An updated list

March 14, 2007 - We've once again -- via pro-gun State Senator Scott Renfroe -- requested a list of sheriffs who enter permit holders into the statewide criminal database.  They're listed below, along with the name of the elected official (Sheriff) who made the decision to enter permit holders into that database, and treat you like a criminal.

Remember, Sheriff's offices (and the Denver police) are the only offices now issuing permits. It's voluntary to enter you into that database -- at least right now, though we expect the Chiefs and Sheriffs to attempt to change the law to make it mandatory, thereby removing them from responsibility

You might like your county sheriff personally, and have shot at the range with him.  But make no mistake about it: if a sheriff enters you -- who have jumped through ample and expensive hurdles to get a concealed carry permit -- into a criminal database (CBI has now created a special database for permit holders, but it is accessed the same way and has all the same unsafe implications) your sheriff is NOT a good guy.

Don't let a sheriff snow you with "pro-gun" talk.  They are politicians, and know this is a hot button issue to gun owners.  Hold them accountable by putting heat on them on this issue.

Even the sheriffs who do not enter permit holders into the statewide criminal database may still be guilty by association: their organization -- the County Sheriffs of Colorado -- is the organization driving this issue, and unless a sheriff has fought against this issue within CSOC (by actively opposing HB1174), his organization is the reason you may be treated like a criminial.

RMGO first reported the story about this issue back in December of 2002.  At that time, many of the "gun groups" ignored the issue.

Why would a sheriff want to enter permit holders into that database? Essentially, their claim can be distilled down to keeping records on "persons of interest." What that means is that you are considered a dangerous person, just like a convicted rapist or murderer.

The following Sheriff Departments are entering concealed carry permit holders into CCIC.

Colorado Counties which enter Concealed Carry Permit Holders into the Criminal Database
Provided by CBI on 3/09/07
County	Offending Sheriff	# in CCIC
Adams	Doug Darr	1688
Alamosa	Dave Strong	68
Archuleta	Pete Gonzalez	606
Arapahoe	Grayson Robinson	2873
Baca	Steve Salzbrenner	1
Bent	Gerry Oyen	13
Boulder	Joseph Pelle	1307
Broomfield	Tom Deland	258
Clear Creek	Don Kruger	1
Crowley	Miles Clark	16
Denver	* Chief Whitman	1209
Delta	Fred McKee	429
Dolores	Jerry Martin	48
Eagle	Joseph Hoy	141
Elbert	William Frangis	18
Fremont	James Beicker	611
Garfield	Lou Vallario	5
Gilpin	Bruce Hartman	70
Gunnison	Rick Murdie	120
Hinsdale	Ronald Bruce	67
Jefferson	Ted Mink	3792
Kit Carson	Ed Raps	62
Lake	Ed Holte	51
La Plata	Duke Schirard	861
Larimer	Jim Alderden	3111
Lincoln	Tom Nestor	5
Logan	Brett Powell	85
Mesa	Stan Hilkey	2181
Moffat	Tim Jantz	123
Montezuma	Gerald Wallace	457
Montrose	Rick Dunlap	548
Otero	Chris Johnson	67
Ouray	Dominic Mattivi	32
Park	Fred Wegener	409
Pitkin	Bob Braudis	80
Prowers	Jim Faull	39
Rio Blanco	Si Woodruff	176
Rio Grande	Brian Norton	5
San Juan	Sue Kurtz	5
Teller	Kevin Dougherty	697
Yuma	Sam McCoy	63
Total		22398

 

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Elbert County Sheriff opposed to local shooting: calls Boy Scouts Hamas

"It sounded like Hamas had a training camp next door.

That's not a quote from US Special Forces in Iraq or Afghanistan.  That's what Elbert County Sheriff William Frangis said about Peaceful Valley Boy Scout camp's shooting range.

Yes, you read that right: Sheriff Frangis compared a Boy Scout shooting range to terrorists.

Peaceful Valley Boy Scout camp, as well as the western tradition of recreational shooting, is being attacked by a number of anti-gun liberals, lead by Sheriff Frangis and former Elbert County Commissioner John Dunn.

Frangis is a known anti-gun activist and has testified before the legislature time and again in favor of gun control. Frangis, Dunn and a small collection of screeching liberals want to prevent the Boy Scouts from holding events at the camp's shooting range. 4-H shooting programs are certainly next.

They're using the same, tired old arguments to try to shut down the Boy Scouts shooting range, claiming lead contamination and disruption of the environment as justification for their attack on the Second Amendment.

It is vital that gun owners like you and me let Sheriff Frangis and the Elbert County Commissioners know that attacks on the Second Amendment will not go unnoticed.

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners is closely monitoring this situation, but there is something you can do to help!

E-mail or call Sheriff Frangis and the Elbert County Commissioners and tell them to stop their witch hunt against recreational shooting and the Boy Scouts.

