Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Colorado Universal Background Check Law HB13-1229, Discriminates Against Gays.

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Justin, Feb 22, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,466
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    RKBA is not a straight right, a gay right, a white right, a black right or a right otherwise specific to a particular group; It is a HUMAN right. People of all races, ethnicities, religions or sexual orientations are HUMANS (except for politicians; they are something less), and have the right to defend themselves with the most effective means.
     
  2. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,291
    Any ammo against the anit's is good. Especially when it's thier own brand. That's +2.
     
  3. GEM

    GEM Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,391
    Location:
    TX
    Great OP - Justin. The violation of rights in the gun panic are stunning.

    There is a similar horror in the violation of patient / mental health professional relationships in the NY SAFE act. Also, the University of Iowa is violating FERPA to report students they don't like to the law if they have concealed permits.

    Civil rights go out the window if there is a vivid instance.
     
  4. feedthehogs

    feedthehogs Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,801
    All they will do is amend the ubc if civil unions are made legal.

    Since the socially liberal types here are preaching rights for all, what about the rights two life long friends have and who probably know each other better than most married couples not being able to gift a gun without a ubc?

    Don't get distracted by a squirrel running across the road.
    The whole damn thing needs to be tossed out.
     
  5. C.F. Plinker

    C.F. Plinker Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    In Colorado where the plains meet the mountains.
    The section Justin quoted above pertains to BONA-FIDE GIFTS; however, the scenerio that was described implies that the transfer would not be permanent and thus would not meet this section of the bill.

    Perhaps another method of complying (if you want to comply) would be to use this section.

    (d) A TRANSFER THAT IS TEMPORARY AND OCCURS WHILE IN THE
    12 HOME OF THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE IF:
    13 (I) THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE IS NOT PROHIBITED FROM
    14 POSSESSING FIREARMS; AND
    15 (II) THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE REASONABLY BELIEVES THAT
    16 POSSESSION OF THE FIREARM IS NECESSARY TO PREVENT IMMINENT DEATH
    17 OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE;


    18 (e) THE TRANSFER IS A TEMPORARY TRANSFER OF POSSESSION
    19 WITHOUT TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OR A TITLE TO OWNERSHIP, WHICH
    20 TRANSFER TAKES PLACE:
    21 (I) AT A SHOOTING RANGE LOCATED IN OR ON PREMISES OWNED OR
    22 OCCUPIED BY A DULY INCORPORATED ORGANIZATION ORGANIZED FOR
    23 CONSERVATION PURPOSES OR TO FOSTER PROFICIENCY IN FIREARMS;
    24 (II) AT A TARGET FIREARM SHOOTING COMPETITION UNDER THE
    25 AUSPICES OF, OR APPROVED BY, A STATE AGENCY OR A NONPROFIT
    26 ORGANIZATION; OR
    27 (III) WHILE HUNTING, FISHING, TARGET SHOOTING, OR TRAPPING
    1 IF:
    2 (A) THE HUNTING, FISHING, TARGET SHOOTING, OR TRAPPING IS
    3 LEGAL IN ALL PLACES WHERE THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE POSSESSES
    4 THE FIREARM; AND
    5 (B) THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE HOLDS ANY LICENSE OR PERMIT
    6 THAT IS REQUIRED FOR SUCH HUNTING, FISHING, TARGET SHOOTING, OR
    7 TRAPPING; OR

    These sections do not require any defined relationship between the individuals and, because the transfer it temporary, would seemingly allow the firearm to be transferred back without the need for a background check.

    However, these sections would not give any reason for striking down the law as proposed. Carry On.
     
  6. ATLDave

    ATLDave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    3,464
    feedthehogs, of course those of us "preaching rights for all" don't like the bill. This is about one specific argument about the bill, not a compherensive list of ALL the things wrong with it.

    One of the most common sources of bad laws is a failure of immagination on the part of lawmakers to envision a terribly unfair scenario that will certainly arise if the law goes through. If you can present such a scenario to a lawmaker, sometimes you can get them to see things differently. But the scenario usually has to be striking, beyond what they consciously intended, and likely. Two good friends swapping guns? Those who like gun control already think that shouldn't be happening. But two partners who live together running afoul of the law because their particular partnership is not legally recognized? You might get some people with that.

    Everyone who already thinks the whole thing is bad doesn't need convincing. New arguments, or new presentations of older arguments, are needed to get people to change their minds. There's no point preaching to the choir.
     
  7. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,291
    The idea is to get them to trip on thier own tail trying to cross the road. Have thier own base of supporters tell them to stop. They won't listen to us, but they will listen to thier own base.
     
  8. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    THR is about bringing lawful gun owners together, regardless of religion, political affiliation, sex, or orientation. That is why we don't allow posts that attack any of those things, because we focus on what brings us together, not the many things we can choose to let divide us.

    Any ammunition that assists in letting us stop bad legislation is good. Any loosening of restrictions on lawful gun owners is good.

    John
     
  9. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    48,350
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    The point is that there is a weakness in the law that can be exploited. Any weakness should be exploited to kill this poisonous legislation.

