Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Constitutional Carry Passes in Arizona!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Frederick, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Governor Brewer signed a bill into law legalizing CC without a permit. While I prefer to OC, it would be nice tonot have to worry about going to jailif my coat accidently 'conceals' my firearm. Does anyone know if the RMGOis going to be pushinganything like this for Colorado? It will never cease to amaze me just how difficult it is for so many to understand exactly what the 2nd amendment means. "Shall not be impaired" means NO LAWS interfering with, or denying this right. We have a God-Given AND constitutional right to carry however we wish. Kudos to Arizona for passing this. Now, if they could just get over their Phobia regarding OC at Applebees...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    Nice for AZ.

    Now for Colorado.

    I've been reading more and more about RMGO and the differences with NRA.

    I'm getting more and more interested in RMGO.

    I'm a life member of NRA, but I may just have to join RMGO...

    And, we should not have to worry about the way we carry our pistol any more than we should have to worry about how to carry a pocket knife.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    My input on that is that criminals usually walk into a store with a gun in hand, or stuck in their pants, while law-abiding citizens usually walk into a store with a properly-holstered firearm.

    So, I am all for ensuring one's firearm is "properly holstered." What does that mean?

    I'm pretty liberal when it comes to this term, including, but not limited to:

    - high hip (paddle, belted, or combo)

    - low hip (belted, with or without end retaining strap)

    - inside waist

    - boot

    - ankle

    - underarm (horizontal or vertical)

    - cross-chest

    - back (usually in the small of the back)

    - hat (suitable for a derringer)

    - backpack

    - bookbag

    - purse

    - belly bag

    - jacket/pants pocket

    Having said all of that, there is only one means of carrying a weapon I believe is, and should be considered improper, if not illegal, and that's in hand, with the obvious exception if it's being used in accordance with the CRS' provisions for lawful use of a firearm.

    The reason I don't include "jammed in one's pants" is that there may be some justifiable reason as to why one's holster is either not available or has malfunctioned, and cannot otherwise be used. In that case, continuing to hold it in one's hand either before or after any justifiable event could easily be seen as "brandishing," while tucked into one's waistband is not.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    500

    Post imported post

    since9 wrote:
    The reason I don't include "jammed in one's pants" is that there may be some justifiable reason as to why one's holster is either not available or has malfunctioned, and cannot otherwise be used.* In that case, continuing to hold it in one's hand either before or after any justifiable event could easily be seen as "brandishing," while tucked into one's waistband is not.
    when i cc, its usually IWB, no holster, 3 o'clock

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Frederick, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    I haven't lived in Colorado long (I'm from AZ), but RMGO seems to be a pretty good and no-compromise organization. I don't mean to start WW3 here, but to me the NRA is worthless. Since that horrible gun control bill in 1967, they seem to want to compromise more than be true advocated of 2A. The Gun Owners of America is a much better and no compromise organization on a national level. RMGO seems to follow suit (with GOA) in Colorado. Don't feel bad, it took me a long time to realize this about the NRA. Hopefully this year's election cycle will produce a much more Conservative State Government so we can pass Constitutional Carry here as well.

    Diocoles wrote:
    Nice for AZ.

    Now for Colorado.

    I've been reading more and more about RMGO and the differences with NRA.

    I'm getting more and more interested in RMGO.

    I'm a life member of NRA, but I may just have to join RMGO...

    And, we should not have to worry about the way we carry our pistol any more than we should have to worry about how to carry a pocket knife.

  6. #6
    Regular Member ooghost1oo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    262

    Post imported post

    I would love to see about getting something like this started in Colorado. (Mentioned it once before) Don't really know where to start. A petition?

    Once that ******** Bill Ritter is out of office, it'll be important to put someone gun-friendly in there. I bet Dan Maes would sign such a bill.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    ooghost1oo wrote:
    I would love to see about getting something like this started in Colorado. (Mentioned it once before) Don't really know where to start. A petition?

    Once that @#$%head Bill Ritter is out of office, it'll be important to put someone gun-friendly in there. I bet Dan Maes would sign such a bill.
    Bill Ritter is brain-washed. He's failed every concept question put to him with respect to this issue, and requires a substantial team of political control experts before he's qualified by his party to engage in any discussion with respect to the Constitutional use of firearms to protect and defend persons, materiel, and general freedom of the populace.

