Colorado sheriffs plan lawsuit challenging state gun control laws

[vossman]

which is when?

When the judge decides which sides bribe is the best for him/her maybe?

[Zundfolge]

When the judge decides which sides bribe is the best for him/her maybe?

Where do we send our checks? :p

[Colorado Osprey]

Where do we send our checks? :p

Wait... are bribes tax deductible?

[Waywardson174]

Wait... are bribes tax deductible?

Only if you label it "political contribution"

[def90]

which is when?

Thought I read somewhere that the judge has 6 months for a decision..

[KAPA]

Thought I read somewhere that the judge has 6 months for a decision..

Yes, we should know right before election time.

[O2HeN2]

Yes, we should know right before election time.
That could very well be a win-win. If it goes in our favor, good. If it doesn't, it'll put the issue in the forefront for the election.

...which is why we might see this decision made quickly, rather than near the election.

O2

[merl]

That could very well be a win-win. If it goes in our favor, good. If it doesn't, it'll put the issue in the forefront for the election.

...which is why we might see this decision made quickly, rather than near the election.

O2

This is a law matter, politics does not weigh into it.



[hahhah-no]

[lc_nab]

This is a law matter, politics does not weigh into it.



[hahhah-no]


I am sorry Sir, but politics always have weigh into law matters... Since the creation of politics, and if it is something crucial like this, politicians will use it to their advantage, specially when re elections are near.

[cofi]

When the judge decides which sides bribe is the best for him/her maybe?
Lol

ao so there is no "must have a ruling by this date" sorta thing?

[Zundfolge]

That could very well be a win-win. If it goes in our favor, good. If it doesn't, it'll put the issue in the forefront for the election.

...which is why we might see this decision made quickly, rather than near the election.

Agreed. If the result comes down right before the election, one way or the other, it puts the issue back in the forefront which can only harm Democrats.

[TFOGGER]

The judge is a Bush era appointee, with a fairly conservative record. If she rules in our favor, the ruling may come sooner, if she decides that the laws are constitutional and otherwise valid, she may delay the ruling to advance party politics. Purely speculation on my part, and I'm probably talking out of my ass...

[Uberjager]

I could see us clearing house (of anti-gun Dems) even if it gets struck down in court.

[UrbanWolf]

I could see us clearing house (of anti-gun Dems) even if it gets struck down in court.

How so?

[Uberjager]

How so?

Hopefully I'm not off my rocker, but it seems like the only reason we get the new gun laws was due to out of state pressure from Bloomberg, and it seems like the majority of people in state absolutely hate the new laws. I could see a majority of them getting the boot.

[Justin]

I could see us clearing house (of anti-gun Dems) even if it gets struck down in court.

Best of both worlds.

[UrbanWolf]

Hopefully I'm not off my rocker, but it seems like the only reason we get the new gun laws was due to out of state pressure from Bloomberg, and it seems like the majority of people in state absolutely hate the new laws. I could see a majority of them getting the boot.

We still have a pretty damn high Liberal voter population, they won't mind if the laws stay. And the likelihood of any governor repealing the laws is low, unless he want to get the bashing from MSM.

[mtnrider]

We still have a pretty damn high Liberal voter population, they won't mind if the laws stay. And the likelihood of any governor repealing the laws is low, unless he want to get the bashing from MSM.

As much as I hate to admit it you are right. Unfortunately I just don't see these laws going away.

[Bailey Guns]

Disagree. I think IF a republican governor is elected and IF the house/senate go republican there is a very good chance they'll be repealed. If a republican house/senate sends a repeal bill to a republican governor's desk, it will get signed. But that's a lot of "ifs".

[Sawin]

I'm worried that there has been an undocumented (as-of-yet) influx of liberal voters who relocated here following the passing of Amendment 64.... at the same time, I know a lot of conservative ones who are moving out...but that's just my small circle of observation/frame of reference talking, so hopefully I'm wrong.

[mtnrider]

I'm worried that there has been an undocumented (as-of-yet) influx of liberal voters who relocated here following the passing of Amendment 64.... .

I know those that enjoy mj will disagree but amendment 64 was a Huge victory for the libtards and is just another part of their master plan to steer this state further to the left. It has, and will continue to bring in liberal voters.

[UrbanWolf]

I'm worried that there has been an undocumented (as-of-yet) influx of liberal voters who relocated here following the passing of Amendment 64.... at the same time, I know a lot of conservative ones who are moving out...but that's just my small circle of observation/frame of reference talking, so hopefully I'm wrong.

I hope they get too drugged up and vote for the other guy.

[balyon885]

I hope they get too drugged up and vote for the other guy.

Or forget to vote.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

[mtnrider]

I hope they get too drugged up and vote for the other guy.

Oh, don't worry. There will be a flower power bus driving them all to the polls promising free weed for there vote.

[kidicarus13]

Oh, don't worry. There will be a flower power bus driving them all to the polls promising free weed for there vote.

It's so predictable

[JVC]

Not if there's no air in the bus tires.

[beast556]

Not if there's no air in the bus tires.


nice[ROFL3]

[brutal]

Oh, don't worry. There will be a flower power bus driving them all to the polls promising free weed for there vote.

Seems it would be hard to round up that many short yellow buses.

[Uberjager]

It seems like we have 3 ways to "fix" the law:

(1) This court case

(2) The upcoming election, which I could see going our way due to the recalls

(3) A ballot initiative

It seems like the ballot initiative would be our last resort, and it also seems like it would be the hardest. Obviously we can't affect the outcome of number 1, but we can definitely affect 2 by voting. If it comes to 3, we'll have to be on top of it. IIRC, it was in the pipeline to come up on the ballot for this election, but it was organized poorly and it got nowhere close to the number of required signatures.

[mtnrider]

Seems it would be hard to round up that many short yellow buses.

Don't under estimate them. :-)

http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff375/Triple8Racing/l_zps6c0f22a7.jpg (http://s1232.photobucket.com/user/Triple8Racing/media/l_zps6c0f22a7.jpg.html)

[The Rat]

It seems like we have 3 ways to "fix" the law:

(1) This court case

(2) The upcoming election, which I could see going our way due to the recalls

(3) A ballot initiative

It seems like the ballot initiative would be our last resort, and it also seems like it would be the hardest. Obviously we can't affect the outcome of number 1, but we can definitely affect 2 by voting. If it comes to 3, we'll have to be on top of it. IIRC, it was in the pipeline to come up on the ballot for this election, but it was organized poorly and it got nowhere close to the number of required signatures.

Wasn't there already a ballot initiative last year that fell on its face?

