Chicago Suburb Bans Assault Weapons And High-Capacity Magazines

[shavdog]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

[MP]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

Depends on state.
Some allow .22 centerfire as minimum.
Others say too small.

[shavdog]

Two questions for OP Robert


Did you serve in the military in your younger days?


What is your solution to solving gun violence in our country?

Thanks.

[Bighead]

Someone here please define an assault weapon! So tired of hearing this description of a rifle.  ANY RIFLE can be an assault weapon if used in an assault......no?
Doesn't matter if it is a bolt action or a semi-automatic with a large magazine capacity.[/font]

[scooperhsd]

Google "military definition assault rifle - results below

Search Results
Definition of assault rifle. : any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire.

[MP]

Two questions for OP Robert


Did you serve in the military in your younger days?


What is your solution to solving gun violence in our country?

Thanks.

Mandatory long prison sentences for having possession of gun in a crime.
Long sentences for true straw man purchasers.
Illegal use of gun long sentences.
Make it so painful it cuts usage.

[MarkT]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

This question isn't harmless as it first appears - there's an agenda attached. The question implies deer hunting is the reason for the 2nd Amendment - and it follows that if it's illegal then there is no justification for "assault weapons".

Of course the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.  It's about having absolute power in the hands of the governed to prevent tyranny.  To have "weapons of war" in the hands of the people is the point.  It's not a deer who is going to pack you and your family off to the gulags.

People's fear of the government is tyranny.  Govt fear of the people is democracy.

[Motodad71]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

This question isn't harmless as it first appears - there's an agenda attached. The question implies deer hunting is the reason for the 2nd Amendment - and it follows that if it's illegal then there is no justification for "assault weapons".

Of course the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.  It's about having absolute power in the hands of the governed to prevent tyranny.  To have "weapons of war" in the hands of the people is the point.  It's not a deer who is going to pack you and your family off to the gulags.

People's fear of the government is tyranny.  Govt fear of the people is democracy.

Yes indeed....and our right to self preservation.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

This question isn't harmless as it first appears - there's an agenda attached. The question implies deer hunting is the reason for the 2nd Amendment - and it follows that if it's illegal then there is no justification for "assault weapons".

Of course the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.  It's about having absolute power in the hands of the governed to prevent tyranny.  To have "weapons of war" in the hands of the people is the point.  It's not a deer who is going to pack you and your family off to the gulags.

People's fear of the government is tyranny.  Govt fear of the people is democracy.

I doubt “the right to bear arms” is the same as “weapons of war”.

[RP#62]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

This question isn't harmless as it first appears - there's an agenda attached. The question implies deer hunting is the reason for the 2nd Amendment - and it follows that if it's illegal then there is no justification for "assault weapons".

Of course the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.  It's about having absolute power in the hands of the governed to prevent tyranny.  To have "weapons of war" in the hands of the people is the point.  It's not a deer who is going to pack you and your family off to the gulags.

People's fear of the government is tyranny.  Govt fear of the people is democracy.

I doubt “the right to bear arms” is the same as “weapons of war”.

You'd be right.  One is an inherent right and the other is hardware.

-RP

[Bighead]

Google "military definition assault rifle - results below

Search Results
Definition of assault rifle. : any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire.

So resembles a military style weapon.....hmmmm
So this wouldn't be considered an assault weapon?

Doesn't resemble a military weapon. It has a wooden stock.
Yet this would? Because it does.

Because it is black and scary looking?
Yet they are both chambered in 5.56/.223 rem?
Kinda proves the point of my Question above.

[98valk]

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=234

 The Federalist Papers #46

James Madison
The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared
New York Packet, Jan. 29, 1788

[Bighead]

Listen to this genius who thinks there should be a ban on Muzzleloaders
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yvO1jX9BVCc

[Robert]

Two questions for OP Robert


Did you serve in the military in your younger days?


What is your solution to solving gun violence in our country?

Thanks.

As for gun violence I really dont see a major problem, but I do acknowledge when there is an attack or gun violence for lack of a better term it has upon occasion been very publicized and the results can be agonizing.  We have many laws on the books and in the latest school shooting was not the fault of gun owners.

The school system is not allowed to have children arrested that are problems, they are not even allowed to reveal the true figures so this keeps kids in the system and sometimes under the radar of Police by a policy instituted during the Obama years. If a kid does a crime then he should go to jail, court or some type of life correction regardless of the age or how it looks to the school. Kids black, white, Asian it doesn't matter. If the black schools come out worse then we should correct that problem not gloss it over.  

