m4carbinephaseII

Yesterday, as you may already be aware, the Colorado House of Representatives held the ‘third reading’ for HB 13-1224, a measure to limit magazine capacity. The vote passed 34:31 and will now be pushed on to the Colorado State Senate.

Other gun control issues aside (though by no means to marginalize them) this will be of significance to Kit Up! readers because it centers around MagPul Industries Corporation, manufacturer of the PMag. MagPul is based in Erie, Colorado, and will obviously be impacted severely if the 13-1224 becomes law (this despite transparently self-serving last minute attempts on the part of supporting legislators to provide an exemption for manufacture). The significance of this lies on several levels, from that of the national debate on gun control to the impact on an individual’s ability to purchase the kit he or she wants at a time when magazines are already in short supply (and potentially those already owned).

As you might expect, it is difficult for me to write in such a way as to distinguish reporting from advocacy. In the larger context of the debate and from the perspective of constructive support (on whichever side) I think it is vital for all involved to leave visceral reaction aside and attempt to address all aspects as respectfully as possible. Unfortunately there seems to be little willingness to do that. This is without a doubt an extremely polarizing issue that has been given very little opportunity for true discussion, which by no means eliminates the need for rational discourse.

This particular article is going to address HB 13-1224 specifically, though it must at least tangentially discuss the three other bills that were approved yesterday.There are a number of reasons the successful passage of 1224 and its fellows are significant, not least of which are concerns as to its Constitutionality and its importance to the national debate. The White House is keeping a close eye on the status of these bills; according to the Denver Post, VPOTUS Biden was in communication with several Democratic Representatives in Colorado on Friday.

RepFields_Colorado

MagPul is a ‘household name’ in our demographic and it is at the center of the 13-1224 furor and despite some odd, even silly allegations to the contrary they’ve made it very clear they will halt operations and move to a different state if the law passes.

MagPul was founded in 1999 by a Marine Corps veteran and has become virtually synonymous for polymer magazines, magazine accessories and what is called firearm ‘furniture’ in our tactical parlance. MagPul is a self-described “proud Colorado company” that has a significant economic impact in the state (though estimates vary, most agree that it would bring $80-$90 million dollars to the Colorado economy in 2013, not counting payroll).

13-1224 bears more than a passing similarity to the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013, Missouri’s recently introduced House Bill 545 and a package of 10 bills put forth by Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento in the state of California (and the one in Minnesota, and Washington, et al). As with other such discussions at both State and Federal level, HB-1224 and its fellows are either being both hailed as a common sense life saving measure or declaimed as an impractical, unenforceable intrusion on the Second Amendment with no impact on public safety. The progress of these bills, and 13-224 in particular, are being closely watched across the country by both pro-gun control and anti-gun control people alike as a key indicator in the national debate.

[Note: The New York Safe Act limited magazine capacity to 7 rounds, broadened the definition of the term ‘assault weapon’ and enacted other steps making it one of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Missouri’s HB-1224 is similar in many ways and includes one phrase in particular that makes it appear providing justification and cause for firearm confiscation in any cases where the weapons in question are not removed from the state or rendered inoperable within 90 days.]

The four bills on their way to the Senate now are HB 13-1229, which would require a background check for all gun transactions; House Bill 13-1226, which would eliminate concealed carry on ‘higher education’ campuses and college premises; HB 13-1228, which would institute a fee on background checks to cover costs incurred by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) processing all firearm purchases (estimated to be approximately $1.6 million) and perhaps the most controversial and hotly debated one of the four, HB 13-1224, which now limits magazine capacity to 15 rounds. This number appears to be arbitrary, and wasn’t always certain. There was a period of time when they discussed an 11 round capacity.

PMAG_Gen3

HB 13-1224 was sponsored by Rep. Rhonda Fields (D House District 42, Aurora), who described it as an “incremental approach” to limiting gun violence, clearly referring in her closing remarks to more measures to come—something that will clearly worry opponents of gun control in Colorado and other states. Her overriding concern, as she explains it, was not to provide a ‘feel good measure’ but to legitimately reduce gun violence.

“Our schools are sacred places, our malls our sacred places, our churches are sacred places,” she said. “…no one should have these high capacity magazines to kill as many people as they can…”

State Rep. Edward Vigil (D-Fort Garland) disagreed, saying he believed ‘high capacity magazines’ were being “demonized” and that that CO should vote no on the measure. He spoke to the fact that criminals were unlikely to abide by a law and any case and suggested instead a law against criminal gangs and efforts to improve mental health efforts, urging a no vote and asking that no vote be made on emotion.

Other opponents of the bill articulated various studies, including those by the CDC and the NIJ, that show no correlation between gun control laws and the crime rate. They also pointed out flaws in the bill that would make it unenforceable and impractical and its disregard for the Second Amendment, and criticized the inconsistencies and hypocrisy of a last minute provision that would allow the manufacture of such magazines in the state despite their being illegal for Colorado citizens. This adjustment has been largely seen as an effort to retain the advantage of having Colorado based magazine manufacturers in the local while removing them from the hands of Colorado citizens.

“Apparently, they (high-capacity magazines) are not instruments of destruction when they’re purchased outside the borders of Colorado,” said Mark Waller, R-Colorado Springs.

