razorback2003
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 1,231
At least it isn't a felony. That dumb NY law i believe is a felony for having mags over 7 rounds.
Colorado Emergency
- Thread starter MBaneACP
- Start date
- Status
Skylerbone
Member
In effect, the restriction would only pertain to those made in Colorado. I applaud Magpul for standing up and speaking up but I truly wish they would have taken the hard line just as liberals do and state in no uncertain terms that passage of any of the currently proposed bills would result in their leaving Colorado permanently.
I am dumbfounded by the lack of support from others in the industry who might have contributed with bans of their products to LE Agencies within the State, holding them to equal footing with the Citizens they serve or perhaps an outright denial.
For those who believe picking up and moving from what was a strong 2A State is the sane answer consider the swift germination cycle of liberals, especially in urban areas. Eventually there would be nowhere left to hide. Hiding is not a solution. My prayers are with all the residents of Colorado that the Courts will restore rights to the populace before any further overt measures to destroy our Constitution gain momentum.
Whether Sheriffs enforce law or not, the shift in gears taking place nationwide is not rational, reasonable or subtle. Radicals are moving at an ever accelerated pace toward the destruction they covet but it is a system that has continually failed leaving mayhem and massive loss of life in its wake. They mistakenly call it a revolution, which can in no wise be likened to the one that shaped our Republic, genocide would be more fitting.
I am dumbfounded by the lack of support from others in the industry who might have contributed with bans of their products to LE Agencies within the State, holding them to equal footing with the Citizens they serve or perhaps an outright denial.
For those who believe picking up and moving from what was a strong 2A State is the sane answer consider the swift germination cycle of liberals, especially in urban areas. Eventually there would be nowhere left to hide. Hiding is not a solution. My prayers are with all the residents of Colorado that the Courts will restore rights to the populace before any further overt measures to destroy our Constitution gain momentum.
Whether Sheriffs enforce law or not, the shift in gears taking place nationwide is not rational, reasonable or subtle. Radicals are moving at an ever accelerated pace toward the destruction they covet but it is a system that has continually failed leaving mayhem and massive loss of life in its wake. They mistakenly call it a revolution, which can in no wise be likened to the one that shaped our Republic, genocide would be more fitting.
Zak Smith
Member
They did just that. Maybe you missed it.
MachIVshooter
Member
1224 & 1229 are both little more than symbolic. Yes, they might hamstring a few people, and that is unfortunate, but they are almost completely unenforceable. The burden of proof a prosecutor faces if he attempts to charge somebody with a violation of these, should they become law, will be nearly insurmountable when faced with potential civil lawsuits for a wrongful accusation/imprisonment. Would you want to be the police chief or sheriff heading an agency that arrested and charged somebody with a violation, only to find that either 1) there is no proof whatsoever that they violated the law or 2) that even if there might be proof, it will only come as the result of a weeks-long inquiry IF BATFE is willing to conduct said inquiry? Because as I mentioned, LEOs are not privy to firearm disposition records.
If these become law, I am quite sure after awhile they'll be asking for registration because there is no way to enforce these laws without it. Should that day come, I would hope that either the Republicans have regained control (likely in the 2014 elections) or the Democrats who have said they don't support registration (Maclaghlin, et al) will maintain that position. If they ever pass registration in this state, I will no longer be a Colorado resident. My family, my business and my tax dollars will go to Wyoming.
If these become law, I am quite sure after awhile they'll be asking for registration because there is no way to enforce these laws without it. Should that day come, I would hope that either the Republicans have regained control (likely in the 2014 elections) or the Democrats who have said they don't support registration (Maclaghlin, et al) will maintain that position. If they ever pass registration in this state, I will no longer be a Colorado resident. My family, my business and my tax dollars will go to Wyoming.
Last edited:
And I sincerely hope Magpul follows through on it.
Zak Smith
Member
Re: 1224.
For now, maybe.
In a couple generations there will be no "legal" 30 round mags in Colorado.
MachIVshooter
Member
Any mag that is not date stamped or serialized is considered pre-ban, because there is no way to prove it wasn't. Now that printed magazines are a reality, that makes this law even more ridiculous. So in practice, the only 16+ mags that will not be available to CO residents down the road are those proprietary designs developed after the effective date.
I an NOT saying I'm ok with this ridiculous legislation. Of course I oppose it with every ounce of my being. Point remains that it really won't do a thing to keep 16+ round magazines out of the hands of CO residents, now or in the future. Yes, mags wear out, but not quickly, and not if you take care of them. I have magazines that are over 100 years old and work fine.
Zak Smith
Member
No, dude, you miss the point. Any kid born after July 2013 could not have possessed a >15 round magazine prior to the effective date. QED.
Think long term.
MachIVshooter
Member
Yeah, I wasn't thinking about that part. I keep thinking in terms of the expired federal ban, where grandfathered stuff was still transferable.
I wonder, though, how bequest might work out in this situation. It is generally not acceptable for a state to seize the property of the deceased unless they owed taxes. Will they have to pay the family for the contraband? I'm sure, as sloppily as these bills were patched together, there is no language concerning this.
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Lois Court is driving me nuts on the pay-for-background bill. She keeps saying how expensive this is for Colorado as things currently stand. Yep. But, we could just go through NICS like the rest of the country, and pay nothing out of the state coffers!
Zak Smith
Member
No, it just can't be possessed by anybody.
leadcounsel
member
Think long term.
The failure of this law to eliminate hi-caps would become the future 'loophole' to be closed, restricting ALL hi caps, regardless of date of manufacture or grandfathering.
The failure of this law to eliminate hi-caps would become the future 'loophole' to be closed, restricting ALL hi caps, regardless of date of manufacture or grandfathering.
