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.
And hey...don't judge every city on the Front Range by Denver's example. Down here in the Springs the military and retired military still outnumber the California transplants.
You are right about regional differences in gun attitudes within a state, but in the end they don't matter. The state of CO has clearly been overrun by gun grabbers. They could ALL be located in Denver, but with the way politics works, they might as well be all over the state. I lived in the Central Valley of California, and the people there are as gun friendly as anywhere else in the country. They don't matter though since they are outnumbered.
I think we are going to continue to see a phenomenon of self-sorting in this country. Liberals are going to keep moving to liberal areas and conservatives to conservative ones. The red states will get redder and the blue ones bluer. The gun battles will ultimately be fought (in a legal sense) BETWEEN the states rather than within the states. In my opinion, this is an optimal outcome so long as the federal government doesn't enter the fray with federal legislation. Californians, Coloradans and New Yorkers can live in their gun-free utopias, and I will continue to walk around in my state with a gun on my person.
In theory, everyone stays happy so long as they stay in their own ideological territory. Unfortunately, the grabbers tend to spread like a virus after they (inevitably) bankrupt their states.
My husband talks about this stuff a lot. He is an enlisted soldier at Fort Carson here in Colorado Springs, and he owns guns (not for home defense, but for sport, target, competitive shooting and "bonding" with our adolescent sons who have zero access to the firearms unless Dad and his old Army buddy Steve are present to monitor and instruct.) He is really hardcore about his 2A rights and so is Steve, in fact Steve has been travelling to Denver to speak at hearings a lot lately. I, on the other hand, am not a big fan of guns. It's not that I disagree with our right to have them, but I grew up near DC where the only people who had them were generally criminals. I've never had the exposure to them in other respects such as hunting or target shooting and I'm just not easy around 'em. It's my husband's thing which I tolerate out of respect for him.
Now recently there was some domestic shooting incident involving a soldier's family near here, I don't know the details, but all of a sudden some of the leadership of middling high rank on post is demanding all soldiers to inform the command of what guns and ammo they possess in their homes. The official stance of the General was that no, only if they live on post do they need to disclose this. So my husband is making a stink and fighting it, as we do not live on post, although his immediate superiors are still trying to demand the info...he told them, when you outrank the CG then you can come back and ask me that. They are trying to persuade the CG to revise his statement.
My husband thinks that UN troops will one day soon appear in our neighborhoods, kicking in our doors, demanding to disarm us, doing harm to family members and etc. He thinks that domestic warfare is coming. As a mother of two kids, I live in horror of this. It disturbs me to even hear him talking about it. I feel like Mel Gibson's character at the beginning of "The Patriot"...I am raising a family, I don't have the luxury of acting on principle. Yet that film illustrates what happens to good people who let it go too far. Another part of me says, "Wouldn't you say that the safety of the family is more important than clinging to your right to own deadly toys? If giving them up keeps us from harm...shouldn't you?" I don't know the answers. But I'm scared. I grew up taking certain things for granted, if only out of ignorance. We decided the abortion argument with Roe v. Wade. End of story. The Constitution guarantees our right to bear arms, whether we choose to exercise that right or not. End of story. Now politicians all over the political spectrum are shaking everything up and it's kind of freaking me out.
I guess I don't understand why a person would need more than 15 rounds in a magazine in the first place. My Beretta 9mm holds 15 rounds and I feel like that's more than enough for home defense. I dont hunt so maybe someone can riddle me as to why a deer or elk hunter would need more than 15 rounds in a mag? Is it really that much of a hassle for you guys to stop and reload in between kills? Are you unable to take down a deer or elk within the 15 round limit?
I guess I don't understand why a person would need more than 15 rounds in a magazine in the first place. My Beretta 9mm holds 15 rounds and I feel like that's more than enough for home defense. I dont hunt so maybe someone can riddle me as to why a deer or elk hunter would need more than 15 rounds in a mag? Is it really that much of a hassle for you guys to stop and reload in between kills? Are you unable to take down a deer or elk within the 15 round limit?
It isn't about need, it's about people having a right to own what they want. Why does anyone NEED a 400 horsepower Corvette that can go twice as fast as the speed limit?
I guess I don't understand why a person would need more than 15 rounds in a magazine in the first place. My Beretta 9mm holds 15 rounds and I feel like that's more than enough for home defense. I dont hunt so maybe someone can riddle me as to why a deer or elk hunter would need more than 15 rounds in a mag? Is it really that much of a hassle for you guys to stop and reload in between kills? Are you unable to take down a deer or elk within the 15 round limit?
