U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-25-2013, 01:40 PM
 
1,316 posts, read 1,182,310 times
Reputation: 1932

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
All very good suggestions. We have driving lessons/tests/licenses to help keep us safe on the road. If you want to walk around with something that can blow the heads off people, you should expect this type of regulation.

HMMM...I can't find anything in the Constitution that mentions driver's licences...I'll go back and read it again and see if there is anything about "the right to ride a horse shall not be infringed"..

 
Old 03-25-2013, 01:47 PM
 
Location: Colorado
1,968 posts, read 1,982,826 times
Reputation: 1724
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
People who support these laws have yet to explain how these laws accomplish their stated purpose. They have yet to explain how they do anything other than infringe upon the rights of law abiding citizens.
The purpose of law:

1. To protect you from outside aggression or harm (robbery, assault, etc.)
2. To establish the rules needed for a society to live and work together (traffic laws, contract law, etc.)
3. To protect the fabric of society as agreed upon by the voice of the people or their representatives (pornography laws, marriage laws, drug laws, etc.).
4. To ensure that justice has been served.
5. To punish people who commit crimes.
6. To maintain social order.

Some details of the bills can be found here:

Guv signs three controversial gun bills | Colorado Statesman

Colorado Bureau of Investigation - Main - 03/20/2013 - Gun Bills Signed Into Law

13-1224 Updated Summary

Banning accessories of mass slaughter will make it harder for people to obtain them. I would have liked to see an assault weapons ban (assuming they come to an agreement on what constitutes an assault weapon).
 
Old 03-25-2013, 02:31 PM
 
20,899 posts, read 39,162,901 times
Reputation: 19173
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo View Post
It's more rules upon more rules upon more rules, more fees, more taxes, more bureaucracy and it will do nothing about nothing.

Lefties only solutions ever involve complicating everything and making it more expensive.

Try another tact for once.
Actually not. Someone mentioned that with all the various state and city firearm laws that there are 25,000 such laws in our nation. ONE set of national gun laws that applies everywhere will greatly REDUCE the "rules upon rules" that you mention, and it'll be a lot easier for everyone from gun owners to gun dealers to law enforcement to the court system.

As far as costing more, that's an unknown, but vastly fewer laws that apply to all should make overall costs a bit cheaper.

One reason that bad guys have guns in cities with tight laws is that the bad guys usually need to cross a state line to a state with lax laws to buy all the weapons they want. That's been the case with DC's tight laws and high gun deaths, the dudes just drive over the bridge into VA where it's like the wild west for buying guns. Straw buyers galore there.

If the laws are tighter everywhere with universal background checks for all buyers, then the ease of getting guns in DC or Chicago will eventually bring about a decline in death rates. We need a level playing field everywhere, but right now there is no level field of play for gun purchases.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 02:41 PM
 
20,899 posts, read 39,162,901 times
Reputation: 19173
Since we're so far off the frigging topic, we may as well take a look at the recent article "Gun Deaths Shaped by Race" in the WaPo.

Click on the first graphic in the article to get a really cool graphic that breaks down gun deaths by state by homicide vs suicide. Some interesting stats indeed. You have to run your cursor across the bars to see the individual state numbers. Blacks tend to shoot other blacks. White tend to shoot themselves.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 03:08 PM
 
Location: Colorado
1,968 posts, read 1,982,826 times
Reputation: 1724
I agree that a national policy/laws makes sense.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Colorado
11,836 posts, read 7,297,740 times
Reputation: 21239
I think that the only means of legislation that could accomplish anything with regard to keeping guns out of the hands of people who are more likely to endanger the public would be something like this:

Not only do you have to register your firearms and do background checks when you buy them, possibly be licensed with a safety course, etc. but you also have to renew your license from time to time, which requires you to present all registered weapons you own for inspection and verification. This way, you can't just shuffle them off to some other owner under the table, without the proper procedure, you'll get caught. Of course even that wouldn't prevent you from lending them out on a short term basis...but if you were also liable for any crime committed with them (unless they were reported stolen) then that might make you think twice about who you lent them to.

I still have vast protests against this sort of lawmaking on the basis that I believe 2A exists so that we can be armed against the possibility of a tyrannical government. BUT...this would be more likely to actually accomplish something productive in the direction they want.