Rep_Stephens_Colorado

“[This law]…will not limit our Second Amendment Rights, it will infringe them,” said State Rep. Jared Wright (R-Fruita). Wright is a former law enforcement officer who spoke at length to the fallacy of believing magazine limitations would increase public safety.

Passage of the third reading in the House today was preceded by ‘second reading’ on Friday, where over six hours were spent debating 13-1224 on the floor. Opponents of the bill fear it is likely to be approved by the Senate and become law. Kit Up readers who follow social media sites and ‘tactical news’ sources know opposition to the measure has largely been led by MagPul.

MagPul disagrees with any assertions that so-called “high capacity magazines” (which might more properly be called standard capacity magazines) contribute to gun violence and that any measures to restrict them would be not only improper Constitutionally but dramatically significant economically—not just to their company, which they readily acknowledge, but to the greater community of with they are a part.

“We have a pretty uphill battle in the Senate,” says MagPul’s Duane Liptak, Director of Product Management and Marketing. “We’re making our arguments, explaining that this bill doesn’t improve public safety in any way shape or form, that it isn’t practical or enforceable and…that it doesn’t hurt anyone except those who are law abiding, but…”

MagPulRep. Jared Wright (R) addressed this same concern.

“What is the functionality of this?” Rep. Wright asked the assembled Colorado House. “How does this improve public safety in the State of Colorado?” In his and others’ opinion, magazine restrictions would do nothing to actually improve the safety of Coloradans, and that there was no way to determine the legality of a magazine in question anyway—no way to identify whether a magazine had been manufactured prior to the proposed law, or if it had been purchased in Utah (for instance) and brought back into the state.  He went on to chastise both sides of the debate, expressing his distaste for the “…the invocation of the images of dead children on both sides…” when arguing their case.

Rep. Claire Levy (D-Boulder) acknowledged she had no study showing definitively that magazines would “stop the killing”, but “[she believes it to be]…a constructive and necessary first step.” She addressed what she described as “straw man arguments” like vehicle deaths and tractor rollovers by articulating methods developed to counter them, such as airbags and seatbelts.

“High capacity magazine are commonly used in gun crimes and police murders [and are involved in] at least14-26% of gun crimes,” said Beth McCann (D – House District 8, Denver). She went on to describe the use of “high capacity magazines” in the Aurora theater shooting, citing the use of a 100 round drum in that event, and then listed a series of homicides she advised involved such magazines. Rep. McCann describes the reduction of magazine capacity to a maximum of 15 rounds as a common sense limitation.

MagPul has made it clear they will leave Colorado if the law passes, in their social media and a press release. They are receiving widespread support across the firearm and tactical industry for their stand and are being lauded for their leadership. In addition to empirical arguments about possible practical results on public safety and violence MagPul has addressed the financial repercussions with the voice of a proud Colorado company.

“We’ve tried to make this argument from an economic standpoint,” Liptak explains, “and it [the decision to move manufacturing out of Colorado] was not an easy decision to make. This will be an incredible disruption for our employees if we have to displace…it wasn’t made lightly, but we have a moral obligation to do it.

Rep. Lori Saine (R-House District 63), in whose district MagPul is located, spoke succinctly after a short break. “This bill is a jobs killer,” she said, “I urge a no vote.”

MagPul employs 200 people directly, and counting sub-contractors and service providers in the Denver area provides employment to at least another 400 jobs. Not counting payroll, they put $46 million into the Colorado economy in 2012 and is projected to increase that to an estimated $85 million in 2013.

I spoke with Rep. Saine after Friday’s debate and she clarified that number. “It would actually take a projected $98 million out of the state over the next year,” she said. When I asked if the bill’s proponents had ever addressed the economic implications she and other legislators had brought up, she replied “Of course not, there’s nothing to say.”

Though I watched several hours of the debate on Friday and more yesterday, I never heard proponents of the bill address the economic ramifications. To be fair, they may be taking the stance that a reduction in violence is more important than monetary considerations, but if so it would have been nice for them to articulate that. Sadly, given the hyperbolae and some factual inconsistencies I observed, it seems more likely they just didn’t want to be on record making such statements in a time when the entire economy is lagging and unemployment is so high.

“They did put an exemption in for manufacturers,” Liptak says, “but that’s not something MagPul can do, not from an ethical standpoint or a business standpoint. Citizens can’t own our products but we’ll continue to make them and just ship them out of state? We can’t do that, it’s not right, and besides people would boycott us out of principal and…we don’t blame them. We aren’t bluffing, though apparently some legislators believe we are; we’ll have production up and running before the enactment of the bill if that is what it comes to.”

“This bill does not require or force any company to leave Colorado,” Rep. McCann noted. “The bill explicitly now indicates the companies can continue to manufacture these and deliver them outside the state…”

To that statement Mr. Liptak responded, “If this passes, remaining in Colorado is just not an option for us.”

MagPul2

Asked where they might go, he would not say for sure, explaining, “We’ve been courted by several states with amenable gun laws and the sort of culture we want to be a part of with our tax dollars and jobs. We love Colorado, the culture personal responsibility and personal freedom here…it’s now just…certainly not in keeping with the values of the great American west.”

Pro gun control social media sites have widely referred to the successful passage of these four bills, in particular the magazine restrictions, to the next step towards law as a hopeful precursor to similar efforts in other states or at the Federal level.

