Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > The Soapbox

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-19-2013, 11:25   #46
Utah Bob
Quiet Professional
 
Utah Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 11 miles from Dove Creek, Colorady
Posts: 3,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdiver View Post
I just posted this on Governor Hickenlooper's FB "wall".



What good it'll do, I have no idea. I have no clue if he reads the stuff posted on his FB wall or if he even cares. But Hickenlooper is going to open a whole new kettle of fish if he signs these bills into law. The revenue that is going to be lost will most definitely lead to this state becoming bankrupt .... much like California is now.
Maybe they plan to make it up with the marijuana revenues.

'Course, they haven't figured out how to tax it yet. But they're working hard on it. It's just hard to focus when you're so high Dude.
__________________
"...But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive."
Shakespeare - Henry V
Lazy Bob Ranch
Utah Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 11:57   #47
TOMAHAWK9521
Quiet Professional
 
TOMAHAWK9521's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by nousdefions View Post
Evidently, Joe Salad Bar wants women to go use their wonder-twin powers and transform into a sea cucumber by covering themselves in their own bodily fluids in order to stave off an attack.

Come to think of it, vomiting, urinating on one's self and passing gas are all symptoms of a successful/rigorous night of hard drinking. I doubt any woman could employ such biological countermeasures on command without a lot of practice, and I imagine that would incur some serious physiological damage.
__________________
"It is a brave act of valor to condemn death, but where life is more terrible than death, it is then the truest valor to dare to live." -Sir Thomas Browne (1605-1682)
TOMAHAWK9521 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 16:39   #48
tonyz
Area Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 4,792
I sure hope this is not just wishful thinking - keep up the good work.

GUN CONTROL BACKTRACK: As Salazar Fallout Mushrooms, Hick Expresses Doubt About High Capacity Magazine Ban

Published on February 20, 2013 by ColoradoPeakPolitics

http://coloradopeakpolitics.com/2013...-magazine-ban/
__________________
The function of wisdom is to discriminate between good and evil.

Marcus Tullius Cicero
tonyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 16:45   #49
Congo336
Quiet Professional
 
Congo336's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 22
As most who hang around this site know, the US Constitution’s 2nd Amendment implies that “We the People” have a God-given Right, that will not be infringed, to have and maintain weapons and equipment comparable to the standing armies of the world in order to be prepared to defend our homeland against any attack from a foreign or domestic threat.

The complete historical record goes on to explain that a well regulated militia is not only acceptable, it is required. What generally doesn’t get taught or addressed in any debate is that “in context” to the times the documents were drafted and ratified, a militia was considered to be all men, from 16 to 60, capable of being in combat to protect their nation, families, and lands. “Well regulated” meant that they were required to know how to use the weapons (well trained) but it didn’t stipulate that they must be well trained first, simply that they should have the weapons and be trained.

Preachin to the choir again.

Meanwhile, if we keep going down this rabbit hole in Colorado thanks to our ever-growing stock of transplants from the coastal regions, I project the next move for the Progs will be to get prostitution legalized so that all those hippies coming to CO for a Rocky Mountain High vacation can get laid by something more exciting than a goat while they are here. Think of the tax revenue that would grow to hand out to even more Progs.
__________________
Sons of the American Revolution: We descendants of the heroes of the American Revolution who, by their sacrifices, established the United States of America, reaffirm our faith in the principles of liberty and our Constitutional Republic, and solemnly pledge ourselves to defend them against every foe.
Congo336 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 17:54   #50
Chaplain Scott
Asset
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: RURAL, south central Montana
Posts: 39
While I do not have a tin foil hat on, when I sit back and look at the absolute politcal craziness that seems to be sweeping across our nation like a plague of stupid thinking, it really feels rather sobering.
Chaplain Scott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 17:06   #51
MR2
Quiet Professional
 
MR2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 3,997
VICTIMS SPEAK: Columbine Survivor Authors Anti-Gun Control Letter to Obama

When advocating for further gun controls, President Obama and his allies have often used children from Sandy Hook elementary or the Aurora shooting as examples. But, Columbine, which also happened right here in Colorado, was one of the first and most horrific school shootings in our country, and one of its survivors is speaking out against President Obama’s gun control agenda that’s being foisted on state governments nationwide.

Evan Todd, who was injured in Columbine and has since recovered, sent an open letter to President Obama yesterday outlining why he disagrees with the President. An excerpt pertaining to magazine round limits from his letter reads:
Quote:
Virginia Tech was the site of the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. Seung-Hui Cho used two of the smallest caliber hand guns manufactured and a handful of ten round magazines. There are no substantial facts that prove that limited magazines would make any difference at all. Second, this is just another law that endangers law-abiding citizens. I’ve heard you ask, “why does someone need 30 bullets to kill a deer?”