"In a couple generations" I certainly "hope" that the least of our concerns is magazines with 15+ rounds being un-banned for future generations.
I'm wondering if anyone is working on "Border State Gun Lockers"... A business run like they run storage units, but for folks in neighboring gun un-friendly states to store their "illegal" mags and weapons so they can come to that state and shoot or just wait out the stupidity (or in anticipation of relocating once they have their affairs in order).
I'm wondering if anyone is working on "Border State Gun Lockers"... A business run like they run storage units, but for folks in neighboring gun un-friendly states to store their "illegal" mags and weapons so they can come to that state and shoot or just wait out the stupidity (or in anticipation of relocating once they have their affairs in order).
Skylerbone
Member
My understanding may be incorrect but what I thought I heard was the amended bill would allow Magpul and others to manufacture and sell to entities and individuals in other non-ban States. In essence, their position was, if I am not mistaken, if they cannot manufacture and sell they will move. With the amended bill, they can but effectively the Citizens of Colorado were left at the bus stop. My hope was that they and other industry leaders would have vowed to move if any further restrictions were enacted.
On future generations, I thought I had posted here but it was part of the thread on Missouri: any child born (in my state) 14 years before the enactment date of the legislation may possess grandfathered magazines. It is (here) legal for a 14 year old to possess a firearm but anyone not 14 years of age on the date of passage will simply go without. (We have no serious legislation pending at present.)
Still, with National Registration looming large on the horizon a battle of wills might well insure over who the rightful owner of the magazines was at the time of enactment. Will the gap kids, those 14-17 refuse to surrender magazines under penalty of law or stand their ground? Realize that in Colorado the gap age could be even smaller, if recognized at all.
Zak Smith
Member
You said (today at 6:04),
Magpul's statement from earlier today
Doug Smith's statement at the Capitol on Tuesday was consistent with both of these.
Here's Magpul's statement from Thursday,
and another one from earlier that day
Magpul's statement from earlier today
Doug Smith's statement at the Capitol on Tuesday was consistent with both of these.
Might be time to back out of some of the assumptions you're working under.
The no TRANSFER or sale part is insane. When you die, you better know someone out of state to ship your magazines to.
No state that ever passed a magazine ban has repealed it.
Time to change that. Vote 'em out.
No state that ever passed a magazine ban has repealed it.
Time to change that. Vote 'em out.
Skylerbone
Member
Thank you Zak, I stand corrected (missed the exemption/amendment portion) and good for Magpul. I did not mean to come off wrong in my statements, merely emphasize what I incorrectly assumed were the differences. Not an opportune time to halt production but certainly a worthwhile reason. My guess is Colorado's loss will be Texas' gain.
Dr. Rob, if CO residents cannot transfer ownership I doubt that any pre-ban magazine could be legally shipped out of State, leaving destruction (or quiet collecting by LEOs) as the primary means of dealing with contraband.
Dr. Rob, if CO residents cannot transfer ownership I doubt that any pre-ban magazine could be legally shipped out of State, leaving destruction (or quiet collecting by LEOs) as the primary means of dealing with contraband.
Zak Smith
Member
Once a magazine is out of state it is no longer subject to Colorado law (presumably). There is nothing in the bill to prevent me from driving to Wyoming and giving the magazine to a resident there.
Skylerbone
Member
But the post was phrased:
the first three words being key. It wouldn't be high road of me to summarize my feelings on what people ought to do but I too might enjoy correspondence with friends out of State.
the first three words being key. It wouldn't be high road of me to summarize my feelings on what people ought to do but I too might enjoy correspondence with friends out of State.
shinyroks
Member
Meaning it disappears into the "void" from where it reared its ugly head when I learned the evil thing had jumped into my shooting bag?
Skylerbone
Member
Perhaps I'm nit picking but draconian laws come from deviants and how they enforce such laws will be anyone's guess. If I were a resident, it would be punishment enough on my children. I would hate to think in death they would suffer any penalty for a gun related crime by transferring illegal magazines. Loosing their "gun rights" is a real risk. Telling them to comply guarantees the loss of true rights. A double end short.
Not a matter of out of the State. If the owner was a resident at the time of death, he was a resident, the property resides with his estate and no resident can transfer that property. If you are a resident, wait a year, then drive across the border and give away your magazines, you've transferred that magazine and broken the law.
Or am I hopelessly confused?
Not a matter of out of the State. If the owner was a resident at the time of death, he was a resident, the property resides with his estate and no resident can transfer that property. If you are a resident, wait a year, then drive across the border and give away your magazines, you've transferred that magazine and broken the law.
Or am I hopelessly confused?
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
mrvco said:
I'm surprised someone hasn't come up with that very business plan somewhere along the California-Nevada border! Still, the idea that something like this would even need to exist saddens me.
Skylerbone said:
There's no provision in the law that says you can't take your magazines out of this state after the ban. Colorado's rule about transferring magazines can only be enforced within the borders of Colorado. As long as you're legally allowed to leave the state with the magazine, you can do whatever you want with that magazine in the state you're in (just so long as you aren't violating that state's laws).
Obviously this whole issue is rather unenforceable to begin with. It isn't like the government knows who has what in the way of magazines. But, the whole concept still sucks.
I guess the one upside is, at least here in Colorado Springs, that local law enforcement has said they will not enforce these bans if they become law. Terry Maketa said exactly that on the county's web page. Tough to enforce a law when there is no one to do it.
May be, but I couldn't help but think of the mess this is going to create. Talk about sloppy legislation, what an embarrassment these so called lawmakers are.
Bottom line is the vast majority of firearms owners are above board when it comes to obeying the law, so we won't violate it even if we could.
Bottom line is the vast majority of firearms owners are above board when it comes to obeying the law, so we won't violate it even if we could.
- Status
Similar threads
