Post by: Dave Workman on March 21, 2013, 08:29:20 AM
Colo. sheriffs sue to overturn new state gun, magazine limit laws
This morning in Denver, 54 Colorado sheriffs and other plaintiffs including disabled gun owners, will file a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Centennial State’s new laws affecting sales and temporary transfer of firearms, and placing limits on magazine capacity.
http://www.examiner.com/article/colo-sheriffs-sue-to-overturn-new-state-gun-magazine-limit-laws (http://www.examiner.com/article/colo-sheriffs-sue-to-overturn-new-state-gun-magazine-limit-laws)
=========================================
Declaring economic war on Colorado
The gun rights community has taken the adage “money talks and B.S. walks” and reversed it when discussing Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper’s signing yesterday of anti-gun legislation, and are now saying that their money walks, and Tom Gresham, host of the nationally-broadcast “Gun Talk” yesterday took a step right behind Magpul Industries.
http://www.examiner.com/article/declaring-economic-war-on-colorado?cid=db_articles (http://www.examiner.com/article/declaring-economic-war-on-colorado?cid=db_articles)
Post by: Fl0und3rz on March 21, 2013, 09:06:21 AM
As far as CO companies go, Warbonnet is a maker of high-quality hammocks and accessories. Sadly, they have the misfortune of residing in CO.
http://www.warbonnetoutdoors.com/contact_us.php (http://www.warbonnetoutdoors.com/contact_us.php)
Here is a message I left on their contact page.
Quote
I was considering purchasing one of your hammocks and accessories after seeing my brother's in action. Sadly, after your Governor's signing of laws that fail to respect the rights of its citizens under the Second Amendment, I must reconsider supporting the many economies of Colorado.
While I realize that the effect on your potential sales is an unfair economic consequence, the effects should be communicated through to your elected representatives. My apologies.
Please keep me on your mailing list, in the event that you relocate to a Second Amendment friendly locale, or in the event that steps are taken to repeal and/or overturn these infringements, as I am still interested in your products or suitable alternatives.
Kind regards.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 11:00:56 AM
It's funny that the outdoor writer in CO doesn't want outsiders to connect paying their department of parks and wildlife to restrictions signed off by the governor. No stretch for me.
My brother called last week with an idea to do an hunt of a lifetime together with two other friends and suggested we hunt elk in CO, because he's done it there before. We haven't hunted together for decades. It looks like when we do it, it's going to be in WY or MT now. Screw CO. We'll probably end up spending a minimum of $30K once all is said and done. I wonder how many others will change their plans, too. I start to feel sorry for the outfitters, the guides, the hotels, the restaurants, etc.. But then I realize that it's their state, too. They all collectively let this happen and they'll all collectively live or die by it, or they'll collectively un-@#$% it.
Post by: WSU on March 21, 2013, 11:18:53 AM
Thanks for the heads up and well-written article, Dave.
It's funny that the outdoor writer in CO doesn't want outsiders to connect paying their department of parks and wildlife to restrictions signed off by the governor. No stretch for me.
My brother called last week with an idea to do an hunt of a lifetime together with two other friends and suggested we hunt elk in CO, because he's done it there before. We haven't hunted together for decades. It looks like when we do it, it's going to be in WY or MT now. Screw CO. We'll probably end up spending a minimum of $30K once all is said and done. I wonder how many others will change their plans, too. I start to feel sorry for the outfitters, the guides, the hotels, the restaurants, etc.. But then I realize that it's their state, too. They all collectively let this happen and they'll all collectively live or die by it, or they'll collectively un-@#$% it.
I agree that it isn't a stretch. Their government (in this case CPW) is supported by gun owners. It isn't a stretch for gun owners to boycott that government when the government chooses to take away rights.