The Denver Post has reported that Vice President Joe Biden contacted several Colorado Democratic lawmakers on Friday after 13-1224 passed second reading. Tony Exum (D-Colorado Springs), described their conversation. “He said it would send a strong message to the rest of the country that a Western state had passed gun-control bills,” Exum said.

As of this writing my e-mails to Representative Fields, private messages left on her Facebook page and phone calls have all gone unanswered.

MagPul has not decided where they will be moving if 13-1224 becomes law, but no matter what happens, even if the measure fails to pass the Colorado Senate, but whatever happens things are going to become even more controversial—and PMags and MagPul furniture even harder to get.

Colorado4

{ 70 comments… read them below or add one }

Edohiguma February 19, 2013 at 5:10 pm

How's banning concealed weapons on campus going to prevent spree shootings? I mean seriously, if I'm the bad guy and I've already planned to shoot 50 people on campus… how is that ban going to stop me? I've already planned mass murder, so violating the gun ban is certainly not going to dissuade me.

It just shows how brain dead those "elected officials" are.

Reply

sigmund February 19, 2013 at 7:01 pm

"How’s banning concealed weapons on campus going to prevent spree shootings? "

It wont. In fact, the only thing that it will do is force students on campuses to become helpless victims.

Im not even sure why this legislation was introduced, concealed carriers on campus grounds has $*@!-all to do with the massacre at Sandy Hook.

Reply

Sgt. Rich Cabral February 19, 2013 at 5:38 pm

David, I read your entire letter and it is sad that this is happening to our industry. Cheaper than dirt just posted that any Law Enforcement agency in a given state that basically supports Firearm restrictions to Law abiding citizens will not be serviced or able to buy from them. We are a very small business but we will be taking the same position starting today the 19th of Feb 2013. Yes this may hurt the bottom line but I refuse to to contribute to my own demise. Semper Fi. Sgt. Rich Cabral http://ShortRifles.com

Reply

Wiebelhaus February 19, 2013 at 5:41 pm

They should come to Texas! Area Code #76513 has new Industrial complex, tax incentives for new business and an eager work force with a lower cost of living which would mean Magpul could pay less per hour but stay competitive in the area.

Reply

Bob Ratliff February 19, 2013 at 6:37 pm

This is not only about Magpul and the jobs associated with it and its sub-contractors. I can guarantee you that the states that are going to Infringe on "We The People's God Given Rights" to Protect Themselves and Their Families are going to lose countless Residents to Relocation because of these Stupid Un-Constitutional Laws! This time I am not going to take it. I am ready to do whatever and go wherever that will take me! There are some things worth fighting for and by God The Bill of Rights and The 2nd Amendment certainly are One of Them! All of these Politicians that say that they respect The 2nd Amendment to The U.S. Constitution, they do not even understand what its true purpose was! I believe a lot are about to find out! Our Founders intended for The 2nd Amendment to be so that "We The People" could stand up to a Tyrannical Government, one that was threatening us with Oppression and to Taking away our Liberties and Freedom! We were to utilize Our Own Personal Firearms that were in common use for that period in time! To Join Forces with Our Fellow Brethren to defend Our Honor, Dignity, Freedom and Liberty!

Reply

ajSpades February 20, 2013 at 4:19 am

Bob,

The right to keep and bear arms is NOT a god given right, it is a Constitutional right. The laws have not been judged unconstitutional, yet, though with so many similar laws being created and passed, it may take a LONG while for the Supreme Court to sort through them all.

Reply

Mike in Fort Worth February 20, 2013 at 5:18 am

ajSpades, while the 2nd Amendment is a Constitutional right it is also a natural right as all of our Constitutional rights are. The Constitution merely guarantees rights that we already possess by virtue of our existence on this earth. While it is true that these laws will have to make their way through the courts it doesn't change the fact that these rights are ours and not the governments. They are not theirs to take away from us.

Reply

David Spicer February 20, 2013 at 6:26 am

Mr. Spades your comminet realy brings to question your views and which side you are on. As an 18 year law enforcement officer and vetran with tours in the wmiddle east, I have seen the inhumanity our fellow citizens in the us and the inhumanity forced upon others by external forces. the right to self defese is an absolute natural right of all people. I will not force my faith on anyone and call it a GOD given right but that IS what it is. We as the gun owning Constitutionally minded people of the greatest nation to ever BLESS the face of this earth better wake up and present a unified front or I fear we will be fighting for these rights again with more than just the ballot box and calls and e-mails. This is not something I want to see for my country, my boys, or my potiential grand children.

THE WRITING ON THE WALL IS CLEAR. TOTAL CONFISCATION IS THE END GOAL.

David Spicer

OATH KEEPER

Service men and women and all law enforcement please look into the Oath Keepers and consider joining or at least supporting.

Reply

JDs Handsome Son February 19, 2013 at 7:11 pm

It is past time for adherents to our Bill of Rights to stop debating and arguing with our opponents on the 2nd Amendment because we should have long ago recognized that enemies of the Amendment are not misguided or misinformed. They are ideologically driven to destroy it and are beyond the reach of any compromise or reasoning.

It is time for our side to act and to act in revolutionary ways, not violently, not by taking up arms, waging war of anything like that. It is time to react by going on offense in novel, "revolutionary" ways.