    Put simply, "he doesn't get it." Meanwhile, armed criminals are robbing our stores.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Frederick, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Hopefully, Colorado voters will be smart enough to send Hickenlooper back to Denver where he belongs! I truely believe the Anti-Obama sentiment will sweep the Republicans back into power here in Colorado. As a Libertarian, I don't always agree with Republican policies, but I usually prefer them to those the Democrats push. I just hope that if the Republicans do take back control of Colorado, they will pass legislation similar to what they are passing in Arizona this year, not like the last Republican Congress. All they knew how to do was restrict rights and spend my money on crap.



    ooghost1oo wrote:
    I would love to see about getting something like this started in Colorado. (Mentioned it once before) Don't really know where to start. A petition?

    Once that @#$%head Bill Ritter is out of office, it'll be important to put someone gun-friendly in there. I bet Dan Maes would sign such a bill.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187

    Post imported post

    Firepower wrote:
    I just hope that if the Republicans do take back control of Colorado, they will pass legislation similar to what they are passing in Arizona this year, not like the last Republican Congress. All they knew how to do was restrict rights and spend my money on crap.
    You mean the "your paperz pleez" law just signed today?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Frederick, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    No, I was referring to the Constitutional Carry law. The immigration bill will be nuked by the first judge that deals with it.

    mahkagari wrote:
    Firepower wrote:
    I just hope that if the Republicans do take back control of Colorado, they will pass legislation similar to what they are passing in Arizona this year, not like the last Republican Congress. All they knew how to do was restrict rights and spend my money on crap.
    You mean the "your paperz pleez" law just signed today?

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187

    Post imported post

    Firepower wrote:
    No, I was referring to the Constitutional Carry law. The immigration bill will be nuked by the first judge that deals with it.
    And cost the taxpayers millions the process of said nuking.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Operations Director @ RMGO, ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Diocoles wrote:
    Nice for AZ.

    Now for Colorado.

    I've been reading more and more about RMGO and the differences with NRA.

    I'm getting more and more interested in RMGO.

    I'm a life member of NRA, but I may just have to join RMGO...

    And, we should not have to worry about the way we carry our pistol any more than we should have to worry about how to carry a pocket knife.
    Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (www.rmgo.org) has been working on passing a Vermont Carry bill (now dubbed, accurately, Constitutional Carry) in Colorado since the early 1990’s.

    It’s called a number of things, and can come in different forms. Vermont Carry, Alaska Law, Constitutional Carry – all mean no-permit-needed, no-Big-Brother-May-I, no lists, and no government-mandated training. Though stand-alone legislation is great, often the efforts to pass Vermont Laws come in the form of amendments to existing legislation.

    We’ve run Vermont legislation and amendments half a dozen times in the Colorado legislature. Former Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave ran Vermont amendments in the State House when she served there as well as her own stand-alone bill (in the post-Columbine environment). At RMGO’s prompting, Colorado State Senators Greg Brophy and Ted Harvey have both offered Vermont legislation and/or amendments.

    Our national organization, the National Association for Gun Rights (www.nationalgunrights.org), has been working with other states to get this legislation introduced and passed. In fact, Wyoming Gun Owners (www.wyominggunowners.org) almost got their Constitutional Carry bill passed in 2010, despite a 30-day budgetary session time limit. They did get the Firearms Freedom Act passed (this one with REAL teeth, and no compromises made to exempt NFA weapons) this year.

    We’ve worked with other groups to get the legislation introduced, including Iowa in 2009 and 2010, and have urged NAGR members to help in any state where it’s introduced (NAGR did an Arizona e-mail to pass that legislation a few weeks ago).

    RMGO even asks a Vermont Carry question in our state candidates’ survey.

    That all being said, the elephant in the room is the NRA. In Colorado, the NRA desperately tried to avoid passing a Vermont Law. In 1997, they threatened then-State Rep. Marilyn Musgrave with lowering her NRA grade if she ran a Vermont amendment (see http://gunowners.org/musgrave.htm) for the letter. In subsequent years in Colorado, the Firearms Coalition of Colorado (which no longer exist) and the state affiliate of the NRA, the Colorado State Shooting Association, all testified against Vermont Carry bills and amendments.

    Across the country, the NRA and their lapdogs poo-poo Vermont Carry, saying it won’t have a chance. But that’s what they said prior to Alaska passing – “That’ll never happen.”


  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    500

    Post imported post

    RMGO-Ops wrote:
    Diocoles wrote:
    Nice for AZ.

    Now for Colorado.

    I've been reading more and more about RMGO and the differences with NRA.

    I'm getting more and more interested in RMGO.

    I'm a life member of NRA, but I may just have to join RMGO...

    And, we should not have to worry about the way we carry our pistol any more than we should have to worry about how to carry a pocket knife.
    Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (http://www.rmgo.org) has been working on passing a Vermont Carry bill (now dubbed, accurately, Constitutional Carry) in Colorado since the early 1990’s.

    It’s called a number of things, and can come in different forms. Vermont Carry, Alaska Law, Constitutional Carry – all mean no-permit-needed, no-Big-Brother-May-I, no lists, and no government-mandated training. Though stand-alone legislation is great, often the efforts to pass Vermont Laws come in the form of amendments to existing legislation.

    We’ve run Vermont legislation and amendments half a dozen times in the Colorado legislature. Former Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave ran Vermont amendments in the State House when she served there as well as her own stand-alone bill (in the post-Columbine environment). At RMGO’s prompting, Colorado State Senators Greg Brophy and Ted Harvey have both offered Vermont legislation and/or amendments.

    Our national organization, the National Association for Gun Rights (http://www.nationalgunrights.org), has been working with other states to get this legislation introduced and passed. In fact, Wyoming Gun Owners (http://www.wyominggunowners.org) almost got their Constitutional Carry bill passed in 2010, despite a 30-day budgetary session time limit. They did get the Firearms Freedom Act passed (this one with REAL teeth, and no compromises made to exempt NFA weapons) this year.

    We’ve worked with other groups to get the legislation introduced, including Iowa in 2009 and 2010, and have urged NAGR members to help in any state where it’s introduced (NAGR did an Arizona e-mail to pass that legislation a few weeks ago).

    RMGO even asks a Vermont Carry question in our state candidates’ survey.

    That all being said, the elephant in the room is the NRA. In Colorado, the NRA desperately tried to avoid passing a Vermont Law. In 1997, they threatened then-State Rep. Marilyn Musgrave with lowering her NRA grade if she ran a Vermont amendment (see http://gunowners.org/musgrave.htm) for the letter. In subsequent years in Colorado, the Firearms Coalition of Colorado (which no longer exist) and the state affiliate of the NRA, the Colorado State Shooting Association, all testified against Vermont Carry bills and amendments.

    Across the country, the NRA and their lapdogs poo-poo Vermont Carry, saying it won’t have a chance. But that’s what they said prior to Alaska passing – “That’ll never happen.”
    so what can we do to help?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lakewood, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,250

    Post imported post

    RMGO I appreciate your willingness to take the time to sign up and post for us. Thank you very much. It matters to us and certainly matters to me, personally. I agree with your sentiment on the NRA being the elephant in the room. What are they afraid of? Losing in court? What are they afraid of?

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187

    Post imported post

    cscitney87 wrote:
    RMGO I appreciate your willingness to take the time to sign up and post for us. Thank you very much. It matters to us and certainly matters to me, personally. I agree with your sentiment on the NRA being the elephant in the room. What are they afraid of? Losing in court? What are they afraid of?
    Coming on too strong and inspriring a backlash against gun owners that gets even squirrel rifles nationally banned. They think it's better to go "low and slow"with a diplomatic tack that will ultimately get better results and less resentments from marginalized gun grabbers.Not saying it's realistic or a course of action I agree with, just offering my theory on their philosophy of compromise.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Operations Director @ RMGO, ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    1. Become an RMGO member, and expand our army.

    2. Push every candidate for the Colorado legislature and Governor to
    complete the candidate survey.

  17. #17
    Regular Member ooghost1oo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    262

    Post imported post

    Firepower wrote:
    No, I was referring to the Constitutional Carry law. The immigration bill will be nuked by the first judge that deals with it.

    mahkagari wrote:
    Firepower wrote:
    I just hope that if the Republicans do take back control of Colorado, they will pass legislation similar to what they are passing in Arizona this year, not like the last Republican Congress. All they knew how to do was restrict rights and spend my money on crap.
    You mean the "your paperz pleez" law just signed today?
    So, a question for you guys knee-jerking at the 'horrible fascists':

    Have you read the bill?

    http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

    Mindless following and nay-saying is no good, no matter WHAT side you're on...

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    Agreed. Read the fine print!

    If you don't, next thing you know, they'll shove a health care bill down your throats while convincing you it's the best cough syrup you ever tasted.

    Oh, wait... wrong metaphor (and too late)

    If you don't, next thing you know they'll shove a Vermont law down your throat while convincing you it's the best maple syrup you ever tasted.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •