Sat Mar 9, 2013, 08:29 AM
Robb (38,343 posts)
Colorado gun bills: Senate gives nod to magazine ammo limit after six hour debate
Source: Daily Camera
Coloradans who want to buy ammunition magazines could be limited to 15 rounds under a measure lawmakers in the state Senate gave initial approval to Friday night. The measure now heads to a final floor vote on Monday — moving it a step closer to being signed into law by Gov. John Hickenlooper, who has indicated his support of the legislation. House Bill 1224 passed through the House chamber by a 34-31 margin in February, and was originally sponsored by state Rep. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora. Read more: http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_22746922/colorado-gun-bills-limits-ammunition-magazines-be-debated?source=most_viewed Excellent night for Colorado Democrats, who are showing the country what you do with a majority! 
Last night's gun bills passed: • Senate Bill 197 - Ban on guns for domestic abusers: Advances in Senate • Senate Bill 195 - Bans online concealed carry certification: Advances in Senate • House Bill 1229 - Universal background checks (including private sales): Advances in Senate • House Bill 1228 - Requires gun buyers to pay their own background check fees: Advances in Senate • House Bill 1224 - Limits on Magazine Size (15 rounds, adios Magpul): Advances in Senate
|
74 replies, 4021 views
 74 replies |
Author | Time | Post |
 Colorado gun bills: Senate gives nod to magazine ammo limit after six hour debate (Original post) |
Robb | Mar 9 | OP |
| Blandocyte | Mar 9 | #1 | |
| ChiTownChavista | Mar 10 | #57 | |
| TheCowsCameHome | Mar 9 | #2 | |
| denverbill | Mar 9 | #3 | |
| Robb | Mar 9 | #4 | |
| joshcryer | Mar 9 | #5 | |
| nikto | Mar 9 | #6 | |
| Peter cotton | Mar 9 | #10 | |
| Scuba | Mar 9 | #13 | |
| Peter cotton | Mar 9 | #15 | |
| Scuba | Mar 9 | #16 | |
| The Magistrate | Mar 9 | #28 | |
| Peter cotton | Mar 9 | #29 | |
| nikto | Mar 9 | #39 | |
| nikto | Mar 9 | #37 | |
| Dr_Scholl | Mar 9 | #7 | |
| nikto | Mar 9 | #9 | |
| Robb | Mar 9 | #12 | |
| Dr_Scholl | Mar 9 | #17 | |
| Robb | Mar 9 | #19 | |
| Lurks Often | Mar 9 | #22 | |
| Bjorn Against | Mar 9 | #14 | |
| Robb | Mar 9 | #21 | |
| Fat Bastard | Mar 9 | #23 | |
| hack89 | Mar 9 | #34 | |
| Bjorn Against | Mar 9 | #35 | |
| hack89 | Mar 9 | #36 | |
| primavera | Mar 9 | #33 | |
| Peter cotton | Mar 9 | #8 | |
| Robb | Mar 9 | #11 | |
| Paladin | Mar 9 | #18 | |
| Robb | Mar 9 | #20 | |
| Paladin | Mar 9 | #24 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 9 | #42 | |
| Paladin | Mar 10 | #47 | |
| xtraxritical | Mar 9 | #25 | |
| Duckhunter935 | Mar 9 | #27 | |
| The Magistrate | Mar 9 | #26 | |
| L0oniX | Mar 9 | #30 | |
| Peter cotton | Mar 9 | #31 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 9 | #32 | |
| hack89 | Mar 9 | #38 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 9 | #41 | |
| hack89 | Mar 9 | #43 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 9 | #45 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #46 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #48 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #50 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #51 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #53 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #54 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #55 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #56 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #60 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #61 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #62 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #63 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #66 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #67 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #68 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #70 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #69 | |
| hack89 | Mar 10 | #71 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #72 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #58 | |
| Doctor_J | Mar 9 | #40 | |
| lonestarnot | Mar 9 | #44 | |
| Auntie Bush | Mar 10 | #49 | |
| ZOB | Mar 10 | #52 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #59 | |
| ZOB | Mar 10 | #64 | |
| apocalypsehow | Mar 10 | #65 | |
| pasto76 | Mar 10 | #73 | |
| ZOB | Mar 10 | #74 |
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 08:40 AM
1. Similarly, Guns & Ammo magazine will be limited to 15 pages.
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 08:50 AM
denverbill (10,514 posts)
3. Well, we still have to wait to see what our 'Democratic' governor will do.
Response to denverbill (Reply #3)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 08:52 AM
Robb (38,343 posts)
4. "Hick? Good to talk to ya, it's Joe Biden. How ya doing?"
