Colorado passes Gun Control Laws

[Lemur]

And this is why Republicans should lose all their seats for timewasting.

I am reminded of an essay by a former Republican on the current state of the party:

We could argue, and should argue, over what the policies of conservative government should be today; that’s not my point in this blog entry. My point here is that there is no creative ferment on the Right, no breathing space, few places where new ideas can emerge. All the energy on the Right seems aimed at hunting down the heretics within. That, and making life as hard as possible for the opposition, not because they have something better in mind, but as an end in itself.

[Papewaio]

If you have a registered firearm you can:
Sell it as long as you provide the papers
Get house contents insurance for its loss or theft.
Get personal insurance for its misuse, misfire or other accident.

If you don't have it registered
No selling of it.
No fine for not registering it.
No house contents insurance on it
Higher premiums for its misuse
Print your own comes under this category unless it is a licensed manufacturer.

I'd also add an amnesty period for selling/ buying to register.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Stay in Australia where you belong.

Constitutional issues should get a filibuster every time. 60 votes to take away peoples rights isn't too much to ask.
Hey, they had the opportunity to get rid of the filibuster in January. They didn't. The Democrats hold the Senate because of tacit agreements that they made by supporting guys like Tester, Donnelly, Heidtkamp, Pryor, Begich, Manchin, etc. Obama never has to run again and just won the 2012 so he decided that the coalition was no longer necessary. Great. If you think that 2A supporters are going to fall for the truce again, you are mistaken.

You guys can gnash your teeth at this. I feel like this was hard fought. I've sent hundreds and hundreds of letters over the past 5 months, did you? Call and speak with your state and house reps? Never stopped engaging friends and family? Reading the bills?

You all knew that the small segment of sales that take place without a background check had nothing to do with the excuse for the entire push, right? Constituents asked themselves - "what does this bill and all of this sanctimony have to do with the reason that this issue is in front of us in the first place?". the answer clear to everyone is - nothing

Almost everyone likes the idea of background checks for all sales, but the simple question was; if I don't have the paperwork for some reason, even in the event that I did the NICS - am I a felon? Is that a misdemeanor, violation? Am I legally responsible if the gun is used in a crime? It may not mean anything to you guys, if you don't buy or sell guns, but it means alot to people who do.

[ICantSpellDawg]

The NRA is me. I am a part of it. They tell us not to compromise, we think that might not be successful and want to compromise like normal humans. They prevent us - we win. They knew better.
The idea is not to do gun reform while the Democrats control more than 1 area of government or when the nation is reeling and grasping at action due to tragedy. Only pass laws when the ground is favorable, shoot them down when it is not. Compromise when you have the upper hand, refuse discussions when you don't.

Tough negotiators do that. The proof is in the pudding and we had a victory because our particular lobby is strong. The NRA and gun lobby has proved that it is a core interest of the GOP and that they are not to be ignored in the Democratic party. Time to regroup and plan the next battle in the courts. As long as the 2A is in the Constitution, courts will almost never overturn the laws we write and often overturn the laws you write. We can lobby for positive reforms, the American people are on board with them.

[Papewaio]

Stay in Australia where you belong.

Internatonal Forum :). So expect international commentary. When American bullets don't kill overseas tourists who are visiting the US I will happily shut up

Almost everyone likes the idea of background checks for all sales, but the simple question was; if I don't have the paperwork for some reason, even in the event that I did the NICS - am I a felon? Is that a misdemeanor, violation? Am I legally responsible if the gun is used in a crime? It may not mean anything to you guys, if you don't buy or sell guns, but it means alot to people who do.

My international response was it should not effect ownership. It should effect commerical selling. So print your own, inheritance and what you have shouldn't be a felony it should be a right.

The state should only be involved in transfer of firearms and where possible it should be more to see that criminals aren't procuring them.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Why do you support the NRA? I'm a responsible gun-owner and I still think they're the devil incarnate (okay, maybe not that bad.. but close). Like any special interest group of that caliber, they are motivated by money more than anything else. Part of the reason we can't have rational discussions on gun control is because the NRA pushed for legislation that prevented proper research into the issue (not unlike what Big Tobacco used to do...) while simultaneously urging their members to jerk their knees every time someone even suggests it. I would happily support an interest group (because they're not all bad) that wanted to preserve gun rights in a more rational way, but the NRA are just ignorance peddlers. They laugh all the way to the bank about this stuff.

You have no idea what you are talking about. The NRA gets results. Every special interest should be so lucky. If you measure an interest by the results and give credit accordingly, credit is due to the NRA.
You have bought into Obama's America narrative hook, line, sinker and should be better than that. What makes them any more money hungry than the people who work at the DNC? The RNC? Major corporations?