[Zundfolge]

Wasn't there already a ballot initiative last year that fell on its face?

Yes, but I seem to recall that there were 3 or 4 Marijuana legalization ballot initiatives that failed before the one for Amendment 64 made it.

[Uberjager]

Yes, but I seem to recall that there were 3 or 4 Marijuana legalization ballot initiatives that failed before the one for Amendment 64 made it.

That's not too encouraging.

[Zundfolge]

That's not too encouraging.

How is that not encouraging? There's too many in our camp that have 100% given up on the idea of an amendment via ballot initiative because the first two attempts failed to get off the ground.

I think a lot of people are in a "wait-and-see" frame of mind vis ah vis the lawsuit and the upcoming election. If the lawsuit fails I expect we'll see a lot of people start talking about a ballot initiative (which may be one reason they're going to delay releasing the judgement until its too close to the elections for an initiative movement to get on the ballot this election).

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

I agree. I'd really rather not go the ballot initiative route, but the pot thing was just a constant effort until they finally got their way. Liberals are great at that.

[Zundfolge]

I agree. I'd really rather not go the ballot initiative route, but the pot thing was just a constant effort until they finally got their way. Liberals are great at that.

I've got mixed feelings about the ballot initiative route ... it'll be a long row to hoe and we might not win, but if we do win we'll have strongly fortified our Federal 2A and state Article II sec 13 rights within the Colorado Constitution (which is more weight then simple legislation).

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Yeah.

[Uberjager]

How is that not encouraging? There's too many in our camp that have 100% given up on the idea of an amendment via ballot initiative because the first two attempts failed to get off the ground.

I think a lot of people are in a "wait-and-see" frame of mind vis ah vis the lawsuit and the upcoming election. If the lawsuit fails I expect we'll see a lot of people start talking about a ballot initiative (which may be one reason they're going to delay releasing the judgement until its too close to the elections for an initiative movement to get on the ballot this election).

I thought the ship had already sailed on that for this election.

[Zundfolge]

I thought the ship had already sailed on that for this election.

Well I meant the General on November 4th, not the primary election June 24th. But yeah, it would probably be too little time to get the signatures in and approved before November.

[OneGuy67]

There was a weak attempt at a ballot initiative last year. It failed as the supporters didn't get enough signatures to put it on the ballot. Leaving them at gun shops in the hopes their employees will advocate for it and obtain your needed signatures is weak. You need a dedicated group of people from all over the state to collect signatures. That does mean standing in front of places and talking to people, not leaving a clipboard on a counter and hoping people will read it.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Uberjager]

There was a weak attempt at a ballot initiative last year. It failed as the supporters didn't get enough signatures to put it on the ballot. Leaving them at gun shops in the hopes their employees will advocate for it and obtain your needed signatures is weak. You need a dedicated group of people from all over the state to collect signatures. That does mean standing in front of places and talking to people, not leaving a clipboard on a counter and hoping people will read it.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

I didn't even hear about it last time around, until it was too late.

What all would we want on our ballot initiative?

Obviously the mag thing...

[KAPA]

There was a sign on Lincoln about 2 miles east of I25 that said something along the lines of "Help repeal the Mag ban" but not much else to let you know what it was for. I remember going to the website and not being able to do anything with it. Really wanted to get involved with it but the organization didn't prove to be too promising. We need to get all those recall people involved with this one. I know I would do something to help if there was something promising in the works. Doesn't the NRA have some organization skill/powers they can lend a hand with?

[balyon885]

Anyone heard anything about the judges ruling?

Just read in an article on Fox news about hickendooper's apology backfire stating she ruled the sheriffs could not sue while in office.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

[Chad0724]

I made sure to send my votes in today. Hoping for some changes in Colorado very soon

[MuzzleFlash]

Sheriff Joy Hoy of Eagle County refused to join the lawsuit. He was the subject of a RMGO email (https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerickJones/posts/10201815635018327). He is about as Republican as Pat Sullivan was - very anti-gun. Well he lost in yesterday's primary to James van Beek. Mr. van Beek's views on 2A and the sheriff's lawsuit are unknown.

[KAPA]

Sheriff Joy Hoy of Eagle County refused to join the lawsuit. He was the subject of a RMGO email (https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerickJones/posts/10201815635018327). He is about as Republican as Pat Sullivan was - very anti-gun. Well he lost in yesterday's primary to James van Beek. Mr. van Beek's views on 2A and the sheriff's lawsuit are unknown.

Good news! It seems the elections were promising in terms of a backlash through voting.

[WETWRKS]

Judge upheld the gun laws

[ryorourke]

"DENVER — A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit aimed at overturning Colorado’s new gun laws, upholding the expansion of background checks on private gun sales and transfers and the ban on magazines of more than 15 rounds." http://kdvr.com/2014/06/26/judge-upholds-colorados-gun-laws-tosses-lawsuit/

[SuperiorDG]

"DENVER — A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit aimed at overturning Colorado’s new gun laws, upholding the expansion of background checks on private gun sales and transfers and the ban on magazines of more than 15 rounds." http://kdvr.com/2014/06/26/judge-upholds-colorados-gun-laws-tosses-lawsuit/

Yep, heard about that. Did you join just to post this?

[MAP]

Not surprised. The real fight is at the appellate level and above.

Mike

[stoner01]

Damn

[RCCrawler]

Hey, at least we can smoke weed and marry dudes...

[Dave_L]

“It is clear from the legislative history that the General Assembly adopted the 15-round restriction in the effort to balance the ability of individuals to lawfully use semiautomatic weapons in self-defense, while limiting the capability of unlawful shooters to fire repeatedly. It considered a more restrictive limit of 12 rounds, but rejected that at the request of citizens and law enforcement officials. Instead, it chose the 15-round limit based on evidence that officers of the numerous state and federal law enforcement agencies all successfully use magazines with 15 or fewer rounds."

That's just hilarious.

[SuperiorDG]

Hey, at least we can smoke weed and marry dudes...

What ever floats your boat dude. .[Sarcasm2][fagpole]

[merl]

Hey, at least we can smoke weed and marry dudes...

One would think that if we respected their freedom they would respect ours but it does not seem to work that way. (either way)

[Gman]

Elections have consequences. End of Story.

[WETWRKS]

Hey, at least we can smoke weed and marry dudes...

Somehow it is unconstitutional to restrict those and abortion even tho none of those are guaranteed by the constitution...yet firearm rights which are guaranteed by the constitution are free game to restrict. The system is broken.

