Can you point me to the statute? The only sites that are repeating this are right wing blogs etc, like townhall, cnsnews, etc. And one other site indicates that Aurora's laws are preempted by Colorado's permissive concelaed carry laws. Haven't really bothered to look into this myself. Edit - here's another pro- Concealed Carry site that claims that Aurora's laws are preempted by Colorado's CC laws. http://www.opencarry.org/co.html
You can explain it to me but as I understand it, it may or may not be enforceable, but they have a ban. Denver does as well. http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/opinions/2004/04SA396and05SA22.pdf I know people that still don't accept Texas' new definition of "traveling" which allows carrying a handgun in your car without a CHL. http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/46.15.00.html
I'm interested in hearing your opinion on the laws, but I've been saying all along this isn't a case for concealed carry. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=7066773&postcount=555 If you weren't in the first row this was pretty much Bear Cavalry. but just realize we were both confused on the law and the average joe will go with better safe than sorry when it comes to felony gun charges.
<iframe src='http://widget.newsinc.com/single.html?WID=2&VID=23751906&freewheel=69016&sitesection=breitbartprivate' height='320' width='425' scrolling='no' frameborder='0' marginwidth='0' marginheight='0'></iframe>
I completely agree with what your saying. I just don't agree with the logic of giving up rights because its futile and the people are too weak to do anything anyway. The purpose of the right is to give yourself a fighting chance if needed for self defense or against a government that takes your rights, because was what was happening then. Of course the government is infinitely more powerful than the people but its made of the people. And so for that reason it is not as powerful as some think.
This is ****ing pathetic. Something like this and they can't even create a system to track this kind of purchases? The system is ****ing r****ded. They need to rethink on how people purchases these type of firearms. To be able to purchase a new system is needed. Every time a person need to purchase an item(s), they must go to the police station first to get approval before they could purchase anything. It is to make sure to have their background check and question and again to double check what the person history and their purchases. It's pretty simple, just like you need a prescriptions from a doctor to purchase certain medication.
If people continue to argue against gun control under the premise that we need guns to protect ourselves from the government, there's no way in hell you'll be able to legislate a system that tracks gun purchases by that same government.
This is the ideal time to talk about gun violence and how to curb it as is done in other countries. We need to quit sacrificing innocents to the gun lobby. Saying now is not the time, wait till the victims and their families grieve, or OMG don't politicize the issue now and let's just agree to all share sadness at the latest massacre is a well worn tactic of the NRA/gun lobby to keep the status quo. Don't fall for it.
Northside, is it just me or do those who want guns abolished have vivid imaginations? If we just get rid of legal guns, all senseless killings will end and we will have a world full of puppies and cotton candy for all. My point (which was missed by many) was that if there were no legal guns, the psychos would find another tool for their murder. Anybody who thinks that they couldn't just make explosives need to remember that the shooters apartment was booby trapped with...wait for it...explosives. Also, tell me when the last time you had to sign for bleach or other cleaning products...you know, the kind with ammonia and chlorine.
In this case, it would not have mattered. With the armor he was wearing, it would have had to have been a head shot to stop the guy.
Let's do it how it is done in Switzerland. They have miniscule gun violence and an assault rifle in every household.
I agree, let's do it their way. All of you please report for training ASAP. Switzerland does not have a standing army, instead opting for a peoples Militia to defend their country. The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 30 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. Due to this fact, the personal weapon of militia is kept at home as part of the military obligations. Switzerland has one of the highest militia gun ownership rates in the world. wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
When did I ever imply this? People who want gun rights abolished often think in terms of pure rational terms. I see it in small incremental decreases in violent crime rates, for example. I think this is your imagination kicking in again. Not everybody can imagine 50 hypothetical situations where you can John Wayne it. Sure, mass killers will find less effective and more easily tracked ways of killing people. And that is the whole point. There's a reason why people go on mass murder rampages with guns, and not pickup trucks. Guns are easier, both from a tracking perspective, and from a logistical perspective. You make it that much harder for a murderer to get any, and then you save more in cost than the benefits of the rule of gun in the balence of powers---judiciary, legislative, executive, and bro, i got guns, you have to listen to me, and you can never fire at us!
Then the NRA and the moron legislators need to stop perpetrating the myth every time there's a mass shooting by announcing that a concealed (or open) carrier could have/would have stopped it. I wouldn't be surprised if somebody in that theater actually was packing, lawfully or not, and did what 99% of us civilians would have, dive for cover and then GTFO. The myth of the armed citizen interrupting a rampage and saving lives remains a myth until it actually happens, and it's pretty irresponsible to use it the way the gun lobby does as a consequence.
Assault rifles need to be illegal to purchase. I own a couple pistols and have no problem with people owning those for home defense, or shotguns and rifles for hunting. Assault rifles have no purpose in American homes (or any homes for that matter).
Really can't conceive of a real defense of owning assault rifles. For those thinking of defense from the government or invading armies, did you drink tap water in the last month? Whoops, you easily could have been owned by the government and now dead. Anyway, I wonder if we could just require mental health check-ups for anyone buying lots of ammo and semi-automatics or higher? Kind of like you need an advanced license to drive an 18-wheeler. (Or don't you?) Would anyone oppose that? All gun arguments aside, I think we can agree it was way to easy for this nut job grad student to assemble this pile of weaponry.
My buddy, whose company owns a gun distributorship and is now hopelessly biased in favor for financial reasons, could only come up with the rationale that "well semi-automatic handguns are just as dangerous as AR-15's..." When that's your best argument...
I keep hearing the argument that a gun protects you. Of the people who own a gun how many of you actually had to use it in self defense? You will not believe it but there are a lot of countries where almost nobody has a gun, and the people are actually safe there. I know, it is shocking news The terrible gun laws in the US are one of the reasons my wife and I would never move to the US.
