Craig CO wants to "Require homes have a modern sporting rifle"

[GoldFinger]

Good quote:
“The state of Colorado is the laughingstock of the country,” Jones said. “We’ve passed an amendment legalizing marijuana that violates federal law and we’ve passed gun laws that violate the Second Amendment. I don’t think passing an ordinance requiring all residents to own an AK-47 is the type of attention Craig wants.”

[Bailey Guns]

Good quote:
“We’ve passed an amendment legalizing marijuana that violates federal law and we’ve passed gun laws that violate the Second Amendment. I don’t think passing an ordinance requiring all residents to own an AK-47 is the type of attention Craig wants.”

The first sentence is ok. But the second is not. It's reactionary. No where does it state you must have an AK-47. He's using that particular gun to elicit a visceral, emotional response so others will oppose it.

[brianakell]

The first sentence is ok. But the second is not. It's reactionary. No where does it state you must have an AK-47. He's using that particular gun to elicit a visceral, emotional response so others will oppose it.

Agreed, its there for shock value. He grabbed the most evil gun in history. ak47's are more evil than ar15's. Always have been. The ar15 is the diet coke of evil.

[Dave]

Agreed, its there for shock value. He grabbed the most evil gun in history. ak47's are more evil than ar15's. Always have been. The ar15 is the diet coke of evil.

Just one calorie, not even enough.

I like the idea of an armed citizen, but I don't want a gov't mandate that says everyone must own one, even if you don't like them. No matter how un-enforceable it is.

[johngraves2]

Wife's parents still live in craig, looks like we get to go shopping!

[RiderGeek]

I absolutely agree 100%, far too much cruft in the books.

[Bailey Guns]

What if the proposal was, you shall give $100 to MAIG ? That ok too ?

That analogy doesn't work. Not the same.

Though useless regs don't necessarily cost anything to write or pass, they do cost us something. Anyone trying to have a good handle on their laws or regulations that they are legitimately subject to must navigate the bullshit of things that will never be enforced, and try to understand regulations that matter - and they will cite/prosecute you for - and regulations that are "feel good" and would never be enforced no matter what the "violation". Basically, it makes it very difficult for people to be responsible, law abiding citizens. Just like complicating the tax code.... same effect. We live in a society where there are no law abiding citizens because our regulations and laws are so inefficient to the point of contradictions in some cases where it's physically impossible for someone to be in compliance with everything, at any given time.

Which was a concern of the FF's I believe, and a big motivator behind the 4th...

If they wanted to pass it like the militia clause, AND ENFORCE IT, I have no problem with it. But it's already enough of a bitch to go through city regs, CRS, etc.

OK, in general, I'll buy that explanation. But in this case I'd be in favor of the pro-2A statement they're trying to make over any minimal increase in bureaucracy problems it causes the residents of Craig (if I were a resident of Craig). On the other hand, if the residents of Craig are OK with it, who are we to say they shouldn't have it?