    If you do or don't like a particular group it is best to remember that we're not interested in the group itself, but in the blind spot that the Antis left for us to exploit.

    Don't let you feelings interfere with using your intellect to fight these pieces of legislation.
     
  10. browneu

    browneu Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    Messages:
    739
    Location:
    ohio
    The point is brilliant. It should be exploited showing the hypocrisy of the left.

    Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
     
  11. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,291
    One of the biggest complaints from gays who want marriage laws is they cannot pass property when one dies or becomes incapacitated/incompetent. If the owner has a stroke, the partner can be kicked out of the house they have shared for decades and has no legal claim on the others property. The state usually takes everything. Even if there is a will stating otherwise. Eventually if property is passed taxes must be paid as if you bought it for market value.

    I know of several gay couples who are in this situation (one is terminally ill and will probably become incompetent before she dies).
     
  12. 1911Tuner

    1911Tuner Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Messages:
    18,550
    Location:
    Lexington,North Carolina...or thereabouts
    As a matter of law, unmarried cohabiting straight couples are subject to the same guidelines.

    F'rinstance, I've lived with SWMBO for nearly 17 years. Whenever I'm away, she has full access to a loaded gun or three.

    Seeing that:

    A. She isn't a prohibited person and
    B. It's not technically a transfer of ownership, and
    B. There are no minor children afoot...

    Should an unwanted caller force his way in, and she shot him with one of my guns...I really don't see the letter of the law being strictly enforced. In fact, in my county of residence, it's unlikely that the matter would even come up.
     
  13. C.F. Plinker

    C.F. Plinker Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    In Colorado where the plains meet the mountains.
    The proposed Colorado law would require a background check on any transfer of possession which does not meet one of the 6 exceptions not just on transfers of ownership. This can be a big difference.

    4 18-12-112. Private firearms transfers - background check
    5 required - penalty. (1) EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (6) OF THIS
    6 SECTION, BEFORE ANY PERSON WHO IS NOT A LICENSED GUN DEALER, AS
    7 DEFINED IN SECTION 12-26.1-106 (6), C.R.S., TRANSFERS OR ATTEMPTS TO
    8 TRANSFER POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, HE OR SHE SHALL:

    The inclusion of temporary transfers of possession where transfer of title is not involved within some of the bills exceptions shows that the bill applies to more that transfers involving a change of ownership.
     
  14. Inebriated

    Inebriated Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,683
    Location:
    NC
    You would think that, for sure. But... I'm growing increasingly positive that the general structure of the democratic party is not to help people, it's to essentially force their dependence on the government. I do not believe that is recognized by many democrats, though.

    EDIT - More on topic, though... Is anyone trying to bring attention to this in a more organized fashion?
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2013
  15. Deanimator

    Deanimator Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    10,854
    Location:
    Rocky River, Ohio
    There is absolutely NOTHING in the world wrong with using somebody's own supposed ideology against him.

    Socially, I'm very liberal and won't HESITATE to point out the hypocrisy of "liberals" who are willing to pitch every OTHER belief they might claim to have in order to create a government monopoly on the means of armed force.

    Harping on this, as well as the galloping misogyny of the anti-gun side is part of a winning strategy.
     
  16. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    So, if I want to transfer a gun to a woman in CO and avoid the BC, all I have to do is marry her?

    What a deal!
     
  17. Creature

    Creature Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,662
    Location:
    Virginia Beach


    How is it that a moderator and another member are both quoting someone's statement...that does not appear anywhere in this thread?
     
  18. natman

    natman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    3,497
    You don't often read arguments in favor of gay marriage in gun forums, but I respect your candor in making one.
     
  19. PedalBiker

    PedalBiker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    Colorado
    It is also a fact that this gun bill is going to force rural residents to DRIVE a lot of extra miles just to find an FFL to do the transfer. This wastes gas, places lives at risk and harms the environment.

    I live in town and bike a lot, however, gun laws discriminate against cyclists as well. There are exemptions for firearms in cars, but not for one in my backpack on my bike. So even for urban residents the background check bill will require more driving.
     
  20. Torian

    Torian Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,015
    Nice catch.
     
  21. Fred_G

    Fred_G Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    497
    Location:
    Louisiana
    Interesting thread. I think we (2A supporters) need to learn to use liberals tactics against them. Also, using liberal tactics to get people to oppose a bill does not have to be legally correct, think how often liberals want something passed 'for the children', or if you oppose an environmental bill, you somehow 'want dirty air and water'.
     
  22. BullfrogKen

    BullfrogKen Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Messages:
    14,886
    Location:
    Lewisberry, PA
    I'm all for pointing out instances where pointy-headed politicians who think they can write perfect laws trip over their own idealogy in their haste to do it.


    Colorado may eventually pass a gay marriage act. So, how's this law supposed to work when the US gov't won't recognize it? This will eventually work it's way into the Federal courts to be settled once and all, at which point this law fails to account for those couples.


    Go get' em, Justin.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page