Colorado's 16rd Magazine Ban and My Interpretation
This is a discussion on Colorado's 16rd Magazine Ban and My Interpretation within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I took some time to vent today on some other pages, I felt the need to share it here as well...
Time and time ...
Post By maxwell97
Post By lionround
Post By Harryball
Post By GeorgiaDawg
Post By Kilowatt3
Post By Brad426
Post By OldVet
July 1st, 2013 03:33 PM
Colorado's 16rd Magazine Ban and My Interpretation
I took some time to vent today on some other pages, I felt the need to share it here as well...
Time and time again I see the unwitting question, "why do you need a 30rd magazine?" Well, let answer that question with a question… Why do you need a car that can go over 75mph? Well, the answers to that question of a question are simple.
A ) Would you rather be in a vehicle that has been governmentally limited to the stated 75mph Speed Limits and therefore physically cannot make an evasive maneuver on the highway to save your life and the lives of others from, say a “run away vehicle?” You are limited and entrapped to the government implemented limitations, “to make the roads safer” and in turn end your life due to those limitations.
B ) Would you rather be in a vehicle that cannot “outrun” another vehicle that is chasing you with means to cause you harm? The individual that appears to NOT be a law abiding citizen IS AND WILL ALWAYS ignore the laws that pertain to him as a citizen as well. While you remain a law abiding citizen and put yourself at further risks and ease of attack.
C ) Would you rather be in a vehicle that can only go the governmentally limited 75mph if you are an Automotive Enthusiast and have to stay under that limit when you go to a race track for recreation? Absolutely absurd in nature!
The answer to the original question, “why do you need a 30rd magazine?” is better answered and addressed directly in terms of law abiding human safety, rifle design, and Enthusiasm again.
A ) Would you rather defend your home, cabin, RV, vehicle, camp, etc. with a rifle that has been designed around a magazine that has a normal capacity of 30rds and not be able to utilize it due to the fact you are a law abiding citizen that had followed the regulations of 15rd magazine limitations?
B ) Would you rather find yourself wielding an AR-15 (Armalite Rifle-15) with a 10 or 15rd magazine while you face ONE or SEVERAL intruders with the same rifle, but instead wielding them with the standard 30rd magazine, if not the high capacity magazines that hold 60-100rds? The individual that appears to NOT be a law abiding citizen IS AND WILL ALWAYS ignore the laws that pertain to him as a citizen as well. The NON law abiding citizen will have obtained that rifle in an illegal manner and obtained the magazines for it in the same way, as to inflict harm upon you, your family, and those around you so that he will have the upper hand.
C ) Would you rather own a rifle that can fire semi-automatically and was designed to fire 30rd magazines, but instead now you are a law abiding citizen and you only have 10 or 15rd magazines if you were a Gun Enthusiast? This factor is the same determination and reasoning as the Automotive Enthusiast wanting the “ability” to travel the speed limitations of the vehicle and not what the government tells them they can do.
After reading all of these reasoning (there are many more) it begins to sound as if we are living in a tyrannical society, where we cannot live how we wish but how we are told. This is not a society I wish to live in, nor a society I wish to contribute to, if everyone is scared of everyone else to the point that they believe a governmental agency can place forth contingencies and laws that will provide safety for all the people of the nation. This in fact could not be any further from the truth! One more time I will state the obvious, that so many people in this nation and other nations, seem to have forgotten, not realized, or ignored… The individual that appears to NOT be a law abiding citizen IS AND WILL ALWAYS ignore the laws that pertain to him as a citizen as well.
-Anthony J Francher
July 1st, 2013 03:39 PM
You make very good points, but I believe the only correct answer to the question is "I need one because IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS WHY I NEED ONE." The question assumes the right of government to decide what you need and don't need, when in reality it has no right to keep you from doing ANYTHING that does not violate the rights of another person.
"...there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."