The FBI was advised about 30 times and the Broward Sheriff were advised about 40 times. Not only from the school but also from school psych and from numerous people. Even the shooters Face book account posted much information that there was trouble. The school wont reveal all the information for fear of being criminally negligent in the suits to follow. Suffice to say the kid was banned from school, banned from having a back pack and known he would be a problem.  He would even greet people saying he was the next school shooter. So I would have to say that no laws would be effective IF the police, FBI and Sheriffs dont do their job in any case, gun laws or no.

I also say the FBI and the Sheriffs are culpable and should be charged with a crime or  of negligence. They should financially and maybe even criminally pay for the lack of following up, going in to stop the shooting, doing a proper investigation, instituting policies that allowed the attack to go on. They I believe are the real criminals not a disturbed, lost,broken,drugged, boy that cried for help in so many ways and society let not only him down but the victims as well. It makes me want to vomit every time I see that sheriffs picture, both the head sheriff and the ones that ran. If the policy would change and there would be criminal liability I bet things would get done instead of a sheriff that still has a job.  

If you take the dramatics out of play here, shootings while horrific in nature are statistically small. If you ask would I like to have a member of my family killed by guns, of course not. But I would not call on society to disarm itself with a act of violence done against me or my family, NO. Heck I see many protected by guns that otherwise would fall victim and be easy prey.  

Guns training, getting people used to shooting, kids learning about guns and I would say even history as to why they are important for individuals. I would say stop teaching we are victims in school and society as a whole its unhealthy, we are not and never were victims. We stop selling toy guns in stores but we do sell video games that are extremely violent. Without a proper grounding in reality of guns and some not having a good family life makes mass shooters of the weak minded.  When I was young I joined the gun club in school and we would shoot 22 rifles in the basement and I was taught about guns. I became familiar with guns and gained a respect for them and what they are capable of and learned to use them properly. I didn't fear them, I didn't fear most owning them and I knew the ones that should not have one just by learning. Education about guns, not fear about them makes people have respect for them and telling people clearly when they will be prosecuted for using them wrongly or what can happen if you kill a loved one will go along way to people making correct choices themselves. We see it today in some owning guns and some not.

 In society today doctors prescribe some pretty terrible anti depressants and other drugs that take away the reality and feelings about what some do. Most of the mass shooters have been on some type of drugs.

We are a sick society and we need to get back to certain values. If that is not going to happen then even disarming good citizens is tantamount to leading the lambs to the slaughter. We kill so many more in so many other ways why is this one way the most important?  Why do we have to disarm people, when doctors kill more than all the guns and no one reports on it or is allowed to. We have all mentioned the thousands killed by abortion but thats ok since its the woman's choice.  If we are truly a free society then why cant we as individuals decide things for ourselves and suffer the punishment for a wrong decision by the law.

When the Founding Fathers gave us the ability to protect ourselves from government it was because they knew that this ultimate check and balance may some day be needed. Because its not people by and for the government but government by and for the people. To many times we see the total disregard for the Constitution and laws on the books to make us comfortable with our government. Congress that is supposed to represent the people for the most part lately has been a total failure. Most new laws have done nothing to eliminate crime or help victims but have taken away many of our rights and privileges, have made travel more cumbersome.

As the last for a long post, while some guns should be restricted in a truly free society and in the terms the Constitution was written in there was no distinction between military weapons and civilian weapons. Hopes that shed some light on my personal feelings about guns and whats happening today with the hype. I will end with the headline below, with one more word, REALLY?


London Mayor Unveils New Stop-And-Frisk Police Policy To Enforce City-Wide Knife Ban

Knife crime across the country has risen by a staggering 21 per cent in the 12 months to September 2017, according to quarterly figures released by the Office of National Statistics.

Stabbings in London are at their highest level in six years, with a 23 per cent rise from the previous year.
Fatal stabbings in London, 2018

The Sun reports that at least 35 people have been fatally stabbed in London since the beginning of the year.

Met Police records show 37,443 recorded knife offences and 6,694 recorded gun offences across the UK in the year up to September 2017.

[Gavin_Sons]

Is it legal to go deer hunting with an assault weapon?

Asfar asiknow it is illegal to hunt deer with an assult weapon in any state. Now as far as sporting rifles are concerned, yes several states allow the use of high powered rifles to deer hunt. Some of these calibers can be found in the sporting rifle platform. Like 308, 243, 300 black out,(450 bushmaster, 458 socom, not high powered rifles). So yes it would be legal under "your" definition of assult weapon to deer hunt with these said rifles. But hunting is not the purpose of the 2nd amendment. So nice try.  Please play again.

[Motodad71]

Definition of "Assault"........like assault rocks/knives/cars/planes/box trucks/pressure cookers.....you get my drift?


as·sault
əˈsôlt/
verb
verb: assault; 3rd person present: assaults; past tense: assaulted; past participle: assaulted; gerund or present participle: assaulting

    1.
    make a physical attack on.
    "he pleaded guilty to assaulting a police officer"
    synonyms:   attack, hit, strike, punch, beat up, thump; More
    pummel, pound, batter;
    informalclout, wallop, belt, clobber, hammer, bop, sock, deck, slug, plug, lay into, do over, rough up;
    literarysmite
    "he assaulted a police officer"
    rape, sexually assault, molest
    "he has no memory of assaulting the victim"
        attack or bombard (someone or the senses) with something undesirable or unpleasant.
        "her right ear was assaulted with a tide of music"
        carry out a military attack or raid on (an enemy position).
        "they left their strong position to assault the hill"
        synonyms:   attack, assail, pounce on, set upon, strike, fall on, swoop on, rush, storm, besiege
        "they regrouped to assault the hill"

noun
noun: assault; plural noun: assaults

    1.
    a physical attack.
    "his imprisonment for an assault on the film director"
    synonyms:   battery, violence; More
    sexual assault, rape
    "he was charged with assault"
        Law
        an act, criminal or tortious, that threatens physical harm to a person, whether or not actual harm is done.
        "he appeared in court charged with assault"
        a military attack or raid on an enemy position.
        "troops began an assault on the city"
        synonyms:   attack, strike, onslaught, offensive, charge, push, thrust, invasion, bombardment, sortie, incursion, raid, blitz, campaign; informalbeatdown
        "an assault on the city"
        a strong verbal attack.
        "the assault on the party's tax policies"
    2.
    a concerted attempt to do something demanding.
    "a winter assault on Mt. Everest"

[Jess from VA]

Deer hunting is regulated by each State, there is no Federal law on deer hunting (although use of federal lands for any hunting in general is regulated by the Fed)

Assault rifles are by definition, select fire machine guns.  To my knowledge, machine guns are not permitted for deer hunting anywhere in the US (but I could be wrong, especially private hunting on your own property).  Even if they were legal, they most likely would be limited (by other rules) to 5 round magazines or so.  Full automatic deer hunting would also not be good hunting, because only the first round (or possibly 2) would hit the target; the rest would miss the target.

Just for comparison, in Vietnam, where the M16 was the most often used battle rifle for many years, and where the enemy was often at deer hunting ranges (if not closer), it is estimated that each enemy kill averaged an expenditure of some 50,000 rounds.  Conversely, Marine snipers (much the same as deer hunters taking their time with individual shots), only required 1.33 rounds per kill.  And they mostly used bolt action rifles, though some used select fire M14s, but always set to semiautomatic.

No AR 15, pistol or rifle, is an assault weapon (like a select fire M16/M4).

Deer hunting firearms are most often limited by caliber and magazine capacity (of any type; inside the receiver, box mag, tube mag, etc).  AR 15s are mostly (but not always) .223/5.56. and that is usually (but not always) a caliber that is proscribed for deer hunting.  AR 15's have magazines from 5-200 rounds (standard is 30), and many states limit magazines for deer hunting to a small number of rounds (but there are five round mags for AR15s).

AR15s (because of caliber) are not an optimal deer hunting rifle, but they are an excellent rifle for hunting individuals who who act in contravention and subversion of the US Constitution.  That's probably a large reason why so many of those individuals don't like AR15s.  However, at this time, there is no state that has on open season (or any other DNR regulations) on the hunting of these individuals. However, criminal statutes should be consulted on this subject.

If an AR15 is unlawful for deer hunting, it is because of caliber, not semiautomatic action, which is legal in a vast majority (if not all) of states for deer hunting.  As a caveat, some states (or locals) allow no center-fire rifle hunting for deer at all, and only shotguns (but semiautomatic shotguns may be fully lawful in those jurisdictions, so long as magazine limits are followed).

