View Full Version : Hickenlooper's video message on Gun Control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7MBtUV2hB0&feature=em-share_video_user
"all it takes is a 90-second criminal background check"
Yeah fuckin right...when has it EVER been 90 seconds? The quickest I ever had one come back was about 10 minutes...
He actualy belives his own lies..
The look on his face is typical of cult followers...
I can't stand to look or hear that phony POS anymore.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the biggest issue with the background check bill is that it makes even the simple act of handing your gun to a friend for him to use at the range a crime, right? I honestly don't have a problem with going through a background check for transfers, so long as the gun still doesn't get registered to you that is, but if not having continuous possession of your own gun is enough to make you a criminal then screw that...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the biggest issue with the background check bill is that it makes even the simple act of handing your gun to a friend for him to use at the range a crime, right? I honestly don't have a problem with going through a background check for transfers, so long as the gun still doesn't get registered to you that is, but if not having continuous possession of your own gun is enough to make you a criminal then screw that...
No, that's the magazine capacity bill.
You can loan a gun for up to 72 hours. So if you know a young person who wants to borrow a rifle to go hunting, it better be a short trip.
kidicarus13
03-23-2013, 13:20
Remember, Colorado is now a lot safer.
Daniel_187
03-23-2013, 13:23
90 sec or its free?
nikolatesla19
03-23-2013, 13:25
Remember, Colorado is now a lot safer.
It's refreshing isn't it.
Nice job reading a script you fuc$ing puppet.
"We hope Washington is listening"
Fuck you Hickenlooper
I can't see this, just try it and now have nausea.
90 sec or its free
dont worry, when they increase staffing 10X they can get it down to 90sec. how does a $100 fee sound?
(and don't forget there is now no check on their budget, it can and will grow without bound)
dwalker460
03-23-2013, 13:47
cant we impeach him?
Bailey Guns
03-23-2013, 13:57
Remember, Colorado is now a lot safer.
Yep. Just ask Tom Clements. Oh...
Great-Kazoo
03-23-2013, 14:06
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the biggest issue with the background check bill is that it makes even the simple act of handing your gun to a friend for him to use at the range a crime, right? I honestly don't have a problem with going through a background check for transfers, so long as the gun still doesn't get registered to you that is, but if not having continuous possession of your own gun is enough to make you a criminal then screw that...
YES YOU ARE WRONG.
WRONG TO SUPPORT BGC'S
WRONG TO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM
WRONG TO EVEN CONSIDER COMPROMISING
WRONG
Yep. Just ask Tom Clements. Oh...
Bet you $20 that one will come back to bite us. That guy was not supposed to have a gun. Oh, woe is us, if only the universal background check law had been in place! Tom might still be alive.
give me 90 secs alone in a room with his ass! His ass my face...I mean my face his ass...come on let's go!
Oh [pileoshit]!
Seriously I'd rather wait 8 days for a BGC than have to listen to that video for another 2mins 38secs
kidicarus13
03-23-2013, 14:36
I see Magpul is starting to move already. Expecting to make their first out-of-state mag within 30 days. You do great work Johnny, thanks.
I see Magpul is starting to move already. Expecting to make their first out-of-state mag within 30 days. You do great work Johnny, thanks.
really? link?
I see Magpul is starting to move already. Expecting to make their first out-of-state mag within 30 days. You do great work Johnny, thanks.
Yep. And when that law is eventually overturned in court (or next election on the ballot)... all that will have changed between then and a week ago is we will still have our 30 round mags but we will have lost a great company and a lot of tax revenue in the process. Same goes for the hunting and fishing industry. While there may not be many IN the state who will boycott... I know of tons and keep seeing tons more who will be going to another state for their anual hunting or fishing trips. That is just more money lost.
BGC for a beer? Same 10 bucks. Isn't Looper in a business that was banned? The 9 news interview was awesome, he was flustered. Even mentioned questions like that jeopardize future access. Was he hiding something?
hammer03
03-23-2013, 15:44
Nice lip service flop sweat. I hope Washington IS watching, for the reaction to this shit. Not that they care what us peasants think...
Come on 2014
DavieD55
03-23-2013, 15:45
YES YOU ARE WRONG.
WRONG TO SUPPORT BGC'S
WRONG TO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM
WRONG TO EVEN CONSIDER COMPROMISING
WRONG
+1
Jumpstart
03-23-2013, 15:49
BGC= Gun registration via proxy. Gun registration is illegal in Colorado, but apparently registering gun owners is not.
kidicarus13
03-23-2013, 15:57
really? link?
Denver Post
Magpul says move out of Colorado "underway," and others will follow 03/21/2013 12:01 AM
Ammunition magazine manufacturer Magpul Industries said it plans to begin leaving Colorado "almost immediately," and other firms may follow suit in the wake of a new law that limits ammunition magazine capacities.
"Our moving efforts are underway," Magpul chief operating officer Doug Smith said Wednesday. "Within the next 30 days we will manufacture our first magazine outside the state of Colorado."
One of three gun-control bills signed Wednesday by Gov. John Hickenlooper prohibits the sale of gun magazines that hold more than 15 rounds.
