You do realize that the British government, prior to the Revolution, WAS the de facto government in charge of the soon to be established USA, right? The citizens of our land, rightfully armed, overthrew their tyrannical British government in the Revolution to establish independence. They were armed, fought British tyranny, and fortunately, won. It was THIS EXACT concept and example of tyranny which was the ENTIRE principle behind the Second Amendment! To say protection against tyranny is not a reason given in the constitution, when it is THE PRECISE reason it was included, makes you look like an absolute idiot.

Are you seriously arguing that the intent of the Constitutional Right to Bear Arms was not to secure the independence and freedom of the common man against tyranny?? Don't be pedantic and play semantics with the actual wording of the Amendment. Its purpose was clear, and the intent is obvious if you do even a shred of your own research into what people like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Paine etc.etc had to say on the matter. Pay no attention to the fact that we had just fought the Revolutionary War to defeat the rule of the tyrannical British government. The founding fathers were hell bent on making sure that never happened again, from any enemy, foreign or domestic. Why the hell else was it included? For hunting? For target shooting? Honestly, do you know nothing of U.S. history? You are entitled to your opinions, but not your own facts, pal. Notwithstanding, all the other reasons I cited are ABSOLUTELY VALID reasons for owning an AR15 with a 30 round mag.

But here are a few quotes from the people who contributed to writing the Constitution to knock some sense into you...... granted they are clearly not experts like yourself:

James Madison: "In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."
Federalist No. 51 (February 8, 1788).

Patrick Henry: "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."
" My great objection to this government is, that it does not leave us the means of defending our rights or of waging war against tyrants."
Virginia's U.S. Constitution ratification convention (June 5, 1788)

George Mason: "[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually. . . ."
At Virginia's U.S. Constitution ratification convention (June 14, 1788)

Thomas Jefferson: " No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
"The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, ... or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press."
Letter to Major John Cartwright (5 June 1824).

Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States."
Noah Webster (writing under the nom de plume of "A Citizen of America"), An Examination Into the Leading Principles of the Constitution (October 17, 1787).

Tench Coxe : "The militia, who are in fact the effective part of the people at large, will render many troops quite unnecessary. They will form a powerful check upon the regular troops, and will generally be sufficient to over-awe them." "Whereas civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
Tench Coxe, Federal Gazette, June 18,1789, A friend of James Madison, writing in support of the Madison's first draft of the Bill of Rights.

Thomas Paine: "[A]rms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves."
Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775.

Now go forth and do your own research and stop acting all smug with your UTTERLY ignorant, self aggrandizing opinions.

You want our guns? Molon Labe!

You cannot legislate your way into a utopia. If the criminals have whatever arms they want, if the police have whatever arms they want, I want an equal selection to protect myself and my family against criminals, multiple assailants, those who may be greater armed, in the event of a riot or natural disaster, economic collapse, any other civil unrest, and, as the Constitutional specifically declares, protection against tyranny....

Oh yea, and hunting dead last.

Vote for the candidate, whether they be Democrat, Republican, Independent, or otherwise, who supports the US Constitution. Anyone who doesn't support the Constitution is the enemy.

This entire process is a sham. The democrats have already decided the outcome, just as they had already decided the the outcome of the bills while in committee. It didn't matter to them how many people testified against them, it didn't matter the chambers were overflowing with those opposed, including the Colorado Sheriffs Organization. They didn't have to give any explanation of their reasoning as to why they voted in the manner in which they did. But all of us know already, don't we? Even before the bills were heard in committee, the word on the street was the Dems were going to make and pass an amendment of 15 rounds. Exactly what happened. Hickenlooper waited for the winner before taking sides so as to preserve his status of being on the side of the victors, so he could play it safe. The outcome of these "debates" is already set. I would be utterly shocked and awed if any of these measures were defeated. Why wast time and tax money, and insult the citizens with this mockery of due process? Some people hate guns. Fine. But even if you do hate guns and want to see all of them banned, this legislation with be nothing short of worthless in preventing any tragedies in the future. It is disgusting seeing politicians standing on the graves of those murdered, and surrounding themselves with our children in order to push their political platform which does anything but address the root causes of these atrocities, namely mental health and side effects from psychoactive pharmaceuticals, of which virtually all of these murderers have been documented to be taking. This whole thing is disgusting and removes any shred of faith in the manner in which our government legislates. The government is not your friend, people! This isn't a partisan issue, this is an issue of an utterly dysfunctional government, and while today it is the pro second amendment supporters who are being beaten, tomorrow it will be a different issue that that will be beating the anti-gun supporters. Stop towing the partly lines, people, and judge each subject on its own merits instead of regurgitating mindlessly the talking points of biased news organizations like the Denver Pravda, CNN, and, yes, Fox....and if you are unable to recognize the bias in all of these by now, you aren't even playing the right game. The people are being played like the mindless sheep so many of them are. Nothing more than political pawns, so the jack*sses on capitol hill can climb their career-ladder. Don't we all hate "politicians"? Well what makes you think those on your side are any different? Disgusting.