[Bighead]

Definition of "Assault"........like assault rocks/knives/cars/planes/box trucks/pressure cookers.....you get my drift?


as·sault
əˈsôlt/
verb
verb: assault; 3rd person present: assaults; past tense: assaulted; past participle: assaulted; gerund or present participle: assaulting

    1.
    make a physical attack on.
    "he pleaded guilty to assaulting a police officer"
    synonyms:   attack, hit, strike, punch, beat up, thump; More
    pummel, pound, batter;
    informalclout, wallop, belt, clobber, hammer, bop, sock, deck, slug, plug, lay into, do over, rough up;
    literarysmite
    "he assaulted a police officer"
    rape, sexually assault, molest
    "he has no memory of assaulting the victim"
        attack or bombard (someone or the senses) with something undesirable or unpleasant.
        "her right ear was assaulted with a tide of music"
        carry out a military attack or raid on (an enemy position).
        "they left their strong position to assault the hill"
        synonyms:   attack, assail, pounce on, set upon, strike, fall on, swoop on, rush, storm, besiege
        "they regrouped to assault the hill"

noun
noun: assault; plural noun: assaults

    1.
    a physical attack.
    "his imprisonment for an assault on the film director"
    synonyms:   battery, violence; More
    sexual assault, rape
    "he was charged with assault"
        Law
        an act, criminal or tortious, that threatens physical harm to a person, whether or not actual harm is done.
        "he appeared in court charged with assault"
        a military attack or raid on an enemy position.
        "troops began an assault on the city"
        synonyms:   attack, strike, onslaught, offensive, charge, push, thrust, invasion, bombardment, sortie, incursion, raid, blitz, campaign; informalbeatdown
        "an assault on the city"
        a strong verbal attack.
        "the assault on the party's tax policies"
    2.
    a concerted attempt to do something demanding.
    "a winter assault on Mt. Everest"

My point exactly. But the gun grabbers think differently

[Serk]

Bowing to the PC silliness, Merriam-Webster just changed the definition of "Assault Rifle" away from the real, military defined definition of the term:

any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault%20rifle

[Bighead]

The word resembles keeps coming up.......this has ZERO to do with what the weapon is capable of.....you can buy a M&P15-22 ( which is black and scary) that is no more lethal than my 1960's era Sears and Roebuck 22 that holds 18 rnds. So again they are judging a weapon On looks no effectiveness......so where will this non-sense stop????????

[Jess from VA]

It will never stop.

[Serk]

so where will this non-sense stop????????

[Bighead]

Jess I fear you are correct. What will this mean? Civil war 2.0????? Are there enough willing to take on tyranny? Or enough that swore the oath to support and uphold OUR Constitution to actually say enough and we won't take on the civilians????!!
I fear not, but hope I am wrong.

[Bighead]

so where will this non-sense stop????????

Hope not Serk. that would cause the 2nd civil war IMHO.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Jess I fear you are correct. What will this mean? Civil war 2.0????? Are there enough willing to take on tyranny? Or enough that swore the oath to support and uphold OUR Constitution to actually say enough and we won't take on the civilians????!!
I fear not, but hope I am wrong.

Being from a family that has had MANY relatives in the military, and having served myself. I think I have decent grasp on the military way of thinking. I don't think there is a snowballs chance in Hell that the military would follow unlawful orders to take people's weapons. Even the Marines. (Just kidding Willow)

[DirtyDan]

Unlawful ?

Is that like......

Undocumented ?

Dan

[Jess from VA]

Jess I fear you are correct. What will this mean? Civil war 2.0????? Are there enough willing to take on tyranny?  Or enough that swore the oath to support and uphold OUR Constitution to actually say enough and we won't take on the civilians????!!
I fear not, but hope I am wrong.

First (and foremost) it's going to depend on who is in charge of the Fed G (and to a lesser extent, State G's).  I'm not going to say Rep and Dem anymore, because sometimes the Rep's just cave in (seemingly the longer they are up there, the more go along and get along they become).

But firearms is a big ticket item with the far left (seeming more and more of the D's), and they will never stop pushing.  But history shows us they can never expect to get all they want at one time (or even in one generation), so they will take what they can get.  Gun show loophole, private transfers, rules, regulations, taxes and maybe even magazines or even ARs.  But the essential thing they want and are working toward (and what they must never get) is the same thing that has been used to disarm populations in the past, and that is universal licensing of owners, and registration of firearms.  A data base of every law abiding gun owner and exactly what guns he owns (this may already exist in a few states like NJ, I don't know for sure).  That is the beginning of the end.

