Mar
02
2013

Democrats about to ban shotguns in Colorado?

This is what happens when people who do not know anything about guns try to write restrictive laws on gun ownership: they lack the experience – or perhaps ability – to know when they’ve messed up.  Short version: the legislature decided to ban those evil, evil high capacity magazines again.  Small problem: Democrats apparently think that history started in 2008, because they didn’t bother to look up certain implications from the federal ‘assault weapons’ ban:

A pump or semi-automatic shotgun is the gun most hunters in Colorado use. It’s a gun state Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, says could be banned under a bill that’s already passed the House and Gov. John Hickenlooper says he’ll sign.

[snip]

Brophy points to a section of the bill that defines a high-capacity magazine as one capable of accepting or — that can be readily converted — to accept more than 15 rounds or eight shotgun shells.

“This is where shotgun shells go inside this tube here,” Brophy showed Boyd, “You can screw this part off the top and screw on an extender to this tube to allow it to hold more than eight rounds. It is readily convertible, which by definition in the bill, makes the whole thing a high-capacity magazine.”

(Via Drudge) Brophy later noted that this was a problem in the last, essentially useless federal “assault weapons ban:” shotgun manufacturers compensated by changing the barrel, but they’re highly unlikely to do that for just the Colorado market.  Hope your shotguns don’t break before you guys get a Republican majority again, folks!

…What, you expect me to show much sympathy?  Well, I’m sorry that it happened, but Colorado isn’t Maryland; there was a viable electoral alternative to the current administration. Remember, these are the people that Coloradans voted for, largely because a large part of the Colorado Right are more libertarian-leaning than they are socially conservative, and they decided that they weren’t all that thrilled with putting social conservatives in office.  So they put a bunch of Democrats in, instead – and now those Democrats are passing gun bills that ban shotguns (something that social conservatives would not do, by the way).  This is, in other words, one of those valuable life lessons that one hears about from time to time.

If it’s painful, well, that just means that it’s working.

Moe Lane

PS: The Democratic response to this problem is that they have top men looking into it.

Top men.

9 Comments

  • Skip says:

    It’s not the only nonsensical regulation concerning shotguns – Federal regulations restrict you to shotguns that can hold at most three rounds for hunting waterfowl. Other than single shot and double-barrel shotguns, I can’t think of anyone that makes a three shot or less shotgun. So if you go hunting, you get to have a limiter installed, which is essentially just a dowel that goes in the magazine tube that limits the number of shells that can be in it. Just having a shotgun without it while you’re out hunting will get you in mucho trouble, even if you’re not actually hunting waterfowl, and even if you don’t have more than three shells loaded.

  • Catseyes says:

    I have said it before in other locations if they had any brains they would be far more worried about what type of weaponry people would create if they took guns away. Does anyone besides me remember the Arc gun(the predecessor for the modern taser) or the big game air-rifles of the last century. Do they truly think a fully automatic air rifle is an impossibility because a semi-auto isn’t. What do they think will happen when the first EMP cannon takes to the field and makes the modern military obsolete in a day. Are they really ready for the age of the ChainSword? Oh yea, right, they don’t think they use feelings instead.

  • nighttwister says:

    While it’s more complex than you state, I won’t quibble with your basic summary of Colorado politics. Hey, at least they get to smoke their pot, right? Part of me thinks they’ll now be so stoned they won’t notice much anymore anyway.

    • acat says:

      (crosses Colorado off the list of possible States to relocate to)
      .
      Mew
      .
      p.s. Hey Night Twister, long time no see.

      • nighttwister says:

        Hey acat. I don’t involve myself much in politics anymore. I’m just completely buried at work, and family takes up the rest of my time. I occasionally pop in to read when I can.

  • Luke says:

    Don’t blame the Colorado natives. Blame the massive influx of Californians fleeing the wreckage of their state. Most of whom happily carry the seeds of the destruction with them. Pretty much every state out West is getting swamped by this mass migration.

    • nighttwister says:

      Well, that’s an easy excuse, but not really accurate. I’m one of the Californians that relocated here 13 years ago. The piece of the puzzle missing in Moe’s summary is there are a lot of social conservatives that have no interest in forming any type of coalition. Back when Schaffer ran against Udall the conservatives (primarily CRTL) did as much damage as the Libertarians. When Bob Schaffer isn’t conservative enough for you, then you’ve pretty much eliminated yourself from having any positive influence over any election.

  • DemosthenesVW says:

    I cannot believe you missed an opportunity to say “classical reference,” Moe. Especially since, re: “top men,” you would be absolutely right.

RSS feed for comments on this post.


Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com