Anti-Rights Colorado Rep. Rhonda Fields Has A Criminal Record


PDA






Justin
March 6, 2013, 08:45 PM
http://colorado.mediatrackers.org/2013/03/06/breaking-anti-second-amendment-legislators-criminal-record-exposed/


BREAKING: Anti-Second Amendment Legislatorís Criminal Record Exposed

According to a Colorado Bureau of Investigations report obtained by Media Trackers, State Representative Rhonda Fields (D-Aurora) was arrested in 1976 on a charge of larceny and again in 1991 on a charge of shoplifting. Despite her own criminal record, Rep. Fields has sought to limit the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

An apparent mugshot of Fields was posted to the Magpul Industries Facebook page by a private user after legislation to limit gun magazine capacity, which was cosponsored by Fields, drove the company to announce that it was closing its doors in Colorado and moving out of state.

If you enjoyed reading about "Anti-Rights Colorado Rep. Rhonda Fields Has A Criminal Record" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jamesbeat
March 6, 2013, 08:59 PM
Perhaps her fear of guns is projection?
Her criminal mind feels that she would be a danger if she had a gun, so she assumes that the same applies to everyone?

Dr.Rob
March 6, 2013, 09:12 PM
Does this affect her ability to hold office?

and by that I mean void her sponsorship of the bills?

Could be worth looking into.

Steve CT
March 6, 2013, 09:26 PM
Universal Background Check for candidates running for Public Office?

jamesbeat
March 6, 2013, 11:10 PM
Universal Background Check for candidates running for Public Office?
You would have thought...

ETA: An IQ test wouldn't hurt either.

heeler
March 6, 2013, 11:20 PM
Yep..And here we go!!
These high minded individuals who want oh so much to come down on us......
Well,lets just turn the heat up few notches on the stovetop to see what surfaces on her as well as many others who just cant resist the push to disarm the law abiding citizens of America.
In my state of Texas those very convictions alone would have kept her from ever getting a concealed handgun permit for many years to come.
And this person stands in judgement of a lot of us!!

Dr.Rob
March 6, 2013, 11:24 PM
On second thought it only says ARRESTED, not convicted if I am reading it right?

788Ham
March 6, 2013, 11:28 PM
^^^^ This is true, but honest folks don't get arrested ! Glass houses and all of that..... remember?

jamesbeat
March 6, 2013, 11:28 PM
Unfortunately it only says ARRESTED.
She probably 'knows people'.

rondog
March 7, 2013, 12:27 AM
Two arrests for theft, 15 years apart....who cares if she wasn't convicted? All that tells criminals is "hey, I got caught and nothing happened!" How many other times might she have NOT been caught?

blarby
March 7, 2013, 09:42 AM
Few things, much as it pains me sometimes :

1. Criminal history does not necessarily bar you from office.

2. As many here state around the board in various cases...even if they were convictions....serve your time, pay your fine, redemption and all that.

Anyone is capable of turning their life around. Sometimes a few brushes with the law can get you to see the light.

If we were to go skeleton in the closet trolling amongst the membership here, and gun owners at large, I'm sure we'd find a lot more than "aggravated shoplifting" and "shoplifting" in our pursuits.

We are a nation that has been led by reformed drug addicts and cronic philanderers most recently.... and many more of those with mixed and tumultous legal history of varying degrees- including slavery- on both sides of the political divide since the founding of our union.

There are no perfect men. There are fewer yet perfect leaders.

If we were to give "the voice" so to speak, only to persons of angelic moral standing- we'd have a pretty quiet nation.

I don't like her either. I'd much rather debate and challenge her based on her incorrect beliefs, and political doctrine than her human frailties.

Much with anyone.

In reality, that is the High Road. I think we should all take it.

But thats just me.

rondog
March 7, 2013, 10:36 AM
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/funnies/RhondaFields02.jpg

blarby
March 7, 2013, 10:46 AM
Or not, I suppose.

Akita1
March 7, 2013, 10:51 AM
Hilarious post Rondog. Love it (and I don't even live in CO).

Godsgunman
March 7, 2013, 10:54 AM
The reason she's against YOUR 2nd amendment rights is so next time she feels like breaking the law she won't have to worry about an armed citizen stopping her since she can squirm her way out if caught by anyone of public service or office.

psyopspec
March 7, 2013, 10:56 AM
Few things, much as it pains me sometimes...

