Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Colorado town outlaws sanity

Posted 10 years ago on May 20, 2013, 7:34 p.m. EST by gwb (42)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

NUCLA, Colo.--The tiny Colorado town of Nucla ( named by george bush ) bhas passed an ordinance making gun ownership mandatory.
The Nucla Town Board last week voted to require that residents own firearms
According to the Montrose Daily Press Nucla's ordinance passed by a 5-1 vote. It was inspired by the Family Protection Ordinance passed by the town of Nelson, Ga.
The Colorado town of less than 1,000 people becomes the latest of a handful of communities nationwide to pass such a rule. The measures are widely considered unenforceable. main reason is to protect Second Amendment rights, especially with the government talking about abolishing them," said Nucla Town Board member Joshua Newingham. "Out here, we hunt, we do sports shooting. It's a way of life."

Nucla's ordinance states that, in order to provide for the emergency management of the town and for the general public welfare, "every head of household residing in the town limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefor.



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

I suspect these mania for guns is perpetuated by the weapons market

[-] 2 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

but unlike addictive cigarettes, a gun owner CAN say NO - if they are sane


[-] 1 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

That's not new news. At least a dozen other rural towns have done the same thing. Basically it's a protest against the anti-gun efforts.

Related, Texas passed legislation this month allowing conceal carrying of weapons at universities.

[-] 1 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

lets hope that they also pass a minimum speed limit of 80MPH

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

I think a lot of Texans would enjoy an 80 MPH speed limit. Most major Texas highways already have a 75 MPH speed limit. Also, Texas has one road with a legal speed limit of 85 MPH (highest in the nation so I told).

But I’m not sure what that has to do with guns.

[-] 1 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

minimum -thimk

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 10 years ago

It has to do with the megalomaniac affliction of Texas and its people. Guns, high highway speed limits, and concealed carrying of weapons at universities seem to indicate a peculiar mental affliction.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

It's harder to hold your aim when travelling at speed.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 10 years ago

Maybe not in Texas! Texas is really huge so I can understand the high highway speed limits but the other issues seem to emanate from the mental disposition, not physical environment.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Western Australia is about a third of the size of the U.S.of A. Our Northern Territory has no speed restrictions on the two major hiways. If you're good enough to hold a target, and judge the lead time, while driving above 85 mph, you're doing pretty well.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 10 years ago

What kind of a target are you holding? I sure hope there are few hills in that terrain so you do not come at me over the hill while blinded.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Most of the NT and WA are flat as a pancake in the north. The truckers call slight rises in the road "jump-ups" because they are hauling three trailers, for a total length of over 170 feet or road-train.

The "target" would be another human, of course, unless you'd be taking potshots at road signs for practice.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 10 years ago

I see.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

Holding a target is pretty hard when you can’t legally own a gun. Australia has pretty restrictive gun laws.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

I can join a pistol club, and buy an automatic handgun quite easily. Anyone (without a history of idiocy or violence) can apply for a rifle permit, and buy a hunting rifle, or shotgun. The restrictions are on semi-automatic, and pump-action weapons.

We also have a cooling-off period before purchase, and history checks before a permit can be issued.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

That makes it double tough to stay on target. I mean trying to drive and operate a bolt-action rifle while maintaining a target would be almost impossible. Still, my favorite guns are bolt-action. I never understood all the interest in semi-auto rifles. The best gun I own is a bolt-action .308. Screw these .223 AR-15’s. Those are intended for up close warfare. I’d much rather be four blocks down the street with my .308; and out of range of a .223.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Sounds like you're aware that bolt actions are the more accurate weapon.

You won't see target shooters or snipers with anything but a bolt action rifle.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

You’re correct. There’s 550 miles of nothing when driving between San Antonio and El Paso. Well, almost nothing. Maybe a couple of small town gas stations; but not a good place to have a car break down.