Let me ask you this: Why would you prefer criminals to have the ability to out-gun law-abiding citizens? Under this policy, criminals will still have their 30-round magazines, but the average American will not. Whose side are you on?
The same could be asked of Colorado’s legislators who voted for four pieces of gun control legislation that would limit Coloradans’ ability to protect themselves. Whose side are you on?
__________________
The two most powerful warriors are patience and time - Leo Tolstoy

It's Never Crowded Along the Extra Mile - Wayne Dyer


WOKE = Willfully Overlooking Known Evil
MR2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 17:30   #52
longrange1947
Quiet Professional
 
longrange1947's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fayetteville NC
Posts: 3,533
Congo stated -
Quote:
“Well regulated” meant that they were required to know how to use the weapons (well trained)
Not really, well means completely, and regulated means controlled, thus a completely controlled militia versus an out of control militia.

This was to keep "War Lords" from forming militias and taking over parts of the country. This has nothing to do with arming the militia and everything to do with arming the civilian to control the militia. The militia is armed in the body of the Constitution. No need for an amendment.

Check Article 1, Section 8 "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia,"

Watch the militia stuff, it ends at a fairly early age, by your definition they can take my arms, not happening.
__________________
Hold Hard guys

Rick B.

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom is knowing it is great on a hamburger but not so great sticking one up your ass.

Author - Richard.

Experience is what you get right after you need it.

Author unknown.
longrange1947 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 19:40   #53
Razor
Quiet Professional
 
Razor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 4,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR2 View Post
But, Columbine, which also happened right here in Colorado, was one of the first and most horrific school shootings in our country...
And perpetrated in the middle of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, with 10rd magazines no less--a fact I reminded my Colorado senators about recently. Sadly, I doubt it matters to the Dem senators that currently hold a majority and are expected to toe the party line.
Razor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 23:51   #54
Sdiver
Area Commander
 
Sdiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Black Hills of SD
Posts: 5,917
If we could get those three Dem votes, than this thing could hopefully die right here. I've read somewhere there are five of six Dem state Senators that are sitting on the fence about this, especially one whose district has Magpul in it.

What I found interesting is the last paragraph in this story. I had heard/read something about this happening elsewhere, but it's a new one on my that it's being proposed here in Colorado.

So if it passes we could go after alcohol companies and car makers, also liquor stores and car dealerships for the countless drunk drivers on the roads ???

Quote:
Democratic gun bills move to Senate where testimony will be heard first week of March


Democratic gun bills that passed through the House earlier this week now move to the Senate where committees will hear testimony on each measure beginning the first week of March.

Democratic gun bills move on to the Senate.

The bills consist of:

• Limiting gun ammunition magazines to 15 rounds.
• Requiring background checks for all gun transactions.
• Ban concealed weapons on college campuses.
• Impose a fee for gun buyers to cover the cost of their background checks.

Each of the measures were debated in a marathon floor session, and in several hours of testimony in committee hearings, before passing through the House where Democrats hold a 37-28 edge. In the Senate, Democrats hold a 20-15 advantage and Republicans need three Democratic “no” votes to spike a bill.

In coming weeks, Democrats plan to unveil additional gun legislation that includes a Senate bill that would hold manufacturers and sellers of assault-style weapons liable for any harm inflicted with the firearm.
__________________
Non Sibi Sed Suis
_____________________________________________
It's Good To Be Da King !!!! Just ask NDD !!!!
Sdiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:41   #55
Hand
Guerrilla Chief
 
Hand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdiver View Post
So if it passes we could go after alcohol companies and car makers, also liquor stores and car dealerships for the countless drunk drivers on the roads ???
That's actually an interesting angle. If pursued, gun manufacturers could take the stance that their civilian version weapons are made for hunting, and that any other use of their civilian weapons would negate any potential liability on the gun mfg's part.

I believe this would shift the argument away from 2nd amendment based angles.