– Captain Bellamy
July 1st, 2013 03:46 PM
1. Nowhere in the Constitution or the BOR is NEED addressed. It is my right.
2. Does Al Gore NEED a 10,000 square foot mansion since he lives there with no one but his dog? No, but it is his right.
3. Does Jay Leno NEED a stable of over 100 cars and over 30 motorcycles? No, but it his right.
“If it's a penny for your thoughts and you put in your two cents worth, then someone, somewhere is making a penny.”
-- Steven Wright
1950 Colt .38 Police Positive Special
2013 SCCY 9mm CPX-2 Stainless Steel
US Army 1973-1977, 95B
July 1st, 2013 03:51 PM
I am tired of questions about our rights....
Don"t let stupid be your skill set....
Hobbit lives matter....
Never be ashamed of a scar. It simply means, that you were stronger than whatever tried to hurt you......
July 1st, 2013 03:52 PM
Shortest answer is "why does it matter to you why I might need one?"
Either I'm a criminal or I'm not. Either I will try to kill you or I won't. Whether I have two 15-round magazines or one 30-round magazine won't make much of a difference if I'm Hellbent on using a gun for evil purposes. It's the person, not the tool, that needs to be addressed here, and asking about why I need a magazine that holds a particular amount of cartridges is avoiding the real problem.
The problem is that those who will ask such a question don't want to hear the real answer. They don't want to talk about the potential for governmental tyranny and protecting our rights. They don't want to hear about self-defense. They don't want to hear about freedom or the Constitution. They don't want to hear facts or logical reasoning. They only want to talk about their feelings. What they need is a therapist.
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9
“The purpose of the law is not to prevent a future offense, but to punish the one actually committed” - Ayn Rand
July 1st, 2013 04:35 PM
A better answer is, "The government has no authority to limit what I can have based upon someone's determination of what I 'need'".
Originally Posted by GeorgiaDawg
NRA Life Member
Charter Member (#00002) of the DC .41 LC Society - "Get Heeled! No, really!"
He that cannot reason is a fool. He that will not is a bigot. He that dare not is a slave.
- Andrew Carnegie
July 1st, 2013 04:46 PM
Or "Yo mama".
Originally Posted by Kilowatt3
I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
July 1st, 2013 04:54 PM
I prefer this approach; how can you argue against it?
Originally Posted by Brad426
Though defensive violence will always be a sad necessity in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men -St. Augustine
July 1st, 2013 07:52 PM
The Government always tries to implement bad laws based on what they think people need rather than allowing people to have what they choose.
In 1973 the government enacted the Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act which restricted highway speeds to 55mph. It effects were not evident as highway fatalities had dropped both during its enactment and after its repeal. This law lead to the widespread use of CB radios in order to circumvent the restrictions and avoid law enforcement detection.
In 1994 the government enacted the Federal Assault Weapons Ban which limited the capacity of magazines and banned the production and importation of certain types of weapons based on cosmetic features. The effects of the Ban were negligible as final reports showed no significant reduction in crime during the ban. Again more recent data shows that the violent crime rate has been dropping for the past 20 years which also coincides with the period after its repeal.
In 1919 the government enacted the Volstead act creating the 18th Amendment Prohibiting the consumption, distribution, production, and sale of alcohol. This eventually lead to an increase in overall crime including violent crime and only marginally impacted the presence of alcohol in America. The increase in crime from organized crime during prohibition caused the government to enact the National Firearms Act in 1934 which effectively banned the production and eventual sale of fully automatic weapons and also short barrel rifles and shotguns to the public by creating a tax stamp system in which the stamps where never issued. Eventually this was challenged and stamps where issued but in 1984 they introduced the Firearm Owners' Protection Act which banned the sale of fully automatic weapons to the public if they were made after this date.
Gun Control is exampled as a continuous reduction of rights based on a perceived need for public safety but this is nothing new. The Government loves to control what people can do in order to protect them. In each case they take just a little but of freedom from people and create an environment were some people break the law for profit or simple rebelliousness. In many cases this is followed by an increase in crime not a reduction in it.
July 1st, 2013 08:13 PM
Nah, it C.W. McCall's song Convoy that did that.
Originally Posted by Ramen
Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid...
Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth
Search tags for this page
interpretations of colorado's new mag limit law
Click on a term to search for related topics.