Hunters begining Boycott of Colorado in response to new Firearms Law

[Serapis]

I would not bet on it. Libtards live in the couple big cities. probably 90% of the people outside of the cities are very pro gun! Unfortunately, numbers wise, the few big cities win the population contest.

The entire county that I hunted in last year had 6,500 people in it!

Yeah but there are anti gun pols in some of these counties in CO. I wish I could find a link to the chart I saw.

 

[Gidge]

Good for them. Hit them in the pocket.

It's the only thing they understand...or do they ?

 

[ivarr]

Hmm, lets throw in ski trips as well! Utah is nice, I hear.

i run a ski shop.

NO-ONE is going to stop going to vail, believe me.

 

[StevieP]

i run a ski shop.

NO-ONE is going to stop going to vail, believe me.

I did. Granted, it's been several years since I visited CO for a ski trip. But I have gone to Vail (I worked at Beaver Creek winter of '88) several times and I won't go back any time soon. There are other places to check out.

 

[soloman02]

I think that the hunters are figuring out that they're going to be next.

At one point there was language in the bill that effectively banned all pump action/semiauto shotguns. I do not know if that was stripped out or not.

The fact remains, it was in the bill and it was advertised to gun owners as being in the bill, country wide.

The fudds might be waking up because someone actually tried to take away their guns for once.

 

[Dadstoys]

I wouldn't go there just based on the anti gun mentality. But even if I was a true Fudd, I would still pass. Drop 6 grand or better on a hunt and take a chance on finding yourself jacked up on some poorly written law? Nope.

 

[calsdad]

Good. Stupidity should be painful.

I know that I cancelled plans for a guided bear hunt in NY this year because of their stupid new law.

Exactly.

The world just doesn't work properly if you take pain out of the equation.

When governments pass stupid laws - both them and the people that support them should feel pain. Yes - "innocent" people will get caught in the crossfire - but nobody in this country seems to give a crap about that when we're bombing the shit out of some foreign country - I'm not sure why it should matter so much when your "fellow citizens" are using the power of government to screw you over DIRECTLY - in a worse way than any foreign government ever has.

 

[Bob J]

Colorado is dead to me....

 

[Bob J]

Every year I go to a conference that keeps me up to date with current trends in my profession.... Next year it is in Colorado Springs and because of this I'm going to pass.....

 

[calsdad]

I would not bet on it. Libtards live in the couple big cities. probably 90% of the people outside of the cities are very pro gun! Unfortunately, numbers wise, the few big cities win the population contest.

The entire county that I hunted in last year had 6,500 people in it!

This is EXACTLY why people need to make sure that Colorado feels economic pain - and why you can't be "nice" about it - as one of the previous posters said in reference to somebody who was going to stop doing business with a company that had recently moved to Colorado.

The basic problem is this : as long as the money continues to flow - people will feel absolutely no obligation to change their ways.

By continuing to do business with ANYBODY in Colorado - you are likely supporting people who are in direct opposition to you as far as gun rights go.

Do you get checks in the mail from anti's so you can buy ammunition?

I didn't think so.

So why send them checks in the mail so they can be supported and have a bunch of free time to get laws passed that prevent YOU from buying ammunition with your own money?

You're slitting your own throat.

 

[calsdad]

I think that the hunters are figuring out that they're going to be next.

Is there any evidence to support that? I've seen what seems to be an awakening among some "hunters" - but it doesn't seem to be pervasive.

I attribute some of the this to the blurring of the lines between "hunting rifles" and "sniper rifles" - or - "tactical rifles" that has been going on for ten years or so.

Also - some of the older generations of hunters are fading from the scene - the ones who grew up in an era where the ownership and use of "military" style rifles really wasn't that pervasive or popular.

Seems like they're being replaced with guys who may be "hunters" - but they likely also have an AK or an AR at home.

 

[soloman02]

Is there any evidence to support that? I've seen what seems to be an awakening among some "hunters" - but it doesn't seem to be pervasive.

I attribute some of the this to the blurring of the lines between "hunting rifles" and "sniper rifles" - or - "tactical rifles" that has been going on for ten years or so.

Also - some of the older generations of hunters are fading from the scene - the ones who grew up in an era where the ownership and use of "military" style rifles really wasn't that pervasive or popular.

Seems like they're being replaced with guys who may be "hunters" - but they likely also have an AK or an AR at home.

Or some of the new age hunters are finding out how awesome the AR platform is from an ergonomics standpoint. And that they can use standard capacity mags to have some fun at the range too.