It's like when my husband talks about "punishing" the cat for something. It's not just that it's wrong, it's that it accomplishes NOTHING productive. There is no purpose in it, other than making you feel like you did something to assert (nonexistant) control over the situation. The gun laws I see today are like that. The difference being that I can explain to my husband why it is stupid and a waste of time to try and punish a cat. You can't explain a dang thing to some of these liberal lawmakers.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 03:31 PM
 
Location: 5280 above liquid
356 posts, read 514,997 times
Reputation: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by artisan4 View Post
The purpose of law:

1. To protect you from outside aggression or harm (robbery, assault, etc.)
2. To establish the rules needed for a society to live and work together (traffic laws, contract law, etc.)
3. To protect the fabric of society as agreed upon by the voice of the people or their representatives (pornography laws, marriage laws, drug laws, etc.).
4. To ensure that justice has been served.
5. To punish people who commit crimes.
6. To maintain social order.

Some details of the bills can be found here:

Guv signs three controversial gun bills | Colorado Statesman

Colorado Bureau of Investigation - Main - 03/20/2013 - Gun Bills Signed Into Law

13-1224 Updated Summary

Banning accessories of mass slaughter will make it harder for people to obtain them. I would have liked to see an assault weapons ban (assuming they come to an agreement on what constitutes an assault weapon).
I like how you complicated the true meaning of law just like the legislators. Law is simply meant to protect our inalienable rights (life, liberty and property). How does one protect his own life, liberty and property without a means for protection?

I also appreciate how the government sycophants throw out the "we need to stop mass slaughters with government laws, regulations and bans" argument but have no qualms with said government killing civilians of other nations with the use of drones.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 03:53 PM
 
Location: 80904 West siiiiiide!
2,942 posts, read 7,322,326 times
Reputation: 1722
Why can't you just leave me alone? Me and my guns have never hurt anyone, nor ever will. Funny how every time some crazy person does something bad, they always want to punish the people who didn't do it.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 04:43 PM
 
30 posts, read 32,990 times
Reputation: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanek9freak View Post
Why can't you just leave me alone? Me and my guns have never hurt anyone, nor ever will. Funny how every time some crazy person does something bad, they always want to punish the people who didn't do it.
You already know the answer to that. Gun control isn't about "guns" it's about Control.
 
Old 03-25-2013, 07:35 PM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,840,928 times
Reputation: 9133
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
All very good suggestions. We have driving lessons/tests/licenses to help keep us safe on the road. If you want to walk around with something that can blow the heads off people, you should expect this type of regulation.
Here is a legal concept that gun control advocates just don't seem to get, the quoted post showing that quite clearly. It is this: they do not understand the legal difference between a "right" and a "privilege."

The right to bear arms is just that--a right guaranteed under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. More than that, it is a right that "shall not be infringed."

Driving a car, on the other hand is a "privilege." The legal difference is that a right generally can not be taken away by the government unless someone is convicted of violating a law that requires surrendering that right. For example, if a person is convicted of a felony, their right to bear arms can be revoked.

A "privilege" is something that a person is permitted to do, usually by meeting a certain qualification, paying a fee, and/or conforming to a standard, for which they are granted a license to engage in the activity that is the subject of the privilege; otherwise the individual is not permitted to engage in the activity. For example, one can not legally operate an automobile on the public streets without obtaining a driver's license. To do so, the individual must pass a test and demonstrate some minimum proficiency (and pay a fee) to get the license.

The whole argument over gun control is whether or not the right of an individual to bear arms (including owning guns) is a right or a privilege. There should be no argument--the Second Amendment makes no bones about it--it is a right. Gun control advocates have been trying to pervert the clear right of people to own firearms into a privilege subject to licensure and control by the government, a "You can't do it unless the government lets you" mentality. Opponents of gun control rightfully believe that gun ownership should not be "infringed" upon by the government, unless the person owning the gun has been adjudicated as being unfit to own a gun. Put another way, gun control advocates believe a gun owner is guilty until proven innocent, and gun control opponents believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. The last time I checked, American juris prudence was based on the latter concept.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top