CO: Bill Introduced to Repeal Colorado Restrictions on Magazine Capacity

Gun Watch ^ | 18 January, 2018 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Republicans in the Colorado Senate have introduced a bill to repeal the limits placed on magazine capacity in 2013. Here is the summary of SB18-052:

The bill repeals statutory provisions:

• Prohibiting the possession of certain ammunition magazines; and
• Requiring each of certain ammunition magazines that are manufactured in Colorado on or after July 1, 2013, to include a permanent stamp or marking indicating that the magazine was manufactured or assembled after July 1, 2013.

The magazine limits were heavily contested by the Colorado Sheriffs who sued Governor Hickenlooper over the law. 

The lawsuit was eventually dismissed, because no one had been prosecuted under the law's provisions.

After the passage of the law, retailers and firearms owners quickly found ways to circumvent it, as opponents had predicted.

As of 2016, there were no prosecutions under the law, according to David Kopel, a firearms law expert. From the denverpost.com:

But Kopel also said no one has yet been prosecuted under the laws.

“The laws are unenforceable, and they haven’t been enforced,” he said.

The Colorado ban on magazines with a capacity of over 15 rounds only applies if the magazines were manufactured after 2013. Firearms magazines do not generally have serial numbers or dates of manufacture stamped on them. There are hundreds of millions of magazines in the United States in private hands.

Large numbers of modern firearms come with standard capacity magazines of more than 15 rounds.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Colorado restrictions on magazine capacity are very bad law.

[real saxophonist]

[Wolfie]

Bkmrk

[marktwain]

I always liked that cartoon!

[PROCON]

RKBA Ping List

This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.

More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.

[PROCON]

You're probably aware that my home state of Washington is now debating bills which would require licensing of owners of these so-called "high-capacity" magazines.

Also a bill introduced to require licensing of "assault rifles."

For every pro-2nd Amendment bill that gets passed in America, it seems 2 anti-2nd Amendment bills are proposed/passed.

[real saxophonist]

That cartoon is perfect.

I can buy all the Glock 19 magazines I want, but if I want a Glock 17 magazine, I have to go to Cheyenne or some place.

[thorvaldr]

Not to kill anyone’s buzz, but this bill is a puppet show. They do it every year and it goes to a Democrat controlled designated kill committee and dies.

[marktwain]

For every pro-2nd Amendment bill that gets passed in America, it seems 2 anti-2nd Amendment bills are proposed/passed.

---

They are proposed, but seldom passed. Where they are passed, is in deep blue states such as California.

The laws are propped up by the Ninth Circuit, which is blatantly anti-Second Amendment, and which the Supreme Court has not called to task on the issue.

We need at least one more Supreme Court justice that is a originalist and textualist such as Gorsuch. Then we will make serious progress.

We are makeing progress, but it is mostly in Red States.

[thorvaldr]

“I can buy all the Glock 19 magazines I want, but if I want a Glock 17 magazine, I have to go to Cheyenne or some place.”

But it’s even stupider than that. Online everyone acts like you live in CA and won’t sell you a magazine but some real physical stores will just pop the base-plate off a G17 magazine and sell it to you as a kit.

[Hardastarboard]

I have a Clinton era high cap magazine marked “Law Enforcement Only”, just because I can.

[grobdriver]

Too late. Magpul has left the building!

[mrmeyer]

https://gunmagwarehouse.com/glock-magazine-gen-4-glock-19-9mm-luger-15-round-with-block-polymer-black.html

[dware]

Utah has em still! So does New Mexico. Screw this law.

[dsc]

“For every pro-2nd Amendment bill that gets passed in America, it seems 2 anti-2nd Amendment bills are proposed/passed.”

Yesterday I mused that this is a country built on the premise that people have rights that precede any government, and which no government may violate.

I wonder if those include the right to knowingly and maliciously deceive people with the intent of harming them. Because that is the habitual behavior of the left.

What do you think? Do other Americans have the right to knowingly and maliciously deceive you with the intent of harming you?

If not, at what point are we at war with those people? What has to happen before honest Americans are justified in removing them from whatever offices they hold, by whatever means are necessary?

[catnipman]

“Colorado restrictions on magazine capacity are very bad law.”

and VERY badly written law, to the point it is unenforceable, and in fact 55 out of 62 county Sheriffs announced they wouldn’t attempt to enforce ANY of the new gun laws passed in 2013. (The intrastate Instacheck law was so badly written as well that it was unenforceable too.)

As a matter of fact, I’m not aware of any attempt to charge anyone with violations of ANY of these laws since they were passed. Probably, among other things, there’s a fear that they would be struck down as too vague if challenged in court.

[wastedyears]

Any law restricting a Natural Right endowed by our Creator is unconstitutional and unconscionable.

[marktwain]

I wonder if those include the right to knowingly and maliciously deceive people with the intent of harming them. Because that is the habitual behavior of the left.

---

You have precisely understood the problem. The Progressives would claim their “intent” is to “help” the people of the future.

[dsc]

“Progressives would claim their “intent” is to “help” the people of the future.”

Yes, but the things they want to do are demonstrably harmful.

[marktwain]

Progressives do not believe in objective reality.