Colorado Governor Signs New Gun Regulations Into Law

[Robb]

Source: Associated Press

DENVER (AP) -- Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper has signed bills placing new restrictions on firearms exactly eight months after dozens of people were shot in a movie theater in suburban Denver.

The bills signed Wednesday require background checks for private and online gun sales and ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. The signing comes the same day as the executive director of the state's Corrections Department was shot and killed at his home.

Jane Dougherty, whose sister was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting, was among the guests invited to the signing.

The proposals signal a historic change for Democrats who traditionally have shied away from a battle over gun control in a state where owning a gun is as common as owning a car in some rural areas.

Read more: http://tristatehomepage.com/fulltext-news?nxd_id=598052

---

Thanks to everyone who helped make this happen!

[otohara]

1. Hick Just Got My Vote

again....

I'm not too crazy about our millionaire gov.
This took courage - thank you Colorado Dems

I sent many many emails to the lawmakers. My neighbors son was executed by her ex last year...9 year old w/ autism.
She is a broken woman.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. So Colorado is now safe from rampage killings forever, right?

[otohara]

3. I Gather You're Not Happy About This

doing nothing like The NRA wants is what the minority wants.

I imagine, some gun nut will try to prove these laws useless and there will be another rampage killing in Colorado.
That would make the gun nuts happy, and the naysayers.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. I find it hypocritical in the extreme

that prohibitionists complain pro-RKBA advocates have no sense of humanity but then the prohibitionists do everything in their power to dehumanize and demonize people who believe they are simply standing up for their basic human rights.

And then on top of it, here you are saying the law would be impotent against a determined killer -- which is exactly my point.

[earthside]

8. An expanded magazine a "basic human right"?

I don't get that.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. Define "expanded."

[earthside]

14. In Colorado as of today -- over 15 rounds.

And let's be serious, the ability to purchase a gun accessory is not part of any person's basic human rights.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

15. Magazines aren't an accessory; they're essential to the function

And 15-rounds is standard for a pistol but only half of what is standard for a rifle.

[earthside]

19. Purchasing an accessory is not a 'basic human right'.

Quibble if you must.

An expanded magazine is an accessory ... just like white wall tires are an auto accessory; you may need tires for the essential functioning of a car, but white walls are an extra.

This kind of argument is precisely why a vast majority of Americans support banning expanded magazines. It has all the odor of extremists just wanting, wanting, wanting what they want despite the broader implications, despite the need to do something to try and stem gun violence.

Furthermore, the new Colorado restriction on magazines and the new mandate for universal background checks are clearly constitutional as well -- they are variants on laws already in place and/or already ruled on by the courts.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. Standard issue rifle magazines carry 30 rounds

I'm told that is for mechanical reliability while allowing for maximum practical capacity. "Expanded" would mean beyond the standard. IIRC, the USSC language in the Heller (or MacDonald) decision said the reasonable standard was what is in common use, or words to that effect.

Furthermore, the new Colorado restriction on magazines and the new mandate for universal background checks are clearly constitutional as well...

So how do you feel about voter ID laws and AZ SB1070?

[upaloopa]

28. Basic human right? What to carry a gun around on you?

What about my basic human right to life? That trumps gun rights any day as it does in most industrialed nations.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

30. I don't carry a gun but how would my doing so infringe on your right to life?

And what does industrialization have to do with people protecting themselves and their families? That's a very strange moral delineation.

[Kolesar]

11. File that one under: "fucked premise" eom

[LanternWaste]

22. I'd imagine the potential is reduced... even if by only a small degree.

I'd imagine the potential is reduced... even if by only a small degree.

I'd also imagine that an idiot would either believe or ask if the state is now safe forever-- not saying that the belief or the question is limited to idiots, merely that they would indeed, ask or believe that.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

23. "even if by only a small degree."

How is that even quantifiable? It seems like this just so much antoganistic feel-goodism.

[LanternWaste]

26. Qualified with "it seems", I'll allow it all the credibility it warrants...

"It seems like this just so much antoganistic feel-goodism..."

Qualified with "it seems", I'll allow it all the credibility it warrants...

[Floyd_Gondolli]

36. You mad bro?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

39. What will this law do or could have done to change anything that supposedly inspired its passage?

Serious question.

[Floyd_Gondolli]

45. It does more than doing nothing

Which is what I'm sure you would espouse.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

46. Deck chairs. Titanic. Arrange to taste.

Why not target the 80% of gun crimes commited by previously convicted criminals? Why not enforce laws against criminals adjudicated to have forfeited their RKBA? Why not allow more affirmative due process to get those who need mental health treatment to be so treated?