 

[Savage99]

Boycotting hunting in a place that has passed some gun law is not the best idea.

The problem is that guns were used by a mentally ill person.

That's what we need to focus on and correct.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

Or some of the new age hunters are finding out how awesome the AR platform is from an ergonomics standpoint. And that they can use standard capacity mags to have some fun at the range too.

Agreed. And it's posts like this that make me pissed (not directed at you). The AR platform is awesome , yep. Why can't they go after Sigmas or some shit. I don't want anything banned nor do I want some prick tell me what I can/can't buy as a free man. It's just upsetting that they believe one weapon is worse than the other. Yeah I know it's been said, I just felt like ranting. Will not comply.

 

[TomH]

why in the world would you do that. unless you have not told us something else, like the owner is a rabid anti, you are going to pull your business because the company moved to a state 18 months ago when that state was very pro gun, and now because the legislature passed more restrictive laws, it is the owner of that company's fault, and you are going to punish him?!

Your profile doesn't say if you are from MA, but if you are, so if somebody pulls business from you from out of state because you are here, that is good?

It's your choice of course, just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Yes, hurt the states the infringe on rights. The majority of voters there are ultimately to blame.

 

[Gidge]

...

The problem is that guns were used by a mentally ill person.

That's what we need to focus on and correct.

The problem with this is that the APA has pretty much labeled most normal human activity as a "disorder" of one kind or another (e.g.
Digital Age overload: ?Internet addiction? to be classified as mental illness ? RT News ) If everyone has a disorder, then everyone is a PP </game>.

 

[TomH]

Boycotting hunting in a place that has passed some gun law is not the best idea.

The problem is that guns were used by a mentally ill person.

That's what we need to focus on and correct.

Terrible idea. Who says there is even a problem? Never give up liberty for "safety".

 

[dwarven1]

Agreed. And it's posts like this that make me pissed (not directed at you). The AR platform is awesome , yep. Why can't they go after Sigmas or some shit. I don't want anything banned nor do I want some prick tell me what I can/can't buy as a free man. It's just upsetting that they believe one weapon is worse than the other. Yeah I know it's been said, I just felt like ranting. Will not comply.

And posts like THIS make me more pissed: "Why can't they go after [someone else's gun]?" Don't you see that that whole attitude is how the antis have split the gun owning community for decades? "Let them go after someone else's gun; they won't touch mine".

Well, the handwriting is on the wall for fools who believe that: they're going after EVERYONE'S gun.

ARs? Too killy.
AKs? Evil! Russian! Or something.
50 BMGs? Too powerful!
Mouseguns? Too small & weak - no one uses those for anything.
[strike=""]Sniper[/strike] Hunting rifles? Too accurate.
Cheap HiPoints and Keltecs? too inaccurate. Or something that they'll make up.

THEY ARE OUT TO BAN ALL GUNS.

Wake UP and fight back.

And yes, this IS directed at you. And everyone else who wishes they'd go after some other gun and leave YOU alone.

 

[Bob J]

Or some of the new age hunters are finding out how awesome the AR platform is from an ergonomics standpoint. And that they can use standard capacity mags to have some fun at the range too.

AR in the larger calibers is an awesome bush gun....

 

[jefftk]

Boycotting hunting in a place that has passed some gun law is not the best idea.

The problem is that guns were used by a mentally ill person.

That's what we need to focus on and correct.

hmmmm... Nope, pass.

Do you think when they passed this law they thought to themselves "Aha, this will stop the next guy!"?
More likely they were thinking "Aha!, here is our chance!".

Colorado passed legislation, that had nothing to do with mental health, that stomped on the rights of people there. Therefore, it is a completely separate problem.

WE need to focus on preserving our rights. We need to focus on correcting bad legislation.

 

[Pete85]

But I thought hunters didn't care about high capacity banana clips and supported this legislation?

That's what makes this great. It proves that hunters, like all freedome loving Americans, oppose this legislation as well. The few token fudds the antis get to speak for them (like John Rosenthal), are now being marignalized.

 

[Pete85]

It's the only thing they understand...or do they ?

No, they'll just reach into someone else's pocket like they always do. They'll raise the taxes on alcohol, or gas, or weed, or the sales tax, or the income tax or any of 1000 other taxes on the books.

 

[Savage99]

Of course, we must keep our eyes on all relevant issues.

However the mental illness issue that leads to violence seems more difficult to deal with.

We must do that also.

 

[Pete85]

Is there any evidence to support that? I've seen what seems to be an awakening among some "hunters" - but it doesn't seem to be pervasive.