[clublights]

“It is clear from the legislative history that the General Assembly adopted the 15-round restriction in the effort to balance the ability of individuals to lawfully use semiautomatic weapons in self-defense, while limiting the capability of unlawful shooters to fire repeatedly. It considered a more restrictive limit of 12 rounds, but rejected that at the request of citizens and law enforcement officials. Instead, it chose the 15-round limit based on evidence that officers of the numerous state and federal law enforcement agencies all successfully use magazines with 15 or fewer rounds."

That's just hilarious.


But True....


That ATF or former ATF agent they had testifying said it. They asked what size his mags were.... he said 15 ( referring to his pistol ) I just wish the legislature had asked the follow up of " rifle or pistol" then he would have had to admit his rifle mags were 30 rounders.

[Dave_L]

But True....


That ATF or former ATF agent they had testifying said it. They asked what size his mags were.... he said 15 ( referring to his pistol ) I just wish the legislature had asked the follow up of " rifle or pistol" then he would have had to admit his rifle mags were 30 rounders.

Yeah, always leaving out those "little" details.

[Zundfolge]

Alright, after this I don't want to hear from you whiny little bitches that think Beauprez isn't perfect enough. You don't like him, don't want to vote for him, whatever just keep it to yourself.

We take this state back in November or its lost forever.

[MED]

“It is clear from the legislative history that the General Assembly adopted the 15-round restriction in the effort to balance the ability of individuals to lawfully use semiautomatic weapons in self-defense, while empowering the capability of unlawful shooters to fire repeatedly. It considered a more restrictive limit of 12 rounds, but rejected that at the request of citizens and law enforcement officials. Instead, it chose the 15-round limit based on evidence that officers of the numerous state and federal law enforcement agencies all successfully use magazines with 15 or fewer rounds."

That's just hilarious.

Fixed

...and, WTF does that have to do with not being able to enforce the law, which is the main issue behind the Sheriff's filing the suit.

[DavieD55]

Not suprissed in the least. Knew this was going to happen. The Kalifornication of CO continues.

[TEAMRICO]

Alright, after this I don't want to hear from you whiny little bitches that think Beauprez isn't perfect enough. You don't like him, don't want to vote for him, whatever just keep it to yourself.

We take this state back in November or its lost forever.
YES.
Thank you for saying it.

anyone can whine about him but I will back him and I'm sick of the "I'm staying home" crowd.

[Zundfolge]

Keep in mind that this will be appealed.

[DavieD55]

Keep in mind that this will be appealed.

Ah yeah, ok.

[Ridge]

One would think that if we respected their freedom they would respect ours but it does not seem to work that way. (either way)

Many posters on this forum don't, or at most do so begrudgingly. So it's hard to say.

[Ridge]

Yep, heard about that. Did you join just to post this?

Nobody posted it before him, why are you getting up in his face about it?

[SuperiorDG]

Nobody posted it before him, why are you getting up in his face about it?

Just asking because it his/her first post. Perhaps only. UP IN HIS FACE? Don't know about that, I used regular type face and all. PS: it was kind of a nanny nanny boo boo comment. Like, "I'm gonna log into one of those gun site and tell um."

[Ridge]

I was about to type "up in his grille" but thought you might ask if I thought you were talking to his automobile.[mlp]

[merl]

He joined back in April

[GilpinGuy]

Alright, after this I don't want to hear from you whiny little bitches that think Beauprez isn't perfect enough. You don't like him, don't want to vote for him, whatever just keep it to yourself.

We take this state back in November or its lost forever.


YES.
Thank you for saying it.

anyone can whine about him but I will back him and I'm sick of the "I'm staying home" crowd.

Bingo. He's our man, like it or not. Like Rosen says repeatedly, "Party Trumps Person" and this is a great example of that.

[cysoto]

One would think that if we respected their freedom they would respect ours but it does not seem to work that way. (either way)

[hahhah-no]

[roberth]

Alright, after this I don't want to hear from you whiny little bitches that think Beauprez isn't perfect enough. You don't like him, don't want to vote for him, whatever just keep it to yourself.

We take this state back in November or its lost forever.


YES.
Thank you for saying it.

anyone can whine about him but I will back him and I'm sick of the "I'm staying home" crowd.


Bingo. He's our man, like it or not. Like Rosen says repeatedly, "Party Trumps Person" and this is a great example of that.

Agreed.

[Great-Kazoo]

18 replies and no one??? DUPED IT??

https://www.ar-15.co/threads/98645-Colorado-sheriffs-plan-lawsuit-challenging-state-gun-control-laws/page8

[Great-Kazoo]

Bingo. He's our man, like it or not. Like Rosen says repeatedly, "Party Trumps Person" and this is a great example of that.

Rosen also stuck with Maes.

[BPTactical]

Elections have consequences. End of Story.

Or beginning.
Vote the clowns out and get in a majority to repeal it.

[Zundfolge]

Or beginning.
Vote the clowns out and get in a majority to repeal it.

While we should work toward this we really should also put a lot of effort behind a constitutional ballot initiative (like the potheads did). Not only does it then put it in the hands of the people (where the majority of support for gun rights is) but it also makes it somewhat permanent and harder for a future crop of Dems to screw with in Denver.


Also in response to the title of this thread, we did NOT "lose" the suit, it was dismissed by the judge. An appeal should be forthcoming so it may not be dead yet.

[GilpinGuy]

Hey, at least we can smoke weed and marry dudes...


One would think that if we respected their freedom they would respect ours but it does not seem to work that way. (either way)


Many posters on this forum don't, or at most do so begrudgingly. So it's hard to say.

Hmmm, what is the difference between "rights" and "freedoms"? Is smoking pot a "right"? Apparently not. The Feds and most States don't think so anyway. Dudes marrying dudes? I'm a little twisted on that myself and many States are as well.

THE 2A DEFINITELY IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION (for now). It was #2 on the list for Christ's sake. Big difference.

[MAP]

While we should work toward this we really should also put a lot of effort behind a constitutional ballot initiative (like the potheads did). Not only does it then put it in the hands of the people (where the majority of support for gun rights is) but it also makes it somewhat permanent and harder for a future crop of Dems to screw with in Denver.


Also in response to the title of this thread, we did NOT "lose" the suit, it was dismissed by the judge. An appeal should be forthcoming so it may not be dead yet.

Sheriff Smith said via FaceBook an appeal will happen. The appellate court is where the real battle will be waged. The trial court is just the first step.

Mike

[SuperiorDG]

He joined back in April

Man he's good.

[Eric P]

Why are these in Federal Court? Shouldn't they be in our state courts? Well at least the background checks, since any restrictions beyond what the feds require is going against the state constitution in questioning our right to bear arms.