Refusing to transact with state and local agencies attacking our rights is one such revolutionary response. It would be nice if the entire arms industry could join in this tactic because cutting off these tyrants would crush these tyrannical and unconstitutional statutes. History teaches us that the sooner these petty dictators are stopped, the less damage they can do.

We are at a disadvantage because while gun rights enjoys wide popular support still in America, we have no coherent strategy and message to counter the well funded, well organized, and well disciplined attacks by the Left. There are no hunter and tactical divisions on the left; they are of one mind and suffer no dissent among their ranks. They dominate all communications and are expert in shaping images and thought. We, on the other hand, are frustrated by the seeming unwillingness of all but one or two in our so called conservative party to stand up for our beliefs and those are not the most dynamic and informed speakers. They are forever blindsided by the same easily refuted allegations and positions as if they had never heard them before. It's time to get competent, thoroughly knowledgeable, and unapologetic advocates who an speak boldly, directly and effectively on the subject.

And for God's sakes, has no one read Heller and MacDonald? Does no one know that those cases have all but protected AR 15s by holding that weapons commonly held and preferred by the citizens and suitable for militia duty are protected? Those case did more than reaffirm individual rights to guns. Yet each day we tolerate some subversive law giver revealing his ignorance or hostility to our Bill of Rights with some new attack on our freedoms.

Reply

David Spicer February 20, 2013 at 6:38 am

Well said my friend. Please continue with informing all you come in contact with.

David Spicer

Oath Keeper

Reply

NotSoSeriousToday February 19, 2013 at 7:16 pm

Im sad that this State is coming to this but if all these bills make it through which sadly is likely at this point Im joining magpul and getting the hell on out of Colorado.

But until then Im Fighting the good fight

Reply

Anthony February 19, 2013 at 7:26 pm

Since being allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus, how many college shootings have occurred at Colorado college campuses? None that I can think of.

Reply

JCitizen February 19, 2013 at 8:57 pm

Boo! Colorado! And any state that passes such rubbish! If we limit magazines, the populace will end up beholding to drug cartel criminals that have all the magazine capacity they want from the black market. And when I say "black market" I mean the fact that it comes from out of country through foreign suppliers and dirt cheap too! Anybody that has ever watched "Cops" on TV has seen those dime bag UZI pistol transactions. And those are FULL AUTO and totally illegal, of course – once again as everyone with a brain knows, the crooks don't care if it is "legal" or not! Sheeze! X-(

Reply

91B10-BPG February 19, 2013 at 10:54 pm

“… A well-regulated Militia, composed of the Gentlemen, Freeholders, and other Freemen was necessary to protect our ancient laws and liberty from the standing army … And we do each of us, for ourselves respectively, promise and engage to keep a good Fire-lock in proper order & to furnish Ourselves as soon as possible with, & always keep by us, one Pound of Gunpowder, four Pounds of Lead, one Dozen Gun Flints, and a pair of Bullet Moulds, with a Cartouch Box, or powder horn, and Bag for Balls.” – George Mason – 1770.

This was written after the Boston Massacre and before the Declaration of Independence, during a firearms confiscation scheme enacted by the government enforced by the standing army.

In the language of the day the term “Well regulated” means properly functioning, and the list following "composed of" was the population at large. The Freestanding Army referenced is obviously the British Army (IE.. the Government), and the supply list was at the time a full combat load in the arms technology of the day.

I hear and see people touting the belief that the founding fathers didn’t know anything about modern weapons and "high capacity magazines" and therefore the 2nd amendment doesn’t apply or should only apply to shotguns and muskets. I disagree, The Founding Fathers were intelligent men, they understood Technology moves forward and no doubt weapons tech would as well. That made no difference to them; the Idea was that the People be armed just as the standing army of the time was armed. That principal has NOT changed, nor have the reasons for it.

Since Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act (18 USCS Sec. 1385) in 1878, making it illegal for the government to deploy its military against “we the people” (My words-) There have been at least 114 instances of use of U.S. military against its own citizens participating in “unrest,” 1878–1994. That number grows to 136 if you go back to 1775.

“Of the people, by the people, for the people”?… Really?

I submit that the modern equivalent to the Boston Massacre is “Kent State” and the modern equivalent for that supply list is a battle rifle, assault rifle or carbine, the magazines to feed it, 200+ rounds of ammunition and the load bearing equipment to transport it.

The politics of power and greed that drove this have not changed, nor has the ability of a government to put down an armed populace. What HAS changed is the intestinal fortitude, morals, and values of our population.

Nothing makes me angrier than an elected official telling ME what I “NEED”. “If it only saves one life” is NOT a reason to strip us of our rights, especially the one that guarantees the rest.

Reply

Johnny Quest February 20, 2013 at 5:42 am

The price of living in a free society is that inherent risk that some folks will do bad things. Lack of the enforcement of laws, deals with prosecutors and judges, rampant recidivism and the revolving door of the judicial system, plus the fact that generationally I gotta believe we are breeding dumber and dumber people (a genetic issue imo) and a bunch of pussies in this country, is where we stand.

Reply

Cristian February 20, 2013 at 12:36 am

Since I live in a not-so-free country (please note that this hurt twice to write, because many young American died to free us from the Fascist) that has very strict gun control law (Italy has probably some of the wrost gun law in Europe.. only UK is worse if I am not wrong) I see another point in this debate that have not been stressed enough.