Erie-based Magpul, with about 200 workers, is the largest Colorado company that potentially would be affected by the bill.
Magpul said earlier this week in a Facebook posting that it " will start our transition out of state almost immediately." The company also posted, "We will likely become a multi-state operation as a result of this move, and not all locations have been selected."
The firm's departure could have a ripple effect on companies that supply parts and materials to Magpul.
"We're basically going to follow Magpul and do our best to continue being a supplier for them," said Lloyd Lawrence, owner of Denver-based Lawrence Tool & Molding. "It will probably be out of state."
Lawrence said about 50 to 60 percent of his business comes from supplying magazine parts to Magpul. He said that, ideally, the company could continue to manufacture parts in Colorado and then open an out-of-state facility where the parts would be assembled.
Lawrence said he doesn't yet know how many of his 82 employees would choose to relocate if the company moves out of Colorado.
Manufacturers could continue to make large-capacity magazines if they stamp them with dates and serial numbers.
That provision is impractical and potentially expensive, said Mark Passamaneck, owner of Wheat Ridge-based Carbon Arms, a manufacturer of parts and accessories for firearms.
He said the five-employee firm may consider moving out of state if the magazine capacity law is not overturned by future legislation or constitutional amendments.
osok-308
03-23-2013, 16:01
Man he's full of it.
Robby30-06
03-23-2013, 16:18
Thanks Hick.......i feel much safer. I just threw up in my mouth.
I don't know what pissed me off more in that video, his blatant ignorance, his "we're all in the same boat" attitude, or perhaps worst of all, his level of excitement, like a 16 year old girl who awoke on her birthday to find a new Mercedes in the driveway with her name on it. Lickenpooper is a big [pileoshit]
gnihcraes
03-23-2013, 16:29
since when does Hick "Hunt"? "We like to hunt...." uh huh.
mikedubs
03-23-2013, 16:55
I couldn't get past the semi-wildeyes in the first few seconds.
I couldn't get past the semi-wildeyes in the first few seconds.
Stonerlooper.
Peeps ain't holdong back on his website. Dob't think the interns can keep up with deleting.
I am so PISSED OFF at him right now. "We hope Washington is listening???" He is only doing what Biden specifically asked him to do! What a lying piece of shit.
What he has done is insidious and inexcusable. If it only applied to SALES I would understand his point . . . I would disagree, but I would understand and NOT be that angry.
Why I am pissed off is because he has basically declared ALL FIREARMS to be a highly restricted item, requiring official government permission simply to leave a gun at a relative's house for over 72 hours or pick it back up. If two guys with bolt action rifles that are EXACTLY THE SAME except for caliber decide to swap, they both need official government permission for that too. Fail to get that permission, you become a criminal and are stripped of your right to own a gun.
This new law is UNENFORCEABLE unless they require all gun owners to register every firearm they own. How can you prove you had that gun prior to July 1st? They say burden of proof is on the prosecution . . . for now . . . but once MANDATORY REGISTRATION OF ALL FIREARMS becomes law (make no mistake, it IS coming, there's no other way they can implement this) it will be a crime simply to own an unregistered firearm, and possession = guilt with zero burden of proof on the state once it is established that you owned an unregistered gun.
They want to make formerly law abiding gun owners criminals by passing asinine, unworkable laws that make no sense . . . unless the purpose is to stigmatize and threaten gun owners.
palepainter
03-23-2013, 18:44
Where and who was all of this gun trafficking he mentions?
sabot_round
03-23-2013, 19:41
[Rant1]FUCK CHICKENLOOPER OR LICKMYPOOPER OR WHATEVER HIS NAME IS, AND EVERYONE THAT VOTED FOR HIM!! HE'S A LYING BASTARD AND EVERYONE THAT VOTED FOR HIM SHOULD BE ASHAMED!!
kidicarus13
03-23-2013, 20:21
Where and who was all of this gun trafficking he mentions?
It doesn't matter, there's no more of it. Thanks John!
Great-Kazoo
03-23-2013, 20:43
Where and who was all of this gun trafficking he mentions?
last i heard, some skinhead rollin south bound in a caddy. Diggin in the scene with the gansta lean
UrbanWolf
03-23-2013, 21:03
I won't even click on the link. He doesn't deserve clicks.
What lying sack of shit.
I am also so very tired of the blatant lie that is "illegal guns with no background check are just a mouse click away." fucking lying fuck twit douche nozzle.
Great-Kazoo
03-23-2013, 21:27
What lying sack of shit.
I am also so very tired of the blatant lie that is "illegal guns with no background check are just a mouse click away." fucking lying fuck twit douche nozzle.
It's not that he is lying, but people believe it. That is and should be the real concern.
stevelkinevil
03-23-2013, 21:48
I tried, I got about 8 seconds in before I couldn't take anymore. It was absurd and more than a little hard to believe that this was the governor of CO and not some left coast shithole.
buffalobo
03-23-2013, 21:51
Glad to know that in Amerika it only takes a little "common sense" to throw out freedom.[fail]
BREATHER
03-24-2013, 07:39
Why is he grinning like a poofter
BREATHER
03-24-2013, 07:46
Again, when you keep the retards in this state drunk and high any piece of shit politician can do anything.....Have you seen the fucks out there smoking weed. ??? I really don't have anything against weed, but there are a whole lot of assmonkeys out there using their government given welfare, food stamps, SSI and SSDI on weed. Thye want to do drugs, lets these POS's get a fucking job....I am tired of these politicians using liberal drug and alchohol policies to buy votes.....
once again.
