CO Bill to ban Semi rifles and shotguns moves to senate floor.

[bayoublaster7527]

The democrats clearly have no desire to win any elections.

Drop the fight with the second amendment, move on to universal healthcare, including mental health care, increasing minimum wage, protecting public lands, you know doing something for the working class.

This kind of crap is not a mandate or a platform that will work.

This vice chair decision is idiotic.

You’re absolutely right. To be fair there are plenty of Dem officials saying exactly the same thing as you, get back to middle America, kitchen table issues. Question is whether the leadership will listen.

Both parties can be guilty of becoming too beholden to special interests, whether that is corporate entities or social advocacy groups.

 

[tormenter]

They literally have no idea. Our mental giant Congresswoman DeGette told everyone a few years ago that banning the sale of magazines would mean eventually they would all go away, because after you shoot the ammo you have to throw the magazine away! It would've taken her approximately 2 minutes on Wikipedia to understand the fundamentals, but actually familiarizing herself with the issue would've been too much work! These are the people who write the laws that we have to abide by...

I remember that, and yet she still won the next election quite handily.

If you voted for her and are a gun owner - please let me know why! it doesn't have to be public, you can private message me.

 

[Mudranger1]

Still waiting for one post addressing how this is any threat to hunting. That is what I call bullchit on. It is disingenuous to trot out 2A and ignore the first 4 words. A well regulated militia. Gun laws are regulations to this nonexistent militia. No bazookas, special license for full auto, felons can't have guns. The argument here is about what regulations to have, SCOTUS already upheld that regulations are legal. Moves to divest federal lands, those are a direct threat to hunting. This bill is not. Where oh where is the threat to hunting? Oh, you thought you saw it behind the curtain. If you live and die by SCOTUS, they have already declined to review this law in several states. If passed, it will stand in CO on precedent, unless SCOTUS runs short of toilet paper that day. See Roe V. Wade.

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Justice Antonin Scalia

District of Columbia V. HELLER, 2008

Want data, such as the fact that 85% of mass casualty deaths in 'Merica resulted from use of semiauto weapons w high capacity removeable mags? Look here, US gov't website: Oopsie, it disappeared last week!
View attachment 359622
National Institute of Justice (.gov)
https://nij.ojp.gov › topics › articles › public-mass-shooti...


No information is available for this page.
View attachment 359623

This page along with thousands of others reporting data we taxpayers paid to have researched and reported, was ordered CENSORED by the ass-clown-in-chief.
View attachment 359624


Know what Amendment comes before 2A?
View attachment 359625
Like it or not, this also applies to the Despot-in-Chief. Which he just violated.

i'm not saying in the grand scheme this law will touch hunting as is. but what about the browning BAR semi auto? now would be illegal? I know out west probably 90% use bolt action guns but still there are those that do not

 

[Cogreeny]

Still waiting for one post addressing how this is any threat to hunting. That is what I call bullchit on. It is disingenuous to trot out 2A and ignore the first 4 words. A well regulated militia. Gun laws are regulations to this nonexistent militia. No bazookas, special license for full auto, felons can't have guns. The argument here is about what regulations to have, SCOTUS already upheld that regulations are legal. Moves to divest federal lands, those are a direct threat to hunting. This bill is not. Where oh where is the threat to hunting? Oh, you thought you saw it behind the curtain. If you live and die by SCOTUS, they have already declined to review this law in several states. If passed, it will stand in CO on precedent, unless SCOTUS runs short of toilet paper that day. See Roe V. Wade.

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Justice Antonin Scalia

District of Columbia V. HELLER, 2008

Want data, such as the fact that 85% of mass casualty deaths in 'Merica resulted from use of semiauto weapons w high capacity removeable mags? Look here, US gov't website: Oopsie, it disappeared last week!
View attachment 359622
National Institute of Justice (.gov)
https://nij.ojp.gov › topics › articles › public-mass-shooti...