|
I'm not worried.
 |
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:25 AM
6. This little baby will still be legal...
|
Last edited Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:27 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2) The Bersa Thunder Plus---A good firearm for a Liberal--Modest, but effective.
(15-shot magazine) [link:http://www.bersa.com/bersa-firearms/thunder-plus.html| |
Response to nikto (Reply #6)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:38 AM
10. Within such a limitation, I prefer the .40 Glock 22.
(Also uses 15 shot magazines) |
Response to nikto (Reply #6)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:43 AM
Scuba (26,771 posts)
13. Strong evidence that the Colorado magazine limits aren't stringent enough.
Response to Scuba (Reply #13)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:52 AM
15. How stringent should it be?
|
The strictest state law in the country (NY) allows 7 round magazines, which means you can have a fully-loaded Colt 1911:
What limit do you propose? |
Response to Peter cotton (Reply #15)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 10:01 AM
Scuba (26,771 posts)
16. Selfishly, seven, as I like my Gov't Model.
Response to Peter cotton (Reply #15)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 02:16 PM
The Magistrate (80,533 posts)
28. Just Cannot Keep That Stash Of Gun Porn To Yourself, Fella, Can You?
Response to The Magistrate (Reply #28)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 03:14 PM
29. Aw, you didn't call me "Sir". I'm crushed.
|
"Gun porn"? What an absurd concept.
But when it is guns, you just whip it out, at the slightest hint of an opportunity for display.... |
Response to Peter cotton (Reply #29)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 07:20 PM
39. Guitars, grass and guns---A great combo for Progressive-Liberals.
|
Last edited Sat Mar 9, 2013, 07:24 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2) |
Response to Dr_Scholl (Reply #7)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:36 AM
9. Yes, it looks like...
|
Last edited Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:39 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2) |
Response to Dr_Scholl (Reply #7)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:39 AM
Robb (38,343 posts)
12. Gun cuddlers haz sadz.
|
Team NRA worked so hard against this useless bill.
 |
Response to Robb (Reply #19)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 11:09 AM
22. Not in Virgina, at least not this year n/t
Response to Dr_Scholl (Reply #7)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:50 AM
14. Jared Loughner was stopped while changing his clip
Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #14)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 10:25 AM
Robb (38,343 posts)
21. These measures are also overwhelmingly popular in Colorado.
Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #14)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 04:32 PM
34. The Va Tech shooter used standard mags
Response to hack89 (Reply #34)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 04:42 PM
35. You are correct, that is why limiting magazine size is not nearly enough
Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #35)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 05:42 PM
36. It is unlikely you will be able to get more
Response to Peter cotton (Reply #8)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:38 AM
Robb (38,343 posts)
11. With respect, Magpul can fuck themselves.
Response to Peter cotton (Reply #8)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 10:12 AM
Paladin (8,693 posts)
18. Were You This Gleeful About Box Cutters After 9/11?
Response to Paladin (Reply #18)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 10:22 AM
Robb (38,343 posts)
20. The Glib Sociopath paradigm.
 |
Response to Robb (Reply #20)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 12:23 PM
Paladin (8,693 posts)
24. I Am Convinced That Tom Tomorrow Monitors DU Gun Threads.
Response to Paladin (Reply #24)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:54 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
42. +1000. I've seen arguments from our "pro gun progressives"* and "RKBA enthusiasts" down in the
|
Gungeon make arguments that eerily mirror that feller in those cartoon panels...