"i dont mind jumping through hoops to use the rights afforded me by the Bill of Rights" what is wrong with you liberal tainted people?
either the second amendment is infringed or its not. i guess in your world its ok if its infringed, just as long as you are ok, how its infringed.
Fudd 1 " i dont care i they take away evil black rifles, i shoot a shotgun"
Fudd 2 " i dont care if they take away shotguns, I shoot a lever action rifle"
Fudd 3 " i dont mind doing background checks, just as long as there is no registration"
Fudd 4 " i dont mind registration if it saves one life"
Fudd 5 " i dont mind if they take away all our guns, they are only meant for killing, i now know I was wrong to own one in the past"
I don't have a problem with it because I already do background checks on person to person transfers to cover my own ass, that doesn't mean I think it should be law for everyone and nowhere in that post did I make that statement. I don't like the law, I don't want the law, I was merely asking for some clarification on the part of it that I thought would impact me the most. Sorry if I did not make that clear enough, but I fought against every single one of their measures, so how about not jumping to conclusions and calling me a liberally tainted fudd just because I asked a question...
Why is he grinning like a poofter
Grandpaw always said "beware of some one who grins all the time, they are up too no good".
I don't have a problem with it because I already do background checks on person to person transfers to cover my own ass, that doesn't mean I think it should be law for everyone and nowhere in that post did I make that statement. I don't like the law, I don't want the law, I was merely asking for some clarification on the part of it that I thought would impact me the most. Sorry if I did not make that clear enough, but I fought against every single one of their measures, so how about not jumping to conclusions and calling me a liberally tainted fudd just because I asked a question...
Contradictory and confusing[facepalm]
Contradictory and confusing[facepalm]
Which part? Lets see if I can make it more clear. The "it" in that post refers to doing background checks on private party sales, not the law making it a requirement for everyone. I don't personally have a problem with doing background checks on private party sales because I already do it. This does not mean I think there should be a law mandating this as a requirement, and nowhere did I say that.
This would be similar to I don't have a problem with wearing my seat belt, or my helmet while riding the motorcycle because I already do these things. But I don't think there should ever be a law mandating that everyone has to. My original post was not meant to make any excuses for this law or meant to infer in any way that I support it. I was merely asking a question about this law, that has unfortunately been signed and will hopefully be overturned, to get some clarification about the part that will affect me the most personally until it is overturned.
By you saying that it doesn't bother you, because you already do it, leads members to believe that it would also make you complacent during these bills and not actively fight against them. That is the gap between what you've said, and what you meant. It is a natural assumption that if something changes that does not affect you, you would not go out of your way to fight against it.
By you saying that it doesn't bother you, because you already do it, leads members to believe that it would also make you complacent during these bills and not actively fight against them. That is the gap between what you've said, and what you meant. It is a natural assumption that if something changes that does not affect you, you would not go out of your way to fight against it.
Fair enough, but I have been and will continue to be fighting against this and every piece of firearms legislation that has come out. I suppose I should have prefaced my original question with that fact. I thought being the owner of and member on a forum for the most vilified firearm out there, that that statement would have gone without saying. I recognize that any win the gun-grabbers chalk up against us, small or big, will only lead to worse and worse things for all of us down the road. So no matter if a law changes what I do already or not I have and will oppose it.
n8tive97
03-24-2013, 13:11
Wow did that piss me off!!!!
Don't compromise on a damn thing, that's how this shit gets out of control!
Don't compromise on a damn thing, that's how this shit gets out of control!
Being COMPLETELY unwilling to compromise is the mark of a zealot or an extremist . . . which is how the anti-gun Liberals are trying to portray us: bigoted zealots who hate the government.
HOWEVER . . . "compromise" needs to apply to both parties, and the Liberal anti-gunners only want to take, take, take and LIE about what they are doing. Personally, if they want to require a background check for sales, I'm opposed to it, but I can understand why they feel a need for it. There is NO LEGITIMATE JUSTIFICATION for arbitrarily mandating background checks on vaguely defined non-sale "transfers" such as trades or storing a gun at a relative or friend's house . . . that is complete bullshit, and as far as I know, no other state has such an overreaching and Draconian law. I am going out of state for a couple of weeks and ask my friend if I can store a couple of guns, in a lockbox, at his home . . . by law he needs to undergo a background check after 72 hours, and I need to undergo one when I come back to pick up my own property? And if we neglect to do this we'te both criminals who automatically lose our rights to own guns? THAT is exactly what Bloomberg and Biden want from this bill . . . the non-sale "transfer" provision hidden in the small print . . . hardly anyone I know is even aware that provision exists . . . they snuck it in, it is unprecedented, deceitful, arbitrary, and insidious.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.