It is amazing people outside the cycling community who have absolutely nothing to do with anything whatsoever even related to this story, act all sanctimonious as if lance walked up and personally smacked their mothers in the mouth. Absurd.

Drama queens. Put this into perspective. For one, think of the millions upon millions upon millions he has paid in taxes over the past 15 years. Think about the half a billion dollars he raised for cancer research and lives potentially saved as a result. Think about the sponsors who have made at least hundreds of millions off of him. Think of the ripple effect and the lives positively affected by this. Think of how almost nobody gave a toss about cycling at all before he came on the scene. He did for cycling what Tiger did for golf. So what if he doped in a sport where you can't ride professionally and expect to win if you don't. Think of the fact that virtually everyone on the tour doped also, and that he still busted his ass though cancer to win. He put in the work as well as the pharmaceuticals. Of course it would be better if nobody doped in any sport ever, but what a witch hunt. The Feds should have nothing to do with this. It is absurd. Now they are likely to rake him over the coals and and take millions more from him as a penalty. Doping is stupid, but this whole affair is infinitely stupider.

The absolute best thing to be done at this point would be to provide accurate, well- researched, and honest education about Cannabis at all points of sale, and perhaps even classes offered in university, etc. As the nation is watching us, this is a tremendous opportunity to finally put to bed all the hyperbolic myths regarding Cannabis use, and to enlighten everyone who is not yet fully aware about the nuances of this plant. Getting rid of NIDA, ONDCP, DEA(so many departments!) propaganda mythology is long over due. People need to know the history of prohibition, the many corrupt entities which made it illegal in the first place, and the corrupt entities which are attempting to keep it in place presently. They need to understand how so many governmental and non-governmental organizations profit from its prohibition at the cost of us as a society. They need to know the differences between smoking, vaporizing, edibles, hashes, and tinctures, and extracts, both as they pertain to recreation as well as legitimate medicine. They need to know the effects of cannabinoids on the central nervous system. They need to be pointed to well-excecuted scientific studies---NOTABLY, those with a large sample-size, peer-reviewed critiques, and not more government funded propaganda-studies with junk science, miniscule sample-sizes, and agenda-based conclusions.

When you go to Amsterdam, you can get a little booklet called the "Smokers Guide" which is the Dutch version of what I am saying. In it, facts are presented directly and honestly without emotion. The Dutch are smart in that, since they know you are going to do it anyway, the best thing is to have a well rounded knowledge so you can make the most appropriate decisions for yourself going forward. That used to be an American concept. Here is to chipping away at the Nanny State so individuals can exercise their birthright to decide for themselves how to live their own lives with personal sovereignty.

Oh- and as an aside to Clare Levy and all those trying to push a DUI bill......Most people would agree driving under the influence of ANY pharmaceutical, drug or alcohol is irresponsible, and potentially dangerous, but for chrissake, at LEAST do the science and actually TEST what the effects of cannabinoids are on drivers using proper scientific procedure before passing any spurious legislation on the matter, and when you DO arrive at that point, make damn well sure the testing methods are accurate indicators of active impairment. If you are going to attempt to legislate, do it with some common sense and scientific basis. Cannabis has an entirely different effect on the central nervous system than alcohol.

If we are going to bring this into the spotlight, let's do it right, and get the facts out there for the rest of the country. Colorado, I love you.

I know how I'll be celebrating :)

Power to the people!

And what do you all know about fracking besides having watched Gasland??? Are you completely unable to assimilate arguments to the contrary by actually educating yourselves? There is a truth out there, and it sits somewhere between both extremes. Fracking is not even close to being the horror you are making it out to be. Do you realize how many natural gas wells already exist across this country with absolutely NO problems? AND- you are probably the same people who don't want us fighting in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over natural resources, yet you do everything in your power to blindly prevent energy production domestically, so its off to war we go- and its because of shortsighted people like YOU. Sanctimoniously driving around in your Prius without acknowledging the energy it takes to produce one, to mine for the rare Earth elements of the batteries, and what that will do to the environment once the car goes kaput. Notwithstanding, your electricity comes from COAL, but ohhh its CLEAN coal... right... Muddled-thinking hypocrites you are.