[Squeeze]

This is only the beginning of the real fight. There is still a lot of positive movement for us to gain. As someone already said, November will be our month to vote these socialist turds out of office. For those of us who were at the Capitol last year on March 4th, it was evident there are far more of "us" than there are of "them". We proved that with the recall of 2 dems and a forced resignation of a 3rd. Time to turn the tides come November folks. Either way, the beauty of these laws is that it appears none of the LE are taking them seriously. So, if they ever change their stance on that...with my shield or on it - ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

[WETWRKS]

This is only the beginning of the real fight. There is still a lot of positive movement for us to gain. As someone already said, November will be our month to vote these socialist turds out of office. For those of us who were at the Capitol last year on March 4th, it was evident there are far more of "us" than there are of "them". We proved that with the recall of 2 dems and a forced resignation of a 3rd. Time to turn the tides come November folks. Either way, the beauty of these laws is that it appears none of the LE are taking them seriously. So, if they ever change their stance on that...with my shield or on it - ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Vote them out in the main election then look at recalling those that slip thru the cracks.

[Bailey Guns]

I'm disappointed but not surprised. Especially with the ruling on the BGC law. I never felt that had a prayer of being overturned. I thought there might have been a slight chance on the mag-limit law but wasn't too optimistic.

[Chad0724]

Sorry guys I'm moving to Arizona


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zteknik]

Just to think I escaped NY just to come to this!!
But I'll be damned if I'm not going to put up a fight!!
No matter where you move to they will follow-so be damned sure you don't loose ground and stand up to these bastards-VOTE THEM OUT!!!!!

[hurley842002]

Sorry guys I'm moving to Arizona


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

At least do us a favor and wait until midterms, so we can get your vote (I assume you will vote for BB).

[Ronin13]

Or beginning.
Vote the clowns out and get in a majority to repeal it.
This sentiment had me thinking... Think of it this way- "Dear [State Legislator], I may not belong to your party, but due to happenstance and circumstances I do not control, you won the election and are duly elected to represent me, therefor I, as your constituent humbly request that you vote to repeal these gun control bills that you voted in favor of in 2013. -A concerned voter."
Think that would go over well if we have a bunch of Democrats that we'd all be writing to? I think not. I think that the republicans that tried (and unfortunately failed) to voted down these bills were simply outnumbered, and the fight is not over if we still have a chance to regain a majority and make it so that we just plain outnumber in the state legislature so that a repeal effort would work. Just my thought. This post applied logic and reason, sorry if that offends any liberals reading this. [Coffee]

[Zundfolge]

The appellate court is where the real battle will be waged. The trial court is just the first step.

I heard some pundit saying that the judges actions now are actually done in favor of our side since this moves it up to the appellate court faster (saying basically that if we'd have won here the other side would have appealed anyway).

[theGinsue]

Threads merged

[Rucker61]

Just to think I escaped NY just to come to this!!


I heard you were dead.

[Chad0724]

At least do us a favor and wait until midterms, so we can get your vote (I assume you will vote for BB).

Deal, and you are correct :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zteknik]

I heard you were dead.
[LOL]Alive and kicking [Coffee]

[KAPA]

I know this is kind of looked down on but what is stopping anyone from going to a bordering state and buying whatever mags they want and bringing them back home? Obviously Pmags have a date of manufacture stamped on them but as far as I know regular 30 round USGI mags don't have dates, I dont think any other mags have dates on them unless they are printed inside somewhere? What if a date stamp is scratched out and no longer legible?

Is it even specifically against this law to bring them in from another state? They are not being transferred here. What about people who move here, do they just surrender them at the border?

[zteknik]

I know this is kind of looked down on but what is stopping anyone from going to a bordering state and buying whatever mags they want and bringing them back home? Obviously Pmags have a date of manufacture stamped on them but as far as I know regular 30 round USGI mags don't have dates, I dont think any other mags have dates on them unless they are printed inside somewhere? What if a date stamp is scratched out and no longer legible?
Is it even specifically against this law to bring them in from another state? They are not being transferred here. What about people who move here, do they just surrender them at the border?
This is a good point-a poorly written law that is almost impossible to enforce.They can use whatever feel good slogans they have,but fact of the matter comes down to enforcement.This will be a fighting point for the appeals.

[theGinsue]

An appeal should be forthcoming so it may not be dead yet.


Sheriff Smith said via FaceBook an appeal will happen. The appellate court is where the real battle will be waged. The trial court is just the first step.

Mike

Handling this through the courts beyond this initial stage is very dangerous. Chances are the Appellate Court (10th Circuit?) will side with the lower court and the case will go to the SCOTUS. While we've seen some good decisions out of the SCOTUS in the last few years, I wouldn't expect this trend to continue - particularly with the current makeup of SCOTUS members. Once the SCOTUS renders a decision, it's significant case law/precedent that's next to impossible to undo.

I believe our best chances for making this right - permanently - is a two step process (which has already been mentioned). First, we need to take back the Governors office as well as a majority in both State houses. They will then have the ability to repeal the laws. Next, we need to
go to the people of the state with a Constitutional amendment which needs to be crafted to prevent laws like these current laws and potential variants from ever infringing on our Right again.

[KAPA]

so is there a list of mags with dates on them? maybe printed internally at all? all we need is Golden and Denver PD cracking open all mags to check for a mfr date.

[68Charger]

Just to think I escaped NY just to come to this!!



I heard you were dead.
I see what you did there.. Snake is alive and well.. (where's the smoking smiley?)


I know this is kind of looked down on but what is stopping anyone from going to a bordering state and buying whatever mags they want and bringing them back home? Obviously Pmags have a date of manufacture stamped on them but as far as I know regular 30 round USGI mags don't have dates, I dont think any other mags have dates on them unless they are printed inside somewhere? What if a date stamp is scratched out and no longer legible?


Is it even specifically against this law to bring them in from another state? They are not being transferred here. What about people who move here, do they just surrender them at the border?

It's been discussed at length... I'll offer the free legal advise (that is worth exactly what your paid for it): there is no penalty for removing a date code or serial number from a magazine.
Most polymer mags have a date code on them somewhere... but as I said, there is no force of law (unlike removing a S/N from a firearm, magazines are not regulated the same way)

[68Charger]

so is there a list of mags with dates on them? maybe printed internally at all? all we need is Golden and Denver PD cracking open all mags to check for a mfr date.

