Constitutional Carry Act of 2011

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FireMoth

Before we get at each other throats, i think we can recognize that with the exception of the second amendment, guns laws in this country are by and large ridiculous.

Acknowledging that, the bills authors conceded to rules already established by the existing CCW law, so that this measure has a chance of passing.
So, they added wording that indicates that the 21 years of age restriction woudl not be changed by this bill.

the bill from its inception, sought to leave the existing CCW law in place, and simply open its availability.
Allowing concealed carry for minors, just as it may be, inadvertently challenges the federal restriction that requires hand gun purchasers to be 21. It isn't a big logical leap to say that forbidding some one to buy a hand gun but allowing them to conceal one doesn't make sense.

Again, i disagree with that restriction, as well as every other gun law since the second amendment, but i appreciate the utility of accepting these limitations so that one change can be made at a time.
The alternative being that the bill would not have a chance, i think its an acceptable compromise.

Getting some of our liberty back will hopefully set the stage to get more.

---

Once again well put!

[Beer]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FireMoth

Before we get at each other throats, i think we can recognize that with the exception of the second amendment, guns laws in this country are by and large ridiculous.

Acknowledging that, the bills authors conceded to rules already established by the existing CCW law, so that this measure has a chance of passing.
So, they added wording that indicates that the 21 years of age restriction woudl not be changed by this bill.

the bill from its inception, sought to leave the existing CCW law in place, and simply open its availability.
Allowing concealed carry for minors, just as it may be, inadvertently challenges the federal restriction that requires hand gun purchasers to be 21. It isn't a big logical leap to say that forbidding some one to buy a hand gun but allowing them to conceal one doesn't make sense.

Again, i disagree with that restriction, as well as every other gun law since the second amendment, but i appreciate the utility of accepting these limitations so that one change can be made at a time.
The alternative being that the bill would not have a chance, i think its an acceptable compromise.

Getting some of our liberty back will hopefully set the stage to get more.

---

I disagree, it is not an acceptable compromise. By accepting the age restriction you are trading one freedom for another. Nothing with this bill as originally written would allow for minors to carry, minors are under the age of 18 not 21. Federal law only restricts purchases from FFL holders not private transactions. In addition federal law for ownership is 18 not 21. This bill as originally written would not challenge any federal law.

Again, the bill was written to mirror the existing CCW law in all other ways except what it is expressly set forth to change.

The existing law does not permit those persons under 21 years of age to carry concealed. nor, to my knowledge, does any other CCW law in the U.S.

Though it does not LEGALLY challenge the federal statute, it would intellectually challenge its intent, and there for be a sufficient arguing point to kill the bills momentum.
All a filibuster would need is some one to ask how it is a person under 21 is getting a hold of hand guns if they cannot legally purchase them, and turn it into an argument about what constitutes legal possession versus straw purchase. It wouldn't ultimately produce anything, except to kill the bill on the floor.

So, yes, there is the purist attitude that the second amendment is the only gun law we need. I share that belief, but we didn't lose our liberty all at once. Its not unreasonable to believe it will have to be retrieved as slowly, on piece at a time.
Short of a revolution, we will have to make some compromises.

You've been adhering to more oppressive compromises already. We are getting something BACK here. Would you rather the bill not pass, at all if 18 year olds cant concealed carry? All or nothing? what woudl that gain us?

My issue is that we do not know what the wording of the bill is in its current form. It is possible that it makes ANY possession of a handgun by someone 18-20 illegal not just concealed carry. If it just makes it illegal for 18-20 to carry concealed I would be OK with it.

Again an 18 year old can legally purchase a handgun, just not from an FFL.

Um, actually we do know what the wording is:

http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLI...e=1205_eng.pdf

And it does not prohibit possession of fire arms by 18 year olds. Its worded very carefully to change only the aspect of CCW that requires the cost and background check.

Being a paranoid rabble rouser without READING doesn't help our cause. There are enough idiots panicking on both sides.

I had not had a chance to find and read the bill yet and was basing my position on the email sent to many that had the statement.

Quote:

---

The bill was amended on the floor to include that there is a 21 year old age limit to legally possess and own a gun.

---

I now also see that this bill will remove the restriction of carrying at a school. It will never pass and get signed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newracer

I now also see that this bill will remove the restriction of carrying at a school. Unfortunately, It will never pass and get signed.

---

Fixed it for you.
The false premise and security theater antics of the "magical gun free zone" have killed far too many people and its time to fucking stop.
Stop the stupid and delusional from creating defenseless victims.
Stop the make believe wall from killing more children.
Stop the ignorant from corrupting the minds of our youth.
Stop acting all bewildered and appalled when LOTS of people die.

Criminals will not oblige your magical line 50-whatever feet from any school-zone nor will they not shoot someone because they aren't armed. This is actually preferable to the criminal, they are LOOKING for large numbers of defenseless scared and confused disarmed victims, and your stupid fucking policies have given them that.
[Bang]


/rant

Good rant!

Rob, We had this discussion the other day in your shop and I have to say you have definitely got me thinking. You are 100% correct in your words and I am definitely a proud supporter far more now than I was before. As DeusExMachina said, you need to get that off to the politicians.