Of course, they would love to rescind or rewrite the 2d Amend, but it is a very difficult thing to do (even if a majority of people want it), and there is no chance of it happening any time soon.  BUT, if they can get the SCOTUS to say the 2d Amend doesn't mean what it says, then it is only worth what they say it means.  A SCOTUS could say it doesn't include ARs (and maybe some other things), but I fail to see how even a rabid leftist court could say it only means flintlock muzzle loaders, black powder and lead balls.

In our lifetimes, and even a decade or so longer, I can see no real chance of anything approaching complete disarmament.  Even the hard left has a feel for what could cause a shooting war (house by house), and they will happily bump up against it, but I think not want to start a full open conflict.  But we could see inroads on mags and semiautos, along with a push for universal licensing and registration.

If licensing and registration were to come (preparing for step by step disarmament), that is the point where citizens will have to make hard decisions.  Do you report all, or some, or one or two, or none?  It will be a felony to not report all.  Your previous new purchases can be discoverable, not your private purchases or inheritances.  Whatever you report, you are on the books, and when this or that is outlawed, it must be given up, or it will be sufficient for an armed no knock warrant at your home.  Then you can stand and fight if you choose.  It will not do to respond to a turn in request with a boating accident story, or to claim theft you never previously reported (that is another thorn with the left, they want to make failing to report any firearm thefts a crime).

An associated issue is concealed carry permits.  I do not know if there is any national database on them, but certainly each state has one.  And how many states will fight for their citizens to not release that information to the Fed (if they don't already have it)?  Especially with a threat to remove or withhold federal funding.  I have actually heard of people who applied and got one, who do not own a firearm (on principle), but it's got to be rare.  It's close to a solid admission of firearm ownership.  And I can foresee a scenario where people start surrendering their permits in droves, if confiscation (or warrants) are chacing permit holders.

My hope would be that if Fed universal licensing and registration were to come, it would be followed by massive non compliance (though that will be a felony).  It will be difficult to arrest, lock up and prosecute millions, but maybe not thousands.  But IMHO, that is where the war must start.  Not after it has been competed and step by step disarmament begins.  No one should first help them by self identifying firearm ownership, then only fight them later when they come for what you listed.  But we law abiding citizen gun owners ARE law abiding, and committing an (even unjust) felony does not come easy to any of us.

We now have a 4th Federal Circuit case that has held ARs (and other semiautos (and high capacity mags) prohibited in MD after Newtown) are not protected under the 2d Amend.  The SCOTUS declined to hear that appeal last November, before Neil Gorsuch took his seat in April.  One can only assume that means there was not a majority (of 8 at the time) to overturn that appeal on the court.  They have not taken up any big firearms appeals for seven years, including similar banns in NY and CT last year.  The 4th Circuit applied the wrong test in reaching it's conclusion, and SCOTUS should have at least sent it back for a new decision using the correct test.  I think the presumably four pro 2d Amend justices protected us from the others by dodging the appeal in November, which is better than the alternative.  The SCOTUS rejection of an appeal is not a decision on the merits and has no precidential value. The 4th Circuit decision is precidential, but does not become the law of the land, but it can be relied on in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

Right now, this is the tip of the spear as far as I'm concerned.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-guncontrol/u-s-top-court-spurns-challenge-to-maryland-assault-weapons-ban-idUSKBN1DR1SE

I would very much like to attend Ruth Ginsburg's (or Kagan's or Sotomayor's) funeral .   (not really)

And her Trump replacement's swearing in.  (really)

Then, I think these appeals don't get rejected, they get accepted and unconstitutional laws overturned as they should be.

And then let the left suck on..... that.  
 

 

[Bighead]

Jess I fear you are correct. What will this mean? Civil war 2.0????? Are there enough willing to take on tyranny? Or enough that swore the oath to support and uphold OUR Constitution to actually say enough and we won't take on the civilians????!!
I fear not, but hope I am wrong.

Being from a family that has had MANY relatives in the military, and having served myself. I think I have decent grasp on the military way of thinking. I don't think there is a snowballs chance in Hell that the military would follow unlawful orders to take people's weapons. Even the Marines. (Just kidding Willow)

You think you are the only one here that has served? And today's way of thinking (government especially ) what makes you thin they wouldn't ? Unlawful until the gov deems it lawful......