They would not be internal... it would be stamped on the outside... some metal mags have stamps, too:

46403
Pmags:
46405

[Zundfolge]

Well in my quest to grasp at silver linings, had the law suit succeeded and the laws been overturned then the issue would likely have been dead in November and wouldn't help Beauprez and that might be just enough to save Hick (and believe me, gun rights isn't the ONLY reason we need to get rid of Hick).

The anti Beauprez folk on the right would have less reason to hold their nose and vote for him and the pro-gun folk on the left (yes, there are a few of them) wouldn't feel the need to vote against their party and many pro-gun folk that are otherwise not politically engaged would have no reason to go the polls at all.

[roberth]

Well in my quest to grasp at silver linings, had the law suit succeeded and the laws been overturned then the issue would likely have been dead in November and wouldn't help Beauprez and that might be just enough to save Hick (and believe me, gun rights isn't the ONLY reason we need to get rid of Hick).

The anti Beauprez folk on the right would have less reason to hold their nose and vote for him and the pro-gun folk on the left (yes, there are a few of them) wouldn't feel the need to vote against their party and many pro-gun folk that are otherwise not politically engaged would have no reason to go the polls at all.

There are no pro-gun folk on the left...period....end of story. They cannot have their command economy, socialized medicine, federal prosecution of the Tea Party, federal disregard for the constitution, federal meddling in business, and then turn around and attempt to cloak themselves in the 2nd amendment. They can try but they need to be called on the carpet and forced to make a choice between tyranny and freedom, they cannot have both. Additionally, any votes they might make in favor of firearms are rendered moot in the face of the massive and wholly unconstitutional activities they and they people they support engage in.

[merl]

There are no pro-gun folk on the left...period....end of story. They cannot have their command economy, socialized medicine, federal prosecution of the Tea Party, federal disregard for the constitution, federal meddling in business, and then turn around and attempt to cloak themselves in the 2nd amendment. They can try but they need to be called on the carpet and forced to make a choice between tyranny and freedom, they cannot have both. Additionally, any votes they might make in favor of firearms are rendered moot in the face of the massive and wholly unconstitutional activities they and they people they support engage in.

So gun rights are something that cannot be embraced by everyone? They have to always be a partisan issue?
I would think both sides would agree (broadly) that the 4th & 5th are valid but it is impossible to agree on the 2nd?

[Rucker61]

Hey, at least we can smoke weed and marry dudes...

I don't think I could smoke that much weed.

[newracer]

C2AA responce, which I think is spot on.


On June 26th, 2014, Federal District Judge Marcia Krieger ruled to uphold Colorado’s gun laws banning magazines that hold more than 15 rounds and mandating a universal background check for personal firearm transfers. The very same gun laws that our sheriffs have said were unenforceable, that Governor Hickenlooper apologized for (and then apologized for apologizing) and even Judge Krieger and our Colorado Attorney General have agreed that the laws are not “good, sound or wise policy” (read more: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26040446/federal-judge-upholds-colorado-law-limiting-gun-ammunition).

Judge Krieger said “A court does not act as a super-legislature to determine the wisdom or workability of the legislation in question. Instead, it determines only whether legislation is constitutionally permissible. A law may be constitutional, but nevertheless, foolish, ineffective, or cumbersome to enforce.” She has effectively told Coloradans that while these laws are bad laws, it’s our problem and the court will not strike them down on the notion that they violate our constitutional rights. To read more about the court’s opinion: http://www.colorado2a.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/cooke-order.pdf

Judge Kriger’s decision will be appealed to higher courts and as you may or may not know, the Independence Institute has led the charge on this lawsuit. Please visit http://coloradoguncase.org/ for more information on the case. To contribute to the cause, please visit the Independence Institute’s Sheriff’s lawsuit page at: http://www.i2i.org/saphomepage.php

While it is disheartening that a judge says bad laws are constitutional, even though they are obviously poorly written and unenforceable, it is our problem to deal with. Colorado voted in to office the very people that created these laws, voted for these laws and signed off on these laws. As you well remember, the people of Colorado also fired 2 of these legislators and caused another one to resign as retribution for ignoring not only the voices of Coloradans, but their right to choose as well. If we the people are the only ones that can fix this problem, then let’s get to work.

This November marks the time for all of us to stand up and tell the incumbent politicians that we won’t tolerate being dictated to. They work for us and we elect them to defend our rights, not violate them. Take note of the incumbents up for reelection that voted to take your right to choose how you defend yourself from you and vote them out of office. We do not need people in office that would seek to limit our freedoms by passing such ridiculous, cumbersome, poorly drafted and unenforceable laws; laws that only punish those who do not commit crimes in the first place.

Get up, spread the word and vote.

[roberth]

So gun rights are something that cannot be embraced by everyone? They have to always be a partisan issue?
I would think both sides would agree (broadly) that the 4th & 5th are valid but it is impossible to agree on the 2nd?

Not singly, the left may try but when they put people into office who vote consistently and thoroughly against gun rights their pro-gun efforts are self defeating.

It isn't partisan, it is liberty vs tyranny and the left embraces tyranny. This is something I am constantly amazed by, the talk by (D) in my office about freedom and then the next second they try to shut me down when I start explaining that gun control is about tyranny. They have no problem limiting my gun ownership or my thoughts on the economy, size of government, etc. They believe in freedom for themselves only, not everyone like I do.

Maybe the 5th but only so they can obfuscate it to allow them to continue their unconstitutional activities (Lois Lerner), I don't think for one second that the left would place any value on my 4th amendment rights and most leftists would be happy to see SWAT kick in my door and shoot me dead.

You need to understand something about leftists, they are incredibly selfish. When they look at the constitution they look at how it applies to themselves exclusively, they do not care if it applies to the right and they try to twist the constitution so it DOESN'T apply to the right. For example, the only 1st amendment rights they want are for them exclusively, the right doesn't have 1st amendment rights. Witness the fairness act where the left wants to shut down Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck et al, witness the shouting down of conservative speakers at various universities around the nation.

The constitution guarantees rights to all citizens and this is what the right wants, the left is attempting to change it to apply exclusively to just citizens who agree with the left, and the 2nd isn't part of that plan.

A person cannot expect to garner support for their own rights while simultaneously working to take rights away from others.

[O2HeN2]

Seems to me that the entire argument against the mag ban would be something along these lines: "You honor, do you believe that restricting ink to 15oz bottles and forcing newspapers to buy 15oz bottles of ink versus ink by the tanker truck truck would abridge the freedom of the press? If so, same goes for magazine capacity limits."

...or something along those lines...

