Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

A successful recall election: Colorado voters oust Democratic state senators over gun control


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,665 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:15 PM

I wonder if they'll try to have a recall of the recall   :eek1:

 

 

Colorado voters oust Democratic state senators over gun control

 

Colorado voters ousted two Democratic lawmakers, including the state senate president, in a historic recall vote on Tuesday over their support for tougher gun control laws, handing a major victory to gun rights supporters.

 

The recall races, the first in Colorado history, are at the epicenter of the national fight over gun control in the aftermath of a series of mass shootings last year, and were seen as a test of the sway of lobbyists on both sides of the debate.

 

State Senate President John Morse, who helped lead efforts in the state legislature to ban ammunition magazines with more than 15 rounds and to require background checks for private gun sales and transfers, said he had "absolutely no regrets" about pushing the gun-control measures.

 

"I said at the time if it costs me my political career, so be it," Morse told Reuters shortly after conceding. "That's nothing compared to what the families of (gun violence) victims go through every single day. We did the right thing."

 

A Colorado Springs Democrat, Morse trailed 50.96 percent to 49.04 percent, according to unofficial results from the Colorado Secretary of State's office.

 

Also unseated was Democrat state Senator Angela Giron of Pueblo, who conceded defeat as 56.01 percent of voters backed her ouster compared with 43.99 percent who wanted her to stay in office, according to the office.

 

The issue came to a head in Colorado after gun-rights activists accused Democrats of ramming through the gun control legislation in the aftermath of a series of shootings which included the killing of 12 people in a suburban Denver movie theatre last year.

 

Angered by the gun control push, gun rights advocates had sought the recall to send a message to current and future legislators that the bills had gone too far with efforts to curb firearm access. Opponents viewed the recall effort as a bullying tactic and not the proper way to handle a policy dispute.

 

Morse's Republican opponent, former Colorado Springs Councilman Bernie Herpin, said it was Morse's own unresponsiveness to constituents that prompted the recall effort, a process in which voters petition to remove an elected official before his or her term has ended.

 

"When you (have) 10,000 valid signatures on a recall petition, that's a powerful message," Herpin said before the voting ended.

 

CONTRIBUTIONS BACKFIRE

 

The recall battle drew more than $3.5 million in campaign contributions. But the vast majority of the funds - nearly $3 million - came from opponents of the recall drive who support stricter gun control, figures from the secretary of state's office showed.

 

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who founded Mayors Against Illegal Guns, wrote a $350,000 personal check to the anti-recall campaigns. Los Angeles billionaire philanthropist Eli Broad kicked in another $250,000 to stave off the recalls.

 

After claiming victory late on Tuesday, Herpin said the push to derail the recall had "backfired" on the gun control lobby.

 

"In Colorado, we don't need some New York billionaire telling us what size soft drinks we can have, how much salt to put on our food, or the size of the ammunition magazines on our guns," he said.

 

Only about $500,000 came from the pro-gun lobby, mainly $368,000 donated by the National Rifle Association, the nation's biggest pro-gun lobby, which feted Morse's ouster late on Tuesday.

 

"The people of Colorado Springs sent a clear message to the Senate leader that his primary job was to defend their rights and freedoms and that he is ultimately accountable to them - his constituents, and not to the dollars or social engineering agendas of anti-gun billionaires," the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action said in a statement.

 

A poll conducted last month showed Colorado residents in general opposed the recall efforts, with 60 percent saying that when voters disagree with a legislator they should wait for re-election rather than mount a recall.

 

Morse was seen as the more vulnerable of the pair, as a quarter of his district sits in Colorado Springs, long a Republican stronghold, although registration in the Senate district is split almost evenly among Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voters.

 

Republican Senate candidate and former Pueblo deputy police chief George Rivera, said Giron had been hurt by her support for other laws, including legislation to allow cities in the Denver area to draw water from the Arkansas River basin at the expense of local communities. But the primary issue remained gun control.

 

"That was the match that lit the fuse," he said.

 

http://www.reuters.c...E98A06I20130911



#2 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:30 PM

Good.



#3 Jim

Jim

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 3,891 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 06:42 PM

see what happens when they legalize pot... 



#4 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:01 PM

see what happens when they legalize pot... 

 

 

Feds Seek to Legalize Marijuana Industry Banking

http://abcnews.go.co...cision-20208037



#5 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:05 PM

Feds Seek to Legalize Marijuana Industry Banking

http://abcnews.go.co...cision-20208037

 

Well, they want that tax money......



#6 Jim

Jim

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 3,891 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:11 PM

Feds Seek to Legalize Marijuana Industry Banking

http://abcnews.go.co...cision-20208037

 

Cash only  MJ biz... that's why they need the guns! 



#7 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:21 PM

Well, they want that tax money......

 

Don't you mean, they want to rob from them too?



#8 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:26 PM

Don't you mean, they want to rob from them too?

 

Same thing. Yeah.



#9 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:26 PM

Same thing. Yeah.

 

According to you.  :lol:



#10 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:27 PM

Sure. Also according to how we humans have defined theft for 1,000s of years.



#11 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:29 PM

Sure. Also according to how we humans have defined theft for 1,000s of years.

 

Semantics.  The joy of politics.

 

:lol:



#12 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:30 PM

I guess.....



#13 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:33 PM

I guess.....

 

Not many see tax as theft.  You would be included in this not many.  

 

The rest accept it, not as theft but as a necessity of society.

 

Not trying to argue if it is or isnt.  



#14 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:34 PM

Acceptance doesn't change what it is. Most comply, rather than accept it. if you didn't have to, you wouldn't pay. Neither would anyone else. They aren't asking though. They are demanding...with a gun...your money.

 

 

Thats theft.