This debate has radicalized me further. I started out by wanting to compromise, saw the bad faith of the opposition first hand in NY and decided that they were too clever to work with and that we had to defeat them here. I like reasonable ideas. I want background checks on all transfers of firearms, but I don't want to be prosecuted on technicality or for the government to have any more information about our guns. In NY, you don't own your guns. The government has the right to confiscate any guns it finds if it believes that you are questionable - without warrant or any adjudication. Trust us in NY that see the political whims of government up-close. You should know that they don't believe that anyone should own guns. They are just biding their time.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Internatonal Forum :). So expect international commentary. When American bullets don't kill overseas tourists who are visiting the US I will happily shut up



My international response was it should not effect ownership. It should effect commerical selling. So print your own, inheritance and what you have shouldn't be a felony it should be a right.

The state should only be involved in transfer of firearms and where possible it should be more to see that criminals aren't procuring them.

You want to see gun ownership responsibly wound down, even among otherwise law abiding citizens because you never know. I don't. I believe that it is inevitable that we print our guns and that the world is about to see an explosion in proliferation of weapons over the next 20 years. Background checks are part of the future, but must be done correctly. Registration is the enemy.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Well its never a sign that this is going to end with both of us coming to an understanding when you start your post off with 'You have no idea what you are talking about.' Athough.. I suppose it may be a sign that I hit a nerve. Nobody likes to hear they've been duped, and I say you've been duped.

What makes you think I'm a big fan of Obama? He hasn't done half the things I wanted him to do, and he's wasted his political capital doing things I really don't care about. As for the people who work at the DNC, RNC, and major Corporations? Most of them suffer from a serious lack of ethics too.

I've just signed up with the NRA, GOA and NYSRPA. I wasn't convinced, now I'm convinced. It's $25 bucks a year, you get a little buck-knife a magazine subscription and they initiate legal proceedings against the opposition and win. what more do you want? I say "you have no idea what you are talking about" because you don't understand that effective workers don't have to agree with you or care about anything more than the money you are paying them to be talented and get results. We pay, they get results. Stop criticizing everything and stand for something. I don't know if I've ever read that you support anything, just criticism. I don't find the GOP or NRA to be worthless idiots. I see value in them. I would like to see them reform in certain areas to make them more effective at getting what I want, but they are the good guys on the things that I care about and work towards.

Do I think filling in the NICS requirement loopholes is a bad idea? No, it sounds like a decent idea. do I think it will do anything to reduce the gun homicide rate or reduce the likelihood and body count of the next mass shooting? No, because it didnt have anything to do with the last 4 that I can think of.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Idealism often clouds judgement. I'm an idealist and spiteful enough to do the wrong thing when my agenda is under fire. Cold, calculating, talent is sometimes needed, particularly when the opposition is passionate and spraying emotions all over themselves.

I care very little about money. I don't make much of it, I don't have expensive hobbies and I never want to own a house or an expensive car. I do like guns, politics, principles, and many other theoretical concepts. If I can give what little money that I have to someone who cares about money and gets me real results, I'm in.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Idealism is bad when it turns into Dogma, yes. But so is Pragmatism when it turns into a cover for outright selfishness. You edited it out, but you had a great little blurb up there a few minutes ago about me never supporting anything and always criticizing. Well, here's what I support: People being better than they are. All of them. Always. Nobody's perfect, but we're a hell of a lot better than this.

I didn't edit it out! Those are empty platitudes, btw. So, maybe you support empty platitudes?

[Papewaio]

You want to see gun ownership responsibly wound down, even among otherwise law abiding citizens because you never know. I don't. I believe that it is inevitable that we print our guns and that the world is about to see an explosion in proliferation of weapons over the next 20 years. Background checks are part of the future, but must be done correctly.

Not quite. I want locally in Aus stricter gun laws. For the US I want better access for responsible owners, ability to print their own etc. For irresponsible operators I would like to see higher barriers to access, training and mental health checks.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Not quite. I want locally in Aus stricter gun laws. For the US I want better access for responsible owners, ability to print their own etc. For irresponsible operators I would like to see higher barriers to access, training and mental health checks.

