Article in Denver Post about possibility of overturn of mag ban by David Kopel

[EvilRhino]

Focuses on the recalls and the remaining head count on each side as a possible reason they might overturn it themselves. Notes DickinPooper probably won't sign but that he is likely on his way out in popularity.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_24134831/will-recalls-lead-repeal-gun-magazine-limits-colorado

[BPTactical]

Good to see, my rep is one of the D who voted against it.
I think she needs a phone call.

[DeusExMachina]

David Kopel is one of my favorite writers, possibly people in general.

[Bailey Guns]

Squared away...

[Rucker61]

Focuses on the recalls and the remaining head count on each side as a possible reason they might overturn it themselves. Notes DickinPooper probably won't sign but that he is likely on his way out in popularity.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_24134831/will-recalls-lead-repeal-gun-magazine-limits-colorado

"This essay was written for and distributed by Bloomberg News."

[Bailey Guns]

Oh, the irony. :)

[def90]

For the record I am registered as "unaffiliated".. for the haters, David Kopel one of the sanest voices on gun laws in this country, is a registered Democrat..

Bush and Romney are on the record banners.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

[def90]

Also don't forget that Kopels argument on this lawsuit is based on the previous Supreme Court usage of "common use". The supreme court has previously ruled that items considered to be of "common use" are not banable. For instance an AR15 is sold with a "standard" 30 round mag and the 30 round mag is the "standard" issue magazine for the military thus 30 round mags could be ruled "common use". This means that it is fully conceivable that it would still be perfectly fine for lawmakers to ban a 45 round magazine as there is no record of 45 round magazines being a "common use" item.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

I sincerely hope this is true.

[Zundfolge]

If the Democrats were smart they'd repeal the mag limit because that's the law most people are griping about without realizing that the background check law is a greater infringement on our rights.

If they repeal the mag limit there's a good chance most people will be happy with the "compromise" and stop fighting them on the other laws they passed.

It also benefits them to NOT have the courts weigh in on the issue as that leaves them free to pass infringing laws down the road.

Hopefully they descend into a fit of arrogance and hubris and stand their ground against these laws so we can keep the fire lit under the gun rights crowd to get rid of ALL of these stupid new laws.

[DavieD55]

If the Democrats were smart they'd repeal the mag limit because that's the law most people are griping about without realizing that the background check law is a greater infringement on our rights.

If they repeal the mag limit there's a good chance most people will be happy with the "compromise" and stop fighting them on the other laws they passed.

It also benefits them to NOT have the courts weigh in on the issue as that leaves them free to pass infringing laws down the road.

Hopefully they descend into a fit of arrogance and hubris and stand their ground against these laws so we can keep the fire lit under the gun rights crowd to get rid of ALL of these stupid new laws.

+1

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

+2

[merl]

If the Democrats were smart they'd repeal the mag limit because that's the law most people are griping about without realizing that the background check law is a greater infringement on our rights.

I disagree on this. The mag ban is the only thing they passed that does not have a legal workaround so in my mind it is the greatest infringement. I can still sell you a gun, just have to jump through the hoops and pay my fines, err fees. I cannot sell you one of my surplus FAL mags.

[Zundfolge]

I disagree on this. The mag ban is the only thing they passed that does not have a legal workaround so in my mind it is the greatest infringement. I can still sell you a gun, just have to jump through the hoops and pay my fines, err fees. I cannot sell you one of my surplus FAL mags.

My point is that its the mag ban that has people fired up, so if they just repealed it most "gun rights activists" would shut up and leave the rest of their crap in place.

I would argue that the background check is a greater infringement than the mag ban because it requires me to get permission from the state to engage in commerce that used to be unfettered. They can shut down all arms sales tomorrow by shutting down the background check system (and eventually I expect that is the plan). Additionally BGCs are back door registration ... which often leads to confiscation.

BOTH laws need to go. I believe we can get rid of both of them but its going to require a lot of work on the part of those of us that support gun rights, the dems are going to lose eventually and they could cut their losses by repealing the mag ban and taking the air out of the sails of the gun rights movement.

[merl]

I understand your point but don't agree with it. Among folks that don't own guns or only own a couple I think repealing the BG checks would be a hard sell and that's the state majority. Between those that think it doesn't affect them (don't trade), don't care either way or think it is a good thing there is not enough support. The only reason the checks are not mandatory in more places is because it is not worth the fight for an ineffective law.

I think it would be easier to get rid of the CBI fee than the BG check.

(but that's just my opinion and I'm often wrong) :)

[Clint45]

The BGC law here in CO is stricter than in most other states, including NY. In NY you do not require a BGC for private party sales or trades of rifles or shotguns. As long as both parties have valid NYS pistol permits you don't need one for handguns either. Here in CO, it's required simply for storing your hunting rifle at a friend's house if you're going out of town for more than 72 hours. No other state has anything like that. It is insane.

[Zundfolge]

The BGC law here in CO is stricter than in most other states, including NY. In NY you do not require a BGC for private party sales or trades of rifles or shotguns. As long as both parties have valid NYS pistol permits you don't need one for handguns either. Here in CO, it's required simply for storing your hunting rifle at a friend's house if you're going out of town for more than 72 hours. No other state has anything like that. It is insane.
My fear is that the left knows the current BCG check law is unworkable and unpopular and they'll come up with the "compromise" of doing away with it and replacing it with an FOID.

Universal Background Checks are an incremental step toward gun registration which is an incremental step toward confiscation.

[Justin]

agree that an outright repeal of the BGC law would be hard to do without tying it to a repeal of the magazine ban.

Frankly, I don't understand why they don't adopt the rules other states have where presentation of a valid carry permit exempts you from background check requirements.

[Zundfolge]

Frankly, I don't understand why they don't adopt the rules other states have where presentation of a valid carry permit exempts you from background check requirements.

Yeah in retail sales too.

But Colorado doesn't use NICS, we use our own expensive waste of bureaucracy.

[TFOGGER]

agree that an outright repeal of the BGC law would be hard to do without tying it to a repeal of the magazine ban.

Frankly, I don't understand why they don't adopt the rules other states have where presentation of a valid carry permit exempts you from background check requirements.

Apparently, because Colorado's background check is tied to the CBI database, the one done for your CCW is not compliant with the letter of the law. This has been proposed on a number of occasions, but effectively would require CO to use the NICS system, so it's always been shot down in committee.

[Kraven251]

My fear is that the left knows the current BCG check law is unworkable and unpopular and they'll come up with the "compromise" of doing away with it and replacing it with an FOID.

Universal Background Checks are an incremental step toward gun registration which is an incremental step toward confiscation.

Though most of us have a FOID already it's just a CHP.


I don't want that system, so don't take the comment as such, just most of us are already on a list of probable firearm owners.

[Bailey Guns]

Except with a FOID at least you can buy a gun. A permit means nothing here if you want to buy a gun.

[Zundfolge]

Except with a FOID at least you can buy a gun. A permit means nothing here if you want to buy a gun.

On the flip side you HAVE to have an FOID to buy a gun or even ammo (at least as its done in most other states) you can buy a gun without a permit if you want. For that matter you can open carry if you don't want a CHP either.