#15 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:48 PM

Acceptance doesn't change what it is. Most comply, rather than accept it. if you didn't have to, you wouldn't pay. Neither would anyone else. They aren't asking though. They are demanding...with a gun...your money.

 

 

Thats theft.

 

 

OK.  You win.  I was just having fun with this, I really don't care if it is or isn't.  It is part of life we all have to deal with.

 

I accept it or comply because I do.  may be for fear of prison, or may be not.

 

 

But what about people who think tax evasion is the worst crime a citizen can commit (other than murder or equally heinous)?  



#16 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 09:55 PM

OK.  You win.  I was just having fun with this, I really don't care if it is or isn't.  It is part of life we all have to deal with.

 

I accept it or comply because I do.  may be for fear of prison, or may be not.

 

 

But what about people who think tax evasion is the worst crime a citizen can commit (other than murder or equally heinous)?  

 

Unrelenting Statists. How dare they keep their own money!! It belongs to the government!



#17 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 12 September 2013 - 12:55 PM

Unrelenting Statists. How dare they keep their own money!! It belongs to the government!

 

Where do the two (tax/theft) meet and we have a better government?



#18 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:04 PM

They dont.
"better" government is smaller government. Tiny. One role oriented, constitutional government. Taxation from the local level is as good as it gets. Because you can hold them more accoutnable and make changes directly through the democratic process.



#19 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:07 PM

They dont.
"better" government is smaller government. Tiny. One role oriented, constitutional government. Taxation from the local level is as good as it gets. Because you can hold them more accoutnable and make changes directly through the democratic process.

 

I figured as much, but then how does society get basic services like school, fire, police, roads, bridges etc?

 

All publically financed?



#20 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:22 PM

Private

private

Public/Private

Public/Private

 

At the local levels.



#21 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:25 PM

Private

private

Public/Private

Public/Private

 

At the local levels.

 

I did mean private, but some how typed out public.

 

hmmm....

 

How do we do that?  Or how do we implement a "better" government.



#22 Depends

Depends
  • VibeTribe
  • 12,167 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:26 PM

How local is the local level?  State?  County? Town/city?



#23 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:50 PM

How local is the local level?  State?  County? Town/city?

 

The problem I see with this is eventually there may some towns, cities will have better everything.  Say for example NYC or LA.  These cities have enough rich people to help fund these types of things, where as a city like Oklohoma City would be F'd as the amount of money that flows through OKC compared to NYC or LA is quite large.

 

 

How would this inequity or unfairness be handled?  How unfair, person in bigger city may have more opportunity.



#24 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:59 PM

I did mean private, but some how typed out public.

 

hmmm....

 

How do we do that?  Or how do we implement a "better" government.

 

We dont. This one has to breakdown first.



#25 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:00 PM

How local is the local level?  State?  County? Town/city?

 

As local as absolutely possible. In some ways, that means state involvement, and thats generally where I see it should end. Unless there is a commerce dispute betweeen two states (the original intent of the commerce claus) in which case the federal government gets involved to arbitrate.



#26 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:07 PM

As local as absolutely possible. In some ways, that means state involvement, and thats generally where I see it should end. Unless there is a commerce dispute betweeen two states (the original intent of the commerce claus) in which case the federal government gets involved to arbitrate.

 

Doesn't most big business now a days deliver products to or manufactor products in different states?

 

How would this apply in today's real world?  

 

 

 

I like asking questions about this, because it is so foreign to me.  The ideas sound good, but I like to know how it will be applied.



#27 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:21 PM

Doesn't most big business now a days deliver products to or manufactor products in different states?

 

How would this apply in today's real world?  

 

 

 

I like asking questions about this, because it is so foreign to me.  The ideas sound good, but I like to know how it will be applied.

 

No state should have the authority to control commerce in a way that impedes trade abilities. Thats the onyl way I see it becoming a problem. And that's when the federal government becomes useful. In dispute resolution. We'd have to take this on a case basis though. There is no way to determine of a completely vague theoretical how this would work out and under what condidtions.



#28 Depends

Depends
  • VibeTribe
  • 12,167 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:23 PM

For the services that Andy questioned, they are already on a local level.  Certainly schools/fire police.   Roads/Bridges are covered local/state with federal funds also.

 

What I don't know, and have no clue to is how the Interstate system was installed/built.  With roughly 50,000 miles of roadway, it would cost trillions today.  I guess there was state funds with matching federal funds, but there is no way it would have been done without the federal pushing for it.



#29 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,673 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:26 PM

No state should have the authority to control commerce in a way that impedes trade abilities. Thats the onyl way I see it becoming a problem. And that's when the federal government becomes useful. In dispute resolution. We'd have to take this on a case basis though. There is no way to determine of a completely vague theoretical how this would work out and under what condidtions.

 

Let's use Toyota as a general example.

 

They have a dealership in every state, and have a manufacturing plant in many states (Mississippi, Kentucky, Texas, Indiana, Alabama and West Virginia.



#30 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:31 PM

For the services that Andy questioned, they are already on a local level.  Certainly schools/fire police.   Roads/Bridges are covered local/state with federal funds also.

 

And they get that (and other things) because the federal government taxes our income. That's what im talking about here int eh first place. Most state and locals are broke, and rely heavily on federal money (monetized debt) to get anything done.

 

 

What I don't know, and have no clue to is how the Interstate system was installed/built.  With roughly 50,000 miles of roadway, it would cost trillions today.  I guess there was state funds with matching federal funds, but there is no way it would have been done without the federal pushing for it.

 

Eisenhower. Federal money. Same as the railroads.
 



#31 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,923 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:31 PM

Let's use Toyota as a general example.

 

They have a dealership in every state, and have a manufacturing plant in many states (Mississippi, Kentucky, Texas, Indiana, Alabama and West Virginia.

 

Ok, so what's the problem there?