We all agree that the weapon ban and magazin limiting issue will not work, even people enforcing them already know this: they have stats form the previous experience.. but they don't want to listen so I will leave that behind, what I would like to point out is that a government main goal is to provide a fertile environments for his population/citizen to live within. Now, is the Colorado Gov doing that? To me doing what they are doing means only that there will be Families directly impacted by this law (that will not reduce violence) and, on a longer time-base this will lead to more crime, not less, because crime prosper in time of crysis, and "deleting" all that job place, deleting all that tax revenue, will do just that, it will create a crysis area: it may be as small as a town/city, it can be as big as a state, it doesen't matter: it is the negation of the pourpose of a Government. Please don't think that I would like to put prosperity and money making on top (as priorities) to safety of the Citizen, I am not: safety of a Citizen is created with the less intrusive law possible, with law that are effective and well tought, this will help the Citizen thrive in terms of knowlege, responsibility and yes, material possession. What I see is not a Governemnt at work, it is an ideology at work, and it is working against the people that put them in office.. crazy.. so crazy that I have never seen it happen in the US, only in Italy..

Please forgive me for my poor English, I hope I have been able to make my tought clear.

Ciao

CV

Reply

91B10-BPG February 20, 2013 at 1:17 am

Well said Cristian, thank you.

Reply

Mitnadev February 20, 2013 at 2:12 am

This is nothing. I live in NJ. There's a feeding frenzy here , working its way to law, which will effectively disarm all law abiding citizens. If any of you care about our Constitution, or not creating a second state (after NY) which is a free fire zone for criminals, please help us!

Google the NJ2AS for full details on the bills.

Reply

Rod February 20, 2013 at 5:20 am

Why is it, that whenever the debate is about taking away a right, we suddenly have t obe civil?

Shouldn't it be the other way around? Isn't it time to stop being civil when they are attempting to rob you of your rights?

I'm all for figuring out a way to sanction states that pass these restrictions and bans. There must be some way to punish them.

Reply

Davey February 20, 2013 at 5:40 am

We in Wyoming would gladly welcome our new Thermoplastic Overlords! They would also be welcome in the South Dakota Black Hills (Sturgis & Rapid City). Life is too short to work, pay taxes and run a business where you aren't wanted.

The Front Range of Colorado (i.e., Denver metro) drives the entire state. The eastern plains and the Western Slope are much more conservative but they get drowned out by the activist legislature and Executive branch.

My sympathies to everybody in Colorado. There's a thriving competitive shooting community (especially Montrose, CO) that is about to be strangled.

Reply

dave/a veteraan February 20, 2013 at 6:03 am

Moce here to Arizona, we will welcome you. I'm sure Texas wquld too. To hell with Colorado, New York, and Jersy.

Reply

gunslinger6 February 20, 2013 at 6:37 am

DJ is that you?

Reply

E. Ronc February 20, 2013 at 6:13 am

Well I would like to see more of our manufactures banning together. S&W sells a black rifle. This law passes they should announce no sales, repairs, armor courses for ANY of their products to Colorado state or local law enforcement. Glock and Sig should follow suit, how many of their pistol have magazines over 10 rounds. That covers the largest percentage of law enforcement handguns. Any company trying to take advantage of these companies stance would become persona no gratis in the rest of the shooting community. We would not buy their products. Gun magazine wouldn't review their products or even take advertising from them. Yes they might take a hit financially but we are a community and I don't see why manufactures of weapons alone should take the hit. Manufactures of ammo can refuse orders from those state and local agency. Once again, you do sell, your name goes on a black list and the same consequence as to our community supporting you and magazines touting or advertizing your products holds true. The NRA should not run any course for law enforcement. I'm sorry that this might be harsh but if you truly want an impact you can't have one or two do something. One stick alone is easily broken, but a bunch together will not break.

Reply

Ed Sunderland February 20, 2013 at 6:19 am

It's been said, the pen is mightier than the sword/gun and we have the first amendment. I think if we are to go after the second, why not the first? So, a newspaper or news person wants to write a story, then make a law that says they have to get a license and they can't write the article or story until some stupid government bureaucrat gives it the OK. Anyone who wants to make a public speech must get a permit, background check and wait 5 days before they can shoot their big mouth off! Think about it, how many people do you think are shot because they say something offensive? How many people really get under your skin because of what they say or write?

Take this gun debate today and exchange the second amendment with the first and see how it feels.

Reply

jsstx February 20, 2013 at 8:00 am

I agree wholeheartedly, but whenever I mention this little fact, the libtard fur starts to fly.

Reply

Dennis Marino February 20, 2013 at 6:40 am

We are under attack as law abiding citizens to come under the thumb of Liberal insanity. Even a gerbil could realize punishing your law abiding citizens in any state will do nothing to halt the crime rate. Hang up a sign that reads, Victims Here, at all schools. Go after the street gangs and drug cartels. Wipe them out instead of avoiding or tyring to compromise with them. Criminals don't care about laws, and neither do Liberals. A normal person says, "I don't like guns. I won't get one." An idiot Liberal says, ""i don't like guns so no one should have a gun." One step closer to Civil War.

Reply

jsstx February 20, 2013 at 7:59 am

PMag, you are always welcome in TX! With everyone else, I agree these laws are ridiculous, but the libtards are on a roll right now and like obamacare laws will be passed with no real thought or discussion. Time to resurrect ole Thomas Jefferson.

