Ballot Proposal To Overturn Magazine Limits?

Found it. With all due respect Fred.....your posts without links are frustrating sometimes.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinionpolls

The page isn't working for me right now so I suspect the poll is attracting a lot of votes.

The polls show an interesting outcome.
It is clear that the CO legislators are clearly running the state against the wishes of voters.
Guns, civil unions.
Interesting outcome on those polls.

It was slow but it worked for me.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: 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.

Yes, you correctly copied and pasted the text from the Colorado Constitution and no, everything else you posted, as per usual, is incorrect. According to the article in the Denver Post referenced in the OP, Misters LeVier and Davis have indeed submitted a legislative proposal to the Colorado Legislative Council to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to overturn the actions of the General Assembly. As what is being proposed is not a referendum on the bill which the legislature has passed, but rather a seperate piece of legislation altogether initiated by the citizens of Colorado (Section 1 (1) of Article V that you provided earlier), Secion 1(3) of Article V is not applicable. There is certainly work yet to be done to get it on the ballot in 2014, but if it makes it to the ballot and it is approved by the voters as either a citizen initiated law or a citizen initiated constitutional amendment it will have the effect of undoing what the current General Assembly is attempting to do.

No one is proposing that Artice V be amended, nor is anyone proposing a referendum on the actions of the General Assembly that would fall under Section 1 (3) of that particular article. Instead, what is being proposed is an entirely new piece of legislation, initiated by the citizens, which falls under Section 1(1) of Article V, specifically a constitutional amendment which would keep any future General Assembly from having the ability to ever propose such a measure themselves again. The language of HB 13-1224 may well prevent a referendum on that piece of legislation, but it has no ability to prevent new legislation from overturning it.

Your attempt to spin this is laughable. Look at what you posted. that the Constitution may "well prevent a referendum on that piece of legislation, but it has no ability to prevent new legislation from overturning it". Are you claiming that this is not a referendum but "new legislation"? I am pretty sure that a citizen initiated ballot proposal is not new legislation but is by definition a "referendum" per Article V, section 3. A ballot proposal by definition is not an initiative as you claim, but is a proposal to put a measure on the ballot for direct election by the voters outside of the legislature. An initiative on the other hand is petition voted on by the people for the legislature to consider new legislation. Initiatives and referendums are two separate animals.

In fact, the Denver Post makes it very clear that despite your laughable attempt to spin it otherwise, that the proposal is not "new legislation" as you claim, but is a referendum to overturn the legislative action.

"Two Coloradans involved in conservative politics announced Wednesday they will ask voters in 2014 to overturn a bill limiting ammunition magazines if it is signed into law."

Read more: Colorado ammunition bill inspires 2nd proposal to overturn it - The Denver Post


Is not the "ballot proposal" a citizen initiated referendum per the State Constitution? Is not the intent of that referendum to overturn the legislation should it be passed into law as seems likely? How does that not violate the Constitution?
You can try to put lipstick on the pig, but it is still a pig.

The people from Magpul are on Mike Rosen's show right now.
[url=http://www.850koa.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;]http://www.850koa.com[/url]

So now magazines with removable floorplates are also illegal no matter what the capacity? Great. I don't have a magazine without a removable floorplate. Very useful when they require cleaning.

FredHayek wrote: The people from Magpul are on Mike Rosen's show right now.
[url=http://www.850koa.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;]http://www.850koa.com[/url]

So now magazines with removable floorplates are also illegal no matter what the capacity? Great. I don't have a magazine without a removable floorplate. Very useful when they require cleaning.

Buh-bye....

the bigger bye bye will come soon enough LOL.

Yes...It will....

Oh, and the obligatory: "LOL"....

What i don't understand.....why legislators run against what voters actually want. seems to me....that is job suicide.
Voter said no to civil unions in a collective vote yet here we are going down this road again. The Denver Post Poll clearly shows that the feelings of the voters have not changed much. 60% say no.
CCW on college compasses is a resounding difference from what the legislators are doing.
Gun magazines are at 80% against the legislature.
I guess we only have to put up with this for a couple of years. LMAO