Post by: bobcat on March 21, 2013, 11:24:11 AM
Post by: WSU on March 21, 2013, 11:27:42 AM
That's ridiculous boycotting companies that just happen to be based in Colorado. Also doesn't make sense to cancel hunting trips to the state. Or did they ban hunting rifles as well? I'm not going to Colorado to hunt, but I sure wish I was! I wouldn't let some stupid decisions by the government of Colorado take that away from me.
As the saying goes, vote with your feet. There are places that support gun rights. Why would give money to a government that opposes them?
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 11:28:55 AM
That's ridiculous boycotting companies that just happen to be based in Colorado. Also doesn't make sense to cancel hunting trips to the state. Or did they ban hunting rifles as well? I'm not going to Colorado to hunt, but I sure wish I was! I wouldn't let some stupid decisions by the government of Colorado take that away from me.
Money talks, BC and in this case, walks. The people of CO are responsible for their government, as we are here in WA. When they let their government trample on their rights, they're setting the stage for others to do the same. In WA, we've been attacked by anti-gun lobbies and the media constantly since January 1st. Hopefully, enough of our citizens have taken a stand so that the message in Oly is clear. Keep your hands off my guns. It wasn't clear enough in CO, but I have a feeling it's clearing up for them today.
Post by: Special T on March 21, 2013, 11:36:01 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 11:38:57 AM
You have 3 ways to influence things in life. Your Time, Your Vote, Your $$$. I personally think that $ is the most powerful influence there is. ESPECIALLY with an economy that isn't so hot.
Capitalism and freedom, baby. They go together like Chevy, mom, and apple pie.
Post by: snowpack on March 21, 2013, 11:41:22 AM
I am inclined to think maybe just pick and choose the CO businesses that should be boycotted and not just everything from CO. Maybe just plan a hunt by only using lodging/restuarants that didn't support the gun control. You would be punishing the ones that did fight for the Constitution if you boycott the whole state. You don't want to weaken your allies. The problem with Colorado is it has become Kalirado, and like Washington is getting so many liberals in their urban areas that the rest of the state is being trampled on due to being outnumbered. If you go for elk, check out the San Juans--lots of elk and National Forest.That's ridiculous boycotting companies that just happen to be based in Colorado. Also doesn't make sense to cancel hunting trips to the state. Or did they ban hunting rifles as well? I'm not going to Colorado to hunt, but I sure wish I was! I wouldn't let some stupid decisions by the government of Colorado take that away from me.
Money talks, BC and in this case, walks. The people of CO are responsible for their government, as we are here in WA. When they let their government trample on their rights, they're setting the stage for others to do the same. In WA, we've been attacked by anti-gun lobbies and the media constantly since January 1st. Hopefully, enough of our citizens have taken a stand so that the message in Oly is clear. Keep your hands off my guns. It wasn't clear enough in CO, but I have a feeling it's clearing up for them today.
Post by: huntnphool on March 21, 2013, 11:42:25 AM
you may want to replace Chevy with Ford. :chuckle:You have 3 ways to influence things in life. Your Time, Your Vote, Your $$$. I personally think that $ is the most powerful influence there is. ESPECIALLY with an economy that isn't so hot.
Capitalism and freedom, baby. They go together like Chevy, mom, and apple pie.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 21, 2013, 11:44:55 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 11:49:56 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 11:55:01 AM
I am inclined to think maybe just pick and choose the CO businesses that should be boycotted and not just everything from CO. Maybe just plan a hunt by only using lodging/restuarants that didn't support the gun control. You would be punishing the ones that did fight for the Constitution if you boycott the whole state. You don't want to weaken your allies. The problem with Colorado is it has become Kalirado, and like Washington is getting so many liberals in their urban areas that the rest of the state is being trampled on due to being outnumbered. If you go for elk, check out the San Juans--lots of elk and National Forest.That's ridiculous boycotting companies that just happen to be based in Colorado. Also doesn't make sense to cancel hunting trips to the state. Or did they ban hunting rifles as well? I'm not going to Colorado to hunt, but I sure wish I was! I wouldn't let some stupid decisions by the government of Colorado take that away from me.
