Ballot Proposal To Overturn Magazine Limits?

All this bill does is send a job producing company its suppliers and the jobs to another state, congratulations Democrats.

Science Chic wrote: There's an important distinction here though. Renegade clearly says that he doesn't generalize it to losing respect for all liberals, based on one person's comments, and isn't reducing broad-brushed generalizations preferable?

Exactly. Kind of like a statistical chart, you throw out the obvious wingers...bad data. I throw out the wingers on both sides, which leaves debate with everyone else.

I enjoy discussion with those who discuss. I understand people see the world thru their own window, experiences, etc. Degrading a poster is bad form.

LadyJazzer wrote: I'd like to send Magpul a good-bye card...

We don't need no stinkin jobs. We have the Democrats and welfare now.

Grady wrote: All this bill does is send a job producing company its suppliers and the jobs to another state, congratulations Democrats.

Not to mention the damage it does to other existing small businesses that will now lose revenue on a poorly written bill that is unenforceable.
People lose jobs. The economy takes a hit.

I will take my chances with the voters is November.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Per the Denver Post this morning, a couple guys want to put on the ballot for the general public to decide if they want a magazine ban. If they get this done for the 2014 ballot, which party do you think it will benefit?

The pollsters believe one of the reasons Dems did so good in 2012 locally is that the stoners were inspired to get to the polls to legalize MJ and they tend to be Democrats.

The GOP has used ballot measures before to increase turnout. Would more traditional non-voters show up to vote to overturn the legislature's magazine ban? Or would the soccer moms be inspired to get out and vote to protect their children?

Right now? I think it will be more likely to mobilize the conservative voters.

Totally meaningless and waste of resources. First, polls show that the voters in Colorado overwhelming support this legislation and Second, the ballot proposal would violate the Colorado Constitution. Under Section V of the Colorado Constitution:

Article V, section 1 (1) and (3), of the Colorado Constitution provide:

General assembly - initiative and referendum.
(1) The legislative power of the state shall be vested in the general
assembly consisting of a senate and house of representatives, both to be
elected by the people, but the people reserve to themselves the power to
propose laws and amendments to the constitution and to enact or reject the
same at the polls independent of the general assembly and also reserve
power at their own option to approve or reject at the polls any act or item,
section, or part of any act of the general assembly.

(3) The second power hereby reserved is the referendum, and it
may be ordered, except as to laws necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace,health, or safety, and appropriations for
the support and maintenance of the departments of state and state
institutions, against any act or item, section, or part of any act of the
general assembly, either by a petition signed by registered electors in an
amount equal to at least five percent of the total number of votes cast for
all candidates for the office of the secretary of state at the previous general
election or by the general assembly. Referendum petitions, in such form
as may be prescribed pursuant to law, shall be addressed to and filed with
the secretary of state not more than ninety days after the final adjournment
of the session of the general assembly that passed the bill on which the
referendum is demanded. The filing of a referendum petition against any
item, section, or part of any act shall not delay the remainder of the act
from becoming operative



Section 3 of HR 13-1224:

SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds,
determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health, and safety

So the proposed referendum is simply an exercise in futility.

I think, perhaps, you should look at what the Colorado Constitution says again Dog. As citizens of this State, we have the right to hold a referendum on any law except those that you mention, but there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution which would prevent a ballot measure, either as a proposed law or as a proposed amendment to the State Constitution, which would nullify the law. Any law which a legislature passes may be superseded by any subsequent act contained in any new legislation. You can bet your backside we can pass a law or an amendment which nullifies what this legislature is attempting to do.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Per the Denver Post this morning, a couple guys want to put on the ballot for the general public to decide if they want a magazine ban. If they get this done for the 2014 ballot, which party do you think it will benefit?

The pollsters believe one of the reasons Dems did so good in 2012 locally is that the stoners were inspired to get to the polls to legalize MJ and they tend to be Democrats.

The GOP has used ballot measures before to increase turnout. Would more traditional non-voters show up to vote to overturn the legislature's magazine ban? Or would the soccer moms be inspired to get out and vote to protect their children?