Note: I think that this idea is patently stupid, but given the completely unexpected position that we are in as a country over the issue of guns at the moment *shrug*
Hand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 11:04   #56
Utah Bob
Quiet Professional
 
Utah Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 11 miles from Dove Creek, Colorady
Posts: 3,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor View Post
And perpetrated in the middle of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, with 10rd magazines no less--a fact I reminded my Colorado senators about recently. Sadly, I doubt it matters to the Dem senators that currently hold a majority and are expected to toe the party line.
Some of these Dems from rural counties are getting a lot of letters from their gun owning constituents. All is not lost..yet.
If this crap passes they may not hold a majority AFTER THE NEXT ELECTION!
__________________
"...But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive."
Shakespeare - Henry V
Lazy Bob Ranch
Utah Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 20:18   #57
GratefulCitizen
Area Commander
 
GratefulCitizen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Page/Lake Powell, Arizona
Posts: 3,346
Magpul deal posted on Facebook.
Don't know if it's true.

http://i.imgur.com/nZIfh5O.jpg
__________________
__________________
Waiting for the perfect moment is a fruitless endeavor.
Make a decision, and then make it the right one through your actions.
"Whoever watches the wind will not plant; whoever looks at the clouds will not reap." -Ecclesiastes 11:4 (NIV)
GratefulCitizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 22:54   #58
Utah Bob
Quiet Professional
 
Utah Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 11 miles from Dove Creek, Colorady
Posts: 3,924
An idiot's opinion
__________________
"...But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive."
Shakespeare - Henry V
Lazy Bob Ranch
Utah Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 01:22   #59
Sdiver
Area Commander
 
Sdiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Black Hills of SD
Posts: 5,917
Well, here's a "message" put out on Gov. Hickenlooper's FB page today.

I "like" how this "letter" patronizes us. "Your voices ARE being heard, but the Governor is going to sign these bills into law anyway."



Quote:
Thank you for your FB posts about the various gun bills being debated by the General Assembly. Given the volume of comments, there is no way we can respond to each of you. But rest assured, your comments are being read and your voices are being heard.
We are all working to find reasonable compromises that balance Second Amendment rights with a goal everyone shares: to keep more guns out of the hands of dangerous people. We are also working with lawmakers on a plan to strengthen Colorado’s mental health system. We know no single plan -- or law -- can stop bad things from happening to good people. But we want to make every effort to get the right care to those who need it at the earliest possible opportunity.
Regarding legislation pending before the General Assembly now, the governor has said he will sign:
-- Universal background checks for all gun purchases, including private sales and transfers (HB 1229).
-- Requiring gun purchasers to pay a reasonable fee for their background checks. (HB 1228)
-- A high-capacity gun magazine limit (HB 1224).
-- We are still reviewing legislation allowing restrictions on carrying concealed weapons on college campuses (HB 1226). And we will review the liability bill introduced Feb. 27 in the Colorado Senate.
We know all of these issues are controversial. We also know everyone is aware of the deplorable threats made against a state lawmaker who is sponsoring gun legislation. Those kinds of threats have no place in our democracy. We don’t expect everyone who posts here to agree with us or with each other. But at the very least we hope for a civil debate and a free exchange of ideas. So keep posting, and we’ll keep listening.
~ Governor’s Office
Here is MY response to this "response".

Quote:
To the author of this "response from the Governor's Office":

I just "love" how you patronize the majority of us who feel that these four anti 2nd Amendment of the United States as well as Article II; Section 13 of the Constitution of the State of Colorado, bills, WILL be signed into law by Governor Hickenlooper, even though, "Our Voices are being heard". As I stated before Governor, by signing into law these four bills, it will "Show your hand on who it is you are working for." It certainly isn't the people of Colorado. It most resoundingly is, the current Presidential Administration in Washington D.C.

Also I would like to point out, that in response to the "deplorable threats made against a state lawmaker who is sponsoring gun legislation.", you stated, "Those kinds of threats have no place in our democracy."

The last time I checked, we live in a REPUBLIC ...... NOT a democracy.

You may have been sick the day they taught the difference between a Republic and a Democracy, so let me "enlighten" you ... (because from where I'm sitting, you do need more LIGHT !!!!)

http://www.garymcleod.org/republic.htm

Once again Governor Hickenlooper, you and your "office" have "tipped your hand" on just who it is you ARE working for, and just who it is you ARE representing.
Colorado Constitution ..... http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/doit/arc...ution/1876.pdf

Link I put up about difference between Republic and Democracy .... http://www.garymcleod.org/republic.htm


This I feel, will fall on deaf ears too.
__________________
Non Sibi Sed Suis
_____________________________________________
It's Good To Be Da King !!!! Just ask NDD !!!!

Last edited by Sdiver; 02-28-2013 at 02:25. Reason: Added my response
Sdiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 07:38   #60
Bill Harsey
Bladesmith to the Quiet Professionals
 
Bill Harsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon, Land of the Silver Grey Sunsets
Posts: 3,879
Well stated Sdiver.
I'm hoping for the best in Colorado.

In the last day or so Oregon has proposed new laws surrounding firearms that might make Colorado seem reasonable.

