Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Hope y'all don't mind if I post this up here.

CO has had a lot of gun control bills going through the state legislature lately.

-Banning concealed carry on campus. (No matter that violent and sexual assaults have dropped over 500% since campus carry was legalized in 2003.)
-Criminalizing private sales.
-Background checks on anyone you lend your gun to, including your buddy to take it out to the range and try it out. (Even if it's just to borrow it.)
-Having gun buyers pay for said background checks with no cap on the fees imposed. (The limiting language says "direct or indirect costs associated with the background check".)
-Banning any magazine over 15 rounds. (Including the standard capacity 30 round AR magazine, and my go-out-and-shoot-for-fun 25 round .22 magazines.)
-Banning any "assault weapons" defined as having a grippable area forward of the trigger and a detachable magazine (which includes plenty of traditional style bolt action hunting rifles btw).
-Banning any shotgun capable of being modified to hold more than 8 rounds. (Basically any shotgun other than a double barrel or single shot.)

For what it's worth, VA tech was the deadliest shooting in US history. The only one of these proposed laws he would have broken was one that VA already had in place, no weapons on campus...

I'd love to hear from people in other countries about what they think about this. I'd love to get into a good debate about this too with someone. Only restrictions I will place on it are: no circular logic, no emotional arguments, and no comparisons to other countries with dissimilar cultures (believe it or not I saw a study trying to compare the US to Japan).


Also for what it's worth, the people attempting to pass these bills are the same ones that, for the majority, passed the exhaust system ordnance in Denver, banning any exhaust without an EPA stamp on it. Same ones that passed a ban on pit bulls. Same ones that passed a ban on >10 round magazines within Denver itself (except for LEOs).

Gun control seems to work very very very well in Japan, England, Iceland, Denmark, et al

Wrider wrote:no comparisons to other countries with dissimilar cultures (believe it or not I saw a study trying to compare the US to Japan).

What is it about Japan that renders it incomparable to the US and what makes the comparison of the two countries so unbelievable to you?

You do realize that violent crimes are higher in England than in the US, and they're working on banning pocket knives.

Japan is a completely different culture than the US. Similar would be England, Australia, possibly similar to France/Germany.

Would you like for me to break out the stats I'm talking about?

SB 195 Yes
SB 196 No
SB 197 Yes
HB 1224 No
HB 1226 No
HB 1228 No / they do anyway lol
HB 1229 Yes

Johnj wrote:SB 195 Yes (No longer allowed to take a CCW course online)
SB 196 No (Makes gun manufacturers and sellers liable for any illegal use of the guns they sell)
SB 197 Yes (Any domestic violence misdemeanor prohibited from owning a gun)
HB 1224 No (Bans any magazine over 15 rounds for rifle/handgun and 8 rounds for shotgun, also bans any shotgun capable of being modified to hold over 8 rounds)
HB 1226 No (bans concealed carry on campus)
HB 1228 No / they do anyway lol (gun buyers pay for background checks with no cap on fees)
HB 1229 Yes (extends background checks to everybody including those who just want to borrow a gun for the day)

SB 195 I can agree with

Fortunately SB 196 was killed by its creator.

SB 197 I don't agree with on the basis that a "domestic violence misdemeanor" basically means anything, including an argument with your neighbors.

HB 1224 Nope, complete crumb here. It would ban any pump/semi-auto shotgun out there. It would ban standard capacity magazines including those of the Glock 17, the most popular self defense handgun on the market, and the choice of a good number of LEOs.

HB 1226 Nope, statistics have proven that assaults (especially sexual assaults on women) have dropped over 500% since it was legalized in 03.

HB 1228 No, because "direct and indirect costs associated with the background check" can be construed so many different ways it's not even funny.

HB 1229 No because 1. it criminalizes private sales period. 2. it extends background checks to any "transfer of a firearm" including a parent passing down a hunting rifle/shotgun to their kid, letting your buddy borrow a shotgun for a day on the range, etc etc etc. Basically if it is out of your hands and you're not in the immediate vicinity, you need a full on background check to be legal.


If you want to look up the full text of any of them, look them up via "CO HB 13 1229" format on google. Should be your first or second result.

Wrider wrote:You do realize that violent crimes are higher in England than in the US, and they're working on banning pocket knives.

Murder by firearm
US: 9,369
UK: 14

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m ... h-firearms

Wrider wrote: Japan is a completely different culture than the US. Similar would be England, Australia, possibly similar to France/Germany.

Explain to me why you feel Japan is a completely different culture than the US.
Why do you feel US, England and Australia are similar while France and Germany are only possibilities.

Wrider wrote: Would you like for me to break out the stats I'm talking about?

Sure why not. How does one even define violent crime? It's not black and white like murder by firearm.

Oops, I meant no on HB 1229. It was late.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

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.

HYPERR wrote:

Wrider wrote:You do realize that violent crimes are higher in England than in the US, and they're working on banning pocket knives.

Murder by firearm
US: 9,369
UK: 14

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m ... h-firearms

Oh we definitely have a higher rate of firearm homicide, no arguments there. I said overall violent crime as defined by both Home Office and the FBI.
2011 violent crime UK: 2,100,000
Source: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-sta ... 11-12.html
2011 violent crime US: 1,203,564
Source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr ... lent-crime

Now keep in mind the population of the UK is 62,641,000 and the population for the US is 313,914,000
That translates to a per capita rate of:
UK: 3,352 / 100,000
US: 383 / 100,000
As you can see, the violent crime rate as reported by the Home Office (British version of the FBI) is 10 times higher than the violent crime reported by the FBI.

HYPERR wrote:

Wrider wrote: Japan is a completely different culture than the US. Similar would be England, Australia, possibly similar to France/Germany.

Explain to me why you feel Japan is a completely different culture than the US.
Why do you feel US, England and Australia are similar while France and Germany are only possibilities.

Japan is a much more respectful and reserved country than the US is. Also, firearms have been outlawed from private ownership since the end of WWII.
Germany and France are also culturally different than the US in the fact that they're more socially open and trusting than the US. Germany tends to have a lot more restrictions in place for things, including driving and firearms. France is a very socially liberal country though, including with its restrictions
The UK had guns until 1997 (after which the violent crime rate jumped 4X btw).
Australia still has guns, but all semiautomatic firearms are outlawed there. (After they were outlawed, btw, the already 2X US rape rate tripled, home invasions doubled, etc.)

HYPERR wrote:

Wrider wrote: Would you like for me to break out the stats I'm talking about?

Sure why not. How does one even define violent crime? It's not black and white like murder by firearm.

Posted that just up above.

Canada sits in between the UK and the US for gun control and is closest to the US in culture. For the stats possessed: how do we compare? I could go on a fishing trip but I am sure you have them ready to go.... And does "murder by firearm" include the cases where someone is killed by either their accidental discharge of a firearm or accidental shooting from someone else?

Because of the passion on both sides I can't help but feel stats are manipulated to support personal arguements. But what the hell: lets hear 'em. Fire away....

Wrider wrote: Oh we definitely have a higher rate of firearm homicide, no arguments there. I said overall violent crime as defined by both Home Office and the FBI.
2011 violent crime UK: 2,100,000
Source: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-sta ... 11-12.html
2011 violent crime US: 1,203,564
Source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr ... lent-crime

Now keep in mind the population of the UK is 62,641,000 and the population for the US is 313,914,000
That translates to a per capita rate of:
UK: 3,352 / 100,000
US: 383 / 100,000
As you can see, the violent crime rate as reported by the Home Office (British version of the FBI) is 10 times higher than the violent crime reported by the FBI.

I'm sorry Wrider but the sources you provided does nothing to support your assertion. First of all, comparing two different sources on data that have subjective interpretations like "violent crimes" is usually highly flawed. This is akin to comparing a list compiled by Wrider of "fast bikes" made in the UK, and a list compiled by TMW of "fast bikes" made in the US. What does fast exactly mean? What is violent?

I did take the time to look at your links and found severe discrepancies, huge discrepancies between the two sources on what violent crimes are and how they are measured.

Here is the US FBI definition: "murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault." Fairly cut and dry, what i would agree to would be violent crimes.

The UK HO definition is far more broad, "violence spans minor assaults, such as pushing and shoving that result in no physical harm through to serious assault and murder" and "Sexual assault covers offences from indecent exposure to rape"

The UK's definition of violence must be exponentially broader than ours: "In half of incidents identified by the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) (50%) and offences recorded by the police (56%), the violence resulted in no physical injury to the victim."

Here is a big kicker, "The data presented in Crime in the United States reflect the Hierarchy Rule, which requires that only the most serious offense in a multiple-offense criminal incident be counted." So if a person commits an assault, battery, kidnap, sexual assault, torture, murder, etc etc etc, that only counts as one violent crime in the US, where in the UK it would count as 7+.

Wrider wrote: Japan is a much more respectful and reserved country than the US is.

And you believe this to be a fact because...?
What exactly is respectful? And what exactly is reserved???

Wrider wrote: Also, firearms have been outlawed from private ownership since the end of WWII.

This does not help your argument if you are implying this is why Japan is such a safe country and why you feel the people there are more "respectful".

Wrider wrote: Germany and France are also culturally different than the US in the fact that they're more socially open and trusting than the US.

Do you have any reliable source that supports this assertion? I never heard this before. I think the US is one of the most socially open countries in the world.

Wrider wrote: Germany tends to have a lot more restrictions in place for things, including driving and firearms.

I guess you never heard of the autobahn....

Wrider wrote:France is a very socially liberal country though, including with its restrictions

UK has to be far more liberal than France. What would make you think France is more liberal than the UK?

Wrider wrote:The UK had guns until 1997 (after which the violent crime rate jumped 4X btw).

Your own source shows this to be untrue, in fact, it shows the exact opposite. The link you provided states that violent crime has halved, not increased.

"The number of violent incidents has halved from its peak in 1995 when the survey estimated over 4.2 million violent incidents."

High_Side wrote:And does "murder by firearm" include the cases where someone is killed by either their accidental discharge of a firearm or accidental shooting from someone else?

No it does not. In the original link I provided, murder by firearm is specifically defined as: "intentional homicides committed with a firearm."