[NickB79]

47. If it allows Republicans to take back power

It does less than nothing, because if the Republicans take power again they will immediately revoke the new gun laws AND get another shot at destroying all the social and political improvements we've made over the past few years, at both state and federal levels. Pass a gun control bill that saves a thousand lives, only to see the GOP repeal the Affordable Care Act and doom tens of thousands to early deaths? Or see the GOP do nothing on climate change while our planet bakes? Or see the GOP dismantle Medicare and Social Security, leaving the poor and elderly destitute?

That is what worries many Democrats from moderate states. That is the reason Harry Reid dropped the AWB from the current federal gun legislation package. There is far more at stake here than many seem to realize.

[mwrguy]

4. Suck it, Magpul

Pack your bags and GTFO

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. And their employees?

[mwrguy]

10. Will have to find another job that doesn't make killing machines

I'm sorry that anyone is unemployed, but some jobs should not exist in the first place.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. Some things that "should not" are still a "have to"

You cannot wish away the fact that some people are determined to hurt other people and the only way to stop them is to confront them.

[upaloopa]

29. And of course confronting them is 100% effective where

gun legislation is not.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

31. But why are restrictive communities in worse shape than non-restrictive?

I've seen the as yet unqualified argument that guns from red states are supposedly flooding places like the notorious Chicago. Yet, in those red states where the guns supposedly flow like water the mere presence of them still leaves them with lower gun violence rates than Chicago with all its restrictions.

[hack89]

13. What do you think of the hypocrisy

of banning the sale of high capacity magazines while still allowing them to be manufactured for sale in other states?

If high capacity mags are such a danger to society should they have banned the manufacture of them? Or does that tax money trump the lives of people in other states?

[mwrguy]

27. manufacture should be banned as well

[Nuclear Unicorn]

32. Why?

[Robb]

34. How dare Colorado not regulate other states!

[hack89]

35. The magazines are either a danger to society or they are not.

How dare Colorado profit from a product they know will endanger citizens of other states.

Gotta keep those tax dollars rolling in.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

37. The legislature tried to cut Magpul a deal to let them manufacture in CO

but not sell in CO.

[Robb]

38. "Tried"?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. Magpul declined the offer preferring to move out of state and taking ~700 jobs with them.

But if the magazines are so nefarious why did they even try to allow them to be manufactured in CO? It seems a bit hypocritical to foist them on other states while pocketing the tax revenue from sales and income taxes.

[Robb]

41. Just lahk them lib'rulz out in Californee!

Taking all that Lockheed money while good citizens can't even possess a SINGLE cruise missile.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

44. Apples to atomic oranges

[SunSeeker]

7. K&R

[NickB79]

16. Millions of existing magazines were grandfathered in

And I haven't read anything about new mags requiring serial numbers or manufacturing dates on them to make it possible to differentiate them.

So, what exactly will stop someone from driving across the border and loading up on fully legal 30-rd magazines in a neighboring state?

[raidert05]

33. absolutely..

nothing i would suppose..

[TheCowsCameHome]

17. Good for him. His state has had too many violent episodes.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

24. This law does nothing except antagonize decent people.

[TheCowsCameHome]

42. Well, that's that.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

43. What practical effects will it have?

Most of the sheriffs say it isn't even enforceable in practical terms. Honest question -- Suppose someone is arrested for possessing a 30-round magazine but their defense claims it was grandfathered-in under the law; how would you prove them wrong?

[NickB79]

18. This will be a good test to see how much clout the NRA still carries

Colorado is a purple state, with a strong history of hunting and gun ownership. It's pretty impressive that they got this bill passed, even as watered down as it is. About the only thing mildly controversial is the magazine restriction, and even that allows a full 15 rounds (not exactly a small number of bullets).

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats can hold their majority in upcoming elections; I see that there are already recall efforts against several Colorado legislators that supported it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/renee-parsons/gun-control-legislation-colorado_b_2856965.html

It will be interesting, no matter how it turns out.

[slackmaster]

20. Someone didn't like NickB79's reply

At Wed Mar 20, 2013, 11:00 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

This will be a good test to see how much clout the NRA still carries
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=430797

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

We advocate for Democrats on this forum, not against them.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Mar 20, 2013, 11:03 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I guess I didn't really see it as advocating, but pointing out something. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I can't really see why this should be hidden.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: A little trigger-happy on the alert button here. The post doesn't advocate against Democrats. It points out that there are people attempting to recall legislators over this bill.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't see advocacy here, just reporting. Without more from the alerter, I vote to LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The post isn't advocating against Democrats, simply pointing out the adversity Democrats could potentially face.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: There is absolutely nothing wrong with NickB79's reply. It's an opinion, stated politely, and supported by a link to a site that is frequently cited on Democratic Underground. I suspect this is a case of alert-stalking, and the alerter's comment is completely misplaced. Democrats are NOT of one mind on gun control issues.

- slackmaster

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

25. I wonder if Juror #2's pun was deliberate or coincidental? n/t