Schaffer attacks Coors on gun rights record

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
Schaffer attacks Coors on gun rights record

http://www.gazette.com/display.php?sid=970965

By KYLE HENLEY THE GAZETTE

U.S. Senate hopeful Bob Schaffer charged opponent Pete Coors, the brewery titan who has contributed to hundreds of campaigns during the years, with supporting congressional candidates who opposed gun rights.

Schaffer, a former congressman from Larimer County, and Coors are vying for the GOP nod to replace Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, who is stepping down after two terms for health reasons.

The attack on Coors came Thursday at a candidates forum hosted by the Pikes Peak Firearms Coalition at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 4051 on Pikes Peak Avenue.

The forum mostly focused on gun issues, an area on which the two candidates have few differences. The men claim to be ardent supporters of the Second Amendment, opponents of gun control efforts and firearms enthusiasts.

Schaffer, however, accused Coors of supporting 16 members of Congress, through the Coors Brewery Corp. Political Action Committee, that received F grades from the National Rifle Association for their votes on gun issues.

“I ask: How did these people get elected and who backs them?†Schaffer said. “They all received campaign finance funding from the Coors PAC. This is a record. I’ve not contributed to people that want to go to Washington to destroy the Second Amendment.â€

Coors defended the contributions by noting that the PAC distributed funds mostly based on issues surrounding beer sales, not gun control.

“The PAC is an employee PAC, managed by employees, that I don’t have anything to do with,†he said. “I don’t even see the list they contributed to.â€

Although the forum did not touch on the war in Iraq or how to jump start the nation’s stuttering economy — the two hot-button issues of the campaign — the candidates devoted time to their histories of support for gun rights.

Coors is a past president of Ducks Unlimited, a pro-hunting organization, and appeared in an NRA advertising campaign during the 1980s.

“For some reason, I felt that guns would be an important part of my life, and they have been,†Coors said. “I just hate like heck when somebody talks about taking those rights away from me.â€

Schaffer said as a state senator, he sponsored legislation that would expand the ability of people to carry concealed weapons. He said he co-sponsored the “Make My Day†law, which allows people to use deadly force against someone on their property when their lives are threatened.

“There is no public official in Colorado who has a stronger record of defending the Second Amendment than I do,†Schaffer said. “Being proven in the battlefield and defending our rights . . . ought to carry some weight.â€

Although they claim to support gun rights, each candidate sidestepped some questions from the audience of about 100 firearms enthusiasts.

Schaffer refused to answer questions about repealing or changing the Brady Act, which requires background checks for handgun purchases, and other gun control measures. Coors said he would vote to repeal the Brady Act, but Schaffer said he would not answer for fear the media would use it against him.

“In these campaigns, as a candidate, I want to be in control of my message,†Schaffer told the audience. “This is a real danger. You need to understand the media’s interest. You have to know I will never vote in a way that harms our Second Amendment rights.â€

Coors steered clear of a question about banning different types of ammunition, including bullets capable of penetrating police officers’ bulletproof vests.

“It seems clear to me that in changing federal law . . . you risk ending up with a mess,†Coors said. “I’m learning you have to be very careful when you say you’ll support such and such an amendment or such and such a bill."

Schaffer said he would not support efforts to ban different kinds of ammunition.

CONTACT THE WRITER: 1-303-837-0613 or [email protected]
 
If the Coors PAC is really run by employees, I don't see how Pete Coors can be held responsible for its actions. If it's an employee PAC, it contributions are most likely based on labor and workplace safety issues, that sort of thing. RKBA wouldn't really be considered. If the PAC was run by the corporation, contributions would be based on beer industry concerns-alcohol restrictions, advertising, things like that.

Single minded concern for one issue is easy when your an issue advocacy group. When there's more than one issue, decisions get toughter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top