President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 01, 2013 10:25 AM UTC
21 Comments
Loving it.
Why is it that these rabid republican gun nuts accuse anyone who supports limitations on firearms as being anti-gun? Limitations on the 2nd amendment are perfectly constitutional and acceptable. We don't live in the 1700s, we live in 2013 where many people die of gun violence each and every year.
The Supreme Court's Heller decision specifically outlines the right of citizens to own weapons "in common use at the time." That includes the standard capacity magines used in many firearms today. Some restrictions are fine, but the sheriffs are suing to stop the magazine ban because it limits commonly used choices of firearms.
It will be up to the courts to decide, not the sheriffs.
What restirctions do you support to protect our families and communities?
The Heller decision was a bad one, and it needs to be reversed and subject to the original intent of the Constitution.
Concur.
The heller decision specifically gutted the proviso in the Amendment that clearly, unquestionably specified that firearm ownership was for the purpose of National Defense, re: Americans forming up in pre organized militia units upon being notified of an emergency.
5 names and the personal history associated with those names are critical in understanding heller.
thomas, alito, roberts, scalia, and kennedy.
scalia…….Born '36, no military service. Considering his age, and the conflicts the Nation was suffering, quite an accomplishment. Who'd he know?
thomas…..Several deferments. Always strong on "national defense and executive powers", unless "strong national defense" included clarence's involvement! .
roberts……never mind, he'd have been no help anyway. Best he left it alone. And he didn't turn 18 'till '73.
kennedy….Born in '36, like scalia, how'd he avoid Selective Sevice from '54-"68? It's called "In the know".
Ah, alito………………..Active duty US Army, September-December 1975. What? Inactive reserves the remaining 7 years, 8 months of his time. 4 months active total? How'd that happen? And why isn't he embarrassed?
As we say, "like minded individuals………me first".
The background for the case itself spawned from the emergence of the huge demographic that was "national defense hawk" wing of the republican party, a gigantic swath of republicans that had, in an act of cowardice that had never been seen by the Republic up 'till then, dodged the Vietnam era draft as young men.
reagan, who himself had managed to avoid service during World War 2, actually conning an "honorary Captain" rank while doing pro US war films, made an entire generation of like minded me-firsters feel better about thier cowardice by becoming "kill 'em all patriots"……with other peoples' kids.
Heller gave this "demographic" a spine. A tough guy strut, a "no-nonsense" image of themselves, a better sense of self worth. The idea of aggressive rambo image gun ownership, sold now through the firearms lobbyists, brings the testosterone out that didn't appear in those "patriots" when the Nation needed it.
Somehow, the coward became the tough guy.
It still stands today. Iraq, Afghanistan, defense of the great Nation that is the USA………….Not so much.
Sig Sauer 226, "Seal Team Operator Small Ams defense system" for the "stateside patriot"…………Oh yeah.
dudley brown, lappierre, brophy, nugent……….poster boys for the national embarrassment that is today's "gun rights movement".
heller gave them that.
The Supreme Court has also refused to take up challenges post-Heller to capacity limits, indicating that there is not likely support on the court to overrule them.
You keep telling yourself that NRA sheeple. in the meantime, thousands and thousands of Americans will continue to die by gun violence. What thing I find strange is how gun violence victims almost never support the position of you or the NRA. Why is that?
Those sheriffs who are suing should lose their jobs. Putting right wing NRA ideology ahead of public safety is shameful. The NRA has blood on its hands. Your right to own guns is not more important than saving people from gun violence. I bet all of these sheriffs who are suing are right wing gun nuts who support the NRA.
I thought that the sheriffs were removed from the suit when the AG ruled that they did not have standing? http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/articles/top-cop-sheriffs-cant-sue-over-guns
Will they enlist the libertarians again to disrupt the election process?
Rope a dope. I hope you get complacent, libtards.
hey troll, got anything better to do than calling us libtard, conservtard?
Got rope?
I a surprised that you haven't been banned yet you conservatard.
So what would you have done if you were in the LA Airport today brave man?
n3b, see my post above re: heller, reply to HawkeyeX.
It's about you.
Large feat as in fake signatures and repeat signatures. And harassing everyone and their mothers to sign it.
It's a Sproul manual, and it needs to be destroyed and the organizers barred from recalling anything except bad dog food. And only with the FDA's approval.
Yo beat me to the punch GilpinGuy. We don't know much about the young man at LAX today, except that he had an assault weapn, three extra magazines and that he couldn't have legally bought them in L.A. Evil or disturbed, only time will tell, but he was specifically hunting TSA officers. That oughta get the attention of the Righties. They'll always cheer for "law and order". Now who's side are they on; the guy with the "hunting rifle" or the Federal agent who was just doing his job? Quite the delimma for them, I'd say.
It's pretty simple chef. They are on the side of the terrorsts because they believe all murderers and domestic abusers should have unlimited access to the most lethal weapons ever developed by man that are specifically designed to kill human beings. They are on the side of the terrorists.