I attribute some of the this to the blurring of the lines between "hunting rifles" and "sniper rifles" - or - "tactical rifles" that has been going on for ten years or so.

Also - some of the older generations of hunters are fading from the scene - the ones who grew up in an era where the ownership and use of "military" style rifles really wasn't that pervasive or popular.

Seems like they're being replaced with guys who may be "hunters" - but they likely also have an AK or an AR at home.

Yesterday's hunting rifle is today's "assault weapon", "sniper rifle", "tactical rifle" or whatever they decide to call it. Particularly with the term "assault weapon", they made up a new term, gave it a definition that had nothing to do with making the gun functionally different. Having a pistol grip, an adjustible stock, a mount that can accept any accessory as long as it can also accept a bayonet or grenade launcher (which are made to attach to a variety of mounts), etc, doesn't make the gun function differently. After the Aurora and Newtown shootings, they've now started pointing out "loopholes" in the law that allow people to still have "assault weapons" as long as the "assault weapon" doesn't have any of the evil features. In their eyes, any semi-automatic rifle is now an assault weapon, and they've started to mention pump action shotguns. They're redefining the term "assault weapon" to give it a broader and broader definition until eventually it will encompass everything more powerful than a RedRider BB gun.

They're not trying to blur the line. In their eyes, there is no line between hunting rifles and "assault weapons". They're just going to keep expanding the definition until they get everything.

 

[Pete85]

Do you think when they passed this law they thought to themselves "Aha, this will stop the next guy!"?
More likely they were thinking "Aha!, here is our chance!".

This. They even admitted that "No laws could stop this type of attack" (President Obama in response to Sandy Hook), but they're still trying to ban certain types of guns. They have expicitly stated that a reduction of violence is not their goal.

 

[rwl1955]

We'll see what the numbers are a year from now. Hopefully enough people avoid Colorado like the plaque. Yup, money talks and bullshit walks.

 

[Stee]

everyone quits hunting in colorado for 5 years the deer population goes out of control.. people wrecking their cars, insurance goes through the roof.. oh please come hunt and take care of our problem... suck it

 

[pernox]

Of course, we must keep our eyes on all relevant issues.

However the mental illness issue that leads to violence seems more difficult to deal with.

We must do that also.

Absolutely. But it should be done as a society - a set of communities and families looking after their own. Using the government as a club will never, ever end with liberty intact for free men. Every time the government gets involved in regulating, controlling, assisting, or overseeing anything - someone loses liberty, freedom, and money. The .gov has no business in health of any kind - mental or otherwise.

 

[Winchester73]

Yesterday's hunting rifle is today's "assault weapon", "sniper rifle", "tactical rifle" or whatever they decide to call it. Particularly with the term "assault weapon", they made up a new term, gave it a definition that had nothing to do with making the gun functionally different. Having a pistol grip, an adjustible stock, a mount that can accept any accessory as long as it can also accept a bayonet or grenade launcher (which are made to attach to a variety of mounts), etc, doesn't make the gun function differently. After the Aurora and Newtown shootings, they've now started pointing out "loopholes" in the law that allow people to still have "assault weapons" as long as the "assault weapon" doesn't have any of the evil features. In their eyes, any semi-automatic rifle is now an assault weapon, and they've started to mention pump action shotguns. They're redefining the term "assault weapon" to give it a broader and broader definition until eventually it will encompass everything more powerful than a RedRider BB gun.

They're not trying to blur the line. In their eyes, there is no line between hunting rifles and "assault weapons". They're just going to keep expanding the definition until they get everything.

This says it all. The gun haters are determined to disarm America, but realize that they must do it in increments. Today it's your evil black rifle. When they've gotten those, then it's those super-accurate high-powered sniper rifles, then it's those pump-action shotguns capable of committing close range massacres because of the multiple pellet ammo. Then its, etc....
Additionally, the gun haters will also shamelessly exploit any firearms-related tragedy to the fullest extent possible, irregardless of who it is. They have no shame nor honesty. To them, the end result ALWAYS justifies the means.

 

[jefftk]

http://coloradosenatenews.com/Downloads/MichaelBane.pdf

This is not a "boycott" in the traditional sense of a centralized,organized operation; rather, it is more of a grassroots decision on where shooters, hunters and other sportsmen are willing to spend their money. Look at the collapse of the Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show in February. That venerable multimillion dollar trade show chose to ban modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines, and with three weeks it collapsed as all vendors and sponsors pulled out.

Colorado is going to pay a huge price for laws that will do nothing.