You're not alone.

CoRoMo
March 7, 2013, 10:57 AM
It's important to know the character of the people operating our government. It's wrong to keep important things hidden. Knowing their past and their known behavior/misbehavior is only part of it.

It shouldn't always disqualify them every time, but it should be a factor in a voter's decision. It shouldn't be hidden, it should be known. It shouldn't bar them from serving the public, but it should be used as context for their service.

A person's past should only be used against them as much as that past is reflected in their current behavior.

Furncliff
March 7, 2013, 11:08 AM
Charges filed over threats against Colo. lawmaker
POSTED: 03/04/2013 01:43:26 PM MST
UPDATED: 03/04/2013 06:14:34 PM MSTThe Associated Press
DENVERóA man accused of threatening a Colorado lawmaker sponsoring gun control bills has been charged with attempting to influence a public servant and harassment.
Franklin Sain was charged Monday over messages sent to Democratic Rep. Rhonda Fields.

Denver prosecutors allege the 42-year-old, who is white, tried to intimidate or harass Fields because she is black.

Sain was suspended from his job as chief operating officer of an information technology firm following his arrest.

He allegedly sent Fields a letter saying "There will be blood" and expressing hope that someone would "Gifords" her, an apparent reference to the wounding of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

Sain's attorney said Monday that while the messages to Fields were deplorable, they were not threats.

Fields' attorney says he agrees with the decision to file charges.



Read more: Charges filed over threats against Colo. lawmaker - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/colorado/ci_22715090/charges-filed-over-threats-against-colo-lawmaker#ixzz2Ms2ks0lM
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us: @Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook


Felony if convicted.

Godsgunman
March 7, 2013, 12:10 PM
Thats a shame. I'm sure this anti stuff makes most if not all our "blood boil" but its people like that who just fuel the antis' fire and use of threats is not the way to win these battles. We must keep our cool and use truths and facts and not let emotion get the best of us.

rondog
March 7, 2013, 12:31 PM
More....

http://colorado.mediatrackers.org/2013/03/07/breaking-rep-rhonda-fields-rap-sheet-longer-than-previously-reported/

rondog
March 7, 2013, 12:35 PM
Few things, much as it pains me sometimes :

1. Criminal history does not necessarily bar you from office.

2. As many here state around the board in various cases...even if they were convictions....serve your time, pay your fine, redemption and all that.

Anyone is capable of turning their life around. Sometimes a few brushes with the law can get you to see the light.

If we were to go skeleton in the closet trolling amongst the membership here, and gun owners at large, I'm sure we'd find a lot more than "aggravated shoplifting" and "shoplifting" in our pursuits.

We are a nation that has been led by reformed drug addicts and cronic philanderers most recently.... and many more of those with mixed and tumultous legal history of varying degrees- including slavery- on both sides of the political divide since the founding of our union.

There are no perfect men. There are fewer yet perfect leaders.

If we were to give "the voice" so to speak, only to persons of angelic moral standing- we'd have a pretty quiet nation.

I don't like her either. I'd much rather debate and challenge her based on her incorrect beliefs, and political doctrine than her human frailties.

Much with anyone.

In reality, that is the High Road. I think we should all take it.

But thats just me.


Sorry that you feel that we should "forgive and forget", but these are the people that are running this country, and running it into the ground. If we don't stand up and do something to hold them accountable, then what? Just open the prisons and give 'em all a public office and throw money at them? You think it's fine for admitted criminals to have power over our lives? I think that's insane.

But that's just me.

Sol
March 7, 2013, 12:40 PM
Maybe she is hehe..."sick" and has a "disease" that we should all be more TOLERANT of.

InkEd
March 7, 2013, 12:41 PM
I am not shocked by such information. After all, we have a healthcare bill being shoved down our throats by a guy who is a life-long cigarette smoker.

Avenger29
March 7, 2013, 12:48 PM
Perhaps her fear of guns is projection?
Her criminal mind feels that she would be a danger if she had a gun, so she assumes that the same applies to everyone?

More like she's afraid that should she commit more crimes a victim might turn her into a good criminal...

mrvco
March 7, 2013, 12:53 PM
My only issue with this sort of thing is that if this person was anything but a Democrat, they would be excoriated by the media.