O2

[Ridge]

There are no pro-gun folk on the left...period....end of story. They cannot have their command economy, socialized medicine, federal prosecution of the Tea Party, federal disregard for the constitution, federal meddling in business, and then turn around and attempt to cloak themselves in the 2nd amendment. They can try but they need to be called on the carpet and forced to make a choice between tyranny and freedom, they cannot have both. Additionally, any votes they might make in favor of firearms are rendered moot in the face of the massive and wholly unconstitutional activities they and they people they support engage in.

This is the kind of bullshit thinking that leads us to the fucked up political system we have nowadays. The Democrats aren't wrong on everything, and the Republicans sure as hell aren't right on everything.

[Zundfolge]

There are no pro-gun folk on the left...period....end of story.
I should have said "pro-gun Democrats" and yes there are quite a few "pro-gun Democrats" here in Colorado (and even a few "pro-gun leftists" ... one posts here under the name Nynco).


The Democrats aren't wrong on everything, and the Republicans sure as hell aren't right on everything.

You're half right, the Republicans aren't right on everything ... but I beg to differ on the Democrats, I can't find one issue where they aren't dead wrong on.

[roberth]

This is the kind of bullshit thinking that leads us to the fucked up political system we have nowadays. The Democrats aren't wrong on everything, and the Republicans sure as hell aren't right on everything.

LOL, you're the delusional one here, thinking you can have both. People like you, who want to stand in the middle and benefit from the largess of government, will be the first victims of the left. Cowardice like yours cost 70 million Chinese their lives during the Cultural Revolution, people like you stood idly by in Germany while Hitler rounded up millions and slaughtered them, your kind watched while Stalin murdered 20 million people after WWII.

The (D) is very nearly universally wrong on everything including The Constitution, economics, human rights vs human wants, welfare, healthcare, abortion, the Bill of Rights, land management, wildlife management, energy, and a host of others, the (R) is just as wrong on human rights vs human wants, welfare, homosexuality, government spending to name a few. The difference is that we have people on the right working to bring the (R) back to the right, back to true human rights, back to capitalism, back to economic growth, the (D) is doing none of those things.

The gun issue isn't about (D) or (R), this is about tyranny vs liberty and the (D) have definitely chosen tyranny.

[Ridge]

You're half right, the Republicans aren't right on everything ... but I beg to differ on the Democrats, I can't find one issue where they aren't dead wrong on.

Gay Marriage. Abortion.


LOL, you're the delusional one here, thinking you can have both. People like you, who want to stand in the middle and benefit from the largess of government, will be the first victims of the left. Cowardice like yours cost 70 million Chinese their lives during the Cultural Revolution, people like you stood idly by in Germany while Hitler rounded up millions and slaughtered them, your kind watched while Stalin murdered 20 million people after WWII.

The (D) is very nearly universally wrong on everything including The Constitution, economics, human rights vs human wants, welfare, healthcare, abortion, the Bill of Rights, land management, wildlife management, energy, and a host of others, the (R) is just as wrong on human rights vs human wants, welfare, homosexuality, government spending to name a few. The difference is that we have people on the right working to bring the (R) back to the right, back to true human rights, back to capitalism, back to economic growth, the (D) is doing none of those things.

The gun issue isn't about (D) or (R), this is about tyranny vs liberty and the (D) have definitely chosen tyranny.

Preach whatever you want, sleep snugly with your Mitt Romney plushie at night.

[roberth]

I should have said "pro-gun Democrats" and yes there are quite a few "pro-gun Democrats" here in Colorado (and even a few "pro-gun leftists" ... one posts here under the name Nynco)..

No worries, doesn't change the fact that they are self-defeating when it comes to the ballot box.

[KAPA]

R's stance on abortion is what will eventually cost Americans their gun rights. Eventually it will happen.

Look at Udall's latest commercial talking about how he stands up for "rights". He ain't talking about guns, he is talking directly to women.

[BPTactical]

R's stance on abortion is what will eventually cost Americans their gun rights. Eventually it will happen.

Look at Udall's latest commercial talking about how he stands up for "rights". He ain't talking about guns, he is talking directly to women.


Fuck Udall with a bag of rusty screws.
Funny how the party of "if it just saves one child" has no issue with endorsing murder of the unborn.

[roberth]

Fuck Udall with a bag of rusty screws.
Funny how the party of "if it just saves one child" has no issue with endorsing murder of the unborn.

There it is.

Hypocrisy, first base for the leftist.

[Ridge]

The point is, the wishes of the many outweigh the wishes of the few. More people care about gay marriage and abortion than care about 30rd magazines. The candidate that appeals to the majority will win. As long as the minority continue to marginalize the wishes of the majority, they will see themselves slowly pushed out of the picture to the point that they are no longer relevant and there is nobody left to pander to them.

You get more flies with honey. Be more courteous about the wishes of others, and there is a better chance they will return the favor.

[Dave_L]

You get more flies with honey. Be more courteous about the wishes of others, and there is a better chance they will return the favor.

I really wish that was still true.

[Caithford]

There it is.

Hypocrisy, first base for the leftist.

Then what do you call the stance of the Republicans, wanting to outlaw abortion, but not wanting to pay for welfare for those unwanted children. Adoption is not always an option, it's not a perfect world.

Sure this may make me somewhat unpopular here, but I believe in protecting everyone's rights to choose how they want to live. Not a choice I would make, but not agreeing with it doesn't mean I'm not going to support their right to make a choice.

And +1 to what Ridge said. The R's are losing because they are appearing to be inflexible. The D's are appearing to be flexible. Time to give up the fight against same-sex marriage, and time to give up the fight against abortion (in the legal sense). Attack it from a moral platform, not a legal one.

[asmo]

All I want is for the government to 1) stay the hell out of my bedroom, 2) get the fuck out of my pocketbook, 3) mind their own damn business (which, 'their business', is explicitly and very directly stated in the constitution).

Any candidate that gives me that will make me happy. That isn't marginalizing shit. That's not being centrist -- it being a fucking american.

[Dave]

You get more flies with honey. Be more courteous about the wishes of others, and there is a better chance they will return the favor.
You can get more flies with manure....

[KAPA]

The point is, the wishes of the many outweigh the wishes of the few. More people care about gay marriage and abortion than care about 30rd magazines. The candidate that appeals to the majority will win. As long as the minority continue to marginalize the wishes of the majority, they will see themselves slowly pushed out of the picture to the point that they are no longer relevant and there is nobody left to pander to them.

You get more flies with honey. Be more courteous about the wishes of others, and there is a better chance they will return the favor.

