IMI Systems Quote of the Day: It’s Time to Repeal Colorado’s Gun Control Laws – Enter to Win 1000 Rounds of IMI 9mm Ammo

Colorado Governor signs a series of gun control bills in 2013.

“I don’t want to hear about support for the Second Amendment,” said Tony Fabian, president of the Colorado State Shooting Association. “We want to hear specifics. And one of those specifics we better hear (is) a repeal the 2013 gun control laws.” – Colorado State Shooting Association president Tony Fabian in Colorado’s controversial 2013 gun laws could loom large over crowded 2018 governor’s race [via denverpost.com]

ENTER TO WIN 1000 ROUNDS OF IMI 9MM AMMUNITION


Click here for more information about IMI System Ammunition

Entries will be added to TTAG’s mailing list and shared with IMI Systems

comments

  1. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Had me worried for a second with that first line… 🙂

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      IIRC, Hillary ‘supported the 2nd’ while viciously attacking gun owners at every opportunity last year, so I support Tony’s message.

  2. avatar Don from CT says:

    Fudds in pro-gun states tend to say things like “I support the Second Amendment”. But then you find they are for mag restrictions because “nobody needs more than 10 rounds”. or something like that.

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Colorado has no shortage of Fudds and fair weather pro-rights supporters.

    2. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

      Every Fudd should be sent to hunt an angry, 500 lb wild pig in texas that knows where the bullets are coming from.

      1. avatar JasonM says:

        Or sent to live in Chiraq with nothing but a bolt action rifle with a three round fixed magazine.

    3. avatar Joel IV says:

      “I support the 2nd, but….”

      My grandfather used to say, “Everything in front of the but(t) is bull, everything that comes out after the but(t)… well, you know what that is.”

  3. avatar DaveL says:

    I think every legislative body ought to have on hand a large bronze cast of a human posterior, their “2nd Amendment Butt”. make it weigh 40 lbs or so. Any member who claims “I support the 2nd Amendment but…” should be made to physically support this 2nd Amendment Butt by holding it aloft for the duration of their speech.

  4. avatar Anonymous says:

    Good luck. Neo-marxists have taken over Colorado. They aren’t interested in freedom. They are interested in managing and supervising your lives with laws.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Kind of hard to believe they want to use laws considering they don’t want to follow the ones they already have. Looks more like they want to have the power of the gun to rule over everyone. Take over the gun and populace, then laws don’t matter anymore.

    2. avatar The Punisher says:

      And I’m the crazy one for espousing and supporting peaceful secession…

      Let Denver do Denver. Let them stew in all their anti-gun goodness if that’s what the constituents of that city want.

      Immoral and wrong to have that be binding for citizens who live outside the city, either in other towns or in rural areas, upwards of hundreds of miles away.

      1. avatar -Peter says:

        For many Denver residents, the border of Colorado ends at DIA, and the next State to the west is California.

  5. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

    It will be an uphill battle as the state has shifted quite a bit further into the statist’s direction since 2013. Through Hickenlooper and his pseudo-centrist cohorts, Bloomberg still holds sway. While the vast majority of the state (By area) is largely pro 2A, the Denver Metro has the majority of population and is mostly in the statist’s pocket.

    1. avatar Bob in Calif says:

      WE have the same problem here. If only we could shitcan Los Angeles and the SF bay area this would be a decent place to live again.

  6. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    They probably have to pass the bill to see what’s in it.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      For some meanings of “pass” it’s actually kind of funny, rather than infuriating.

  7. avatar cisco kid says:

    People in power never give up even one shred of their power over the proletariat whether they be far right or far left. Dream on people it will never happen.

  8. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

    “I don’t want to hear about support for the Second Amendment,” motherfu….

    “We want to hear specifics. And one of those specifics we better hear (is) a repeal the 2013 gun control laws.” oh. Carry on then.

  9. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

    I have no qualms with revoking Colorado’s ant-gun laws. When is the effort to repeal the Peoples Republic of Komiforna anti-gun laws? Or MA? Or NJ? Or, or, or…

    1. avatar roadrunner says:

      Effort to repeal NJ anti-gun laws? You jest.

      We’re getting more laws next year. The favorite to succeed Christie, Democrat Phil Murphy, has promised to pass everything that Christie vetoed. That includes:

      *Mandate all gun shops carry a smart gun
      *Outlaw .50cal
      *Reduce magazines from 15 rounds to 10
      *Embed FOID in drivers license, so that police know in traffic stops if you own a gun
      *Background checks on private sales of long guns
      *Safety training prior to getting FOID or P2P

      He also proposes new gun/ammo taxes. Gonna get much worse here.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        What an incredibly stupid idea. Now every time an NJ driver gets pulled over, he will be yanked out of his car at gun point with the officer demanding to know where the gun is, and then demanding a search his car, with five other officers, while the driver sits in the back of a patrol car. Wonderful. Let’s give the cops more reason to shoot people.

  10. avatar Joe R. says:

    Time to repeal Colorado.

  11. avatar Michi says:

    I’m sure Dudley and RMGO will begin to attack the CSSA until they throw in the towel in short order, and then proceed to ask for money in email blasts, and then do nothing.

  12. avatar Ralph says:

    An anti-gun law is like herpes zoster. You never really get rid of it.

    1. avatar 0351 says:

      Dudley and his “organization” make me want to scream.