As for guns. Several States have more lax gun laws than Texas. There’s still a couple of States where you don’t need a license to carry a gun. Also, unfortunately, Texas didn’t pass the open carry law this session. So we still have to carry our guns concealed. I’m really bummed out about that.

Also, While the Texas Legislature did pass a bill allowing carrying a conceal weapon on campus, they put a loophole in it where Universities can opt out and not allow guns on campus. It’s up to each school to decide.

Personally I blame the influx of fleeing Californians now in Texas on the State not passing open carry and the campus loophole. However, the legislature did pass a bill where the State will pay for teacher fire arms training.

I predict the massive influx of people from other States looking for a jobs and less taxes will turn Texas Blue within the next twenty years. Just like everywhere else, It’s the urban and city folks against the rural population. A distinct difference of values.

[-] 1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 10 years ago

Yea, I agree.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 10 years ago

I see some comparison (in)equalities:

Texas : U.S. = U.S. : Canada

California : U.S. = U.S. : World

California + Texas < U.S. and Texas + California > U.S. => U.S. = 0

Rural culture is too suffocating and urban culture is too choking so you know that I am neither blue nor red but purple with anger for where we all end up -- Colorado, California, Texas, U.S., Canada, or the World.



[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 years ago

preserving the right to bear arms is important of equal importance is insuring weapons do not fall into the hands of the insane or depraved if possible WITH OUT infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens. the best way to accomplish this is enforcing the existing laws on the books and closing existing loopholes in addition to fully funding a nationwide mental health and happiness initiative to provide services for those in need instead of whatever the hell you want to call our mental health system now.

[-] 0 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

"fully funding a nationwide mental health and happiness initiative to provide services for those in need" everyone who wants to own a gun ( including OWNERS ) must go through at least a 12 month therapy session that will CERTIFY their sanity
just like we have to pay for driver ed - drivers pay to learn how to drive
If they fail the test, they cant own a gun

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 10 years ago

Ehh... it's just grandstanding. The reality is that everyone already owns a gun.

[-] 2 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

the number of people who own guns is going DOWN
the number of guns owned per gun owner is going up

Now if you want to make millions,
invent a machine that lets you hold and fire six guns at the same time.

FYI- Biotab Nutraceuticals - manufacturer of ExtenZ
did a survey of its customers - 73% are gun owners

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 10 years ago

Has anybody ever asked you if you own a gun? 73% of the guns in this country are unaccountable. So how do you determine that ownership, or more accurately - possession - is going down? It's certainly not going down in metro areas and we now have new generations coming of age in rural areas. Such statements defy logic.

[-] 2 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

simple - if you are an unlicenced driver of an unregistered car, you are a law breaker - if you are an unlicenced owner of an unregistered gun, you are a law breaker go to jail

[-] 1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 10 years ago

As an unlicensed driver of an unregistered car I would not go to jail; what country are you living in? And nooo... we are not obtaining licenses nor registering our guns.

[-] 1 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

"we are not obtaining licenses nor registering our guns"
we should

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

Guns aren't registered in the US. Well maybe in a couple of isolated instances, but for the most part the government does not know who has guns or how many guns there are. And, people will not register their guns. They view gun registration as a precursor to gun confiscation.

Wow, with all the gun restriction talk the past few months I thought everyone understood that.

[-] 0 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

but the nra has a list of your guns

[-] -1 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

Nope, Not true. No one knows what guns people have. Even when doing a background check to buy a gun you don't state what, if any, gun you are buying.

For instance, I recently did a multi-gun trade with a gun store. Several guns were involved, but only one background check required. And since the gun store owner is a friend of mine I didn't even do any sales paperwork. Not to mention that guns can be bought and sold between individuals without a background check.

I'll say it again, no one know who has guns, or what type of guns, or how many guns, etc..,

[-] 1 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

A new investigative report says that the National Rifle Association collects and maintains an expansive database of information on gun owners.