Money talks, BC and in this case, walks. The people of CO are responsible for their government, as we are here in WA. When they let their government trample on their rights, they're setting the stage for others to do the same. In WA, we've been attacked by anti-gun lobbies and the media constantly since January 1st. Hopefully, enough of our citizens have taken a stand so that the message in Oly is clear. Keep your hands off my guns. It wasn't clear enough in CO, but I have a feeling it's clearing up for them today.
Sorry, but pressure needs to be applied to the wound. The pressure from without and the pressure from within. Those tourism dollars are flying out the door right now and CO isn't CA. The people won't tolerate this for long, especially when that state's been hit hard enough by extremely liberal federal policies, as well. If they do tolerate it, they don't deserve my money.
If it happens here in WA, I know we'll lose some great companies. Olympic Arms will pull out and go to ID or MT, where their money will be welcomed and our freedoms embraced. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
Post by: washelkhunter on March 21, 2013, 12:03:24 PM
Post by: Bob33 on March 21, 2013, 12:05:21 PM
Post by: WSU on March 21, 2013, 12:07:09 PM
You are either part of the solution or part of the problem. I think a boycott of Co. and business based there is warranted. Im calling coors and belgium brewing today and telling them no more of your products for me. Lets spread the word among our coworkers, family and friends. Just by not buying coors the impact should be major. Lets all here at least boycott coors! :tup:
Good call. Plus, light beers are damn-near interchangeable.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 12:12:33 PM
I understand the anti-CO sentiment, but would not customers boycotting me because I happen to reside in a state with Patty Murray, Jim McDermott, and Jay Inslee as some of our elected representatives.
I agree. All the more reason for us not to sit on the sidelines while these hosers do us painfully. Keep sending the message and make if loud and frequent.
Post by: washelkhunter on March 21, 2013, 12:30:50 PM
Post by: ShooterBull on March 21, 2013, 12:33:00 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on March 21, 2013, 01:18:16 PM
Well its a sad day. Since the governor of Co. has signed into law a bill infringing on the Constitutional 2nd amendment rights of law abiding citizens of the state of Co. i will no longer be purchasing your products, or those good and services offered by other business' of Co. Ranger has been my goto brew since its introduction here at home and in my local pub. I usually purchased 2 six packs a week but no more. I intend to ask my favorite watering hole to consider pulling your taps from the pub; sorry. :( And i was so looking forward to sampling the new IPA. I sincerely hope all of you good folks at NBB understand my frustration and that of others. A boycott of Co. and her business' is afoot here in Wa. State and we hope it is'nt a terrible inconveinence. No vacations, fishing or hunting trips, no sporting events attended, no skiing or bicycle tours, sigh! oh well. Goodbye.
Post by: actionshooter on March 21, 2013, 01:31:24 PM
Voting with $ is the only thing that will make them see it our way. But for this to work it will take millions and unfourtunately people will not go along b/c banning standard capacity mags and modern sporting rifles does not affect them.
Post by: Slingeroflead on March 21, 2013, 01:45:31 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 21, 2013, 01:51:05 PM
I think I'll start doing my research tonight. Always have wanted to hunt mule deer in Colorado.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 02:18:35 PM
Looks like this might be the year to go on a hunt in Colorado- less competition from other hunters. :tup:
I think I'll start doing my research tonight. Always have wanted to hunt mule deer in Colorado.
You don't see any threat to your rights at all, do you BC? You understand that the people pushing for bans of MSRs want more than that, right? They think they can save us by getting rid of all guns. And you understand that if your voice isn't heard in opposition, they'll just assume you agree, right?
If the politicians in CO who stood up for this ban take a huge bashing for hurting their state, others will take notice and we can defend our 2nd Amendment. If they don't, it's an open door for all to enter. Talk about a slippery slope. This one is the slickest yet.