Right now? I think it will be more likely to mobilize the conservative voters.

Totally meaningless and waste of resources. First, polls show that the voters in Colorado overwhelming support this legislation and Second, the ballot proposal would violate the Colorado Constitution. Under Section V of the Colorado Constitution:

Article V, section 1 (1) and (3), of the Colorado Constitution provide:

General assembly - initiative and referendum.
(1) The legislative power of the state shall be vested in the general
assembly consisting of a senate and house of representatives, both to be
elected by the people, but the people reserve to themselves the power to
propose laws and amendments to the constitution and to enact or reject the
same at the polls independent of the general assembly and also reserve
power at their own option to approve or reject at the polls any act or item,
section, or part of any act of the general assembly.

(3) The second power hereby reserved is the referendum, and it
may be ordered, except as to laws necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace,health, or safety, and appropriations for
the support and maintenance of the departments of state and state
institutions, against any act or item, section, or part of any act of the
general assembly, either by a petition signed by registered electors in an
amount equal to at least five percent of the total number of votes cast for
all candidates for the office of the secretary of state at the previous general
election or by the general assembly. Referendum petitions, in such form
as may be prescribed pursuant to law, shall be addressed to and filed with
the secretary of state not more than ninety days after the final adjournment
of the session of the general assembly that passed the bill on which the
referendum is demanded. The filing of a referendum petition against any
item, section, or part of any act shall not delay the remainder of the act
from becoming operative



Section 3 of HR 13-1224:

SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds,
determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health, and safety

So the proposed referendum is simply an exercise in futility.

I think, perhaps, you should look at what the Colorado Constitution says again Dog. As citizens of this State, we have the right to hold a referendum on any law except those that you mention, but there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution which would prevent a ballot measure, either as a proposed law or as a proposed amendment to the State Constitution, which would nullify the law. Any law which a legislature passes may be superseded by any subsequent act contained in any new legislation. You can bet your backside we can pass a law or an amendment which nullifies what this legislature is attempting to do.

Yet another attempt to deflect by Printsmith. Am I not correct in my interpretation of the Colorado Constitution? Is not everything that I posted above correct? Yes. Is there any ballot proposal being offered to amend the State Constitution to change Article V, section 3? No. Is the current ballot proposal that is the topic of this thread totally irrelevant and an exercise in futility based on the Colorado Constitution? Yes. Does it contain language to amend Article V, section 3 of the Colorado Constitution? No. Is the Easter Bunny preparing to hop around Printsmith's backyard? I don't know. That is a topic that could be debated, because according to the Colorado Constitution, the topic of this thread is dead.

Many here continue to miss, or more likely ignore, the common denonminator in all the mass killings. It isn't magazine capacities, its GUN FREE ZONES. Every killer chose an area where people can't legally carry a firearm and thereby have a chance at defending themselves. Gun free zones include, schools and government buildings and can extend to the grounds as well. Fort Hood fits this, as did Sandy Hook and the Aurora theater. When the original talk was to explore ALL causes behind these killings anyone that realizes when politicians are speaking, lies are being told. Hollywood, whose glorification of killing is obvious, simply had to say "we're not at any fault" and the administration that recieved millions in campaign funds from the stars and moguls, were given a pass.

All seven of the bills in play are not about what makes sense or taking the time it would take to develop a sensible approach to finding ways to prevent mass shootings with the possible exception of better background checks (only exceptionally stupid criminals will submit to a background check).

These bills are all about politically expedient actions that take advantage of liberals having the majority in the state congress and attempting to make other liberals feel good about doing "something" right now. Never mind what the majority of the population wants, pass the bills and let every citizen of the state of Colorado know that they are no longer in charge of their elected officials. Consequences be damned. Who cares if businesses leave the state, new businesses avoid Colorado, and residents are unemployed?

Haven't the polls shown that the majority of Coloradans support these measures?

archer wrote: Haven't the polls shown that the majority of Coloradans support these measures?

Nope, the push polls have shown whatever the pollster wants to see, but the independent ones have shown a split. The magazine limit one only polls between 35-50%. A couple of the other ones do poll in the 70% range.