BuzzFeed contributor Steve Friess reports that the NRA keeps the stockpile of information at its national headquarters in Virginia and that it goes well beyond the group’s estimated 3 million members.

“That database has been built through years of acquiring gun permit registration lists from state and county offices, gathering names of new owners from the thousands of gun-safety classes taught by NRA-certified instructors and by buying lists of attendees of gun shows, subscribers to gun magazines, and more,” Friess writes.

Defenders of the policy note that the NRA is a private organization and therefore its efforts to collect information on gun owners is not a contradiction to its opposition to a government mandated gun ownership registry.

“It’s probably partially true that people don’t know the information is being collected,” former NRA lobbyist Richard Feldman told BuzzFeed. “But even if they don’t know it, they probably won’t care because the NRA is not part of the government.”

The story has also sparked a reaction from NRA supporters who argue that the NRA’s database is more of a marketing tool than an actual “gun registry." The conservative Ace of Spades blog writes, “There's a world of difference. The ‘gun owner’ classification is mostly assumed, based on interests and behavior. It's not even particularly important to the NRA whether they are gun owners, so long as they have an interest in gun rights and the second amendment.”

Information obtained for the report shows that the NRA has purchased lists of gun owners from state governments in Virginia and Iowa, and uses its own relationship with states through licensed gun safety instructors to collect the information, often without the knowledge or consent of those on the lists.

Other states including Arkansas, Louisiana, Oregon and Tennessee have received similar information requests from the NRA.

“There’s nothing that prevents them from mailing those people,” Feldman said. “The more you know about people, the more targeted the message you can communicate with them, the more the message will resonate with them.”

Feldman says he estimates the NRA has files on “tens of millions” of individuals.

In February, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said gun background checks were tantamount to creating a national gun registry. The website FactCheck.org said that was a false claim, noting that current federal law prohibits the government from creating a national gun registry.

A 2009 email obtained by BuzzFeed shows a representative from a private firm hired by the NRA reaching out to Virginia government officials for access to lists containing the names of concealed carry permit owners.

“Can you please let me know if you offer 2008 and/or 2009 names?” Preferred Communications' Michele Wood wrote to the Virginia State Police on behalf of the NRA. “Can you please let me know the address to send the check to and also whom to make it payable to?”

In a separate email, NRA lobbyist Christopher Rager wrote to the Iowa Department of Public Safety making a similar request.

“If the NRA wanted to collect data from DPS’ permit holder files, is there a specific process or any rules for us to acquire the records?” Rager reportedly wrote. “Can we pay to have the files copied or sent to us?”

When BuzzFeed reached out to the NRA about its information gathering policies, spokesman Andrew Arulanandam reportedly declined, saying, “That’s not any of your business.”

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 10 years ago

Interesting. I didn’t know that. But I’m not a member of the NRA. I also don’t meet the definition of a gun nut. I just own a few guns for self defense and occasional plinking at the farm. I don’t own a AR15 or a AK47. My bolt-action hunting rifle fits my needs. I have a conceal carry permit, but mostly carry only when I’m traveling or going somewhere I’m not familiar with. Most people don’t realize how uncomfortable carrying a gun is. It’s a hassle to pick out clothes that conceal your gun that most people stop carrying a gun within a year of getting their permit. I think my profile as a gun owner is probably more the norm than the AR15 crowd.

As for the NRA collecting info. I don’t like it. But what you gonna do. At least they still don’t know for sure if I own a gun. There just guessing based on a profile. Kinda a “best guess” on their part.

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 10 years ago

The Western Slope is so far behind that all ~750 people in Nucla are all related to eachother.

Its a good thing that Montrose is about 10 hours away from civilization.

[-] -1 points by summerbummer (-33) 10 years ago

They must be Dems. Obama said there were 57 states so they are just trying to help reestablish his credibility

[-] 1 points by gwb (42) 10 years ago

and he's a muslim kenyan illegal alien from mars