Reply

40MikeMike February 20, 2013 at 9:00 am

"You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas!" We'd love to have yall, Magpul.

Reply

40MikeMike February 20, 2013 at 9:01 am

Didn't even see jsstx's comment. Hell yeah.

Reply

CDS February 20, 2013 at 10:12 am

Unfortunately, that's a distinction few people tend to make. Really, when we're talking about murder, there's a distinction between "impulse" and "planned" attacks.

At best, what a magazine size limit does is limit the amount of ammunition available per magazine in an impulse attack, such as "I just found out this guy is sleeping with my wife" or "I've got my fifth wedgie from that bully in as many days, now I'm gonna get them back". When we're talking murder on this scale, where there's usually only one or a very few, specific, targets, magazine size doesn't matter because you only need a few bullets.

But large scale murder is usually planned out to maximize the body count regardless of laws and using whatever the attacker has available. All they do is go out and buy "pre-ban" mags (most of us probably remember that term) or enough post-ban magazines to make up for the difference.

If they've taken the time to do that planning, your problem is something MUCH bigger than the gun, itself. Your problem is a human who will sit down and calculate how to kill as many other people as possible. (We should all bear in mind that the Columbine attack happened DURING the previous Assault Weapons Ban and it's 10-round magazine limit.)

Reply

Johnny Quest February 20, 2013 at 10:53 am

Ronnie Barrett started this years ago when Kali banned .50 rifles. You are correct, if the manufacturers would stop supporting the government agencies perhaps this would be a wake up call. Then again, that may be a tall order.

Reply

Gone Shootin February 20, 2013 at 11:12 am

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, whether federal or state, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose. Since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it, an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed and never existed; that is, it is void ab initio. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, it follows that generally the statute imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office or liabilities, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, is incapable of creating any rights or obligations, does not allow for the granting of any relief, and justifies no acts performed under it.

Once a statute is determined to be unconstitutional, no private citizen or division of the state may take any further action pursuant to its provisions. A contract that rests on an unconstitutional statute creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it. A law contrary to the United States Constitution may not be enforced. Once a statute has been declared unconstitutional, courts thereafter have no jurisdiction over alleged violations. Persons convicted and fined under a statute subsequently held unconstitutional may recover the fines paid.

Reply

JCitizen February 20, 2013 at 11:27 am

Here! Here! Gone Shootin'! I wholeheartedly concur!!!

Reply

E. Ronc February 20, 2013 at 1:15 pm

But who wants to be the first to have their life ripped apart while this becomes a matterof settled law?

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:19 pm

We can also fight these illegal laws from the jury box…

Reply

JCitizen February 20, 2013 at 4:26 pm

Frickn' A J. Emerson! – E. Ronc – did the Christians ask why they were being fed to the lions? Don't worry – we got a lot of peaceful means to fight these laws before us, even though they deserve to be met by force! Resistance is NOT futile! Just think and use our brains to defy tyranny! We can make life miserable for evil without hardly a glance at our watches! Just use our brains!

Reply

E. Ronc February 20, 2013 at 8:56 pm

Haven't given up, see my above post. These people should get nothing from us. As I posted above. Also my nephew's club has made a stance.

Burlington police barred from local club shooting range
http://www.stowetoday.com/stowe_reporter/news/art

Sell or service no weapon. Sell no ammo, especially at a discount. Give the police no place to shoot or make it as expensive as you can. Let them waste a day making it to a government range.

Then let's see how well they like waiting for an under trained cop to arrive.

Ned B February 20, 2013 at 11:35 am

As someone who loves to travel, I receive travel information from many states, including Colorado. I have just posted on the Colorado Vacation FB page my intention to boycott the state of Colorado and any business in Colorado. I would suggest that everyone do likewise. Prior to the legislation taking effect, and as soon as MagPul pulls out of Colorado once the legislation takes effect, I will be one of their most devoted customers.

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 12:51 pm

These elected officials care more about the party line coming out of Washington D.C. than they do about their own voters in their own State. To hell with The Constitution their oath of office and the American people, not to mention the job's and local economy. What the hell is the matter with these progressives? Nothing they are trying to do will effect crime or the mental instability of the one's carrying out these crimes, this is all about controlling the honest people and is just the start as stated, to total dis-armament, in our once proud free Country…

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:09 pm

Our 2nd amendment Sir is a natural God given right that was protected by the bill of rights, you need to study up a bit on the history of our Constitution…The shall not infringe means just what it says, period…I don't care what some liberal judge says to try to twist the meaning. I can read and think for myself…

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:17 pm

Very well said Sir. I've been saying this all along. It's time we stick together and show our support for all these companies that join us and boycott the companies and States that trample our rights. I think we might get their attention if everyone refused to supply their police with weapons and ammo till they withdraw their anti-gun, and anti-Constitutional laws…

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Good for you Ned, I agree 110%…

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:27 pm

Its not just Colo. folks, Obama and his gang are putting pressure on all the States that are controlled by progressives, including mine in Minnesota. I think we have managed to shut them down for the most part up here, thank God…

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm

91B10-BPG, Very well said Sir, and right on the money if anyone is interested in history and facts, rather than emotions…

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:38 pm

I believe government is intentionally dumming down our kids I don't blame it on just the breeding. The kids need a parent home to raise them right too and government has made that next to impossible. I believe this is all planned for just like their plan to dis-arm…

Reply

Johnny Quest February 20, 2013 at 4:20 pm

Government doesn't MAKE you lazy, the ENABLE it.

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 1:55 pm

Dennis, this is not liberal insanity, they know exactly what they are doing. This is an attack on us as a free people and these people need to be jailed for treason and conspiracy to overthrow our Country…

Reply

Dennis Marino February 21, 2013 at 2:11 am

I agree. They want to run everything we do while they stay above the law and have people with weapons to protect them 24/7.

Reply

J. Emerson February 20, 2013 at 2:22 pm

Thank you David, and thank you Oath Keepers, which I fully support…

Reply

durabo February 20, 2013 at 2:25 pm

Magpul, why not tell Colorado to get stuffed, and move your company to Texas or Arizona, both Resistance states? Besidees, we'll need your products here (in AZ) to fight off the invaders from the south…

Reply

Broadsword February 20, 2013 at 3:02 pm

aj SPADES…YOU..like every person on the Planet…have the God-given RIGHT to defend the gift of your LIFE. The Constitution merely codifies what was understood by the Founders to BE such a right. Oddly enough, Ted Nugent expressed it quite well, when he observed this: “I believe that a person’s Moral Compass can be determined by how he references free men the right to defend themselves. The Second Amendment is so obvious to me , it’s insane that there’s even an argument! I don’t need a document and I don’t need another person to explain it to me. I have the right to defend the gift of my life. And…that there is an argument in America from Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein…from a whole gaggle of numb-nuts who would try to tell me THEY will dictate WHERE, HOW and IF I can defend myself ….I find that preposterous ! I find that unacceptable and I will not accept that! I am a FREE man….Don’t tread on me!”

Do you REALLY want to be subject to someone ELSE'S lame-arsszed opinion as to

YOUR LIFE?

Reply

ajspades February 20, 2013 at 6:52 pm

I stand by my previous statement that the 2nd Amendment, or any of the bill of rights, is not a God given right. The Constitution is neutral (neither confirming nor denying) the (non)existence of god(s). We have inherent rights to self-defense (life), liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and my belief is that that these rights are in line with what the values of the (Christian) God, but my belief is neither here nor there, and does not hold up in court. Everyone is extrapolating from my limited statement what my personal views are on the matter of the Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. I have not expressed these opinions because no one has asked me and they are merely opinion.

Mike in Fort Worth,

I agree that many of the rights in the Bill of Rights are inherent/natural rights that should be granted to all citizens of the USA until such time as that individual citizen proves they are unable/irresponsible to have them. I also agree that these rights, due to their inherent nature, are not the government's rights, but the rights of the sovereign (the People).

Broadsword,

Thank you for asking a direct question. No, I do not want to be subject to someone else's opinion about my life.

However, living in the country (United States) I do (cause I cannot judge what country you or anyone else live in) subjects me to the laws that the sovereign (the People) have agreed to.

Until such time as laws (not bills) oppose the will of the (majority) of the people, I, as a lawful citizen, will follow said laws.

If these bills and laws do not follow with my opinion, then I will do my citizen's duty to express my opinion to my representatives that they should not be made laws, the laws should be changed, or the system should be changed.

Reply

JCitizen February 21, 2013 at 7:59 am

I used to be an atheist, and I respect non-believers – but let's face it – no human being is going to respect anything not bestowed by divine interpretation. After all – they will just say, "well – animals have rights – big deal!" They will never respect authority at all.

I for one am thankful there are believers out there that DO respect the authority of a person's rights and assign that as enforced by God himself. Otherwise our society will fall. Even when I was an atheist, I had the COMMON SENSE to see that!

Reply

Broadsword February 20, 2013 at 3:06 pm

I wanted to re-post this at the top for all to enjoy and ponder. Ted Nugent makes a singular observation I have not read elsewhere.

“I believe that a person’s Moral Compass can be determined by how he references free men the right to defend themselves. The Second Amendment is so obvious to me , it’s insane that there’s even an argument! I don’t need a document and I don’t need another person to explain it to me. I have the right to defend the gift of my life. And…that there is an argument in America from Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein…from a whole gaggle of numb-nuts who would try to tell me THEY will dictate WHERE, HOW and IF I can defend myself ….I find that preposterous ! I find that unacceptable and I will not accept that! I am a FREE man….Don’t tread on me!”

Reply

Broadsword February 20, 2013 at 3:29 pm

SGT…nice products you have going there. Nice website, too. I am a proud owner of the M-14's predecessor…the venerable M-1 Garand. I have met, recently, a couple of Korean War Marines; To a Man they agreed that it was the most accurate rifle they had ever fired. OOHRAH!

Reply

JCitizen February 20, 2013 at 4:28 pm

There ya go Ned B.! That is part of the equation! KUDOs!!

Reply

Coastey February 21, 2013 at 12:36 am

Amendment IX – The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain

rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained

by the people.

You have more rights than are specifically listed in the

Bill of Rights.

Amendment X – The powers not delegated to the United States by

the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to

the States respectively, or to the people.