The problem comes down to who determines what constitutes "need"? In my opinion, the individual should determine what they need for themselves since the government can't be relied upon to protect them.
I guess I don't understand why a person would need more than 15 rounds in a magazine in the first place. My Beretta 9mm holds 15 rounds and I feel like that's more than enough for home defense. I dont hunt so maybe someone can riddle me as to why a deer or elk hunter would need more than 15 rounds in a mag? Is it really that much of a hassle for you guys to stop and reload in between kills? Are you unable to take down a deer or elk within the 15 round limit?
The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting.
I guess I don't understand why a person would need more than 15 rounds in a magazine in the first place. My Beretta 9mm holds 15 rounds and I feel like that's more than enough for home defense. I dont hunt so maybe someone can riddle me as to why a deer or elk hunter would need more than 15 rounds in a mag? Is it really that much of a hassle for you guys to stop and reload in between kills? Are you unable to take down a deer or elk within the 15 round limit?
I guess I don't understand why anyone has to put their nose in my business. What I own is my business. Its also stupid for the Government to say its OK to have 15 rounds but not 16. If I can not be trusted with 16 rounds I can not be trusted with 15.
Why does anyone NEED a 400 horsepower Corvette that can go twice as fast as the speed limit?
You're right. I don't need my 170mph Suzuki GSXR750 and I've gone well over the speed limit on long empty stretches of desert highway many many times but something needs to be done. Maybe infringing on the 2nd amendment isn't the answer but it seems to me that the mass, indiscriminant killings have gotten way out of hand in recent years. Maybe we need stiffer background checks and a complete denial of gun ownership to people with a history of mental illness. Don't know?? I sure as hell would be pissed if it had been my daughter that had gotten killed in Connecticut.
It's like that law in NY that limits the size of the sugary unhealthy drink that you can buy. I don't necessarily think that limiting the size of a persons Dr. Pepper is the answer but clearly something must be done because there are way way to many obese people in this country and it affects all of us because ailments due to obesity is one of the major factors driving up our continually skyrocketing health care costs.
Since everyone in this thread is so against this new bill, maybe some of you can chime in as to what you think a real, working solution to the problem is.
As the World turns! (cue sounds of endless <retching!>)
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcrow2
No one I have seen ever posted it could not happen in some states. Colorado though a bit disconcerting is not unthinkable. For years people from California have moved here to retire and or vacation and escape the crime and high taxes of California. Texas is not Colorado, not yet. What others have said is that with the house in the hands of Republicans its not likely that any gun ban or mag ban is going t pass the Congress. There are many states where no gun laws will pass, Michigan, Texas, Florida, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas to name a few. I will not live above the Missouri line and not in a state that does not allow me to own my suppressor and or guns and mags. I live in a very free gun state Florida and if any other state is considered its not going to be Colorado.
Remember what happened to Kmart when it gave in to Mike Moore on Ammo and guns? I don't know that it was the biggest thing Kmart did wrong but people who were gun and hunting people quit going to to Kmart and started to only go to Walmart. They gave up on hand guns but still sell rifles and shotguns and ammo. Heck they still sell ARs.
Heck, they all came up tov Idaho and / or Montana few years back, including Hanoi Jane, soz she could enjoy her hubby's massively humungous ranch, and ride naked through the aspen groves, stopping to "chuck" the odd grizzly bear under his chinny-chin-chin! "Awe... nice teddy bear!"
(Too bad she didn't actually get the chance to be mano-a-mano [sorry: don't know how to say that in Spanish when it's woman to woman...] mit dem bären! Just like Timothy "Braijdead" Treadwell!
Anyhow, I understand that now the glitzy blingistá city-dwellers, finding the winters a tad bit to challenging, and the backwoods far too dangerous with all the salvaged wolves, bären, undt the beer too stout, have fled back to Monterey and San Luis O., esp. since house prices in Kalifornia have plummeted like a 20lb stone out of a Cessna!
And of course, it's SO MUCH safer there now too, right? As you CA gun owner types have found... (My sincere apologies and condolences btw;, but you really ought to do what my family did: we fled S. Orange County for central WA State!))
This is the phrase that virtually guarantees horrible legislation. "Something" doesn't always need to be done. If people and legislators can't come up with something better than "something needs to be done", then nothing should be done. Sometimes it is better to do nothing than something.
You use obesity as something that requires government action because people cannot be trusted to make the right choices. There is virtually no aspect of life where everyone is going to make the right choices all the time. We are either free to make bad choices or we aren't free. It's really that simple.
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.
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.
As the World turns! (cue sounds of endless <retching!>)