Post by: huntnphool on March 21, 2013, 02:20:56 PM
Looks like this might be the year to go on a hunt in Colorado- less competition from other hunters. :tup::chuckle: No chance of that happening.
I think I'll start doing my research tonight. Always have wanted to hunt mule deer in Colorado.
Post by: Dave Workman on March 21, 2013, 02:59:51 PM
Looks like this might be the year to go on a hunt in Colorado- less competition from other hunters. :tup:
I think I'll start doing my research tonight. Always have wanted to hunt mule deer in Colorado.
You just don't seem to get this.
It's not about your crummy deer hunt, it's about the livelihoods of a lot of people who work for Magpul, and about the civil rights of maybe a million gun owners in Colorado.
Post by: lokidog on March 21, 2013, 04:14:23 PM
Post by: Noiro on March 21, 2013, 04:41:12 PM
Colorado ammunition magazine manufacturer leaving the state over newly passed gun laws
Associated Press – 7 hrs ago
ERIE, Colo. (AP) -- A Colorado ammunition magazine manufacturer is making good on a threat to leave the state after lawmakers approved new gun laws.
Magpul Industries says it plans to begin packing up as soon as possible for a move to several other states. A search is under way to find new locations.
According to the Denver Post, Magpul chief operating officer Doug Smith said Wednesday a bill signed by Gov. John Hickenlooper that prohibits the sale of gun magazines with more than 15 rounds could seriously impact the company's business.
Magpul is based in Erie, which is about 30 miles north of Denver. It has about 200 workers and is the largest Colorado company that potentially would be affected by the bill, one of three state gun measures passed this year.
Post by: Smossy on March 21, 2013, 04:45:34 PM
The Grand Junction Sentinel reported back in December 2011 that, “Studies have shown the economic impact of fishing, hunting and wildlife-watching activities to Colorado is $3 billion annually, supporting 33,800 full-time jobs in the state.”
Them are some big numbers....
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 05:15:16 PM
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on March 21, 2013, 05:20:51 PM
Quote
Now, where did I miss the mark?
You hit the bullseye! :tup:
Post by: WSU on March 21, 2013, 05:26:14 PM
Post by: Noiro on March 21, 2013, 05:28:38 PM
THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me. Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
Post by: WSU on March 21, 2013, 05:30:03 PM
Not a lot of businesses amenable to boycott.
Post by: 33 Winchester on March 21, 2013, 05:38:59 PM
First, they hurt folks who are not at fault, including your friends.
Second, they rarely work. How many effective boycotts have you seen? A boycott requires leadership and organization. It has to be run like a campaign. The posts on this topic suggest ambivalence in our own group.
Third, if a boycott is successful enough to attract any public attention it frequently stimulates an antibody. Folks who favor the firearm restrictions can make a point of visiting Colorado and spreading their money around.
I'm not saying a boycott is a bad idea, just that it requires cool consideration and consultation with folks who have actually organized a successful, substantial boycott.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 05:42:02 PM
I think you missed the mark because the state representatives aren't going to notice your version of a boycott. Most state reps (at least in our state) are not people who have business subject to boycott. When I worked at the senate, there were lots of cops, farmers, etc. from whatever district. How are you going to boycott a cop? Or a farmer? Or a soccer mom?
I get that doing damage to each of them would be difficult - impossible in some cases.
But that's no good reason to do damage to our friends and allies. And that's exactly what this boycott would do. the people to bleed first and most would be the gun shop owners, archery shop owners, guides and outfitters. How could you possibly be OK with putting some of those folks out of business because some OTHER people did something wrong????
I think my original analogy stands........ And bringing your brother to his knees in excruciating pain won't stop the rapist down the block.
Put yourself in this hypothetical: Your a 2A advocate. You invest your life savings in a gun shop in Colorado, and you're barely squeaking by because it's tough all over. Your elected state leaders do something incredibly wrong. Your clientele decides to put you out of business as a result.
Does that seem ok to you?
It's like you're willing to kill an innocent person in order to do some modest damage to the real culprit.
