By Kevin Lorusso
On Tuesday September 20th, Broomfield’s City Council will be conducting a Study Session to consider adopting the Everytown for Gun Safety legal ordinance blueprint. If this sounds familiar to you, it’s because RMGO is currently involved in lawsuits against Boulder, Superior, Louisville, and Boulder County over the exact same set of ordinances.
In a move that can only be described as malicious, the City Council of Broomfield has decided that brownie points with the Commie Mommies are worth your hard-earned money as a taxpayer. Not only have two separate liberal judges deemed that RMGO is “substantially likely to win on the merits,” we have made it abundantly clear that we don’t care who you are, we are more than willing to add your town to the list of defendants.
The ordinances, which are provided to local municipalities by the Bloomberg-backed Everytown for Gun Safety, contain some egregious violations of the Second Amendment, such as:
- Banning the sale and possession of so-called “assault weapons” and standard capacity magazines.
- Requiring a minimum age of 21 simply to possess a firearm.
- Banning the open carrying of firearms throughout the city.
- Banning concealed carry in “sensitive” and public places.
- Implementing a 10-day waiting period on all firearm purchases.
The City Council claims these ordinances are in the name of “firearm safety”, yet it seems more likely they are coming from a place of fear. The actions of individuals have become the justification for sweeping acts of tyranny aimed at punishing good, law-abiding citizens for acts of great evil. In doing so, they make it clear that they view every citizen as a potential monster, capable of slaughtering their fellow Americans. In reality, the overwhelming majority of people are good and want their communities to thrive.
Broomfield’s City Council is signaling to their people that the Bill of Rights is closer to a set of guidelines than a pronouncement of inalienable rights. The “will of the people” should, in their mind, overrule the foundational documents that codify the values of our country. If we allow them to continue with their intended goal of disarming their populace, we are telling them our rights are negotiable. What would stop them from deciding that the labor shortage plaguing their city, as it plagues every city, can be solved by forcing their citizens to fill these vacancies? If the Second Amendment is negotiable, why wouldn’t the 13th and 14th Amendments be as well?
Perhaps most egregious is their potential prohibition on 18-20 year-olds from carrying firearms. In America, an 18-year-old is legally allowed to join the military, thereby putting their life on the line for their country. If Broomfield has their way, an 18-year-old would be required to volunteer their life in order to exercise their Second Amendment rights. This is morally reprehensible, to say the least. An American citizen should not be required to volunteer their life away in order to enjoy the protections of the Bill of Rights, and the City Council should be ashamed for even considering it. In effect, they are saying, “We believe you are mature enough to make the potentially life-ending decision to join the armed forces, but not to protect yourself, your family, or your property.” This just further reinforces the idea that they see their constituents as potential monsters, rather than potential heroes.
Their belief that only the government should have a say in who carries weapons is exemplified in their banning of open carrying of firearms. Article 13 of the Colorado Bill of Rights states that the right of any person to keep and bear arms for self-defense “shall not be called into question.” Well, it seems like that is being called into question right now. If you want to carry a weapon concealed, you first need the government’s permission. It is a complete reversal of the original intent behind the Second Amendment. It is the government that requires the people’s permission to bear arms, which we agree to on the condition that our right to bear arms is not infringed. Instead, we are beholden to bureaucrats that are dead set on disarming their populace. The only way to ensure the people are safe is to treat all of them like equally capable monsters and prevent them from having guns.
Finally, Colorado is currently seeing dramatic rise in violent and property crimes. Simultaneously, we have a shortage of law enforcement officers coupled with liberal District Attorneys that refuse to punish criminals for violent acts. Despite these facts, the Broomfield City Council wants to further restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves. Nowhere in the document outlining the study session is the safety of citizens considered, a fact that should further emphasize that their only concern is keeping themselves safe from their constituents. There is nothing suggesting that firearm safety can be increased through community outreach and training on the proper handling of firearms. Instead, the police are placed in an untenable position: be everywhere they are needed whenever they are needed. No matter how capable to police force is, they cannot be there to protect individuals the moment they are needed. And if they could, the DA’s refuse to incarcerate the offenders, meaning the people are at the mercy of criminals, deprived of their right to self-defense. It is not fair on the police, and it is not fair on the people. In the end, the City Council’s desire to virtue signal to gun control nutjobs will get good people killed.
Ultimately, we hope the Broomfield City Council makes the correct decision in not pursuing these ordinances. They are morally wrong, a clear violation of the Constitution, and demeaning to the people of Broomfield, the overwhelming majority of whom are good, upstanding, law-abiding citizens. Punishing them for the evil acts of a small number of individuals is immoral. Wasting taxpayer dollars on frivolous lawsuits is a clear sign of contempt for the people as well. Please, contact your councilor and express to them how upset you are at their reckless disregard for their constituents.