*(  )
|
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #42)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 09:51 AM
Paladin (8,693 posts)
47. Me too. Over and over.... (nt)
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 02:00 PM
xtraxritical (2,978 posts)
25. This thread has been hijacked by gun nuts and should be deleted or locked or whatever DU does.
 |
Response to xtraxritical (Reply #25)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 02:10 PM
Duckhunter935 (1,291 posts)
27. lets just censor
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 02:09 PM
The Magistrate (80,533 posts)
26. Good, Sir
|
Last edited Sat Mar 9, 2013, 02:17 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 03:19 PM
L0oniX (17,343 posts)
30. Woop ...now S&W and Glock get to sell replacement 15 round magazines. Nice!
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 03:55 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
32. Good first start. More sensible gun regulation is coming nationwide. Kick, Rec.
 |
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #32)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 07:14 PM
38. Everything up to an AWB has good chance
Response to hack89 (Reply #38)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:36 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
41. I'm just impressed you haven't put me on *ignore* yet: nearly every one of your Gungeon pals
|
have decided that the heat's too hot in the gun debate kitchen when 'ole apoc's around, and 32 of them - 32! - currently have me on ignore. The day Meta closed that number fell to 31 for some reason, but as of today it's right back up to 32.
*My* ignore list, OTOH, remains barren. 
Now, I know I'm going to get the predictable reply, "they've decided it's a waste of time arguing with you; you offer nothing in the debate; blah, blah, blah," anything other than the plain truth, i.e., they simply can't handle debating a poster who runs circles around them consistently. Fine: I really only post this reply to acknowledge that you are nearly alone among the Gungeoneers who has decided it's better to continue to fight for your viewpoint, rather than run for the hills.   
 
|
Response to hack89 (Reply #43)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 11:08 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
45. "I do not share your high opinion of yourself" - Sure: you're still here, "debating," despite the
|
fact that the data and the evidence are rarely - if ever - on the "RKBA" side. So even though you are consistently wrong you are at least consistently up for a discussion. That was rather the point of my reply above.
" I don't mind you because the gun rights movement benefits from people like you." Uh-huh. That's why 32 - 32! - of your pals from the Gungeon have put me on *ignore*, huh? They just can't stand all that help I've been giving 'em....
Fun stuff. |
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #45)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 09:33 AM
46. I doubt they are ignoring you because you are right
Response to hack89 (Reply #46)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 02:16 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
48. We've already been over this; but such a reply was predictable (and *predicted*) as the day is long:
|
"Now, I know I'm going to get the predictable reply, "they've decided it's a waste of time arguing with you; you offer nothing in the debate; blah, blah, blah," anything other than the plain truth, i.e., they simply can't handle debating a poster who runs circles around them consistently."
Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014419873#post41 No, the fact of the matter is they simply cannot handle debate with a poster who constantly & consistently brings facts they cannot refute. We can go round & round on this silly circle, but the point of my first reply was not to argue about why they've run off to the proverbial hills using the *ignore* button, but that they have, while you have not. Indeed, I even inserted the disclaimer above in that very first reply. But that you insist on taking off on that predictable tangent is why internet "discussion" so often fails: you want to argue that the reason your pals have fled and are hiding behind the *ignore* button is not because I could possibly be right in any way, shape or form, but because I'm wrong in some fashion. And you even manage to insert a personal attack into your absurd analysis: "it has more to do with your rudeness, insults and immaturity" So, what's starts out as an attempt to compliment you for sticking around to talk while the rest of your buddies have run off quickly devolves into an attempt on your part to defend them - and, hence, your dubious cause - by indulging in pedestrian personal attacks. You can't just accept the observation that they're gone and you're not and move on: it's gotta be another opportunity to snark and posture and, well, engage in "rudeness, insults, and immaturity." Funny stuff. 
