'Close the Freedom Loophole!'
by S. Tate Shill
Denver -- The Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines yesterday to close the "freedom loophole."
"The people of Colorado have demanded that we put public safety above the right to freedom, if there is such a thing," said State Senator Bob Lunkhort, sponsor of the bill.
Lunkhort pointed to statistics from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms that show most crimes involve the use of a freedom. "96.42 percent of crimes involved the criminal obtaining information later used in a crime from a newspaper or book. Over 80 percent of gun crimes involved the previous acquisition of a gun, often a high-capacity Saturday Night assault shotgun purchased from an unlicensed dealer at a gunshow. In addition, the ATF found that over half of all crimes committed might have been avoided with the presumption of guilt or through reasonable, common-sense regulation of jury trials," Lunkhort said.
"The freedom loophole was created in the law when the federal Congress took on powers beyond those outlined in the Constitution," Lunkhort said. "All we're doing is making state law mirror federal law, by saying that no citizen may have any rights whatsoever."
Rich Head, co-founder of Sane Alternatives to the Freedom Epidemic, testified in favor of the bill. He said, "Republican President Gush supports this bill. Republican Governor Bill Olens supports this bill. SAFE has a million members after only a few years of operation. Therefore, it is a good bill. QED."
Head added, "Federal law already prohibits most Coloradans from having freedom. Therefore, state law should mirror federal law. QED."
Some critics responded that the Bill of Rights and related clauses in the Colorado Constitution guarantee the right to have freedoms such as speech and bearing arms.
Head responded to such critics, reasoning, "The Bill of Rights is not absolute. Does the First Amendment protect a religion that practices human sacrifice? Does the Second Amendment allow two-year-olds to blow each others' heads off? Does the Fourth Amendment protect a man with blood on his hands from being searched on suspicion of murder? Does the Sixth Amendment guarantee the right to a speedy trial even if a tornado destroys every court house in the state? Of course not. Anyone who would read it would know this. Therefore, no one should have any freedoms whatsoever. QED."
One person testified that he had grown up with the Bill of Rights. "My father taught me to respect freedom. I never abused it, and neither did my friends."
Senator Susan Blendells responded, "Does anyone NEED freedom? The Bill of Rights just doesn't apply in the 21st Century. Given all the violence caused by freedom, I just can't condone its continued existence."
Members of the freedom lobby, stupid sots, argued that freedom actually fosters safety. Joe Doe argued that further restricting freedom would only affect peaceable citizens without deterring violent criminals.
SAFE said if the legislature fails to close the freedom loophole this year, it may bring an initiative before the voters.