U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 29, 2014 08:18 AM UTC

Guns For Dangerous Crazy People, Too!

  • 17 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
For illustration purposes only.
For illustration purposes only.

As the Grand Junction Sentinel's Charles Ashby reports today:

Responding to numerous emails and a “legislative alert” from the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Association, several state lawmakers voted against a bill that changes some definitions in the state’s civil commitment statutes.

Under those laws, mental health professionals can hold potentially dangerous patients for up to 72 hours and prescribe additional treatment beyond that time…

It stems from a civil commitment task force that was created last year in response to the shooting deaths at an Aurora theater in 2012.

But gun owners worry that once someone is labeled mentally ill, they lose their right to own or possess a firearm.

During last year's pitched debate over gun safety legislation passed in the Colorado General Assembly, one of the most often-heard arguments against the legislation then being debated was that it ignored the real issue identified in recent mass shooting events: that is, mental health problems afflicting the shooters. We shouldn't be regulating guns, they said, we need to do more to both protect the community from and provide treatment for people with mental illnesses.

Now that there's legislation to do just that, what's the response from the gun lobby and their pet legislators?

“I think that a lot of stakeholders weren’t included, including law enforcement … and Second Amendment community,” [Pols emphasis] said Rep. Justin Everett, R-Littleton. “We want to consult with all communities out there, especially after we had two-and-a-half recalls this last cycle.”

As you can see, the gun lobby may have once paid lip service to mental health legislation as an an "alternative" to the gun safety bills passed last year–but when they had the chance to actually do something, in this case carrying out the recommendations of experts convened after the Aurora shootings, forget it! Right back to the "take our guns" scare tactics. It's not  a surprising development, but it should be eye-opening for those who think Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and their wholly-owned representatives in the legislature can be reasoned with.

Allow us to suggest here, as gently as we may, that some of those most upset by the possibility of civil commitment reform, to include figures in Colorado politics whose names you may even know, might themselves be in need of it. We'll leave the individual diagnoses to qualified professionals, naturally.

In the meantime, somebody check the weather in Hell, because GOP Rep. Bob Gardner is a legitimate voice of reason in the Republican House caucus on this legislation, as well as one of the only "yes" votes:

“I, like you, received a large number of emails about House Bill 1386 over the weekend, most of which simply did not understand the bill,” Gardner said. “This bill has nothing in it about guns. If we fail to get the help to those who need it and they harm themselves or they harm a family member, we’ve done them no service by not putting them on a 72-hour hold.”

Good for Rep. Gardner, and shame most of his colleagues.

Tweet
Share

Comments

17 thoughts on “Guns For Dangerous Crazy People, Too!”

  1. Nothing that any of the RMGO Gun Huggers, or any of their ilk, ever say about anything should be believed, in the least . . . 

    . . . except this one thing:  They want more and more and more guns in more and more and more hands. (It's simply the gun industry's business – profit – model.)

  3. Dudly Brown and RMGO could care less about dealing with society's mental health issues; we know this.  That's because they fear being exposed as the looney tunes they are!

    1. I've noticed before that gunhumpers quite often say we don't need any more laws we needto enforce the ones we have without ever saying which extant laws they wish to see more strenuously enforced. I've always figured that was just one more dodge and stall.

  4. Thanks for the photo that cannot be un-seen…brain bleach, and a good dump can't undo the damage…Is the Gop/bagger poster boy for concealed carry???

  5. We do need reform of civil commitment laws. Right now, if someone is dangerous to themselves or others, but is uninsured, there is no alternative except incarceration.

    In incarceration, someone who is suicidal or disruptive is likely to be stashed in solitary confinement indefinitely, so that they won't disturb the other inmates.

    Stout Street clinic in Denver used to take walk in mental health appointments, but of course, they lost their funding for that.

    Private hospitals will take someone on a 72 mental health hold on referral from the police department, but will sedate them, and then kick them out onto the streets with no folow up plan, as soon as it is determined that the hospital will not be paid. "indigent care" laws are a joke, and hospitals do not promote this alternative to patients.

    It's hell for mentally ill people, and for their families and loved ones.

    RMGO's "solution" of making sure that mentally ill folks have easy access to guns is one way to ensure that suicides and gun violence increase.

  6. “I think that a lot of stakeholders weren’t included, including law enforcement … and Second Amendment community,” [Pols emphasis] said Rep. Justin Everett, R-The guy that represents Columbine High School and the surrounding community.

    Why doesn't Rep. Everett consult with some of those families effected by that shooting? I think there might be many who would support more robust measures to protect the public from potentially dangerous mentally ill people.

  8. What years of cheetos, CPP blogging, and lack of sunlight will do for you.  Dosen't the photo constitute " outing " here at Pols ?

  10. That picture screams out to be Photoshopped with inserted faces of:

    Tom Tancredo

    Cory Gardner

    Bob Beauprez

    Scott Gessler

    (I'd add Mike Kopp but no one would know who he is.)

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

41 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!