The Sentinel published a guest column from State Sen. Tom Sullivan marking 14 years since the Aurora theater shooting that killed 12 people, including his son, Alex, and wounded 70 others. Sullivan’s grief is not abstract, borrowed or manufactured for television. He has lived with the consequences of that night for 730 Fridays, and no serious person should treat that loss as a prop.
His column argues that Senate Bill 25-003 was intended to restrict future sales of certain semiautomatic firearms with detachable high-capacity magazines, but was later changed at the request of Gov. Jared Polis’ office to include a permit-to-purchase system. Sullivan says he accepted those changes after receiving assurances that implementation problems would be addressed, yet he has not been consulted or briefed during the past year.
That frustration is legitimate. So is his desire to prevent another family from living through what his has endured. But “save lives” cannot become a policy blank check. Compassion does not erase the Constitution, and grief does not relieve lawmakers of the obligation to prove that a restriction will work, can be enforced fairly and targets violent conduct rather than lawful ownership.
The Bullet Point Brief
- Sullivan writes from personal loss no parent should endure. His son Alex was murdered in the 2012 Aurora theater shooting. That gives his advocacy emotional authority, but emotional authority and constitutional authority are not the same thing.
- The bill changed substantially during the legislative process. Sullivan says the original proposal focused on requiring fixed magazines for certain firearms. The governor’s office later pushed for a permit-to-purchase system. Nothing says “carefully considered public policy” like redesigning a major gun bill hours before floor debate.
- Implementation appears to have become someone else’s problem. Sullivan says he accepted the changes after receiving assurances from the governor’s office, then spent the next year without a single implementation briefing. Colorado government remains undefeated at passing a law first and locating the instruction manual later.
- Colorado already has a magazine limit with uneven enforcement. Sullivan notes that magazines holding more than 15 rounds remain available despite the law passed after the Aurora shooting. That raises the uncomfortable question politicians avoid: why create another restriction before honestly confronting enforcement failures under the existing one?
- The real argument is over what actually saves lives. Sullivan asks what people can do together. Good question. The answer should include evidence, enforcement, mental-health intervention, prosecution of violent offenders, secure public spaces and agency accountability, not simply another slogan followed by another burden on lawful citizens.
My Bottom Line
Tom Sullivan deserves respect. His grief is real, his purpose is sincere and his determination to prevent another mass killing is understandable. Conservatives should be capable of saying that plainly without surrendering every constitutional argument that follows.
The disagreement begins when “saving lives” is treated as proof that a particular gun law will do so. Every side claims the same goal. The hard work is showing which policies stop dangerous people without turning millions of peaceful citizens into suspects. Criminals do not become compliant because the governor signs a bill with solemn music playing in the background.
Colorado should enforce the laws already on the books, prosecute violent offenders, examine missed warning signs, strengthen legitimate mental-health interventions and hold agencies accountable when they fail. It should also demand evidence before restricting a God given and constitutionally protected right. Politicians discovering “common sense” five minutes before the fundraising email goes out is not evidence.
Compassion and the Second Amendment are not enemies. Honest policy requires both. Honor the dead. Support survivors. Prevent violence with measures that can be shown to work. But do not use tragedy as permission to flatten constitutional rights while government applauds itself for caring.
Source: The Sentinel
Now It's Your Turn...