AURORA | Local lawmakers are joining and some leading a national debate about whether gun control laws are too lax.
U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-Golden, told reporters July 22 that Congress should discuss reinstating the assault weapons ban that was passed during former President Bill Clinton’s administration in 1994 and expired in 2004.
The assault weapons ban outlawed AR-15s, one of which was allegedly used by the suspected gunman, according to Perlmutter’s spokeswoman, Leslie Oliver.
“If there are loopholes for (modified assault weapons), we need to close those,” she said in an email. “We hope legislation is brought forward.”
Perlmutter declined to comment for this story. Oliver said he wanted to focus on mourning the victims of the Aurora tragedy.
She said Perlmutter has consistently supported the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban and is also a proponent of background checks and prohibiting people with mental illnesses from accessing firearms.
“The amount of ammunition the suspect obtained is alarming,” Oliver said.
Adam Bozzi, communications director for U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, said Congress isn’t likely to pass any new gun laws before the November election, but he said the tragedy warrants a discussion among lawmakers.
“This tragedy is sure to instigate a full-throated debate of our gun laws,” Bozzi said in an email. “That debate and any subsequent review of our gun laws should be informed by a full accounting of the facts related to the shooting, which are still emerging.”
U.S. Sen. Mark Udall’s office did not respond to questions regarding gun policy.
Gov. John Hickenlooper told reporters July 22 that tougher gun laws probably wouldn’t have stopped the alleged shooter, James Holmes.
“This person, if there were no assault weapons available, if there were no this or no that, this guy’s going to find something, right? He’s going to know how to create a bomb. Who knows where his mind would have gone? Clearly a very intelligent individual however twisted,” Hickenlooper said during an interview with CNN.
He said Holmes was “diabolical” and likely would have gotten his hands on another type of weapon if assault rifles or other weapons were unavailable.
Holmes was allegedly carrying an AR-15 assault rifle, a Remington 12-gauge 870 shotgun, and two .40-caliber Glock handguns.
A few high-profile lawmakers have petitioned for stricter gun laws in the aftermath of the Aurora shooting, including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
He told MSNBC on July 23 that both President Barack Obama and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney should explain how they’ll address gun violence in the future. Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, a supporter of bans on assault weapons in Illinois, said July 23 that he supports a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines like the one allegedly used in the Colorado shootings.
Obama’s Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters July 21 that the President is committed to enforcing existing gun laws.
Romney said July 23 that additional laws would not have stopped the massacre, according to Reuters.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
To say that nothing could have prevented this, it would have happened anyway is shameful. Wonderful leadership from Romney and Hickenlooper. They don’t know what might have been different if it wasn’t so easy to buy assault weapons. Maybe they are right and nothing would have changed the outcome and as “leaders” they ought to at least try something. Their indifference and unwillingness to act borders on the criminal.
Obviously, there is not an easy or absolute answer to the question of gun control. It seems that there is a substantial amount of laws and regulations, both state and federal, to answer gun control questions. Additionally, it seems that these laws do not work! I do not believe that we should be influenced by foreign politicians, (President of Mexico et. al.), when they obviously can’t control their own internal problems. I also believe that people like the Rev. Jessie Jackson, are more concerned with personal agendas and use times like this to elevate themselves and their political position.
How are stricter gun laws going to help. “Gun free zones”
only keep law abiding citizens from having weapons for defense. This gunman violated state law when he entered with a weapon. The theater legally prohibited firearms inside. If he was willing to commit a felony to get the weapons into a criminal safe zone, what would make anyone think that he would not commit a felony to obtain the firearms. Stricter laws only prohibit legally armed persons from defending them self. A piece of paper with signatures on it, is not going to protect anybody from a destruction bound bullet.