Controversy over whether it’s a good idea to allow people to openly carry guns around city hall reveals that the majority of conservatives and liberals alike don’t like it.
Six of 11 city council members, a mix of Republicans and Democrats, agreed Monday to post a sign on city hall saying openly carrying guns is not allowed.
It was a good call. Like most Coloradans, we get that, out here in the West, guns have long been a big part of life. But here in the city, it’s more than unnerving when anyone other than law enforcement straps on a firearm, unless it’s at a shooting range.
Even staunch Second Amendment defenders such as Councilman Bob LeGare, who is a Republican, agreed that having people inside city council chambers or wandering around city hall with guns is at best a distraction, and at worst a very real cause for alarm.
“It (open-carry) disrupts basically everything that’s going on in the city because it’s not the norm to have a Dirty Harry gun on your holster if you’re not wearing a badge right next to it,” he said during Monday’s city council meeting. “Although I have a great deal of respect for the Second Amendment and the rights with it, I have very little patience for people that come in and make a show and disrupt the city operations doing it.”
Well said. And the sentiments were shared by other council conservatives such as Barb Cleland, Brad Pierce and Mayor Steve Hogan, who cast the tie-breaking vote in the issue.
So why then don’t these wise city lawmakers extend the same level of comfort and security to everyone in Aurora, not just those who work at city hall?
Increasingly here and across the country, so-called open-carry proponents wander all over public places with purposely revealed firearms, looking for confrontations with police. They often post videos of such encounters online, seeking more attention.
Groups like OpenCarry.org encourage and exploit such encounters.
These incidents are sophomoric and dangerous. Past incidents here in Aurora always warrant a flood of 911 calls as motorists or bystanders are alarmed and savvy enough to call for help.
Strapping on guns to draw attention or shock from the public reduces guns to toys or props, which, despite the cavalier sentiments of some gun proponents, they most definitely are not.
Denver was wise enough to ban the practice years ago, and Aurora made a perfect argument this week why it should follow suit. The Denver law has already been tested in court. Denver’s provision doesn’t preclude anyone from owning and carrying a gun if they feel the need. Concealed guns carried by citizens licensed to carry them can still find their way into city hall.
But the ability to stop traffic or in some way terrorize the public by wandering around with a holstered gun or even one stuck in a waistband goes too far. Nothing good can come from such a circus.
Either as a council-initiated ordinance or as a referendum to Aurora residents, it’s time for city lawmakers to extend the same security and peace of mind to all Aurora voters that lawmakers were smart enough to afford themselves.
When someone with a gun tells me to do something, I do it. I don’t necessary know who they are what their intent is. They have a gun and as far as I am concerned, their intent is to kill me. I take no chances. I comply and leave. If they are in a public meeting, I still consider someone with a gun a threat and I leave. Thus, someone with a gun infringes on my right to participate in the Democratic process. Therefore, I believe guns should be barred from public settings unless they are there for a very specific purpose and that is instilling confidence that I will be protected by trained and sworn law enforcement officers. ie police.
Your argument is emotional and irrational. If you live in fear like this perhaps you should investigate medication.
You don’t seem to recognize that your fear of firearms is your own. The question you need to ask yourself is, is that fear rational. Statistically, it is not. 99.997% of firearms owners have killed or injured no one.
Silver,
You are much more likely to be shot by a police officer in Aurora or Denver than you are by a citizen exercising their right to open carry.
I have never been threatened by a police officer and I never will be. I comply, I am polite, I do what I am told and move on. The intent of the police officer is very clear to me, I understand their training along with the command & control structure. I know nothing about the armed citizen. A citizen with a holstered sidearm is less threatening than a citizen on the street with a shouldered shotgun or assault rifle but why would a citizen carry such a weapon in a civil setting? The intent is not clear and I have to assume the worst for my own safety. Sorry Notafan – I recognize the unknown threat and respond appropriately for my own safety and the safety of my family. Your right should not trump my right to feeling safe.
My rights shouldn’t trump your feelings? Do you feel the same way about the rest of the Bill of Rights, or just the 2nd Amendment?
You don’t have the right to feel anything. There are menacing laws. If someone is threatening you with a weapon then they can be arrested. The mere presence of a firearm coupled with your feelings is not a violation of the law.
See how quickly the discussion becomes confrontational! I “have no right to feel anything”. Really? What happened to “the right of the people peaceably to assemble”. No peaceable discussion? Sorry boys, the intent is clearly to intimidate and bully me and everyone else there to peaceably assemble.
So are you ok with violating the 4th Amendment so someone feels safer? If you feel that someone is a criminal, would you be OK with unlawful search and seizure?
How about the 1st? Should we be able to stop people from saying things that we don’t like?
Or the 5th? Surely people like James Holmes don’t deserve due process, right?
You have the right to feel whatever you want. But your right to feeling the way you want should stop before it infringes on the constitutionally protected rights of others.
Can you show me where in the Constitution it says you have a “right to feeling safe”? My copy is missing that page I think.
Just read your well thought and rational comment. Couldn’t agree more. The comment, one is more likely to shot by a police officer than by a “citizen” carry a concealed weapon, is absurd in my opinion.
The more important question in Aurora is should pit bulls be armed? Now a pistol-packin’ pit bull is something to be afraid of.
The slave who wrote this should do some research on state law and the state constitution. I suspect they care about neither.
The simple solution then is to pass a law implementing Constitutional carry which would allow all of those that open carry to conceal their firearms and protect the delicate sensibilities of those who choose to be unarmed. My home state of Minnesota doesn’t require permit holders to conceal their firearms and people don’t seem to freak out here. They can even carry in the State Capitol.
You can view the City Council meetings below for Feb 2 (where a “minor stir” was allegedly created and March 16). I can see no disruption and the meetings seem to be as mind numbing as always. Looks like the panty wetters only excuse is that they don’t like the people they serve to exercise their rights.
..
Feb 2
March 16