      In other news, I do desperately hope for legislative change and vote accordingly. Denver is the worst part of the state. At least Boulder *looks* nice….

  13. avatar strych9 says:

    I was actually discussing this with a guy at Dreamhack Denver this past weekend (shockingly high 2A support there btw).

    All those laws did was cost the state a ton of money. For example: The mag bans are unenforceable but that “readily convertible” language in reference to shotguns temporarily screwed parts of the hunting industry (which may have bounced back, I haven’t looked). That rippled through large parts of the travel industy and cost the state a lot of tax money. For what? A law no cop even tries to enforce!

    1. avatar ColoradoKid says:

      “Readily convertible language in reference to shotguns”?

      Huh? You lost me.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        The law states that you cannot have a shotgun with an 8+ round capacity or one that is “readily convertible” to such a capacity.

        That means if you take a standard, say Remington 870, with a five shot capacity, unscrew the cap at the end of the magazine, remove the spring etc and install a tube extender that extends the tube by four or more shells (they sell them up to 10 actually) that gun is illegal. However, under the plain text of the law simply possessing the shotgun may be illegal unless you already possessed it in the State of Colorado on or prior to July 1, 2013 and that firearm cannot have left the State since that date.

        The question is, and there is at this time no actual answer to this right now, is that 870 “readily convertible” since to install a tube extender generally requires no tools and can be done at home by any idiot who buys a kit to extend their mag?

        The law doesn’t define what “readily convertible” means and the language has not been tested in court. There was a big hullabaloo about this before the law passed where some people pointed this out. After Joe “Two Blasts” Biden made a few phone calls however, you might remember, the bills basically just passed into law without the usual procedure.

        1. avatar ColoradoKid says:

          The “…readily converted…” phrase applies to box, drum, feed strip type mags (18-12-301, (2)(a) (I). The reference to tubular shotgun mags is in the paragraph that follows: “…a fixed, tubular shotgun magazine that holds more then 28 inches of shotgun shells, including any extension device…”. A 28″ 12g tube mag holds 12 shells by my calculation. So yes you are correct about an extension tube being illegal (whether it’s readily convertible or not), but I’m not sure what part of hunting would have been affected by this law, in that the allowable number of shotgun hunting rounds is way less for most fowl/game and is/was enforced by the Division of Wildlife long before the new law. I will agree that just before the law was enacted there was a lot of ‘opinions’ on what it would limit and maybe some hunters decided to avoid Colorado until it was all ironed out.

  14. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    In the end, they want a disarmed population because a farm isn’t run for the benefit of the livestock.

    – You are not to be trusted with anything so dangerous. (You are an idiot.)
    – You aren’t worth protecting. (You are literally worthless, so vs. their lives or feels you are expendable.)
    – This isn’t how we do things. (No acting outside the system where everything not compulsory is forbidden.)
    – You are no one to decide what’s better or worse. (We, meaning you, have them for that.)
    – Your choosing agency is bad, wrong, and evil. (They’re the star. We’re just props n supporting players.)

    It’s always about their interest not yours, and reducing your ability to assert your interest where you differ. For many of these martinets, even these base assumptions are just rationalizations: “I get to be in charge and tell people what to do (for a nominal service fee, of course), if these things are true. So, I believe them.”

    Every anti-gun argument, polemic, or proposal grounds out in these assumptions. Every story I’ve seen of an anti- changing their opinion amounts to helping them realize that their position rests on one of these. Then they flip themselves. “Hey, these gunny people aren’t so crazy.” “Hey, people like Emily in DC *are* worth protecting; maybe we should let that happen.” “Hey, maybe the person on the ground knows the risk in their neighborhood better.” “Maybe they can decide their own trade-off of ‘risk’ and ‘protection’, just like the rural folks Ms. Obama mused could have valid use for a gun with protection so far away.'” “Who am I to deny people agency, or the chance to own their own power?”

    I wish I’d be proven different any one time. But, just today, Bloomie directed a crackdown on e-assisted pedal bikes in NYC, opting for congestion, pollution, throttled businesses, worse services because … he heard a story about bikes whizzing around. People chose to do something better for them without his permission. Good god, people could get where they want without paying gas taxes, or being monitored and directed the whole way. Something must be done! Off with their heads! Everything not compulsory is forbidden!

    Who are these livestock to make their own choices; to improve their lot on their own? What to do? We hate the autonomy, but can’t just grab all of that or people will catch on. I know, ban the thing; ban the bikes! Just like some other kind of agecyless devices that people choose to use for their own advantage, exactly as if they were competent and their lives their own.

    What are those banned things again?

  15. avatar Adam says:

    Colorado is one of those unfortunate states. It used to be an awesome place to live with a ton of freedom but it is slowly gaining more and more progressives and slowly those freedoms are going away. I won’t be surprised if it doesn’t stay in Cato’s top 10 list of most free states within the next decade.

  16. avatar Docduracoat says:

    Jim,
    It’s funny that you should say that about statists not allowing local decision making
    Keen county California had a program where teachers and janitorial staff could bring their concealed weapons to the school after obtaining written permission from the principal
    The California legislature felt the need to pass a law forbidding this practice even though it was a local decision not affecting any other school in the state
    We can’t have carefully selected members of the school staff running around with guns!
    We don’t like it so the locals can’t do it

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email