Yeah, that is my point. I don't believe abortion is right and I struggle with this but I really think you have to put responsibility into the hands of the people. Sure there are going to be some crackheads out there that get knocked up every year and have an abortion. But at the same time there may be other women that are in a very risky pregnancy and have to choose between themselves and a possible baby that may be extremely handicapped and perhaps kill her during the birth. If she has other kids and a deadbeat husband then what is she to do? I can't blame someone for choosing abortion in that situation. My point is once you start drawing lines, then who gets to draw the line and where do they draw it?

As for weed and gay marriage, I am not for those things either but as long as they don't affect what I do, then have at it. It is not something I choose but as long as a stoned boyfriend isnt bestowed upon me, that is your life, live it how you want.

Until we get some politicians that are not afraid to run a "Freedom campaign" one side will always be able to point to them as a hypocrite. You don't have to live it, just allow it. When it starts affecting others then that person gets to pay the price.

[Whistler]

The point is, the wishes of the many outweigh the wishes of the few. More people care about gay marriage and abortion than care about 30rd magazines. The candidate that appeals to the majority will win. As long as the minority continue to marginalize the wishes of the majority, they will see themselves slowly pushed out of the picture to the point that they are no longer relevant and there is nobody left to pander to them.

You get more flies with honey. Be more courteous about the wishes of others, and there is a better chance they will return the favor.

Majority rule=mob rule, that's not how it's supposed to work. "The wishes of the many outweigh the wishes of the few" is a Roddenberry creation and nothing to do with our system of government, you are talking about "democracy" which some folks seem to mistake for our "Representative Republic" which unlike the former allows for safeguarding the rights of the individual or the minority.

[Ridge]

Majority rule=mob rule, that's not how it's supposed to work. "The wishes of the many outweigh the wishes of the few" is a Roddenberry creation and nothing to do with our system of government, you are talking about "democracy" which some folks seem to mistake for our "Representative Republic" which unlike the former allows for safeguarding the rights of the individual or the minority.

The purpose of the Senate is to rule on what is best for the populus. The purpose of the House is to vote for the wishes of their constituents. If the majority of the voices they hear are pro something, then it is their duty to vote in favor of that topic.

Too many people are getting into a bitchy semantics argument over democracy and republic based on current political parties instead of what those terms actually mean.

[Dave_L]

The point is, the wishes of the many outweigh the wishes of the few.

Is that why gay marriage licenses are being issued even though the majority of the state voted to not have them legal? ;)

[Dave_L]

The purpose of the Senate is to rule on what is best for the populus. The purpose of the House is to vote for the wishes of their constituents. If the majority of the voices they hear are pro something, then it is their duty to vote in favor of that topic.


Do you honestly feel that's how things are run around here anymore? I would like to think the BCG and mag limit laws had quite the opposition that was ignored in honor of a staffer that "made a commitment".

[Ridge]

Do you honestly feel that's how things are run around here anymore? I would like to think the BCG and mag limit laws had quite the opposition that was ignored in honor of a staffer that "made a commitment".

Yes, and those people voted against the wishes of their constituents, and were voted out of office for it. The system works. There is an election in a few months, and we can see the will of the people again in November.

[ryorourke]

Yep, heard about that. Did you join just to post this?

Nope. Joined so I can ask a few questions on reloading and see the misc. reloading pics.

edit: No offense taken SuperiorDG. First post with negative information from the lawsuit seems dubious anyways. Was just hoping for good news so I can finally buy a few new rifles with standard magazines, instead of the stubby mags.

[Whistler]

The purpose of the Senate is to rule on what is best for the populus. The purpose of the House is to vote for the wishes of their constituents. If the majority of the voices they hear are pro something, then it is their duty to vote in favor of that topic.

Too many people are getting into a bitchy semantics argument over democracy and republic based on current political parties instead of what those terms actually mean.

No it is their duty to vote in a manner consistent with the wishes of the people they represent, popular opinion doesn't factor (ideally) and one of a myriad of reasons our government wasn't formed that way.

No bitchy semantics argument from me regarding anything other than what you said in your post, if you meant something different I missed it. I know exactly what those terms mean, I'm not attacking you personally Ridge and I understand your point, I just disagree with your assessment of how our representatives should respond, a more systemic issue.

[Zundfolge]

R's stance on abortion is what will eventually cost Americans their gun rights.

I'm sorry but that's just flat wrong. Republicans don't lose because of their opposition to abortion, that's a lie told by the left to get Republicans to abandon their fight to protect the unborn. Hell that makes as much sense as a pro-lifer saying "Second Amendment supporters are what prevents us from saving babies."

Abortion is a 50/50 issue in the US today and as such it isn't enough to sway the electorate one way or the other.

[Ridge]

I'm sorry but that's just flat wrong. Republicans don't lose because of their opposition to abortion, that's a lie told by the left to get Republicans to abandon their fight to protect the unborn.

That is so much bullshit. Just admit it. People want to be able to do with their own bodies what they want. The left doesn't need to lie about why the Republicans suck and people should leave. They are doing it just fine all by themselves.

[Zundfolge]

That is so much bullshit. Just admit it. People want to be able to do with their own bodies what they want.

The country is divided 50/50 on abortion, its not going to move the election one way or the other.

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/qgpmcs1jxuwo2l6achm_cg.gif

This "Republicans need to change their position on abortion" bushwah comes from the same liberal lie that "Republicans can't win because of [insert conservative position] and can only win if they move to the middle". If this was true then Reagan would have lost (or at least not been reelected in 84) and both McCain and Romney would have won landslides.



Furthermore, even if I bought this BS that the pro-life position costs Republicans votes, it wouldn't matter if every Republican swore a blood oath to never mention it again, Democrats would still run stupid ads like they are now saying Cory Gardner wants to make all forms of birth control illegal.


Like Reagan said; Bold Colors no pale pastels. Stand for something and people will respond.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OznoFCZdS8

[OneGuy67]

My wife is one of many who voted for Obama this last election based solely on the advertised fear that Mitt Romney wanted to unfund Planned Parenthood and restrict her access to female medical care.

She is pretty conservative in her views otherwise, but that issue is what got her to vote for him. I'm sure she isn't alone in that.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[KAPA]

I'm sorry but that's just flat wrong. Republicans don't lose because of their opposition to abortion, that's a lie told by the left to get Republicans to abandon their fight to protect the unborn. Hell that makes as much sense as a pro-lifer saying "Second Amendment supporters are what prevents us from saving babies."

Abortion is a 50/50 issue in the US today and as such it isn't enough to sway the electorate one way or the other.

Well since it has not happened yet, there is no way to tell. Just my opinion... I am pretty sure that the majority of people in this country care more about Abortion than they do gun rights and even though you call it a lie above, it is working and that is all that matters.