No information is available for this page.
View attachment 359623

This page along with thousands of others reporting data we taxpayers paid to have researched and reported, was ordered CENSORED by the ass-clown-in-chief.
View attachment 359624


Know what Amendment comes before 2A?
View attachment 359625
Like it or not, this also applies to the Despot-in-Chief. Which he just violated.

This is how I picture you with the bullshit you say. Am I close?

 

[Oak]

I remember that, and yet she still won the next election quite handily.

DeGette's district:

 

[SFC B]

Still waiting for one post addressing how this is any threat to hunting. That is what I call bullchit on. It is disingenuous to trot out 2A and ignore the first 4 words. A well regulated militia. Gun laws are regulations to this nonexistent militia. No bazookas, special license for full auto, felons can't have guns. The argument here is about what regulations to have, SCOTUS already upheld that regulations are legal. Moves to divest federal lands, those are a direct threat to hunting. This bill is not. Where oh where is the threat to hunting? Oh, you thought you saw it behind the curtain. If you live and die by SCOTUS, they have already declined to review this law in several states. If passed, it will stand in CO on precedent, unless SCOTUS runs short of toilet paper that day. See Roe V. Wade.

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Justice Antonin Scalia

District of Columbia V. HELLER, 2008

Want data, such as the fact that 85% of mass casualty deaths in 'Merica resulted from use of semiauto weapons w high capacity removeable mags? Look here, US gov't website: Oopsie, it disappeared last week!
View attachment 359622
National Institute of Justice (.gov)
https://nij.ojp.gov › topics › articles › public-mass-shooti...


No information is available for this page.
View attachment 359623

This page along with thousands of others reporting data we taxpayers paid to have researched and reported, was ordered CENSORED by the ass-clown-in-chief.
View attachment 359624


Know what Amendment comes before 2A?
View attachment 359625
Like it or not, this also applies to the Despot-in-Chief. Which he just violated.

Believing that the definition/usage of "a regulated militia" in colonial times as compared today doesn't matter is disingenuous. The intent, which should be as clear today as it was then, is to provide the citizens of our country with the ability to stand against tyranny. That included weapons in military usage at the time. The idea that people would not have the ability to have contemporary weapons with which to hunt and feed themselves isn't something the founders could have even thought possible. Myself, like many others in this forum I believe, do use weapons that would fit into this prohibition to hunt various (including big game) species. As a resident of Colorado, given the current and recent political climate, if you would pose that this is not merely another attempt/step to try and prohibit or ridiculously limit the ownership of firearms in general you are either being untruthful with yourself or you are fine with those restrictions but won't come out and say it.

As for any discussion about "casualties" from guns......if anyone is for gun control of ANY sort on that basis but is also not strenuously campaigning against alcohol and abortion they are a clanging gong of hypocrisy. Those are responsible for many multiples more casualties yearly.

 

[WildWill]

Believing that the definition/usage of "a regulated militia" in colonial times as compared today doesn't matter is disingenuous. The intent, which should be as clear today as it was then, is to provide the citizens of our country with the ability to stand against tyranny. That included weapons in military usage at the time. The idea that people would not have the ability to have contemporary weapons with which to hunt and feed themselves isn't something the founders could have even thought possible. Myself, like many others in this forum I believe, do use weapons that would fit into this prohibition to hunt various (including big game) species. As a resident of Colorado, given the current and recent political climate, if you would pose that this is not merely another attempt/step to try and prohibit or ridiculously limit the ownership of firearms in general you are either being untruthful with yourself or you are fine with those restrictions but won't come out and say it.

As for any discussion about "casualties" from guns......if anyone is for gun control of ANY sort on that basis but is also not strenuously campaigning against alcohol and abortion they are a clanging gong of hypocrisy. Those are responsible for many multiples more casualties yearly.

 

[kansasdad]

DeGette's district:

View attachment 359632

Gerrymander much CO?

 

[LuketheDog]

I remember that, and yet she still won the next election quite handily.

It only has to do with the dark blue district she runs in, it's not a surprise or a mystery that she wins.

 

[Buffs35]

I know out west probably 90% use bolt action guns but still there are those that do not

We call those tourists.

 

[brymoore]

DeGette's district:

View attachment 359632

Love gerrymandering!

 

[mtmuley]

Thank God there is no TV show called "Idaho Falls". Things are bad enough here.

Been to IF quite a bit. You're right. mtmuley

 

[MTGomer]

Still waiting for one post addressing how this is any threat to hunting. That is what I call bullchit on. It is disingenuous to trot out 2A and ignore the first 4 words. A well regulated militia. Gun laws are regulations to this nonexistent militia. No bazookas, special license for full auto, felons can't have guns. The argument here is about what regulations to have, SCOTUS already upheld that regulations are legal. Moves to divest federal lands, those are a direct threat to hunting. This bill is not. Where oh where is the threat to hunting? Oh, you thought you saw it behind the curtain. If you live and die by SCOTUS, they have already declined to review this law in several states. If passed, it will stand in CO on precedent, unless SCOTUS runs short of toilet paper that day. See Roe V. Wade.

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Justice Antonin Scalia

District of Columbia V. HELLER, 2008

Want data, such as the fact that 85% of mass casualty deaths in 'Merica resulted from use of semiauto weapons w high capacity removeable mags? Look here, US gov't website: Oopsie, it disappeared last week!
View attachment 359622
National Institute of Justice (.gov)
https://nij.ojp.gov › topics › articles › public-mass-shooti...


No information is available for this page.
View attachment 359623

This page along with thousands of others reporting data we taxpayers paid to have researched and reported, was ordered CENSORED by the ass-clown-in-chief.
View attachment 359624


Know what Amendment comes before 2A?
View attachment 359625
Like it or not, this also applies to the Despot-in-Chief. Which he just violated.

shooters, not hunters largely fund Pittman Robertson. Recreational shooters, largely favor semi automatics.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Still waiting for one post addressing how this is any threat to hunting. That is what I call bullchit on. It is disingenuous to trot out 2A and ignore the first 4 words. A well regulated militia. Gun laws are regulations to this nonexistent militia. No bazookas, special license for full auto, felons can't have guns. The argument here is about what regulations to have, SCOTUS already upheld that regulations are legal. Moves to divest federal lands, those are a direct threat to hunting. This bill is not. Where oh where is the threat to hunting? Oh, you thought you saw it behind the curtain. If you live and die by SCOTUS, they have already declined to review this law in several states. If passed, it will stand in CO on precedent, unless SCOTUS runs short of toilet paper that day. See Roe V. Wade.

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Justice Antonin Scalia

District of Columbia V. HELLER, 2008

Want data, such as the fact that 85% of mass casualty deaths in 'Merica resulted from use of semiauto weapons w high capacity removeable mags? Look here, US gov't website: Oopsie, it disappeared last week!
View attachment 359622
National Institute of Justice (.gov)
https://nij.ojp.gov › topics › articles › public-mass-shooti...


No information is available for this page.
View attachment 359623

This page along with thousands of others reporting data we taxpayers paid to have researched and reported, was ordered CENSORED by the ass-clown-in-chief.
View attachment 359624


Know what Amendment comes before 2A?
View attachment 359625
Like it or not, this also applies to the Despot-in-Chief. Which he just violated.

Right - are you saying the second amendment, in current form, is not limited?

Heller also refers to weapons "in common use" - the ar15 has been americas best selling firearm for a while now. What do you say to that?

 

[Oak]

Gerrymander much CO?

Love gerrymandering!

Interestingly enough, our current congressional maps were drawing by an independent redistricting commission and approved by the state SC. You can find the maps and the data at the link below. The effort resulted in 4 fairly solid Democratic districts, 3 solid Republican districts, and one district that is one of the most competitive in the nation (currently R).

Colorado Independent Redistricting Commissions

 

[Bonasababy]

Seems like a lot of angst without clear language in what the bill actually says. The original post had an article describing it--not the actual bill language. One other post implies that most hunting arms and ammo--excepting those that want AR's with 30 round detachable clips to hose a hillside with--are not going to impacted at all.

Can ANYONE provide evidence of what typical hunting arms will be impacted by this--is it really ALL semi autos? Or is it more nuanced than that?