I want select fire, unregistered guns in every home in Australia. But, you know, you can have background checks to buy them, if you aren't printing them yourself. Your opinions affect my rights, so lets bring that idea home to you. The issue is - who decides who is irresponsible? I don't want irresponsible people to own guns either, but I wont give the authorization button to a guy like Bloomberg, who doesn't believe anyone should carry a knife over 3 inches.
"over 50? you could go senile!"
"Diabetes? What if your sugars go too high!?"
"18-21? arn't you a bit too young to own a firearm?"
"neighbors don't feel safe? gun free neighborhood"

Just, fair, and common sense oppression

[ICantSpellDawg]

Empty Platitudes? Not really. I want a just and fair system, not a plutocracy.

Platitudes. Anyway, I'm begin to troll people, so I will bow out. for now...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Show me the mass-shooting where the firearm wasn't purchased by the perp using a NICS check. Show me one instance of mass death that would have been prevented by one of the laws proposed. Maybe I'm missing it. Then we can resume the gnashing and criticizing. Doesn't mean filling the loopholes isn't a good idea, but the overreaction is priceless. None of these people procured using the loopholes.

Psychiatric Dr's are not prohibited from alerting authorities if they believe that a patient is an immediate threat. This is the current law everywhere.
I cannot buy a gun online from anyone outside of the State of NY without undergoing a NICS background check at a local FFL. This is the current law everywhere.
Any individual or store who is in the business of selling firearms at a gun-show must provide a background check. If you regularly sell firearms, you must run the check. This is the current law everywhere.
If you are a violent felon, a regular user of a controlled substance or have been adjudicated mentally defective or were recently committed- you have committed a felony by handling a firearm. This is the current law everywhere.

If the Toomey-Manchin law was passed, would there still be loopholes? Yep. How about the Reid bill unammended. Still loopholes? Yep.

[Papewaio]

I want select fire, unregistered guns in every home in Australia. But, you know, you can have background checks to buy them, if you aren't printing them yourself. Your opinions affect my rights, so lets bring that idea home to you. The issue is - who decides who is irresponsible? I don't want irresponsible people to own guns either, but instead of give the authorization button to a guy like Bloomberg, who doesn't believe anyone should carry a knife over 3 inches.

True. We can all wish for things. There are foreign lobbyists in Washington and Canberra.

My wish for registration would end at resale and insurance. For the US which is cultural similar in some areas but drastically different in others I believe individuals should have the right to self arm, manufacture, print and bear arms to their hearts content. Frankly it isn't the firearm that needs to be checked, its the person. My reasoning for registration on selling firearms is not to limit their sale but to limit faulty weapon sales and selling to criminals. I start from the position that everyone is innocent and responsible. The grey/gray area is keeping full access for responsible operators vs not responsible ones (lack of training, mentally ill or felons).

[ICantSpellDawg]

True. We can all wish for things. There are foreign lobbyists in Washington and Canberra.

My wish for registration would end at resale and insurance. For the US which is cultural similar in some areas but drastically different in others I believe individuals should have the right to self arm, manufacture, print and bear arms to their hearts content. Frankly it isn't the firearm that needs to be checked, its the person. My reasoning for registration on selling firearms is not to limit their sale but to limit faulty weapon sales and selling to criminals. I start from the position that everyone is innocent and responsible. The grey/gray area is keeping full access for responsible operators vs not responsible ones (lack of training, mentally ill or felons).

Well, then I like your starting point.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I just wanted to point out that the NRA is one of the unhealthiest examples of lobbying gone horribly wrong. Gun Control? Seriously? That's not even important. Lets talk about Citizens United v. FEC, Super PACs, and the triumph of 'pragmatism' over 'idealism' in American politics.

Your problem with the gun lobby special interest group is that they are not a different special interest? I don't follow. They do a good job defending and expanding the right to keep and bear arms - this is their mission. It isnt their job to reduce crime, or enact gay marriage, or de-salinize the middle east. They need to make sure that I can access whatever firearm I can, wherever I am without the government interfering. The brady campaign, citizens for responsible gun rights, mayors against illegal firearms can worry the limits. NRA, GOA - they are the defense and offense of the right and their job is the blast down impediments that even threaten to threaten threatening the right of the people to keep an bear arms.

AND THEY ARE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB! they deserve your credit as someone who doesn't get harassed by governmentfor owning your guns. Without the NRA, GOA, imagine where your rights would be every-time progressives get the bright idea to ignore your rights on this issue.

MAIG, CRGL, Brdy - they are all anti-gun organizations. They aren't for responsible gun laws. they want to ban 10 round AR-15's because they look scary and will come for your glocks for being functionally equivalent if they think that they can get away with it. Take it from me - we have a 7 round magazine limit in NY now which is the "compromise" amount. They wanted (and will eventually probably get) 5 rounds. And after that? You don't really need 5, right? You can reload, and semi-automatics are used on the battlefield, right?