[Bighead]

Zero replies to my earlier post.........hmmmm.
And I wonder where all the snowflakes will hide and take cover?

[Robert]

Boulder City Council passes gun ban on first reading

https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/2018/04/07/10538/

A controversial city ordinance to ban “assault weapons, bump stocks and high capacity magazines” passed the Boulder City Council unanimously on first reading Thursday night after more than five hours of public testimony on both sides of the issue.

As written, the ban would require anyone legally possessing anything under the ban to either register that gun with the Boulder Police Department (fee charged) or surrender it for destruction.

[shavdog]

 :)Good job Boulder City....I would like to see Minnesota put a total  ban on the same weapons....since I can't use them to shoot a deer....I guess I shouldn't need them to shoot a human either.....good choice...

[Gavin_Sons]

:)Good job Boulder City....I would like to see Minnesota put a total  ban on the same weapons....since I can't use them to shoot a deer....I guess I shouldn't need them to shoot a human either.....good choice...

  then don't own one.  Problem solved.

[Serk]

:)Good job Boulder City....I would like to see Minnesota put a total  ban on the same weapons....since I can't use them to shoot a deer....I guess I shouldn't need them to shoot a human either.....good choice...

[shavdog]

I wonder why Trump lowered the Corporate Tax rate from 35% down to 21%.....

[Gavin_Sons]

I wonder why Trump lowered the Corporate Tax rate from 35% down to 21%.....

I also wonder why communist live in our country.

[MarkT]

Boulder City Council passes gun ban on first reading

https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/2018/04/07/10538/

A controversial city ordinance to ban “assault weapons, bump stocks and high capacity magazines” passed the Boulder City Council unanimously on first reading Thursday night after more than five hours of public testimony on both sides of the issue.

As written, the ban would require anyone legally possessing anything under the ban to either register that gun with the Boulder Police Department (fee charged) or surrender it for destruction.

Take ANYTHING Boulder does with a grain of salt.  They are known far and wide around these parts as The People's Republic of Boulder.  Perhaps the MOST commie/progressive jurisdiction in the country.  I'd guess more than Austin, Hawaii, the bay area, much of Minnesota, Chicago, NJ, NY, or much of MA.  Hardly a serious precedent-setter for the rest of the country.  If I had the misfortune to live in Boulder - say my family had moved there decades ago - I would have made it a priority to move out also decades ago.  Interesting, the other side of the fence is embodied only about a hundred miles away in Colorado Springs, the home of the Air Force Academy, Fort Carson, Cheyenne Mtn, Petersen AFB, Schriever AFB, Air Force Space Command - 40% of the local economy is from the military and the demographics are solidly red.  Not to mention the Olympics with a nationalistic lean.  In between is Denver - which is also blue politically but I think that's due to being a developed inner - city.  Much like other big cities.  The surrounding towns / metro area  - not so much.

I think a good reason to own an AR15 - is it's a great choice for being the tool to support the 2nd Amendment in it's original purpose.  Yeah, it's a great battle rifle platform.  So Shavdog - don't own one.  You can submit to whatever your progressive govt has in store for you since you won't have any say with appropriate implements to enforce your rights.  Maybe you have a neighbor who can help save your bacon.  Or you can help with your deer rifle.  I believe we should all pull our weight when TSHTF and TEOTWAWKI.

[3fan4life]

I wonder why Trump lowered the Corporate Tax rate from 35% down to 21%.....

And I wonder why some people are allowed to waste perfectly good oxygen?

Had a DI that called them, "Oxygen Thieves".

[Motodad71]

Colorado is becoming "infested" with left coast transplants "yes Commiefornia", I had a conversation with more than a few lifetime Colorado folks who are not happy about what is happening in their beautiful state.

[98valk]

Colorado is becoming "infested" with left coast transplants "yes Commiefornia", I had a conversation with more than a few lifetime Colorado folks who are not happy about what is happening in their beautiful state.

its all about the weed laws.

[Jess from VA]

Colorado is becoming "infested" with left coast transplants "yes Commiefornia", I had a conversation with more than a few lifetime Colorado folks who are not happy about what is happening in their beautiful state.

its all about the weed laws.

But inquiring minds want to know.  What came first, the Commiefornia's or the weed laws?