Edited to add:
From the NRA Legislative Alert,

Senate Bill 758, sponsored by “F-rated” state senators Jackie Dingfelder (D-23) and Ginny Burdick (D-18) and state Representative Dembrow (D-45), would require that anyone who owns firearms that are located in Oregon possess discriminatory liability insurance for their firearms.

This egregious bill requires that law-abiding gun owners keep evidence of their coverage with them or available for “immediate inspection at all times during which the person uses, carries, transports, stores or otherwise has access to the firearm.” Even more outrageous is the $10,000 civil penalty for EACH firearm not covered by this absurd liability insurance mandate.

Under SB 758, a person cannot sell or transfer firearms or ammunition to another person without verifying that they also have firearm liability insurance. The minimum amount of liability held must be $250,000 payable to each person physically injured or killed, and to each person whose property is damaged by the discharge of a covered firearm, and $100,000 for each person that is injured in “any way” by the discharge of a covered firearm.

This legislation is a clear affront to law-abiding gun owners—one is not required to carry insurance to exercise any other constitutional right. It is also economically discriminatory—insurance is expensive and such a mandate could make firearm ownership unattainable for thousands of law-abiding Oregon residents.

Currently, no other state has a firearm liability insurance law. Misguided legislators behind this effort would subject their constituents and tens of thousands of law-abiding Oregonians to a discriminatory and burdensome law that especially penalizes those who might not be able to afford such insurance.

While SB 758 has not yet been referred to a committee, please contact your state Senator and urge him or her to oppose SB 758. You can find your state Senator and his or her contact information by clicking here.

Senate Bill 760, also sponsored by Senator Dingfelder, would require that a person make a “good faith effort to retreat” before using physical force against an attacker. SB 760 is also awaiting a committee assignment.

Senate Bill 796, sponsored by “F-rated” state Senator Floyd Prozanski, would require that applicants for CHLs perform a live fire demonstration and receive a score of at least 70 percent on a firing range test. SB 796 has not yet been referred to a committee.

House Bill 3114, sponsored by the House Higher Education and Workforce Development Committee, would authorize public universities, the Oregon Health and Science University, or community college districts to prohibit possession of firearms on campus, including by those who possess a valid CHL. HB 3114 has not yet been assigned to a committee.

House Bill 3413, sponsored by state Representative Alissa Keny-Guyer (D-46) and three others, would create a crime of endangering a minor by allowing access to a firearm, which would be punishable by a maximum imprisonment for one year, a $6,250 fine, or both. HB 3413 would also prohibit the transfer of a firearm to anyone convicted of this new crime for a five-year period. This bill has not yet been referred to a committee.

The following bills have been sponsored by the Senate Judiciary Committee but have not yet been assigned to a committee:

Senate Bill 699 would ban concealed handgun license (CHL) holders from carrying in the state Capitol, unless they receive written permission from the Legislative Administrator.

Senate Bill 700 would require that all private firearm transfers, except those between immediate family members, be subject to a criminal background check. These background checks would either have to be conducted directly through the Department of State Police or a through a licensed gun dealer, who may charge an unspecified fee. What’s more, the Department of State Police would be required to maintain the background information they obtain for a period of five years!

Oregon currently has strong background check requirements in place. Furthermore, it is already a federal felony for any private person to sell, trade, give, lend, rent or transfer a gun to a person they know or should have known is not legally allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. It should be noted that every year, tens of thousands of people fail to pass the background checks required for firearm purchases, yet only a small fraction are prosecuted for providing false information. Before lawmakers consider passing more onerous rules and regulations, they should start enforcing the laws that are currently on the books.

Those who urge passage of so-called “universal background checks” fail to grasp the fundamental truth that this will only affect law-abiding citizens and not criminals. Criminals do not obey the law in the first place. For more information on restrictions on private transfers, please click here.

Please contact members of the Senate Judiciary Committee TODAY and respectfully express your opposition to SB 699 and SB 700. Contact information for members of this Committee is provided below.

On a positive note, your calls and e-mails are working! State Representative Mitch Greenlick (D-33), sponsor of House Bill 3200, the outrageous ban on commonly owned firearms and magazines, is backing off from his own bill. He recently admitted to local reporters that his extreme anti-gun bill went too far in a variety of ways. To see our previous report on HB 3200, click here. We have also heard reports that Senator Floyd Prozanski, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, would refuse to hear this bill. However, as his introduction of SB 796 illustrates, Senator Prozanski’s anti-gun beliefs are still alive and well.

Last edited by Bill Harsey; 02-28-2013 at 07:54.
Bill Harsey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:26.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies