Magazine Bill Amended

jf1acai wrote:

LE typically obtains the serial number of a firearm used in a crime, then contacts the manufacturer who provides the entity to whom they sold the firearm. The chain of custody is then followed from seller to purchaser to the final purchaser.

So, if I sell a firearm and do a background check through a dealer, whose business records are destroyed in a fire or other means, and that firearm is later transferred several times by individuals who do not utilize a dealer to make a background check, I am then liable for anything that the final purchaser of that firearm, over whom I have no control, might do with it?

Nope, since you will also have a copy of the transfer. Unless you are so careless not to keep that safe.

But hey, it makes a much better outrage if you just make it up.

Before you get your panties in a further twist, and since the conservatives here tend to make up their facts without bothering to research them, here is some public service information.

Is it possible for you to have a conversation without demeaning or insulting an individual or group?
The rest of your discussion here has been respectful and I have wanted to read your responses.....whether I agree with them or not. I want to hear a point of view that is different from mine to balance me out.
I could just live without the little jabs and personal insults above.
This has been a good thread short of those two comments above.

frogger wrote:

But hey, it makes a much better outrage if you just make it up.

Before you get your panties in a further twist, and since the conservatives here tend to make up their facts without bothering to research them, here is some public service information.

Is it possible for you to have a conversation without demeaning or insulting an individual or group?
The rest of your discussion here has been respectful and I have wanted to read your responses.....whether I agree with them or not. I want to hear a point of view that is different from mine to balance me out.
I could just live without the little jabs and personal insults above.
This has been a good thread short of those two comments above.

It would still be a good thread if it was not for the intervention of the "politeness police". If you don't like my comments, don't read them. I have little tolerance for those who spread false information as facts and have no problem with commenting on it. If you prefer to have your discussions to be "polite" by not challenging false information and lies, then you better put me on ignore. I have no problem when I am corrected as to the reliability of my information and would prefer that to happen rather than have a discussion based on false information and lies. I believe in truth and facts trumping out over "politeness". But then that is why I get "moderated" out of conservative echo chambers.

nevermind.

(This isn't the courthouse and I am losing a bit of faith in the experiment)

Is there anywhere you can go to have a respectful conversation with a liberal?

Something the Dog Said wrote:

frogger wrote:

But hey, it makes a much better outrage if you just make it up.

Before you get your panties in a further twist, and since the conservatives here tend to make up their facts without bothering to research them, here is some public service information.

Is it possible for you to have a conversation without demeaning or insulting an individual or group?
The rest of your discussion here has been respectful and I have wanted to read your responses.....whether I agree with them or not. I want to hear a point of view that is different from mine to balance me out.
I could just live without the little jabs and personal insults above.
This has been a good thread short of those two comments above.

It would still be a good thread if it was not for the intervention of the "politeness police". If you don't like my comments, don't read them. I have little tolerance for those who spread false information as facts and have no problem with commenting on it. If you prefer to have your discussions to be "polite" by not challenging false information and lies, then you better put me on ignore. I have no problem when I am corrected as to the reliability of my information and would prefer that to happen rather than have a discussion based on false information and lies. I believe in truth and facts trumping out over "politeness". But then that is why I get "moderated" out of conservative echo chambers.

Let's try this again.....
In red....you see a conservative commend you for a mostly civil thread. 4 pages of dialog and I can only find 2 incidences of truly disrespectful behavior. I state that it is a good thread minus the broad brush insults to an individual or group. You justify the bad which, in my opinion, disqualifies even all the good you have stated here. If you want to be taken seriously try to take responsibility for your insults and raise your bar. Otherwise.....I can only assume that you just like to see yourself type.
Many of us have stated here that we have little tolerance for the insults and unproductive discussion.....hence, the creation of Bob's forum. Does that matter to you? Is it suppose to matter to any of us what you have little tolerance for if you don't reciprocate?
I hopefully await a more grown up discussion of my post.

Mtn Gramma wrote:

A large-capacity magazine that is manufactured in Colorado on or
after the effective date of the bill must include a serial number and the
date upon which the large-capacity magazine was manufactured or
assembled. The serial number and date must be legibly and conspicuously
engraved or cast upon the outer surface of the large-capacity magazine.
The Colorado bureau of investigation may promulgate rules that may
require a large-capacity magazine that is manufactured on or after the
effective date of the bill to bear identifying information in addition to the
serial number and date of assembly.
A person who manufactures a large-capacity magazine in Colorado
in violation of the new provision commits a class 2 misdemeanor.

I'm assuming the first paragraph applies to companies and the 2nd paragraph to individuals.

So this new rule about individually serializing hi-capacity magazines might still encourage Magpul to take their 900 jobs and head to a free state. Although serialized magazines might be desirable to goverment and law enforcement for inventory control.

frogger wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

frogger wrote:

But hey, it makes a much better outrage if you just make it up.

Before you get your panties in a further twist, and since the conservatives here tend to make up their facts without bothering to research them, here is some public service information.

Is it possible for you to have a conversation without demeaning or insulting an individual or group?
The rest of your discussion here has been respectful and I have wanted to read your responses.....whether I agree with them or not. I want to hear a point of view that is different from mine to balance me out.
I could just live without the little jabs and personal insults above.
This has been a good thread short of those two comments above.

It would still be a good thread if it was not for the intervention of the "politeness police". If you don't like my comments, don't read them. I have little tolerance for those who spread false information as facts and have no problem with commenting on it. If you prefer to have your discussions to be "polite" by not challenging false information and lies, then you better put me on ignore. I have no problem when I am corrected as to the reliability of my information and would prefer that to happen rather than have a discussion based on false information and lies. I believe in truth and facts trumping out over "politeness". But then that is why I get "moderated" out of conservative echo chambers.

Let's try this again.....
In red....you see a conservative commend you for a mostly civil thread. 4 pages of dialog and I can only find 2 incidences of truly disrespectful behavior. I state that it is a good thread minus the broad brush insults to an individual or group. You justify the bad which, in my opinion, disqualifies even all the good you have stated here. If you want to be taken seriously try to take responsibility for your insults and raise your bar. Otherwise.....I can only assume that you just like to see yourself type.
Many of us have stated here that we have little tolerance for the insults and unproductive discussion.....hence, the creation of Bob's forum. Does that matter to you? Is it suppose to matter to any of us what you have little tolerance for if you don't reciprocate?
I hopefully await a more grown up discussion of my post.

Of course you find only two instances of "disrespectful" behavior. I on the other hand find it quite disrespectful for posters to lie and distort the truth. For example, one post makes reference that the proposed legislation would require an individual to do a background check on his daughter before presenting with a gift of a firearm. That is false, but is used to propagate outrage over the proposed legislation. Another poster claims that the proposed legislation would be akin to creating a gun registry where the government would keep a database on every individual and every firearm that they own. I find such misinformation to the utmost form of disrespect to the integrity of this forum. I also find it disrespectful that you would prefer such misinformation and lies rather than having the peaceful and politeness of this forum to be disturbed. If you do not like my tone, ignore me, plenty of others do. However, don't expect me not to expose the falsity of information when it is propagated. I understand that you and others prefer the "productivity" of echo chambers so that your "facts" will not be challenged. I prefer a healthier dialog of advocates defending the integrity of their information upon being challenged on its veracity. To each his/her own.

sorry Bob......I am not interested in Courthouse 2.
I prefer an intelligent discussion of opposing points of view without the BS.
Call me when that turns around. In the mean time....I still owe you a beer.

edited to add...... Just because someone might have incorrect information, it does not mean they are liars or intend to propagate information in order to create outrage or fear.
Would it be so hard to just simply say..."I disagree with your premise and here is why" and then provide correct information or source?

frogger wrote: sorry Bob......I am not interested in Courthouse 2.
I prefer an intelligent discussion of opposing points of view without the BS.
Call me when that turns around. In the mean time....I still owe you a beer.

edited to add...... Just because someone might have incorrect information, it does not mean they are liars or intend to propagate information in order to create outrage or fear.
Would it be so hard to just simply say..."I disagree with your premise and here is why" and then provide correct information or source?

Intelligent discussion requires a concerted effort to provide accuracy in your facts. Repeatedly disseminating false information does arise to the point of lying and propagating information in order to create outrage and deserves no respect. It is the equivalent of constantly posting off topic posts to deflect from the issues being discussed in the thread.
I would suggest that you concentrate on ensuring the truth in facts in creating "intelligent discussions" rather than the lack of polite language.

whatever