That's just not right.
Post by: iusmc2002 on March 21, 2013, 05:43:06 PM
THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me.
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
How is supporting the mom and pop stores/outlets going to do ANYTHING to get those rights back? By hitting the mom and pop shops, and ANY other business in the state, and letting them know exactly WHY you're doing it, is where it's going to hit the politicians. It's going to hurt. Someone is going to get hit. Either you continue to give your money to places that agree or disagree on gun control, or you stop giving them your money and they say "Hey, holy *censored*, these wack-jobs in power are REALLY causing us to hurt, economically." Once the outfits in CO realize that these idiots in power are hurting their pocketbooks, the people that put them in power are going to start hurting THEIR pocketbooks. Money is the only thing that todays supposed "reps of the people" understand. When they're getting it, they think they're doing a good job. When they aren't getting it, they'll realize that some things need to change. I wish I had the money to wave it at some hunting outfitters in that state and then call them back with a "Thanks anyway" message, and let the know why it is I won't give them, or their state, my money.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 05:44:21 PM
I feel all we have is our pocketbook to control politicians. All they know is money. Take away the money and they learn very quickly. I feel so helpless. I feel my votes count for nothing. All I can do is take my cash to the people who feel the same about things as I do. The inmates are running the shop now.THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me. Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
I agree and I share your frustration. These law makers have done a despicable thing..... I would LOVE to see them punished.
I just don't want to see innocent small business that see eye-to-eye with us paying the brunt of the price.
Post by: iusmc2002 on March 21, 2013, 05:48:12 PM
I think you missed the mark because the state representatives aren't going to notice your version of a boycott. Most state reps (at least in our state) are not people who have business subject to boycott. When I worked at the senate, there were lots of cops, farmers, etc. from whatever district. How are you going to boycott a cop? Or a farmer? Or a soccer mom?
I get that doing damage to each of them would be difficult - impossible in some cases.
But that's no good reason to do damage to our friends and allies. And that's exactly what this boycott would do. the people to bleed first and most would be the gun shop owners, archery shop owners, guides and outfitters. How could you possibly be OK with putting some of those folks out of business because some OTHER people did something wrong????
I think my original analogy stands........ And bringing your brother to his knees in excruciating pain won't stop the rapist down the block.
Put yourself in this hypothetical: Your a 2A advocate. You invest your life savings in a gun shop in Colorado, and you're barely squeaking by because it's tough all over. Your elected state leaders do something incredibly wrong. Your clientele decides to put you out of business as a result.
Does that seem ok to you?
It's like you're willing to kill an innocent person in order to do some modest damage to the real culprit.
That's just not right.
Colorado has sales tax. By purchasing anything that can be taxed in that state, you're giving their GOVERNMENT your money.
And, no, it doesn't seem ok. But it's not ok for them to enact the laws they just did. NY has already started to set precedence in the gun-control arena. CO took more steps. What state is next? By denying them your dollars, your voice will be heard MUCH more loudly than any other way.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 05:50:11 PM
THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me.
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
How is supporting the mom and pop stores/outlets going to do ANYTHING to get those rights back? By hitting the mom and pop shops, and ANY other business in the state, and letting them know exactly WHY you're doing it, is where it's going to hit the politicians. It's going to hurt. Someone is going to get hit. Either you continue to give your money to places that agree or disagree on gun control, or you stop giving them your money and they say "Hey, holy *censored*, these wack-jobs in power are REALLY causing us to hurt, economically." Once the outfits in CO realize that these idiots in power are hurting their pocketbooks, the people that put them in power are going to start hurting THEIR pocketbooks. Money is the only thing that todays supposed "reps of the people" understand. When they're getting it, they think they're doing a good job. When they aren't getting it, they'll realize that some things need to change. I wish I had the money to wave it at some hunting outfitters in that state and then call them back with a "Thanks anyway" message, and let the know why it is I won't give them, or their state, my money.