Bill language is what people should be reacting to IMO, not beliefs of what it is or what some of the more extreme anti gun people are saying....

 

[ismith]

Seems like a lot of angst without clear language in what the bill actually says. The original post had an article describing it--not the actual bill language. One other post implies that most hunting arms and ammo--excepting those that want AR's with 30 round detachable clips to hose a hillside with--are not going to impacted at all.

Can ANYONE provide evidence of what typical hunting arms will be impacted by this--is it really ALL semi autos? Or is it more nuanced than that?

Bill language is what people should be reacting to IMO, not beliefs of what it is or what some of the more extreme anti gun people are saying....

I’d be willing to bet you post on the Accurate Reloading Political sub forum. If not, you should check it out.

 

[Bonasababy]

I’d be willing to bet you post on the Accurate Reloading Political sub forum. If not, you should check it out.

Nope don't reload and don't have any idea what that forum is.

I've seen a lot of gun control ideas come and go in my state--most I have issues with--but every single one of them has people greatly overstating their intent or impact it seems. Few pass. We are consider a blue state--still, few pass. Wild accusations of taking guns away aren't reality as most of the Dems don't want to either--or know voters of all persuasions won't stand for it.

My sense is CO is not unlike my state--a broad difference between metro and rural and metro votes with a majority, What do polls say there?

FWIW I sure would not agree to a broad semi auto ban, that would clearly affect hunters with standard semis some that might have been passed down for generations. But I don't feel at all hampered by limits on capacity for those semi autos. That's the norm I see in bills--again not sure what this one says?

 

[Bonasababy]

Seems like a lot of angst without clear language in what the bill actually says. The original post had an article describing it--not the actual bill language. One other post implies that most hunting arms and ammo--excepting those that want AR's with 30 round detachable clips to hose a hillside with--are not going to impacted at all.

Can ANYONE provide evidence of what typical hunting arms will be impacted by this--is it really ALL semi autos? Or is it more nuanced than that?

Bill language is what people should be reacting to IMO, not beliefs of what it is or what some of the more extreme anti gun people are saying....

OK have to backtrack here.

Still haven't seen actual bill language but saw several mainstream media reports on it.

Looks like it was just introduced, proponents are claiming it's in response to a 2013 law not being honored or at least multiple violations that law have been seen in mass shootings since it was enacted, it does NOT involve any existing owned guns (fun for LE figuring that out I bet), and has no round limitations--so yeah if passed as written for any new gun purchases quite a few traditional sporting arms would be impacted.

It does do some things that in my view sportsman should support regarding trigger and other mechanisms that can turn a semi-auto into near full auto type function.

Also speculation it won't be supported without alter\ring some aspects. Seems like some limit on capacity and a few other changes should be sought as it moves through the legislature--and sportsmen might be most effective at pointing out how many traditional sporting arms have detachable mags or clips.

I would guess some of the more popular arms--like a 10-22--could be set up with a detachable mag that holds less then 10 rounds. Popular handguns too. Probably a wave of this coming anyway manufacturers would do well to adapt IMO.

What is lost would be older no longer made guns with mags. If you already own one thats one thing, but I have a few I have toyed with buying over the years. There won't be many folks seeking out a BAR or BLR or 88 or 100 to commit a mass shooting!

 

[elkduds]

Nope don't reload and don't have any idea what that forum is.

I've seen a lot of gun control ideas come and go in my state--most I have issues with--but every single one of them has people greatly overstating their intent or impact it seems. Few pass. We are consider a blue state--still, few pass. Wild accusations of taking guns away aren't reality as most of the Dems don't want to either--or know voters of all persuasions won't stand for it.

My sense is CO is not unlike my state--a broad difference between metro and rural and metro votes with a majority, What do polls say there?

FWIW I sure would not agree to a broad semi auto ban, that would clearly affect hunters with standard semis some that might have been passed down for generations. But I don't feel at all hampered by limits on capacity for those semi autos. That's the norm I see in bills--again not sure what this one says?

"Removable magazines" is language in the bill.