The U.S. federal government has only those specific

powers granted to it by the Constitution. All other

powers belong either to the states or to individuals.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments, taken together, mean that the

federal government has only the autho rity granted to it, while the

people are presumed to have any right or power not specifically

forbidden to them. The Bill of Rights as a whole is dedicated to

describing certain key rights of the people that the government is

categorically forbidden to remove, abridge, or infringe. The Bill of

Rights clearly places the people in charge of their own lives, and

the government within strict limits – the very opposite of the

situation we have allowed to develop today.

Reply

Coastey February 21, 2013 at 12:59 am

A few words of inspiration:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Reply

steve davis February 21, 2013 at 1:25 am

Time for MAGPUL to move to Alabama. You are appreciated here.

Reply

E. Ronc February 21, 2013 at 7:25 am

Slight problem with all of you who like to quote the Constitution, THEY don't care. We read it, we understand it, most of us here at one time pledged to defended it. We get it. They have the yellow highlighter out and are swiping sections they don't like. Doesn't fit with their vision of utopia, highlight that to be redacted. You can tell them 2+2=4. They come up with god knows what. Take away guns (X) = only criminals have guns (Y). Doesn't correlate to them, they will pick the letter from the Campbell's kids chicken alphabet soup can. Like to show Japan as their vision, but ignore 30,000 suicides a year for over a decade. Guess you don't need a gun to kill yourself. Britain only if we were like them, then we would have the highest assault rates, just like they do in all of Europe. Once I thought these people wore blinders, now I think it's just blindfolds.

Oh, and if were soliciting for Magpul Try my neighbor to the north, Vermont. Could still ski and snowboard and doesn't even require a permit for CCW.

Reply

JCitizen February 21, 2013 at 8:06 am

Right on E. Ronc!! :)

Reply

daisy February 21, 2013 at 10:41 am

We will just hear more killings in their schools. They made a smart move by getting their children kill instead of protecting them. Libtards ways of saying, good we succeded our agenda. The fools will later learn their lesson when there get more crime rising and killings. Hope they enjoy life while they can.

Reply

Jesse February 22, 2013 at 5:41 pm

This kind of ridiculous and destructive behavior by our politicians will not stop until Americans "Refresh the Tree of Liberty" as Thomas Jefferson once said would be needed from time to time.

Reply

RACJr February 26, 2013 at 11:03 am

Magpul should be obliged to leave Colorado. I'd pay a lil extra for a PMAG to help em out. Not as much extra as some of the pos scalpers are charging for Magpuls items, but they should just pack it all up and head out to AZ, TX, OK or any other place where they wouldn't have to worry about this crap. It would all be fine and dandy in Colorado if that theatre was in a different state. COME ON COLORADO! your better than this. Good luck Magpul. Hit me up if you need help with the move. :)

Reply

Devon Stavrowsky February 28, 2013 at 1:42 pm

This is Colorado….. not California or New York. But the liberals who have left their sickened states to come here because they are overall becoming intolerable places to live are working hard to turn us into those sorry states. The sponsors and supporters of this bill turn my stomach. They won't be happy until Colorado is as despicable a place to live as the miserable places they created and then left to come here.

Reply

JCitizen March 2, 2013 at 12:34 am

I hear ya Devon – Californicators just don't get it that the way they soiled their cat box in California is why they had to leave. I just can't imagine the space cadet attitude of them dumb mother f**kers! I hope they rot in hell!!

We ought to be posting guards at THEIR border instead of Mexico – I live with immigrants here and they are decent people who APPRECIATE freedom!!!!

Reply

J. Emerson March 2, 2013 at 8:49 am

The progressives are spreading out across our country like a sickness, bringing their twisted ideals to any city that they have a majority in. We are being attacked from within by these elitists that think they are so much smarter than we the people, and we need them to tell us how to live and work as slave labor keeping them in the lap of luxury. Taking away any means we have now to defend ourselves, when even the dumbest lib.'s wake up to the fact that they were had. Government tell us we don't need guns to defend ourselves and families, while they keep their guns and surround themselves with bodyguards that carry full auto weapons. Their children are protected at school while ours are in no gun zones, like thats going to stop a nut case. They know it, tiny tears Obama knows it, they really don't care about our children. I sometimes think they see our kids as having just escaped the abortionist anyway…My life as well as all of you are a gift from God and we have a natural right to defend our lives from some madman, including governments from trying to kill us. The lib.'s have destroyed our schools so the kid's won't learn about their rights and freedoms. They destroyed the family farms so they can more easily starve us into submission if need be. Obama's private army Home Land Security just purchased 7000 new personal fullauto machinegun's along with 1.8 billion rounds of hollow point ammo. Their black helo.'s armed with mini-guns practice over our cities at night while armed military like troops run around our neighborhoods. But were told not to worry, its just practice. For what???

Reply

Sgt. Rich Cabral March 2, 2013 at 9:29 am

PATRICK HENRY SAID

Reply

Sgt. Rich Cabral March 2, 2013 at 9:39 am

PATRICK HENRY said and I quote "They tell us that… we are weak – unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when will we be stronger?… WILL IT BE WHEN WE ARE TOTALLY DISARMED, and when a British guard (HLS) is stationed in every house? THREE MILLION PEOPLE (120M) armed in the Holy cause of Liberty…are Invincible by any force which our enemy can send against US". 1775 Semper Fi!

Reply

aurora virtual office August 2, 2013 at 7:22 pm

Hi, yes this paragraph is genuinely good and I have learned
lot of things from it on the topic of blogging.
thanks.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: