• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Colorado Safe Storage law

Do you support this Safe Storage law?

  • Total voters
    36
Wayne Jr said:
Incorrect, I already know it. I'm just trying to explain it to you so that you can learn.


It's actually both a trademark and a kind of firearm, thus the importance of knowing the difference between the stuff (marketing) and the stuff (actual kind of firearm).


They're called SCARs for marketing purposes to civilians but they aren't actually SCARS unless they're mag-fed select-fire 7.62mm.

It's like Ford coming out with a brand of truck and calling it a 'compact car'. You're arguing that it's a compact car just because that's what the company calls it, but 'compact car' means something and trucks do not fit the description. You can call a PC a 'laptop' but that doesn't make a PC an actual laptop. You can call a tomato a vegetable all you like, even sell it in the vegetable section, but it's still a fruit by definition.

I don't know how to illustrate the difference between marketing labels and technical descriptors any clearer than that. You'll either get it, or you won't.
Click to expand...
SCAR is a trademarked line of rifles designed, produced, and sold by FNH.

No other firearms manufacturing company produces SCAR rifles. They may produce other rifles of the same caliber and similar design, but cannot label them as SCAR rifles because SCAR is a trademark brand owned by FNH.

Unless you can prove (with links to verifiable references) any of the above false, you’ll have to concede the truth, that there are multiple variations of the SCAR rifle.

If you still aren’t getting it, I’ll provide you with an analogy that will hopefully clear up your thinking; Chevrolet has the Corvette, a trademarked product within a line of vehicles manufactured by GM. Some have manual transmissions and some have automatic transmissions, but all are Corvettes.
 
Wayne Jr said:
No one is threatening anyone's rights.
Click to expand...

Yes they are. If I have to render my self defense weapons useless in order to prevent stupid from someone else, that'a an infringement.
 
jimbo said:
Yes they are. If I have to render my self defense weapons useless in order to prevent stupid from someone else, that'a an infringement.
Click to expand...

Like you do on a plane?
 
Wayne Jr said:
Yeah, you either leave loaded firearms around children or you're anti-gun, sure thing guy :D
Click to expand...

pro-2nd amendment and pro-gun aren't the same thing. Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstien and other other democrats are pro-gun when it comes to their security detail with guns protecting their asses but support banning semiautomatic firearms for the average joe. Someone who is pro-2nd amendment doesn't believe you need the government's permission to buy,keep,carry and or use a gun. Someone who isn't pro-2nd amendment believes that you should need permission to buy,keep,carry and or use a gun. This law is asking permission from the government to do those things.
 
Last edited:
Rich2018 said:
Or ask how many people want the police to pull you over for speeding.
Click to expand...

So the police pulling you over while you're out in public operating a dangerous machine is the same thing as the bathing into your house and searching whenever they feel like it?

So why do you need a warrant for one of them and not for the other?
 
CLAX1911 said:
So the police pulling you over while you're out in public operating a dangerous machine is the same thing as the bathing into your house and searching whenever they feel like it?

So why do you need a warrant for one of them and not for the other?
Click to expand...

You don't in the UK

The police have the duty of ensuring you've following the law


And you asked how many people would want the police in their house, and I said about the same number of people that want the police to pull them over for speeding


You countered but that's operating a "dangerous machine"
To which I counter that storing a gun is the operation of a "dangerous machine"
 
Rich2018 said:
Better a safe serf than a threatened free man...well not actually a serf as they were in pretty poor conditions of servitude but as Napoleon is reputed to have said:

"A man will fight harder for his interests than for his rights"


Freedom is overrated.

Security is not...and Benjamin Franklin was wrong.

For security, we must give up a degree of freedom.
Click to expand...

That's what Lenin said. It is the philosophical bedrock of Communism. Capitalism/Democracy offers the most freedom but the least security. Communism, with state control, promises a great deal of security but very little personal freedom.

You makes your choice an then you have to live with it.
 
joko104 said:
I don't have a problem with this. Biometric locks are cheap for pistols or gun safes. It allows it carried on your person and having it under your pillow or nightstand while sleeping.
Click to expand...

On the face of it, this law doesn't hinder self defense at all. Basically, only when you have kids in the home, and you will be elsewhere in the house than where the gun is, you lock it up. A small finger dial safe would do. Or a cable lock. If the gun is on or near you, basically under your control, no changes, even with kids in the home. There are no changes whatever if you don't have kids in the home.

I am a gun nut. Life time NRA member. But before I would let my kids play at other people's homes I always asked if their guns were put up. Much as you would love to think you can teach a 5 yr old boy gun safety, it just ain't possible. I took my kids shooting when they turned around 10 yrs old. But only with me present.

The slippery slope I worry about is will government eventually ask for "inspection power" because not enough people are compliant? Inspections could become warrantless searches. That could lead to confiscation.

How will they "access" that not enough people are compliant? Maybe a couple of high profile accidental shootings in homes after the law goes into effect.

I remember when wearing seat belts was only a recommendation.......... then it was well, they won't ticket you for not wearing a seat belt unless they are already ticketing you for something else.......then, you will be issued a ticket for not wearing a seat belt.

Government always seems to push for more, especially if the anti-gun crowd is behind them.

Hey, and generally I like what you post.
 
Waddy said:
That's what Lenin said.
Click to expand...

Quotation please


It is the philosophical bedrock of Communism.
Click to expand...

No it's not.
I highly doubt you know what communism is - in short it is the equal distribution of weath

Security doesn't come into it

What did Karl Marx have to say about "security"
Nothing, that's what


Capitalism/Democracy offers the most freedom but the least security.
Click to expand...


False

What is the draft of WWII if not the mandatory surrender of freedom ?

Have you ANY idea of the number of laws you are subject to ?

Have you got any idea of the amount of private property that's denied to you (the old USSR didn't have any private beaches)

Generally a rich country will protect it's people better
Who won WWI ?
Who won WWII ?
Who won the Cold War ?
Who won the Falkland's conflict ?


Communism, with state control, promises a great deal of security but very little personal freedom.
Click to expand...

False

The most basic form of communism is a workers collective factory or a farm (like a Kibbutz in Israel).
They would say they are free.

You makes your choice an then you have to live with it.
Click to expand...


You should really learn something about politics and economics before post stuff you do not understand.

Have you ever studied politics or economics beyond high school social studies ?
 
Last edited:
CLAX1911 said:
Who cares?
Click to expand...

The people in the UK

Th people in the US looking for evidence on how gun control might work


Just like people in the USA have looked at the results of Portugal's experience with the decriminalization of drugs.
Doesn't mean it's going to happen here but it's evidence of what might happen.
 
Rich2018 said:
Quotation please




No it's not.
I highly doubt you know what communism is - in short it is the equal distribution of weath

Security doesn't come into it

What did Karl Marx have to say about "security"
Nothing, that's what





False

What is the draft of WWII if not the mandatory surrender of freedom ?

Have you ANY idea of the number of laws you are subject to ?

Have you got any idea of the amount of private property that's denied to you (the old USSR didn't have any private beaches)

Generally a rich country will protect it's people better
Who won WWI ?
Who won WWII ?
Who won the Cold War ?
Who won the Falkland's conflict ?




False

The most basic form of communism is a workers collective factory or a farm (like a Kibbutz in Israel).
They would say they are free.




You should really learn something about politics and economics before post stuff you do not understand.

Have you ever studied politics or economics beyond high school social studies ?
Click to expand...

You just wing it , don't you?

So your contention is security in exchange for personal freedom has no basis in Communism? LMOA you really are entertaining at times.

Know when I know someone has no argument? They start with the insults.
 
Waddy said:
You just wing it , don't you?
Click to expand...

Sometimes I can because there's an obvious answer to a highly incorrect statement another poster has made, other times you are skeptical of another's claims and post evidence to the contrary



So your contention is security in exchange for personal freedom has no basis in Communism?
Click to expand...

Yes

Show that it has. You can't can you ?


Know when I know someone has no argument? They start with the insults.
Click to expand...

Please show the bit of my post that insulted you
Or are you, to quote yourself, just "winging" it or being "entertaining" ?


You never answered the question:

Have you ever studied politics or economics beyond high school social studies ?
 
Rich2018 said:
Sometimes I can because there's an obvious answer to a highly incorrect statement another poster has made, other times you are skeptical of another's claims and post evidence to the contrary

Yes

Show that it has. You can't can you ?

Please show the bit of my post that insulted you
Or are you, to quote yourself, just "winging" it or being "entertaining" ?

You never answered the question:

Have you ever studied politics or economics beyond high school social studies ?
Click to expand...

If you had any concept at all of the differences between Democracy and Communism you wouldn't make such ludicrous statements as claiming Communism doesn't sacrifice personal freedom for security. YOU are the one who hasn't studied political science or economics. Really, you actually believe what you're spouting? Incredible.

I can't help you. But I accept your surrender, again. And on yet another topic.
 
Waddy said:
If you had any concept at all of the differences between Democracy and Communism ...
Click to expand...

Right there you show your ignorance


Democracy is a political concept regarding the distribution of political power - extreme right wing politics sees political power vested in one man (eg: Hitler, Stalin)
Left wing politics sees political power as equally distributed as practical - we call that Democracy


Communism is an economic concept regarding the distribution of wealth, extreme right wing economics sees one man own everything (capitalism), extreme left wing economics sees an equal distribution of wealth (communism)


YOU are the one who hasn't studied political science or economics...
Click to expand...


I've studied politics and economics at college - what do you have besides high school social studies ?

I'm not surprised, a great many American don't understand what fascism is for example. And how to categorize the totalitarian regime in the old USSR under Stalin
I'm guessing you think Hitler was a socialist ?


I can't help you. But I accept your surrender, again. And on yet another topic.
Click to expand...

I would doubt that you could but you can help yourself by studying politics and economic properly.


As I said before, you're a day late and a dollar short to "accept" anyone's "surrender"
More evidence you're deluded.
 
Rich2018 said:
Right there you show your ignorance


Democracy is a political concept regarding the distribution of political power - extreme right wing politics sees political power vested in one man (eg: Hitler, Stalin)
Left wing politics sees political power as equally distributed as practical - we call that Democracy


Communism is an economic concept regarding the distribution of wealth, extreme right wing economics sees one man own everything (capitalism), extreme left wing economics sees an equal distribution of wealth (communism)





I've studied politics and economics at college - what do you have besides high school social studies ?

I'm not surprised, a great many American don't understand what fascism is for example. And how to categorize the totalitarian regime in the old USSR under Stalin
I'm guessing you think Hitler was a socialist ?




I would doubt that you could but you can help yourself by studying politics and economic properly.


As I said before, you're a day late and a dollar short to "accept" anyone's "surrender"
More evidence you're deluded.
Click to expand...

Your statement that Communism doesn't sacrifice personal freedom for security is the most idiotic post I've ever read. That's saying a lot, I've read some pretty bad stuff.

And now mish-mash to cover your mistake. Just own it, man. I accept your surrender.
 
jimbo said:
Yes they are. If I have to render my self-defense weapons useless in order to prevent stupid from someone else, that'a an infringement.
Click to expand...
This law does NOT require anyone to render their self-defense weapons useless. This law only applies to weapons you are leaving unattended around children. Nothing else.
 
jamesrage said:
pro-2nd amendment and pro-gun aren't the same thing. Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein, and other Democrats are pro-gun when it comes to their security detail with guns protecting their asses but support banning semiautomatic firearms for the average joe. Someone who is pro-2nd amendment doesn't believe you need the government's permission to buy, keep, carry and or use a gun. Someone who isn't pro-2nd amendment believes that you should need permission to buy, keep, carry and or use a gun. This law is asking permission from the government to do those things.
Click to expand...
In my 4 decades on this planet, this is the first I'm hearing of a difference between "pro-2A" and "pro-gun".

Just because someone claims they are pro-X does not mean they are pro-X. Anti-X will claim to be pro-X while undermining X-rights. Anti-X lie and deceive in order to achieve a greater portion of their goal within their lifetime. See Ronald Reagan as an example: He claimed to be pro-gun but committed treason to get elected and signed the machine gun ban.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
SCAR is a trademarked line of rifles designed, produced, and sold by FNH.
Click to expand...
That's the "stuff (marketing)". You still need to learn the difference between marketing and actual types of firearms. I've done all I know how to educate you.
 
Rich2018 said:
Or ask how many people want the police to pull you over for speeding.
Click to expand...

Hmm... is that because what you just might be doing wrong in the privacy of your home is akin to what you have been seen doing wrong on public roadways?
 
Wayne Jr said:
In my 4 decades on this planet, this is the first I'm hearing of a difference between "pro-2A" and "pro-gun".
Click to expand...

You haven't been on this forum long enough.

Just because someone claims they are pro-X does not mean they are pro-X. Anti-X will claim to be pro-X while undermining X-rights. Anti-X lie and deceive in order to achieve a greater portion of their goal within their lifetime.
Click to expand...

Most of the time we know someone is outright lying when they say they support the 2nd amendment because they say some nonsense that they also support common sense gun control. Which is code for banning semiautomatic firearms and other repeating firearms under the guise of an assault weapons ban and enacting more laws that turn whats left of the the 2nd amendment into a state granted privilege instead of a right.

See Ronald Reagan as an example: He claimed to be pro-gun but committed treason to get elected and signed the machine gun ban.
Click to expand...
I am amazed how many republicans and conservatives act as though Reagan is republican Jesus of the conservative movement. I am sure in 20 or 30 years from now republicans and conservatives will act the same regarding Trump and or Bush.
 
Wayne Jr said:
That's the "stuff (marketing)". You still need to learn the difference between marketing and actual types of firearms. I've done all I know how to educate you.
Click to expand...
No, you’ve done all you can to prove your unwillingness to acknowledge your ignorance/error.

While I have provided irrefutable, supported, proof, you have posted only ignorant opinion.

Congratulations on the great job! :bravo:
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Hmm... is that because what you just might be doing wrong in the privacy of your home is akin to what you have been seen doing wrong on public roadways?
Click to expand...

Yes

Because how else could Law enforcement see that you're obeying the law.

Invent a remote device to check on your gun storage ?


What do you suggest ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom