Colorado Assault Weapons Ban Submitted

[SAJ-99]

My point being is we could have come up.with this ban as gun owners and they aren't gonna be satisfied.

Try it and find out.

Your proposal is reasonable but the anti gun activists aren’t reasonable.

Neither is the NRA (this wasn't;t always the case, just in recent memory). At some point shouldn't we try to find something we can agree on, or do we just keep letting the extreme fringes on both sides dictate actions?

 

[Nick87]

Try it and find out.

Sure.

 

[buckbull]

My benelli SBE that I use for turkey hunting is now illegal to buy in Illinois because it has a thumbhole stock. And I have to register mine as an assault rifle. Wow.

 

[DouglasR]

I think that is a huge piece of the issue actually.

But everyone hates my marketing soap box speech.

I barely have service in the cargo trailer, I didn’t mean to post that.
And that’s why my opinions shouldn’t be taken seriously.

 

[LWC55]

My benelli SBE that I use for turkey hunting is now illegal to buy in Illinois because it has a thumbhole stock. And I have to register mine as an assault rifle. Wow.

Fill in that hole

 

[Doublecluck]

Huntalkers

Guns- we should compromisssseeee.

Public lands - my cold dead lands!

 

[Dsnow9]

Huntalkers

Guns- we should compromisssseeee.

Public lands - my cold dead lands!

 

[SAJ-99]

Huntalkers

Guns- we should compromisssseeee.

Public lands - my cold dead lands!

Gotta get out of the echo chamber and read the room.

 

[Nick87]

Gotta get out of the echo chamber and read the room.

View attachment 260583

Edit- have a good weekend.

 

[BigHornRam]

Gotta get out of the echo chamber and read the room.

View attachment 260583

6 to 3 is my read.

 

[Bullbrl]

While I agree advocating for violence is not smart.

I think the idea that the government is just your friends, neighbors and family members, is somewhat disingenuous. Ultimately they are people doing a job, and the lines get fuzzy when the time comes to take orders and keep your job or do what’s right. The fact that the government is made up of people alone suggests that the possibility exists it could be nefarious, people are often nefarious. There are too many examples to list, but certainly Randy weavers wife and 14 y/o boy didn’t get a neighborly welcome from the good folks at the 3 letter agency.

The problem with the idea of democracy as it pertains to gun rights, in many states we are sheep voting with wolves on what’s for dinner. Good luck with that! Especially up against the well organized , well funded narrative driven by the media. The only thing protecting gun rights in many states is the courts and Constitution. That’s where the war is being fought and the only place we seem to win battles.

Are you trying to insinuate that the government might not follow the letter of the law precisely? They might violate the constitution? No way, our government and those that have sworn an oath to the constitution would never do that. (insert loads of sarcasm to the above)

The old adage, we are the government and here to help comes to mind.

 

[SAJ-99]

View attachment 260589

6 to 3 is my read.

That will buy you some time, for sure. But nothing in politics is static. Unfortunately, I think it is unwise to try to hold a position in which the numbers look like they do in that chart. As long as the number of people and guns continues to increase (and the level of crazy), it will be hard to change the trajectory. I think we can agree we don't want Elizabeth Warren to define what an assault weapon is.

 

[Bullbrl]

I just spent the better part of an hour reading this thread, an hour I'll never get back unfortunately.

I'm too tired to post about the nonsense I've read on here from those who think banning guns is going to help anything. We have a constitution for a reason and the minute we start losing sight of that is the minute we start losing our country (it's already started with censoring speech). If you really think banning guns is to prevent "mass shootings" you are being fooled. The end goal is to ban firearms, period.

 

[BigHornRam]

That will buy you some time, for sure. But nothing in politics is static. Unfortunately, I think it is unwise to try to hold a position in which the numbers look like they do in that chart. As long as the number of people and guns continues to increase (and the level of crazy), it will be hard to change the trajectory. I think we can agree we don't want Elizabeth Warren to define what an assault weapon is.

That's why it is important to vote for people who will nominate solid SCJ's. That is where I will focus my effort. Not spend it worrying about what some stupid Chicago University poll is saying.

 

[LWC55]

Neither is the NRA (this wasn't;t always the case, just in recent memory). At some point shouldn't we try to find something we can agree on, or do we just keep letting the extreme fringes on both sides dictate actions?

Why would anyone want to agree on something that takes away their freedoms? Seems unnatural.

We should be thankful there were some extreme fringes willing to fight and give up their lives for our freedoms. Otherwise there never would have been a USA.

#allfringeain'tequal

 

[Gr8bawana]

I'm not giving any more inches, neither should any CITIZEN who values the second amendment that lives in Colorado or any other state in this nation. It's time to take a stand people. This is nonsense.

And for the record, I don't own a suppressor.

Let me ask this question AGAIN since nobody was willing to answer the first 4 times I asked.
Who here is willing to add one or more of YOUR family members to the body count all for the sake of continuing to do nothing?

 

[LWC55]

Let me ask this question AGAIN since nobody was willing to answer the first 4 times I asked.
Who here is willing to add one or more of YOUR family members to the body count all for the sake of continuing to do nothing?

I believe my family is safer if 2A stays strong as it was intended. If you feel better without your weapons, feel free to turn em over.

 

[Bullbrl]

Let me ask this question AGAIN since nobody was willing to answer the first 4 times I asked.
Who here is willing to add one or more of YOUR family members to the body count all for the sake of continuing to do nothing?

I've already had members of my family add their body count for the sake of this country, and it wasn't about doing nothing, it was about giving you the right to sit there on your computer and type out your free speech!

Would you like to talk about doing something to help the death toll in this country? How about we stop the fentanyl from coming across our border? The single largest killer of people from ages 18-45 is fentanyl, 100,000 just last year. How many years of "mass shooting" would it take to equal that?

Here's a few questions for you. How about we start infringing on the 1st amendment even more than we already are. How about we severely limit free speech and religion? Would you be ok with that?

 

[Stocker]

Then assuming your referencing Chicago
There is no control group, there is no way to know if the homicide rate wouldn't be 5x as bad with less stringent rules. Could be the same, but there is no data to support that idea.

There are lots of data points in the strict laws/ low violence/ big city column, but there aren't really any big cities with very permissive laws with low murder rates.

Basically, there are just too many other variables to say one way or the other.

View attachment 260575

Texas

ucr.fbi.gov

I don’t wholeheartedly disagree with the points you make and rarely do. We are just looking at this from 2 different angles. It’s admiral to look at horrific things happening and deciding to try to do something about it.

My perspective is it’s a societal decay problem. While we think our society is evolving in an upward trend, it’s not in all aspects. The decay of morality, right and wrong, a sense of self worth, and ambition has driven a large part of society to the brink. Instead of focusing on getting out streets cleaned up and giving people purpose we make rules and tell them it’s not their fault, it’s the guns fault, or the drugs fault.


Basically I look at it as there is no laws, rules, or regulations that are going to get the homeless drug adiduct, the kid that’s picked on in school and has no self worth, the depressed person driven into a tailspin by watching politicized news, to continue down the path of carrying out a bad thing. It’s been in society forever, bigger population exacerbates it. So we go the way of communism and force everyone onto a path, or you live as a “free” society and deal with it. There’s no in between, we are trending towards totalitarianism. There’s not a damn thing I can do to really stop it, people want rules, we’ll get rules. It only applies to those of us who follow them. You aren’t punishing the people who will shoot up a place, sure you might prevent a shooting, but who’s to say they don’t find something somewhere else more destructive that harms more people.



This probably sounds very syndical, but written human history backs it up fairly decently.

 

[SAJ-99]

That's why it is important to vote for people who will nominate solid SCJ's. That is where I will focus my effort. Not spend it worrying about what some stupid Chicago University poll is saying.

Yeah, let them eat cake.