The anonymous internet discussion board literally is the place of the never-ending push on open doors.
|
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #48)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 03:21 PM
50. So you are winning because lots of people have you on ignore?
Response to hack89 (Reply #50)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 03:28 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
51. Now the rhetorical question gambit. Good talking with yah. Tell your Gungeon pals I said
 *
*(Those not yet PPR'd, of course. Which narrows the list considerably...   )
|
Response to hack89 (Reply #53)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:13 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
54. You know no such thing, as no one has "folded." I complimented you on your refusal (so far)
|
to put me on *ignore* like all of your Gungeon pals have, and you took the opportunity of that compliment to (1) launch personal attacks and (2) attempt to change the subject.
My reply above was merely indicating that that part of the conversation was, predictably, over, with your attempt to ask rhetorical questions that have nothing to do with my original reply. Is there anything else you wish to discuss?  |
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #54)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:15 PM
55. No - your entire point is that you are winning because so many have you on ignore.
Response to hack89 (Reply #55)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:18 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
56. Nope - my "point" was that all of your Gungeon pals had run off, while you stuck around.
|
As there was no "flaw" in any "logic," ergo, it was impossible for you to have pointed it out.
Again: is there anything else you wish to discuss? |
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #56)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:44 PM
60. Yet all your pro-gun control pals have also run off
Response to hack89 (Reply #60)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:48 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
61. As 99.9% of DU is pro sensible gun legislation, FIVE THOUSAND DU'ers could have you on *ignore*
|
Last edited Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:51 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) and it still wouldn't be percentage-wise equivalent to your pals who've fled the field: only a tiny minority of DU'ers peddle or hold the right-wing pro-NRA viewpoint on guns, after all. 32 makes up about the entire core of the Gungeon "regulars."
Sorry, no dice: false equivalences and phony analogies just don't cut it.
Edit: typo. |
Response to hack89 (Reply #62)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:51 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
63. That's nice. Enjoy your stay at DU. n/t.
Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #63)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:53 PM
66. Considering I have been here three years longer than you
Response to hack89 (Reply #66)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:54 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
67. That's nice. Enjoy your stay at DU. n/t.
Response to hack89 (Reply #68)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:56 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
70. Sure. n/t.
Response to hack89 (Reply #66)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:55 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
69. Addendum: *Placeholder* reply for Bookmarked thread, re: future reference. n/t.
Response to hack89 (Reply #71)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 07:30 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
72. Your ongoing "not concerned" concern is noted. n/t.
Response to hack89 (Reply #55)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:22 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
58. I'm just impressed you haven't put me on *ignore* yet: nearly every one of your Gungeon pals
|
have decided that the heat's too hot in the gun debate kitchen when 'ole apoc's around, and 32 of them - 32! - currently have me on ignore. The day Meta closed that number fell to 31 for some reason, but as of today it's right back up to 32.
*My* ignore list, OTOH, remains barren.
Now, I know I'm going to get the predictable reply, "they've decided it's a waste of time arguing with you; you offer nothing in the debate; blah, blah, blah," anything other than the plain truth, i.e., they simply can't handle debating a poster who runs circles around them consistently.
Fine: I really only post this reply to acknowledge that you are nearly alone among the Gungeoneers who has decided it's better to continue to fight for your viewpoint, rather than run for the hills.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Exact replica of my first reply above, since it seems to have slipped from your memory. Need a link? |
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 09:29 PM
Doctor_J (26,383 posts)
40. The NRA lawyers will appeal to the corrupt SCOTUS
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sat Mar 9, 2013, 11:05 PM
lonestarnot (71,135 posts)
44. Something I guess.
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 02:36 PM
Auntie Bush (15,260 posts)
49. Good for Colorado.
|
Now only 15 people can be shot without reloading.
 |
Response to Robb (Original post)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 04:31 PM
ZOB (151 posts)
52. I Wish This Argument Had A Basis In Reality
Response to ZOB (Reply #52)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:35 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
59. LOL! You literally couldn't make this stuff up.
|
Welcome, errr, to DU. And enjoy that stay!
|
Response to ZOB (Reply #64)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 05:52 PM
apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)
65. That's nice. n/t.
Response to pasto76 (Reply #73)
Sun Mar 10, 2013, 08:00 PM
ZOB (151 posts)
74. My "Creds" Certainly Don't Measure Up To Yours