[ICantSpellDawg]

the Anti-gun lobby will use anything to hammer gun owners/manufacturers with lawsuits. The gun lobby has learned a number of things from the tobacco lobby - what not to let happen. I'm not part of the tobacco loby because it is chemically addictive and makes people ill. The gun lobby is not equivalent. no ciggarete has ever saved a life, they don't win wars, help arrest criminals, protect your home and property and loved ones. False equivalence.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Yes, of course. A lobby is a group of people with a common interest. I don't "oppose" the tobacco industry, I support individuals rights to make their own decision. I am skeptical about a product that stacks the deck and creates a chemical dependence, hence I don't "support" the tobacco lobby, I take a more neutral approach. I do support the firearms lobby because they support the citizens rights lobby. We have a mutual interest.

I oppose the gay marriage lobby but support the "keep the government out of my bedroom" lobby. You can decide strategically what you support in order to effect the changes you want.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm glad that they make so much money, it keeps them in the game. The reality is that if Google didn't make so much money from content creation arising from questionable online copyright issues, they probably wouldn't be fighting for our rights as hard and SOPA/PIPA would be the law of the land. We are merely pawns in the game. nobody cares about us. We form groups because there is strength in number. Emotions get carried away, creating a sense of cameraderie, but the reality is that everyone is in it for themselves. Sometimes, in order to look just and fair and thus show potential allies that you are willing to put skin in the game, you do things that don't directly benefit you. But, boy-oh-boy, does that benefit you later when people give you credit for being so principled and selfless. Smart politicians invest in the short term and long term.

I think that you are naive about why anyone does anything. Or maybe I am. And I think that you should probably stop smoking or cut back, because it is a stupid idea. But I would defend your right to do it, just not with everything I've got because you have a chemical dependence.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I think that the idea that everybody just wants to harmonize is a bunch of bunk. As I regularly say, this is a total war forum. Harmony and Chaos are human natures. I would hate a world where everyone is just blowing each other and dancing around in hemp underwear. Strife and fighting make the world interesting. So does vegetable gardening, but I digress.

people are 90% selfish and 10% dumb and confused enough to do altruistic things.

I would hazard a guess that that's partly because you have a lot more invested in the status quo than I do. I gain nothing from rich people getting richer. I gain nothing from a spineless government that is happy to be manipulated by those who don't need the help. My interest is in a better system.

It really is selfless that all of these poor and disenfranchised people want to do "the right thing" and take wealthy peoples stuff for their own gain. It's all a bunch of hoey. Poor peopel are just trying to get richer and rich people are trying to stay rich. I'm just a monkey wrench launcher who likes to disrupt populist impulses. I derive pleasure from attacking the majority opinion and making sanctimonious liberals and their idea of "inevitability" frustrated.

[LittleGrizzly]

I used to be very anti gun.

To be honest my policy has completely changed, for America at the very least.

The genie is out of the bottle and with organisations like the NRA it is not going back in, even without them you probably couldn't do it the way modern America is.

Arm everyone, train everyone (everyone does exclude those proven to be mentally unstable or a criminal, children probably require it just as much, if not more than everyone else) make sure everyone knows how to use their gun quickly and effectively.

I imagine the average criminal for various reasons (element of surprise, probably better physical shape, more likely at peak physical ages) would have the advantage over regular people but if you have enough people shooting back at the guy even a few bad shots might have one get lucky.

Yes I imagine there will be innocents that get shot by people trying to shoot at bad guys but in the case of the school shooters it would be worth one or two innocents dying at the start to kill the shooter for the lives he would have taken later on....

Background checks for all guns does seem sensible (as to stop the mentally ill and criminals) but to me most things outside of that are pretty much window dressing.

If I am shooting at a bunch of unarmed school children the size of the clip doesn't really matter too much if it is a reduction from say 10 to 5. If I as a shooter cared that much I would practice my reloading and I am sure with repetition I could get it down to a pretty low time...

As a numbers game I think it only really works for school shooters and the like, in terms of going into a shop and demanding the money is handed over there is probably much more risk of innocents getting hurt in the gunned up society but as the guns are not going anywhere why punish the shop keeper?

The criminal has a nice selection with the only limitations being what can be stolen/imported (or bought legally) whilst the shopkeeper is confounded by all sorts of rules...

Sorry for not being more specific on the topic but I guess that is my take on guns in the USA.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Spoken like someone who hasn't seen very much strife and fighting.

Edit

[ICantSpellDawg]

Background checks for all guns does seem sensible (as to stop the mentally ill and criminals) but to me most things outside of that are pretty much window dressing.
.

I think that this post shows a good understanding of the issue.

[Beskar]

You want to know what is an actual affront to peoples liberty and freedoms which did get passed and wasn't filibustered, and even Obama got jeered at but will hopefully going to Veto it.

Cispa.

Talk about screwed up priorities.

[LittleGrizzly]

It is okay, you can march on the federal buildings brandishing your 2nd amendment protected weaponry (my spell check and google both agree on this spelling but it just doesn't look right to me) to stop the government turning your country into big brother!

That is the point of them after all.

[drone]

You want to know what is an actual affront to peoples liberty and freedoms which did get passed and wasn't filibustered, and even Obama got jeered at but will hopefully going to Veto it.

Cispa.

Talk about screwed up priorities.

CISPA passed the House, which doesn't have a filibuster. It now has to pass the Senate before Obama pulls a psych on his veto like he has done before.

[ICantSpellDawg]

It is okay, you can march on the federal buildings brandishing your 2nd amendment protected weaponry (my spell check and google both agree on this spelling but it just doesn't look right to me) to stop the government turning your country into big brother!

That is the point of them after all.

I realize. Look at government reaction to the guy in Cali. Do you think that the Federal government as it currently exists could withstand a few thousand Dorners? Small arms ARE an effective hedge against tyranny. Of course, I believe that government is going in the right-ish direction and becoming more transparent, with the help of the droves of people who urge them to open up. This evolution is not certain, and while we have the right to hedge by owning small arms, I believe that we should push the right to the limit. Entrenched interests seek to increase Federal opacity and power and we have to stop them through all available legal channels

I'm not anti government, I believe in government. Living in a world governed by far right extremists or theocrats would be a nightmare. I want the Federal system to work and people to get off of each others backs more often. I want to know where money goes and which politicians are bought and sold on which issues and by whom. Things are better than they've ever been, but we are more aware of how bad they were and could be, so the fever has hit to make sure that we still move in a more open direction. Guns are the great equalizer and powerful guns give otherwise helpless citizens a bargaining chip for when their elected officials give up on the theater of democracy. We must be considered by the elite who govern us. They must know that we have the power to lobby, vote and, if necessary, take the reins back. This sounds radical, but this nation was founded in that way. This is a radical experiment.

[Lemur]

The NRA gets the vast majority of its money from manufacturers, not members. Hence its ability to sell cut-rate memberships for months on end. Hence its willingness to go against the will of its members, 74% of whom are in favor of universal background checks.

ICSD, if you think the NRA is working for you, you are deluded. You are one of the 90% of Americans and 74% of NRA members in favor of universal background checks. The fact that you're now reversing yourself on a slim talking point is ... revealing.

On the interesting side, I do believe the NRA and its boot-licking minions in the Republican party have overreached. This will have consequences.

-edit-

Doing a little more reading, looks like the relationship between the NRA and manufacturers is more complicated than I'm making it out to be. Nevertheless, the central point stands: The NRA does not represent its members, but rather a fringe-right extremist policy underwritten by manufacturers, not dues-paying members. Like Republican congressmen in gerrymandered states, the NRA only fears challenges from the right. The 90% of Americans who favor universal background checks are just background noise to these extremists. And talking-point parroting drama enthusiasts like ICSD are what Stalin would call "useful idiots."

The companies that make and market firearms might prefer a softer tone, but they rarely complain publicly about NRA fear mongering because it’s been so good for business. Corporate donations to the NRA, which together with its affiliates has annual revenue of $250 million, have risen during the past decade, a period when the organization has taken increasingly absolutist positions. Still, it’s not the industry that muscles the NRA.

“NRA leadership worries about two things above all else: perpetuating controversy to stimulate fundraising from individual members and protecting its right flank from the real crazies,” says Richard Feldman, author of a feisty 2007 memoir, Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist. Feldman has worked in various capacities for both the NRA and the industry. “The idea that the NRA follows orders from the gun companies is a joke,” he says. “If anything, it’s the other way around.” [...]

Gun companies defer to the NRA for two main reasons: First, there’s intimidation. The lobby group has incited potentially ruinous consumer boycotts against firearm makers that fail to follow the NRA line with sufficient zeal. Second, regardless of some executives’ concerns about civil discourse, gun companies benefit financially from the NRA’s hype. Alarms about imminent gun confiscation—an NRA staple, despite its implausibility—reliably send firearm owners back to retail counters. Sales are booming. Mossberg is running three shifts a day. “Demand,” Bartozzi says, “is very strong.”

[ICantSpellDawg]

Double post