Political Sheet

Colorado Gun Restrictions Become Campaign Theater

Political figures at an Aurora firearm policy event
A public-safety event, with campaign lighting.
Written by Scott K. James

Jena Griswold and John Hickenlooper used an Aurora gun-policy event to push more restrictions and frame the November election as a public-safety fight.

Sentinel Colorado reports that Democratic attorney general candidate Jena Griswold and U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper gathered in Aurora to promise more firearm restrictions, condemn Republicans and turn a serious discussion about violent crime into a campaign rally with better lighting.

The article calls the subject “gun violence.” That phrase does a great deal of political work before the conversation even begins. Guns are tools. They do not develop grudges, suffer psychotic breaks, join gangs or decide to murder innocent people. Violence is committed by human beings, often amid criminality, social collapse and untreated mental illness. Blaming the object is easier than confronting the person, the culture and the government failures that allowed danger to grow.

Rather than address those hard realities, Griswold pledged to fight the NRA, expand firearm bans and continue her crusade against “MAGA and Trump.” Hickenlooper warned that Republican election victories would make people’s lives worse. Apparently, no Colorado problem is too serious to be repackaged as a Democratic campaign commercial.

The Bullet Point Brief

  • Griswold said confronting the NRA and other gun-rights advocates would be her top priority as attorney general. Not violent criminals. Not repeat offenders. Not the mental-health catastrophe unfolding in plain sight. The NRA.
  • She endorsed a broader ban on so-called assault weapons, because politicians who cannot control violent people always seem eager to control peaceful citizens.
  • State Rep. Monica Duran celebrated Colorado’s existing restrictions, including storage mandates, a higher purchasing age, a gun-sale tax and a magazine ban. Missing from the victory lap was any evidence presented in the article showing that these laws have stopped violent people from being violent.
  • Community leader Bianka Emerson made the most practical observation of the event, telling politicians to show up outside election season and invest in communities. That was dangerously close to discussing actual responsibility, so the campaign rhetoric quickly resumed.
  • Hickenlooper declared the November election a matter of “life and death” and portrayed Republican control as a threat to public safety. Nothing says thoughtful policy discussion like telling voters that the other party is coming to kill them.

My Bottom Line

There is no such thing as “gun violence.” There is violence. There are criminals. There are deeply disturbed people. There are broken families, collapsing institutions, untreated mental-health problems and justice systems that repeatedly return dangerous offenders to the street. A firearm can be used for evil, just as it can be used by a law-abiding citizen to stop evil. The moral responsibility belongs to the human being holding it.

That distinction matters because language determines policy. Once politicians convince the public that the gun is the problem, every lawful gun owner becomes part of the problem. The rancher, the single mother protecting her home, the competitive shooter and the veteran are all placed on the same political target board as the murderer. That is dishonest, lazy and hostile to the Second Amendment.

Griswold’s promise to fight “MAGA and Trump” tells us exactly what this event was really about. It was not a sober examination of violence, mental illness or public safety. It was partisan cosplay. The victims supplied the emotional backdrop, the Constitution became the villain and Democratic candidates left with campaign footage.

Colorado voters deserve answers. Which violent offenders are being repeatedly released? Where is the mental-health system failing? Why are existing laws not preventing known dangerous people from harming others? What measurable result will another restriction on lawful citizens produce? Until Colorado’s Democratic leadership can answer those questions, this is not public-safety policy. It is political theater performed at the expense of constitutional rights.


Source: Sentinel Colorado

Now It's Your Turn...