OK, so when someone completely screws you over because of what someone else did, you'll feel ok about it....... right?
Screwing someone else over because someone screwed you over is not ok.
Again, punish those responsible.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 05:58:50 PM
Look at the owner and most sponsors of this board. Small businesses trying to eek out a living in the hunting industry. Some great little businesses sponsor this board....
So, if some horrible whack job runs a terrible bill through our state legislature, should we take out our revenge on this site owner and the sponsors? NO! I say that's ludicrous......
Killing innocent people because you're mad is still wrong...... If that's not clear to you, just trade positions and it should be cleared right up.
Post by: huntnphool on March 21, 2013, 06:01:21 PM
Its the majority of those people in that state that put those politicians in office. The only way they understand the impact of their vote is for them to feel it as well.THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me.
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
How is supporting the mom and pop stores/outlets going to do ANYTHING to get those rights back? By hitting the mom and pop shops, and ANY other business in the state, and letting them know exactly WHY you're doing it, is where it's going to hit the politicians. It's going to hurt. Someone is going to get hit. Either you continue to give your money to places that agree or disagree on gun control, or you stop giving them your money and they say "Hey, holy *censored*, these wack-jobs in power are REALLY causing us to hurt, economically." Once the outfits in CO realize that these idiots in power are hurting their pocketbooks, the people that put them in power are going to start hurting THEIR pocketbooks. Money is the only thing that todays supposed "reps of the people" understand. When they're getting it, they think they're doing a good job. When they aren't getting it, they'll realize that some things need to change. I wish I had the money to wave it at some hunting outfitters in that state and then call them back with a "Thanks anyway" message, and let the know why it is I won't give them, or their state, my money.
OK, so when someone completely screws you over because of what someone else did, you'll feel ok about it....... right?
Screwing someone else over because someone screwed you over is not ok.
Again, punish those responsible.
Maybe now one of those gun owners will try to explain a little better, the impact, to their friends that voted for these idiots. If you have a friend that voted for someone that potentially effected your income/life wouldn't you do your best to explain the impact to your frined? If your friend still voted that way would you continue to support his business when he clearly doesn't care about you?
Post by: Bob33 on March 21, 2013, 06:02:47 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 21, 2013, 06:03:45 PM
So, if some horrible whack job runs a terrible bill through our state legislature, should we take out our revenge on this site owner and the sponsors? NO! I say that's ludicrous......If he voted for the idiot in office that sponsored that bill you bet your ass!!!!
Post by: iusmc2002 on March 21, 2013, 06:07:37 PM
THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me.
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
How is supporting the mom and pop stores/outlets going to do ANYTHING to get those rights back? By hitting the mom and pop shops, and ANY other business in the state, and letting them know exactly WHY you're doing it, is where it's going to hit the politicians. It's going to hurt. Someone is going to get hit. Either you continue to give your money to places that agree or disagree on gun control, or you stop giving them your money and they say "Hey, holy *censored*, these wack-jobs in power are REALLY causing us to hurt, economically." Once the outfits in CO realize that these idiots in power are hurting their pocketbooks, the people that put them in power are going to start hurting THEIR pocketbooks. Money is the only thing that todays supposed "reps of the people" understand. When they're getting it, they think they're doing a good job. When they aren't getting it, they'll realize that some things need to change. I wish I had the money to wave it at some hunting outfitters in that state and then call them back with a "Thanks anyway" message, and let the know why it is I won't give them, or their state, my money.
OK, so when someone completely screws you over because of what someone else did, you'll feel ok about it....... right?
Screwing someone else over because someone screwed you over is not ok.
Again, punish those responsible.
How, exactly, do you plan on doing that? Please enlighten all us evil people that would screw someone over because their state is trying to screw the rest of the country by setting a precedence?
It's sad, it really is. But the fact of the matter is that pols respond to money. When Magpul pulls out and lots of other revenue stops coming into the state, the pols will re-examine their decisions on gun-control.
