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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-13-2013, 04:52 PM
 
9,830 posts, read 19,505,062 times
Reputation: 7596

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
This is questionable. Here's some data that tells another story:

Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993

From the link:

A clear societal change took place regarding gun ownership in the early 1990s, when the percentage of Americans saying there was a gun in their home or on their property dropped from the low to mid-50s into the low to mid-40s and remained at that level for the next 15 years. Whether this reflected a true decline in gun ownership or a cultural shift in Americans' willingness to say they had guns is unclear. However, the new data suggest that attitudes may again be changing. At 47%, reported gun ownership is the highest it has been in nearly two decades -- a finding that may be related to Americans' dampened support for gun-control laws. However, to ensure that this year's increase reflects a meaningful rebound in reported gun ownership, it will be important to see whether the uptick continues in future polling.

I think that gun ownership is likely at a pretty high level for modern times and that Americans are become less and less willing to give affirmative answers in these surveys. To many, gun ownership is a very private matter and many are unwilling to share their gun ownership status with a stranger over the phone.
I personally have no understanding why the gun grabbers think that because they can write up phony stats that firearms ownership is dropping that means it's game on to impose tyranny?

So because there are fewer people that own something means they can single them out more to tax, regulate and impose difficulties on, just because they are a smaller group, so that means they can pick on them?

I believe all of that statistical study stuff is total garbage. A typical responsible firearms owner is not going to take phone calls from bozos asking whether they have firearms in the house and how many.

Glock alone now has over 1.3 million pistols on order. Just about every manufacturer out there has over a year of orders or more. The entire supply of new pistols and semi auto rifles was entirely sold out within 2 weeks last December. Millions of firearms have been sold in 2 months and that isn't changing anytime soon. Billions of rounds of ammunition have been sold as well.

 
Old 03-13-2013, 05:01 PM
 
9,830 posts, read 19,505,062 times
Reputation: 7596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
That is not what I said. I said even though I have not shot a gun and have no desire to I support the right to do so 100% and if I felt these laws infringed on that right I would be very upset. I do not think these laws do that so I am not upset over them.
They do infringe on the right to own firearms. The magazine limit is a great example. Once you give governments the precedent to say how many rounds you can have in a magazine, sky is the limit on more restrictions down the road. It will be like in Canada until they get it down to 5. And then it will be down to 4, 3, 2, 1 and then nothing. They will say we can't have certain calibers, they'll tax ammo to death, they'll continue to restrict it until it's all dried up. Then they will really put the screws to us.

It's very similar to Mayor Dumbberg's rulings on soda in New York City, banning sodas over 16 oz. Once you establish that precedent, there is nothing stopping them reducing it to 12 oz, 8 oz, 6 oz, until nothing at all.

When citizens support these dumb laws, all they are doing is sticking their hand up and admitting they are incapable of making their own decisions and hence need a politician like mommy and daddy to tell them what they are allowed to have and how much and when.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 05:02 PM
 
Location: 77441
3,161 posts, read 3,812,703 times
Reputation: 2303
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
You've avoided the question repeatedly. The question is not "how will it be paid for?" The question is, "How does it increase public health and safety?" The question of public health and safety is the stated purpose of the law, therefore the effects of the law should be tied to its stated purpose. Paying for it is irrelevant to the stated purpose of the law. Please answer the real question or acknowledge that you don't know the answer.

it will be attacked in courts as the equivalent of a poll tax.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 05:06 PM
 
Location: 77441
3,161 posts, read 3,812,703 times
Reputation: 2303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
I think most people are like me on this issue. The bills that have made it if passed or not passed will not change how we vote in the next election. Its going to be about the economy.

wait and see, but dont be surprised during the campaigning if this becomes a major point for people. Colorado is going to lose Magpul and their vendors.
Other gun/hunting related industries are going to leave.
This hairbrain move by the democrats will hurt your economy.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 06:51 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,173 posts, read 20,930,678 times
Reputation: 4258
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo View Post
They do infringe on the right to own firearms. The magazine limit is a great example. Once you give governments the precedent to say how many rounds you can have in a magazine, sky is the limit on more restrictions down the road. It will be like in Canada until they get it down to 5. And then it will be down to 4, 3, 2, 1 and then nothing. They will say we can't have certain calibers, they'll tax ammo to death, they'll continue to restrict it until it's all dried up. Then they will really put the screws to us.

It's very similar to Mayor Dumbberg's rulings on soda in New York City, banning sodas over 16 oz. Once you establish that precedent, there is nothing stopping them reducing it to 12 oz, 8 oz, 6 oz, until nothing at all.

When citizens support these dumb laws, all they are doing is sticking their hand up and admitting they are incapable of making their own decisions and hence need a politician like mommy and daddy to tell them what they are allowed to have and how much and when.
I don't have the same view. To be honest when I first heard about the laws I was already to be upset especially when my far left friends were then once I actually read them I was oh ok.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 06:53 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,173 posts, read 20,930,678 times
Reputation: 4258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bily Lovec View Post
wait and see, but dont be surprised during the campaigning if this becomes a major point for people. Colorado is going to lose Magpul and their vendors.
Other gun/hunting related industries are going to leave.
This hairbrain move by the democrats will hurt your economy.
I just don't see it. The impact on the economy because of this should be negligible even if a few companies move out. As one poster suggested the sequester will have a bigger impact.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
10,612 posts, read 10,996,688 times
Reputation: 13820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
I just don't see it. The impact on the economy because of this should be negligible even if a few companies move out. As one poster suggested the sequester will have a bigger impact.
I doubt it. The sequester drops us to FY12 levels of spending, and that is felt across the board through the end of this FY, which is just half a year. But a losing a local company, 600 jobs, hundreds of millions in tax revenues...and once it's gone it's gone. Federal spending has a nasty habit of always firing up like a trick candle, but once the state loses MagPul and related industries, they're gone.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 07:35 PM
 
9,830 posts, read 19,505,062 times
Reputation: 7596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
I don't have the same view. To be honest when I first heard about the laws I was already to be upset especially when my far left friends were then once I actually read them I was oh ok.
Oh ok what? That manufacturers and consumers get more costs and headache and for what exactly?

I have a big problem with people that just cram laws in because "We have to do something!" and they don't care what that imposes on other people and it accomplishes nothing. The lefties are all about emotion and never care about the results.

I also don't think they seem to grasp when you surrender yourself in such a way to government you open it up for more abuse.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:34 PM
 
Location: Golden, CO
2,181 posts, read 5,604,959 times
Reputation: 2072
I think the bills are ridiculous, but it won't change my voting habits, simply because I wasn't planning on voting for Democrats anyway. Colorado doesn't need to be a blue state -- it was better when it was purple.
 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:37 PM
 
68 posts, read 148,379 times
Reputation: 107
Default Are you %#@$ing kidding me

Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes View Post
I believe in the 2nd Amendment.
If you want to own "arms" then you must be a member of the "militia" [National Guard].
Not a member, then you can't own a gun.
Period.
You are kidding, right?
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

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