can no more support THEM these days than I can present-day repubs, you know?)

Yeah, *I'd* sure like that extra $100k+/year too.... But if the Repubs were to enable me to earn that much, yet sell out our RKBA, what the HELL would I be working for?

Answer: Paying ever-more money into the blood-sucking abyss called the fedgov. For nothing. I find that no more pallatable than paying for the Dem's "social(ist) programs".

My opinions only. YMMV
 
Ah-HEM.

This thread is about preserving anonymity of CHL holders.

If Dennis and Nestor want to debate Democrats vs Republicans, start a new thread. Or take it to email.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

[This message has been edited by Coinneach (edited March 24, 2000).]
 
Ok we both agree that the Fed-Gov is to big but lets be real clear on some points

1. even if they are using some "creative accounting" the GOP has ballenced the budget (more or less)

2. the most succfull method found yet to cure poverty is and will remain Free Enterprise

3. if you think the Fed-Gov is to big now just think of what it would be like with the Nanny-State memtality of many promanent members of the "new democrats" in charge

4. if you really want to keep any part of the constitution alive you had better keep the democrats from stacking the High Court.

5. I am an Original Intent Conservative and at present the Republicans more agree with me than the democrats do.

6. as for race and religion lets not forget the "white rooster" and whose party used it as there emblam just 45 years ago and I don't see how following the Bishop of Rome makes your opinion any more relavent than mine.

7. We shoud not bring up abortiton on this bbs is will do not one any good and cause much strife, but as no one seems to have taken my side on the issue I will this and say NO MORE, If we are going to start deciding whom we may kill leagaly I will start making my list too.

I hope I have not offended anybody.

Nestor Rivera
NRA
GOP
 
Back
Top