April 17, 2012 09:05 PM UTC

Like The "Pinto Memo," Except For Murder

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

Associated Press:

A Colorado proposal to eliminate state background checks for firearm purchases has been tentatively approved by the Republican state House.

The bill would end checks done by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. Republican Rep. Mark Waller, who sponsored the bill, said the state is spending unnecessarily on its background check program. Walker says the background checks duplicate ones already done federally.

House Bill 12-1048 is presented by its supporters, like sponsor Rep. Mark Waller, as a bill eliminating a “redundant” background check performed by the Colorado Bureau of Investigations (CBI) and using only the federally-administered background check. The use of state background checks originated from an incident in 1998 where a man with a restraining order against him was nevertheless able to purchase a gun, which he used to murder his family.

What does the sponsor of House Bill 1048 say about the 1998 case of Simon Gonzales? At the end of last month, here’s what he said on the House floor:

WALLER: And I’ll tell you members, when we talked about this bill in committee, I asked, um, those in opposition to come forward and show me where this has had an impact. Show me where we have had problems in this arena. And there was one incident, only one incident, that, that caused this, um, program to be put in place in the first place, that was an incident back in 1998 with a guy named Simon Gonzales. Now Simon Gonzales did go out an purchase a firearm, and Simon Gonzales committed a horrible act. He, he killed his family after, um, um, after, uh, after he went out and purchased that firearm and that’s the only reason, that one act is the reason that we have this statute on the books right now. [Pols emphasis]

FOX 31’s Eli Stokols:

[Rep. Rhonda] Fields, D-Aurora, argued that the second background check by the state is important in that it catches individuals the federal system often overlooks – namely, those subject to restraining orders.

“Already this session, the House Republicans have passed bills to allow anyone to carry a concealed handgun without a permit and to allow business owners to shoot fleeing robbers even if their own lives aren’t threatened,” Fields said. “Maximizing the number of guns is no way to stem the violence that afflicts our society.”

In 2005, Fields’ son, Javad Marshall Fields, and his girlfriend, Vivian Wolfe, were gunned down by gang members because Fields was set to testify against them in another murder trial.

So folks, who would you rather line up with here politically? The representative who tells you that this “one act” (that is, a guy killing his family) is the “only reason” we have the statute, or the one who can make a rather convincing case that one preventable murder is enough? According to opponents of this bill, CBI checks are more thorough “because of access to municipal criminal records and restraining order records not necessarily accessible to the FBI.”

How do you argue that’s not worth “the fuss” without looking like a comic book villain?