Like someone else said, a true boycott needs to be organized. If it isn't, you'll have folks like BC that jump up and run to the state so they can get a good hunt...... Hell, they didn't ban hunting rifles, so it doesn't affect those "people", right?
Precedence, precedence, precedence. That is what's going on right now. If 2 states can get away with it, why can't more? If one of those states gets SLAMMED because of it, other states that want to trample on our rights will take a much closer look at what they're trying to do.
Even at the federal level the Dems have backed off on their more draconian gun-control attempts. Why? Because they KNOW what is going to happen to them come election time. They KNOW that the American people don't want more gun-control and have realized that if they enact more laws, they're going to get their asses handed to them like they did in 1994.
Post by: Dave Workman on March 21, 2013, 06:11:05 PM
According to KUNC radio, “Colorado is a popular destination for hunters in particular, with the state issuing more licenses than any other for big game, including elk. The state Division of Parks and Wildlife says big game hunting nets more than $400 million annually.”
The Grand Junction Sentinel reported back in December 2011 that, “Studies have shown the economic impact of fishing, hunting and wildlife-watching activities to Colorado is $3 billion annually, supporting 33,800 full-time jobs in the state.”
Them are some big numbers....
Yeah, and if that starts going away, the bean counters in Denver are gong to sit up and pay attention, because the guides, outfitters and other business people are going to show up on the governor's front lawn and down at the legislature and in the various districts where these boobs live, and make their lives holy hell.
A boycott that costs the state revenue is the ONLY thing that will get their attention. The only thing that affects these people is a bunch of their constituents showing up with a good grouch on. They look at us and say "Those jerkweeds from Washington don't vote in my district," but then Billy Bob from Cortez Outfitters shows up and he DOES vote in their district, and he's pissed.
The legislature, as I wrote, just penalized a lot of people who never hurt anyone. They set the stage for loss of a couple of hundred jobs and the loss in possibly several million dollars in revenue.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:12:33 PM
Its the majority of those people in that state that put those politicians in office. The only way they understand the impact of their vote is for them to feel it as well.THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me.
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
How is supporting the mom and pop stores/outlets going to do ANYTHING to get those rights back? By hitting the mom and pop shops, and ANY other business in the state, and letting them know exactly WHY you're doing it, is where it's going to hit the politicians. It's going to hurt. Someone is going to get hit. Either you continue to give your money to places that agree or disagree on gun control, or you stop giving them your money and they say "Hey, holy *censored*, these wack-jobs in power are REALLY causing us to hurt, economically." Once the outfits in CO realize that these idiots in power are hurting their pocketbooks, the people that put them in power are going to start hurting THEIR pocketbooks. Money is the only thing that todays supposed "reps of the people" understand. When they're getting it, they think they're doing a good job. When they aren't getting it, they'll realize that some things need to change. I wish I had the money to wave it at some hunting outfitters in that state and then call them back with a "Thanks anyway" message, and let the know why it is I won't give them, or their state, my money.
OK, so when someone completely screws you over because of what someone else did, you'll feel ok about it....... right?
Screwing someone else over because someone screwed you over is not ok.
Again, punish those responsible.
Maybe now one of those gun owners will try to explain a little better, the impact, to their friends that voted for these idiots. If you have a friend that voted for someone that potentially effected your income/life wouldn't you do your best to explain the impact to your frined? If your friend still voted that way would you continue to support his business when he clearly doesn't care about you?
So, if the majority of people in mt geographic group are criminals (and I act in such a way to distinguish myself from them) , I should be punished?
You know that most of these small business owners are inherently conservative and pro-2A, but ...... just screw 'em because their neighbors are a bunch of *censored*s?????
You guys are taking a classically liberal/socialist approach to this.
The majority of the state's voters did put them in office...... I'm betting the majority of small gun shop owners and guides DID NOT. But hey, we're pissed so screw 'em.
