CO Guv: Time to talk about gun control

[Straight Arrow]

rhomas, I agree with your emphasis on educating and informing.

However, you can define, distinguish, differentiate, and discuss "assault rifles" and magazine capacity all day long and at the end of the day there are those who will point out that it was a 223 AR-15 rifle with rapid firing and large volume of ammunition available, therefore it is a "bad" weapon. No amount of rational definitive discussion about what is or is not an "assault rifle" will diminish their emotional position on that type of firearm. They will perceive your argument as "splitting hairs". In my opinion, it is far more productive to simply advocate for the 2nd Amendment and to move the discussion away from the type and model of firearm used in this tragedy to the subjects of school security, mental health care improvement, and other more proactive programs.

 

[rhomas]

Big Fin, I had hoped everyone did know the difference, thus my failure to understand why so many on here fall into the same misuse of the term! To me, that's akin to going along with the gun-grabbers through the use of fraudulent description and failure to point out the differences. Shouldn't we, the gun owners, make an all out effort to use the correct terminology in our distinction of the differences? Also, why do we fall into the same category of calling magazines, clips? I'm just as certain that the folks on here also know the difference between those as well.

 

[WV Hunter]

Big Fin, I had hoped everyone did know the difference, thus my failure to understand why so many on here fall into the same misuse of the term! To me, that's akin to going along with the gun-grabbers through the use of fraudulent description and failure to point out the differences. Shouldn't we, the gun owners, make an all out effort to use the correct terminology in our distinction of the differences? Also, why do we fall into the same category of calling magazines, clips? I'm just as certain that the folks on here also know the difference between those as well.

While were on the subject of proper terminalogy and all that......

There is no federal license to own a fully automatic weapon. Fully automatic weapons have to have been manufactured before May 1987 to be legally owned by an individual (non SOT Class 2 or 3 dealer). You simply pay the inflated price, fill out a NFA Form 4, send it along with a $200 check, signed CLEO (Chief Law Enforcement Officer) form and fingerprints, or your Living Trust (no need for sign off or fingerprints) to the ATF in Atlanta who will cash your check and send the forms to the NFA in Martensburg, WV who will approve or not your Form 4 application. You'll know 4 - 6 months from the time you submit when your Form 4 arrives at the dealer and you can go and pick up your weapon at that time.

Same exact senario if you want a suppressor.

 

[Monteman11]

Any "new" gun ban is nothing more than a feel good solution. So take it for what it is worth. There are billions of high capacity magazines in existence that weren't affected by the first Brady Bill and millions produced since. They won't round them up and nothing will essentially change. The problem lies when stores like Dick's make a nationwide stance, clearly, they have crossed the line and jumped in head over heels. While I am sure they don't feel like they have turned anti-gun, in essence, that is exactly what they have done. There is a fairly hard line in the sand, and unfortunately, their is very little middle ground. Even one strike on either side gives the other ammunition. These guns weren't obtained from a Dick's store, but were obtained illegally through theft. Until companies like Dick's realize that selling guns to individuals legal to own them isn't a crime, they are essentially stating that AR's regardless of capacity are "illegal" to own. A pretty drastic statement from a company that does millions of dollars in business in recreational shooting sports. When the anti's ask for their statement, how will they respond to the matter? State that they don't agree with the second amendment or legal gun ownership? I can't think of how they can rationally answer this question as it isn't black and white and a pump shotgun can do arguably more damage than a 30 round AR-15 at the distances of these latest horrific events.

In general, the media is again on the take. An "assault" weapon wasn't even used, handguns were, and an assault weapon was in the trunk. Let's face reality for a second, there will be a second brady bill, and it will again do little. The only thing it will do is appease some of the masses and make headway into further restrictions after the next incident. Anyone that thinks these tragedies are over, is naive. We can't stop illegal drugs and we certainly can't stop illegal weapons purchases. I do agree that there should be gun purchase restrictions in place, and the ones currently used are more than adequate. The fact is, as with everything in life, emotions of people, not hard evidence, are what play the largest role in "change."

 

[Oak]

DENVER - Colorado set a single-day record for gun-purchase background check requests the day after the Connecticut school shootings, creating a backlog that still hasn't been cleared.

Colorado Bureau of Investigation spokeswoman Susan Medina said there were more than 4,200 requests to buy guns in Colorado on Saturday. Those gun-purchase requests surpassed the previous record -- 4,028 background checks processed on Black Friday this year.

The latest surge in gun-buyer applications came after a gunman on Friday killed 20 children and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn....

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...day-after-newtown-connecticut-school-shooting

 

[noharleyyet]

Oak, definitely a pre 'gov't kneejerk intervention' buying spree mentality out there. Same kinda reports from the Ft Worth Cabelas.

 

[Oak]

Oak, definitely a pre 'gov't kneejerk intervention' buying spree mentality out there. Same kinda reports from the Ft Worth Cabelas.

Maybe....

Pelosi, however, voiced a more bullish outlook on the current willingness of Congress to take up gun rules.

"Right away -- today, this week -- we could pass the ban on assault magazines," she told NBC's Andrea Mitchell. "In the larger sense, let's go down the path of banning the assault weapon. I think that has a better chance to do that now than ever."
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/...ush-on-gun-violence-begins-to-take-shape?lite

 

[JohnCushman]

When I bought my new AR15 Sunday at Ft Carson, they said they had sold 18 of them in 2 days, and the guy after me in line to see a clerk was buyiing one too.

 

[lbirch]

Can't afford a new rifle at the moment. However, the NRA and RMEF got my renewal today.

 

[wgiles]

This is going to be a tough one to get around. Public sentiment will be against firearms as long as emotions control us. The urban states will have many people in favor of new controls, without regard to whether they will work or not. We need to know what happened and what could have been done to prevent it. The best thing for now, is to try to refrain from doing anything until the emotional tide passes. We have to do something meaningful or we will lose our rights.

 

[fowladdict]

Maybe....

Pelosi said this past sunday morning that she has been working on tighter gun control now for the past year.

 

[rhomas]

wgiles, the problem is that the gun grabbing liberals aren't going to wait. They will push their agenda and keep this in the limelight. They may ignore the facts, but they aren't ignorant, and they know how to take advantage of a tragic situation. The question is, what are we (gun owners) going to do to counter all of the lies, and misinformation in order to successfully protect our Second Amendment rights???? There isn't any room for compromise, since we know that if we concede any point of contention, that will simply provide more fuel to their arguments...........and when will they be satisfied?