Sheriff William Frangis: (303) 621-2027

Commissioner Suzie Graeff: (303) 621-3132: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Commissioner Hope Goetz: (303) 621-3139: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Commissioner John Metli: (303) 621-3114: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Additionally, on July 18th, the Elbert County Commissioners will be meeting to discuss granting Peaceful Valley Scout ranch a temporary permit to continue shooting activities. The meeting will be held at 215 Comanche Street, Kiowa in the 2nd floor conference room, and is scheduled from 9:00am-4:30pm.

This meeting's agenda hasn’t been published yet, but as soon as RMGO knows when the shooting issue comes up, we will notify you. Strong representation from the gun community is vital at this meeting.

NRA passes McCarthy Gun Control bill through US House!

June 13, 2007 - We warned you just a few days ago that the NRA was working with anti-gun forces to pass new gun control.

Today, far sooner than we would have imagined, the bill passed in the US House, with almost no notice and no recorded vote.

Anti-Gun stalwart Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) is the sponsor of HR2640, as well as legislation to ban .50 caliber firearms.

HR 297 was quickly morphed into a new bill, HR 2640 (by notorious anti-gunner Carolyn McCarthy) and passed on a voice vote, with so little notice that the most pro-gun members of Congress didn't know it was on the agenda until early in the morning -- when the NRA actively lobbied their offices to pass the largest gun control move since the 1994 Assault Weapons ban.

(Click here for news story)

The bill gives the Federal Government vast new access to people's mental health records and opens the door for expanded abuse of power, delays and denials of firearms purchases.

The bill purports to give people a chance to have their names removed from the no-buy list, but only at great personal expense... with no guarantee of success.

If the past is any indication, purchasing a firearm is about to become a lot more complicated.

Keep in mind that for years the ATF has been forbidden from doing any investigations to expunge records and return people's gun rights.

Now, with the help of the NRA, even more restrictions are being created.  (Click here for the E-mail NRA lobbyists sent Members of Congress lobbying for this gun control)

Of course, unlike a "crime," "mental illness" is a very subjective evaluation.

As Corey Graff from Wisconsin Gun Owners writes;

"Since 1952, the American Psychiatry Association (APA) has utilized the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as its standard for defining, diagnosing and treating mental health disorders.

Since its first printing, the manual has undergone five revisions, the most recent being the DSM-IV, which was finalized in 1994. Currently a fifth version is being prepared and is due out by 2012.

Each new version contradicts the previous version; new authors with new perspectives and agendas write each new release. The standard keeps changing, shifting, sometimes radically so -- the result is that mental illness is never clearly or objectively defined. It is a moving target shaped by political and social pressures.

Following controversy and protests from gay activists at APA annual conferences from 1970 to 1973, the seventh printing of the DSM-II, in 1974, no longer listed homosexuality as a category of disorder. After talks led by the psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, who had been involved in the DSM-II development committee, a vote by the APA trustees in 1973, confirmed by the wider APA membership in 1974, replaced the diagnosis with a milder category of "sexual orientation disturbance."

In today's politically correct climate, the most recent version of the DSM-IV contains "no reference to homosexuality."

Which DSM was correct or were both wrong? One can easily see the danger this contradiction raises if these diagnoses were synced up with a gun owner database that acts as an automated judge, jury and executioner for the gun buyer.

Such variance also calls into question the credibility of those who define mental illness.

Psychiatrists can't even agree amongst themselves over a relatively short period of time on how to precisely define mental illness on any given issue. Thirty years ago no one heard the term "attention deficit disorder" or "post-traumatic stress disorder" -- today diagnoses for these new mental illnesses are commonplace.

We believe the next step -- if you don't think there's a "next step" you undoubtedly fit the description of mentally deranged -- is to require information and deny firearms purchases for anyone who has ever taken an anti-depressant (the estimates for the number of young adults in America who have, at one time, taken these anti-depressant drugs is staggering). If that happens, a large portion of a number of generations in America will be stripped of their Second Amendment rights.

The bottom line: If NICS is expanded, expect entire groups to be denied their right to purchase a firearm.

Legislation like this paints with a broad brush and will disarm many good people who should be able to buy handguns. One such group is veterans.

"[NICS Expansion] could have a significant impact on American servicemen," wrote Gun Owners of America recently, "especially those returning from combat situations and who seek some type of psychiatric care.

Often, veterans who have suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder have been deemed as mentally 'incompetent' and are prohibited from owning guns under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4). Records of those instances certainly exist, and, in 1999, the Department of Veterans Administration turned over 90,000 names of veterans to the FBI for inclusion into the NICS background check system."

Once again, the NRA has colluded with anti-gunners to pass new gun control and tell gun owners it's good for them.

They did so when the Brady Insta-Check Registration system was passed into law, and now they're attempting to strengthen that gun control... and weaken our rights.

CQ.com "Advocates of House-passed legislation say it likely would have prevented the gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, from buying a firearm because of his history of mental illness." But this is, of course, nonsense. The Brady law has not kept criminals from getting guns and won't stop madmen from getting them either. But it might very well stop you.

To stop this in the Senate will mean fighting not only the anti-gunners in the Legislature, but America's biggest "gun lobby." We'll need all the help we can get. Please consider making whatever contribution you can to RMGO by clicking here.