[roberth]

Then what do you call the stance of the Republicans, wanting to outlaw abortion, but not wanting to pay for welfare for those unwanted children. Adoption is not always an option, it's not a perfect world.

Sure this may make me somewhat unpopular here, but I believe in protecting everyone's rights to choose how they want to live. Not a choice I would make, but not agreeing with it doesn't mean I'm not going to support their right to make a choice.

And +1 to what Ridge said. The R's are losing because they are appearing to be inflexible. The D's are appearing to be flexible. Time to give up the fight against same-sex marriage, and time to give up the fight against abortion (in the legal sense). Attack it from a moral platform, not a legal one.

The (R) is wrong to outlaw abortion because it can be a necessary medical procedure.

The (D) is wrong to use abortion as birth control, which isn't what abortion is for. The (D) is also wrong to force taxpayers to pay for abortions, you get preggers, pay for it yourself, that would at least make a couple people think twice before getting pregnant.

The (R) is wrong to oppose same-sex marriage, this might be one issue where the (D) has it right but time will tell.

[Firehaus]

Wouldn't paying for abortions be cheaper than welfare and reduce the democrats voting base? Free will to choose and all that...just thinking purely strategically about taking the country back from the takers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ridge]

What is abortion for, then? And who ruled it to be as such?

[Squeeze]

How in the blue f&*k did we go from a gun control lawsuit over to a debate about "abortion". FFS. [ontopic]

[Firehaus]

How in the blue f&*k did we go from a gun control lawsuit over to a debate about "abortion". FFS. [ontopic]

Ridge started it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ridge]

Ridge started it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nuh uh!

[Rucker61]

What is abortion for, then? And who ruled it to be as such?

According to Megatrends, it's for crime reduction.

[SuperiorDG]

"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln

[Mtn.man]

Off topic real quick:

The reason for abortion is right in front of your face...

Pelosi
Obama
Hillary
Holder
Bloomberg,,,

The list goes on

[BPTactical]

Off topic real quick:

The reason for abortion is right in front of your face...

Pelosi
Obama
Hillary
Holder
Bloomberg,,,

The list goes on


Poster children for why it needs to exist?



Just a thought....

[Ridge]

Poster children for why it needs to exist?



Just a thought....

That's what I figured.

[Mtn.man]

That's what I figured.

Yes

[<MADDOG>]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m5nc03q72te9al8/Krieger-Opinion-Outfitters.pdf

[KAPA]

How in the blue f&*k did we go from a gun control lawsuit over to a debate about "abortion". FFS. [ontopic]

For most people, abortion has been a more important issue over guns. Not sure if that is true at the moment but we may find out in November. Since the people that want to take guns away also want abortion to be legal, the majority has been voting for pro choice and the result is that laws get passed restricting guns. And if someone wants to tell me I am wrong, just look at the last presidential election. Romney got painted as a "women's rights mean nothing, save the baby" guy, and Obama got painted as a "women have the right to do whatever they want" guy.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Then what do you call the stance of the Republicans, wanting to outlaw abortion, but not wanting to pay for welfare for those unwanted children. Adoption is not always an option, it's not a perfect world.

Sure this may make me somewhat unpopular here, but I believe in protecting everyone's rights to choose how they want to live. Not a choice I would make, but not agreeing with it doesn't mean I'm not going to support their right to make a choice.

There is a big difference between supporting their right to make a choice and agreeing to pay for that choice. If a guy wants to make 50 babies, that's his choice but it's up to him and his women to take care of those babies ... I donate to shelters and other charities to help the unfortunate but being stupid is not the same as unfortunate and Society is on a steady path downward as long as it subsidizes stupidity.

[Gman]

There is a big difference between supporting their right to make a choice and agreeing to pay for that choice. If a guy wants to make 50 babies, that's his choice but it's up to him and his women to take care of those babies ... I donate to shelters and other charities to help the unfortunate but being stupid is not the same as unfortunate and Society is on a steady path downward as long as it subsidizes stupidity.
Having been adopted, it certainly changes your perspective. Thankfully, values were a bit different in previous generations.

Our society is slipping on many levels, including those that were the founding principles of this nation.

[hatidua]

Society is on a steady path downward as long as it subsidizes stupidity.

Sadly, I can't think of any country that does that to the extent that the U.S. does.

[roberth]

Sadly, I can't think of any country that does that to the extent that the U.S. does.

There isn't one, some European countries are close.

[Great-Kazoo]

This still a conversation about the lawsuit?

[roberth]

This still a conversation about the lawsuit?

Let's change it back.

The lawsuit outweighs abortion, gay marriage, and host of other things because a successful lawsuit will grant rights to ALL citizens, not just a few, select groups.

[Mtn.man]

well the supreme shot it down.

[Chad0724]

I can guarantee you one thing, weed related car accidents are going to kill way more people this year then "high capacity assault weapons"..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ridge]

Let's change it back.

The lawsuit outweighs abortion, gay marriage, and host of other things because a successful lawsuit will grant rights to ALL citizens, not just a few, select groups.

One could argue that the desire for 30rd mags only affects a few select groups. Those who would make that argument are almost guaranteed to be FUDDs and people who don't own and don't care to own an AR or AK style firearm.

CBI did 355,000 background checks last year.
Colorado has 5,268,000 citizens

14.83% of Coloradans bought guns last year, assuming each gun went to a different person (and we know from people on here that they didn't). We can also assume that not all of those guns, though most likely greater than half, would be AR and AK-types. That means 7.4% of Coloradans.

Now who's the few, select groups?

[Graves]

Of the 5,268,00, how many are over 21 years of age? And how many pro gun folk actually purchase a gun every year?

[Bailey Guns]

Well, big surprise, but my math works out a little different than yours. By my calculations 100% of Colorado citizens have had their constitutional protections diminished by the gov't of Colorado and these laws, whether 100% recognize it or not.

[Gman]

"...shall not be infringed."

[Uberjager]

well the supreme shot it down.

The "sheriff" lawsuit? Wasn't it in the process of getting appealed by the circuit court?


Are there any ballot initiatives in the works for a future election?

[funkymonkey1111]

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/06/25/2-incumbent-colorado-sheriffs-lose-in-primary/

Eagle County Sheriff Joe Hoy, who was not a party to the lawsuit, was defeated.

[Mtn.man]

Got this yesterday from our sheriff:
Well it's back on. I have joined the rest of the Sheriff's in appeal of the gun laws to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. I hope we have a better out come.
Fred