Three thoughts on the open carry article
Freda, excellent writing as always!
Regarding Arapahoe County Clerk Joan Lopez, there are three thoughts on this subject.
One: The second amendment to the constitution to bear arms shall not be infringed. This was set up by our founding fathers to protect us from threats foreign or domestic. Therefore, anyone can carry a weapon anyplace they like without a permit. If more people carry in the open, this would deter idiots from going in and doing mass shootings. This is due to the fact that they could protect themselves and the public.
Two: A person does need a permit if they conceal the weapon. A conceal-carry permit can be issued to anyone who pays for it and has the background check and training. Some people feel safe packing a weapon.
Three: There is really no reason for this person to just walk up and intimidate the person at the Government office. How many mass shooting have taken place in a Government office in the past? Government workers live under a cloud of fear and should be delt with kids gloves at all times. Most guns are locked up in a safe and only brought out for hunting or target practice on the weekends.
I object to using tax dollars to share your personal opinion
We write in response to a Greenwood Village Newsletter recently received from Councilman Dave Bullock. Instead of an informative newsletter, we were sent Councilman Bullock’s personal opinion of various bills pending in the state legislature. We will not take issue here with the Councilman’s characterizations of Representative Froelich’s and Senator Bridge’s legislative positions as alleged by Councilman Bullock; the Legislature is still in session, and no final action has been taken on these bills.
We believe these three public servants, each of whom we have supported with our votes, are motivated by their desire to help our community, and we are grateful for their service.
However, we do object to the use of Village funds to send this political attack by one public servant on two other public servants who represent this community. The Councilman’s language was inflammatory, disrespectful, and did little to advance civil discussion of these pending bills. We urge all to eliminate the vitriol.
In the future, we suggest that Citizen Dave Bullock share such expressions on his own stationery, at his own expense – not the Village’s.
Kim Morss and Richard Dehncke
Village resident disagrees with Bullock
As a citizen of Greenwood Village Council District 1 for 37 years, I was very concerned when I read the District 1 Newsletter from Council member Dave Bullock. Although I have spoken with him regarding my concern, I was not entirely convinced he actually understood SB21-062 which essentially says that an arrest cannot be made by a peace officer simply based on the alleged commission of a traffic offense, petty offense, municipal offense, misdemeanor offense, a class 4, 5, 6 felony, or a level 3 or 4 drug felony. The fact is an arrest can be made if the officer is unable to sufficiently verify the individual’s identity absent an arrest, a person was convicted for a violation of driving under the influence in the last 5 years, the offense is a felony or a victims’ rights crime, the offense includes an element of illegal possession or use of a firearm, the offense constitutes unlawful sexual behavior, or the offense is a violation of a temporary or regular extreme risk protection order, a violation of a credible threat to a school, or a violation of eluding in a vehicle. Mr. Bullock, in fact, incorrectly cites the reasons by which an officer can make an arrest as the reason an officer would not make an arrest. In other words, he has reversed the process by which one can be taken into custody.
It should also be noted the bill has only passed the Senate Judiciary Committee, the second step in an eight step process before it may become a law. It is currently sitting in the Senate Appropriations Committee and if it is passes out of that committee it has to go to the Senate Committee of the Whole for two more readings. If it passes either one or both, it then goes to the House side of the Legislature and the whole process starts again. And along the way, there are and will be many amendments to the original bill which may change it significantly, if it passes at all or dies along the way.
The purpose of the bill, as I understand it, is to protect those who are already serving sentences in jail from the COVID-19 virus, not that legislators or the Governor want to protect criminals from going to jail. Basically, any rise in crime can be attributed to a number of factors, not the least of which is the lack of arrests by the Greenwood Village police. The fact that the COVID-19 virus has contributed to joblessness, economic insecurity, opportunity to violate property, etc. can be contributory to any raise in crime in any community which could well include Greenwood Village.
Response from Dave Bullock
In response to the two letters opposing my recent newsletter sent to residents of District 1 in Greenwood Village; 1) Out of over 4,000 residents and 1,100 homes in the district, I received only five opposing letters. Over 85% of the feedback was positive. 2) Prior to sending the newsletter, it was approved for content and accuracy by the City Attorney, City Manager and Chief of Police. Therefore, those who claim it was inaccurate are suggesting that they know more than these three professionals and do so based on emotion driven by a political ideology and not the facts. 3) One letter said that people should wait until it goes through all the committees and is in final form before commenting. But they missed the entire point. Once a bill is completed, there is no time or ability to change so people’s voices need to be heard while it is going through the process. That is how a democracy works. Furthermore, the mere proposal of SB62 shows how radical our state legislature has become where they are more interested in protecting criminals than honest, law abiding citizens. 4) Claims that the rise in crime is attributed to a laundry list of things other than elected officials calling to defund the police and limiting their ability to enforce the law are not true. A simple Google search will show that violent crime has increased more in cities and states where officials do not support the police vs. those jurisdictions where officials stand behind law enforcement. 5) One letter claims that my language was inflammatory and disrespectful while letters from other residents tell a different story. Here are a couple of excerpts from those emails: a) “I want to thank you for your enlightening and informative April District 1 Newsletter. It’s hard for me to grasp that Senate Bill 21-62 could even be proposed, let alone be passed into law,” and b) “We certainly agree with the comments in your April letter…We appreciate your clear message and courage as we all work to keep our communities safe.”