 

Sen. Coburn stands heroically, while NRA's response fails to hit mark

U.S. Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) is standing firm against H.R. 2640, but he needs your help (see below). His leadership in the U.S. Senate, a body almost totally devoid of principled and courageous statesmen, has been rivaled by few in the last decade. Send a quick note to Senator Coburn at to thank him for being one of the few voices supporting our Constitution.

If you contacted the NRA in opposition to H.R. 2640, you may have received an e-mail dismissing gun owners' objections to the bill. But make no mistake, the NRA is feeling the heat, and the criticism from the gun rights community is getting louder.

The NRA is bragging about how this bill, with it's rabid anti-gun House sponsor Carolyn McCarthy driving it, will improve the Brady Registration system, but they miss one fact: Gun owners want to repeal the Brady Registration system, not improve it. We were opposed to the original compromise, which was cut by the NRA (Click here for details on how it passed originally), and are opposed to anything short of repealing it.

Gun owners are also adamantly opposed to building massive government databases where, even if you have a clean record, the system will -- sooner or later -- come back to haunt you.

Witness Virginia, long considered one of America's most pro-gun states. Gun banners in that state proposed a one-gun-a-month rationing scheme, but couldn't pass it through the legislature because it was too costly to create the system to restrict the purchase to one gun a month. But once the NRA passed the state-level Brady in Virginia, the system was in place. It gave our opponents the tools to advance their anti-gun agenda, and it was accomplished through the actions of the NRA.

The real tone of the NRA's response is "Trust us, we wouldn't do anything to hurt your rights".

But gun owners around the United States are starting to question that trust.

Take, for instance, the comments of one former NRA member:

"You told us to trust you in the past, and we got the 1934 National Firearms Act; the 1968 Gun Control Act; the Brady Registration system; the Assault Weapons Ban; the Lautenberg Gun Ban, so many compromises on the state level I've stopped counting, and now this: HR2640.” Eric, NRA member

Or this one:

“Any trust you might have earned from me by the tough talk in your fundraising letters has long-since vanished with your cacophony of compromises on my gun rights. I'd sooner write a check to Sarah Brady, as she's not as effective at passing gun control as the NRA." Gerry, former NRA member

A checklist of problems hasn't been answered by the NRA, and can't be, because these are devastating facts:

1. Why pass this gun control (everyone knows that's what it is)? Without the NRA's help, this bill wouldn't have a prayer. But our enemies are smiling, knowing they have cornered the group that is tasked with defending gun owners into supporting HR2640.

2. This bill is a massive expansion of the Brady Registration system, a scheme gun owners want to repeal, not expand.

3. This bill is offered by the most rabid anti-gunners in Congress, and is being praised by all of the enemies of freedom. That alone should give anyone pause.

4. We're told we should trust the very group that has been bargaining our rights away for decades. Let me ask you: Are you more comfortable with today's firearms laws than those 50 years ago? No, you aren't. And who is the self-appointed decision maker on gun issues?

But why is the NRA doing this?

It's very simple: the NRA is more concerned with their image in the press and their relationship to squishy politicians than in standing firm for gun owners. They'd rather be liked by Washington insiders than respected by their members.

They covet their media-dubbed status as the being the "powerful gun lobby" (ever wonder why the anti-gun press would praise the NRA in such a manner?), and you can't maintain that image if you don't sit down with your opponents to cut deals -- that's what Washington demands of its players. And cutting deals is what the NRA does best.

Of course, that isn't what they'll tell you in their fundraising mail, but their actions speak volumes.

The NRA will tell you that that H.R. 2640 will bring relief to gun owners; they claim it only enforces existing law; they claim it is an improvement to the NICS system.

Gun Owners of America's long-time gun rights attorney does a great job of detailing why these claims are not only wrong, but misleading. You can read those here.

In order to swallow the NRA’s minor clerical “improvements” to the NICS system, we must assume it is better to fix unconstitutional gun control than repeal it. Most gun owners have enough common sense to understand that no matter how much you try to change them, a bad law is still a bad law and an “infringement” is still an “infringement.”

The NRA also claims that “wrongfully” accused gun owners will now have recourse to regain their rights. If the NRA hadn’t bargained our rights away in the first place, combat veterans, kids with ADHD and gun owners whom liberal judges view as “extremists”, wouldn’t have to spend $100,000’s to regain their constitutionally protected rights.

The anti-gunners are doing a good enough job putting gun owners behind bars. We certainly don't need those considered to be "on our side" to help them.

What the NRA refuses to publicly acknowledge is that H.R. 2640 loosens the restraints on anti-gun BATFE agents and liberal judges in the process of “adjudicating” the mental state of gun owners.

No matter how much perfume the NRA uses, this pig still smells like a pig.

What you can do:

1. Call both your U.S. Senators and tell them to oppose H.R. 2640, the McCarthy/Leahy Gun Control Bill. The U.S. Senate switchboard number is (202) 224-3121. Ask for your Senators' office.
   
   Go here to find your U.S. Senators.