Upon further consideration, the "restricting the rights of (actual) law-abiding citizens" aspect bothers me as well.

CoRoMo
March 7, 2013, 12:55 PM
No, not shocking at all.

This nation has had tax cheats head up the Treasury Dept, swindlers chair the House Financial Services Committee, and frauds direct the House Ways and Means Committee. Our Justice Dept. helped Mexican cartels acquire illegally transferred firearms that were used in the death of a multitude of innocent people.

Criminals ARE running the government.

dastardly-D
March 7, 2013, 01:06 PM
Yes,criminals are running the Govt and I consider them a ''special interest group'' ! There should be full disclosure on anybody running for office !

somerandomguy
March 7, 2013, 01:07 PM
No, not shocking at all.

This nation has had tax cheats head up the Treasury Dept, swindlers chair the House Financial Services Committee, and frauds direct the House Ways and Means Committee. Our Justice Dept. helped Mexican cartels acquire illegally transferred firearms that were used in the death of a multitude of innocent people.

Criminals ARE running the government.
Republicans = Criminals = the Government...

NavyLCDR
March 7, 2013, 01:17 PM
The very first legislation requiring a permit to possess a handgun was sponsored by Big Tim Sullivan in New York in 1911.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/big-tim-sullivan-tammany-kingmaker/

Sullivan’s ties to the criminal underworld of gambling and prostitution are also major themes of the book. When the Republicans won City Hall in 1895 on a wave of voter anger over Tammany’s support of vice, Sullivan clashed with a young police commissioner, Theodore Roosevelt, over the Republicans’ attempts to cut the Democrats out of patronage jobs.

Even so, Sullivan supported what are now viewed as major items of progressive legislation. He was a longtime supporter of extending the franchise to women. He sponsored the Sullivan Law, which restricted possession of concealed firearms.

Gun control history, from the very beginning, is about protecting the criminal and the government from law abiding citizens. Gun control has nothing to do with guns and everything to do with control.

CoRoMo
March 7, 2013, 01:45 PM
Republicans = Criminals = the Government...
This is not only untrue it is illogical. Being a Republican does not equal being a criminal and a criminal is not the same thing as the government. Weird post you made there.

Dr.Rob
March 7, 2013, 02:56 PM
If if you belive forgive and forget and rehabilitaion.. which I do. WHY then is she pushing legsilation that doesn't give a law abiding citizen the same benefit of the doubt?

somerandomguy
March 7, 2013, 03:14 PM
If if you belive forgive and forget and rehabilitaion.. which I do. WHY then is she pushing legsilation that doesn't give a law abiding citizen the same benefit of the doubt?
Because she's a politician...her job is to be a lying deceitful a-hole. Why do you even need to be a law abiding citizen to own a firearm, not just a citizen? Say that a tyrannical government does happen, we're all going to be labeled as criminals anyways, so let's try and keep it down on the "law abiding part", the constitution applies to everyone equally, even those with a past of mental illness and/or criminal background.

SSN Vet
March 7, 2013, 03:26 PM
If we were to give "the voice" so to speak, only to persons of angelic moral standing- we'd have a pretty quiet nation.

Sounds good to me!

99% of the cr@p my ears hear and my eyes read every day is coming from somebody trying to lie to, steal from or cheat me..... I can do with less of that.

HorseSoldier
March 7, 2013, 03:37 PM
Because she's a politician...her job is to be a lying deceitful a-hole.

My personal belief is that if you did psychological screening of every elected or appointed official in Washington DC, you'd find a density of sociopaths on par with the worst estimates for American prisons, they're just higher functioning sociopaths. I also believe the same would hold true at other levels of government.

For the particular scumbag in question, I'm pretty alarmed by the fact that of her two arrests the second one for shop lifting occurred when she was 37 years old. In my professional experience, if you're still doing petty crimes like that at that sort of age you either have mental health issues or are an aging junkie. Or both, I suppose.

somerandomguy
March 7, 2013, 03:40 PM
My personal belief is that if you did psychological screening of every elected or appointed official in Washington DC, you'd find a density of sociopaths on par with the worst estimates for American prisons, they're just higher functioning sociopaths. I also believe the same would hold true at other levels of government.

For the particular scumbag in question, I'm pretty alarmed by the fact that of her two arrests the second one for shop lifting occurred when she was 37 years old. In my professional experience, if you're still doing petty crimes like that at that sort of age you either have mental health issues or are an aging junkie. Or both, I suppose.
I think you are 100% right...we have the rare ones who actually care like Elizabeth Warren, but I don't think many are there to do their jobs, they just want to get out and get paid by the lobbyists imo. In fact I wouldn't be suprised at how many of them probably have criminal records, I'm going to guess at least 50% of them do.

miller.lyte
March 7, 2013, 04:05 PM
Just open the prisons and give 'em all a public office and throw money at them? You think it's fine for admitted criminals to have power over our lives? I think that's insane.


Wow, because that's not a stretch at all. :rolleyes: Fact is some crimes are worse than others. Serial offenders are worse than one time offenders. As he said, and he's right, most folks here on THR aren't squeaky clean themselves. They may not be holding public office but many of them are in charge of something, somewhere. That alone doesn't make or break them.

While I don't prefer people holding office with a prior record from decades ago, that does not necessarily mean they are incapable of holding office because of that. Could it, certainly. It's not like politicians without records are much better though.

The anti's spin on your statement went a lot like this: "You think it's fine for someone with (depression, PTSD, insert any type of medical here) to have control of a gun? I think that's insane."

Most of us are not clean in some way just like she is. We need to be careful who we persecute.

12many
March 7, 2013, 04:10 PM
Well, they always said criminals don't want victims to have guns.


This really makes my blood boil. Should never have elected her so it is their own fault. I am shocked it did not come out during the election, but some state elections are short on cash and background checking.

12many
March 7, 2013, 04:12 PM
Miller, Larcany is very serious and is a crime of dishonesty and fraud.

somerandomguy
March 7, 2013, 04:52 PM
Wow, because that's not a stretch at all. :rolleyes: Fact is some crimes are worse than others. Serial offenders are worse than one time offenders. As he said, and he's right, most folks here on THR aren't squeaky clean themselves. They may not be holding public office but many of them are in charge of something, somewhere. That alone doesn't make or break them.

While I don't prefer people holding office with a prior record from decades ago, that does not necessarily mean they are incapable of holding office because of that. Could it, certainly. It's not like politicians without records are much better though.

The anti's spin on your statement went a lot like this: "You think it's fine for someone with (depression, PTSD, insert any type of medical here) to have control of a gun? I think that's insane."

Most of us are not clean in some way just like she is. We need to be careful who we persecute.
The 2nd ammendment guarantees the right to a gun though, it doesn't guarantee a right to run for political office. That is where your analogy is kind of flawed...

HorseSoldier
March 7, 2013, 05:19 PM
There was a Denver Post article saying she blamed her arrests on being married to a drug addict ("I had to do it to feed my kids"). I'm guessing she was using, too, but at a low enough level she managed to avoid drug arrests and other clear indicators.

CoRoMo
March 7, 2013, 05:42 PM
Bloomberg's employee lobbyist in Colorado enjoys using the things he's pushing our legislators to restrict: http://freebeacon.com/the-watermelon-hunter/

http://s1.freebeacon.com/up/2013/03/Eichberg.png

rondog
March 7, 2013, 05:50 PM
It WAS mentioned when she was running for office, and she's also been charged with other things since she's been IN office.

http://colorado.mediatrackers.org/2013/03/07/breaking-rep-rhonda-fields-rap-sheet-longer-than-previously-reported/

locnload
March 7, 2013, 06:46 PM
In Colorado we have the right to a "Ballot Initiative" meaning if you can get enough signatures you can get it put on the ballot in the next general election. I think I will propose one that simply says that if you cant pass a background check to buy a firearm, you can not hold public office, elected or appointed. Oh, and make it retroactice by the way. :cuss:

somerandomguy
March 7, 2013, 07:07 PM
It WAS mentioned when she was running for office, and she's also been charged with other things since she's been IN office.

http://colorado.mediatrackers.org/2013/03/07/breaking-rep-rhonda-fields-rap-sheet-longer-than-previously-reported/
Great reporting! Thanks for the link lol

If you enjoyed reading about "Anti-Rights Colorado Rep. Rhonda Fields Has A Criminal Record" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!