Post by: JLS on March 21, 2013, 06:12:41 PM
I understand the anti-CO sentiment, but would not customers boycotting me because I happen to reside in a state with Patty Murray, Jim McDermott, and Jay Inslee as some of our elected representatives.
Couldn't agree more Bob. After all, maybe we all should do more to control them :rolleyes:
Post by: Dave Workman on March 21, 2013, 06:12:57 PM
Stop buying anything in Washington. We have Patty Murray and several other very anti-gun politicians.
That doesn't wash because they didn't get anything into law. We stopped them.
Maybe Magpul will come here. :chuckle:
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:13:58 PM
So, if some horrible whack job runs a terrible bill through our state legislature, should we take out our revenge on this site owner and the sponsors? NO! I say that's ludicrous......If he voted for the idiot in office that sponsored that bill you bet your ass!!!!
I agree completely!!!!!!!!
But you KNOW that most of the gun shop owners and outfitters didn't vote these *censored*s in. Why punish them?
Post by: Dave Workman on March 21, 2013, 06:15:15 PM
So, following the prevailing crowd logic, lets turn a corner....
Look at the owner and most sponsors of this board. Small businesses trying to eek out a living in the hunting industry. Some great little businesses sponsor this board....
So, if some horrible whack job runs a terrible bill through our state legislature, should we take out our revenge on this site owner and the sponsors? NO! I say that's ludicrous......
Killing innocent people because you're mad is still wrong...... If that's not clear to you, just trade positions and it should be cleared right up.
Well, Dan-O..
What's YOUR idea?
Post by: snowpack on March 21, 2013, 06:20:26 PM
Its the majority of those people in that state that put those politicians in office. The only way they understand the impact of their vote is for them to feel it as well.But what about when severely outnumbered? Think we can talk sense into Seattle regarding guns? hounds? bear baits?
Maybe now one of those gun owners will try to explain a little better, the impact, to their friends that voted for these idiots. If you have a friend that voted for someone that potentially effected your income/life wouldn't you do your best to explain the impact to your frined? If your friend still voted that way would you continue to support his business when he clearly doesn't care about you?
My thought is not boycott but encourage more business with the allies down there. When they get more money, they'll be able to employ more...and become more influential on their side of politics. Making them weaker makes the overall cause weaker and makes CO a stronger lib state.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:21:38 PM
THIS boycott seems completely WRONG to me.
If this boycott is successful, the people it will hurt most are on our side!!!!
Sure, the entire economy would take a small hit. But the hunting economy would take a huge beating. Archery shop owners, gun shop owners, outfitters and guides would pay the price for this..... THEY ARE NOT TO BLAME.
This is like kicking your brother in the nuts because he lives on the same block as a rapist.
This boycott paints with way too broad a brush.
What we SHOULD do, is go after the anti-2A folks who perpetrated this. Find out which state reps and legislators voted for it. Find out what their small family owned business is and BOYCOTT THAT. DO DAMAGE TO THE PEOPLE DOING THE DAMAGE!!!!
This reminds of how THEY behave...... Some criminal minded whack job shoots up a school or theater. How do they react? Take away from the good folks by infringing on their rights. We complain about that all the time - rightly so. Don't do the same to innocent small business owners who happen to live in Colorado. We're better than that.
Now, where did I miss the mark? :dunno:
How is supporting the mom and pop stores/outlets going to do ANYTHING to get those rights back? By hitting the mom and pop shops, and ANY other business in the state, and letting them know exactly WHY you're doing it, is where it's going to hit the politicians. It's going to hurt. Someone is going to get hit. Either you continue to give your money to places that agree or disagree on gun control, or you stop giving them your money and they say "Hey, holy *censored*, these wack-jobs in power are REALLY causing us to hurt, economically." Once the outfits in CO realize that these idiots in power are hurting their pocketbooks, the people that put them in power are going to start hurting THEIR pocketbooks. Money is the only thing that todays supposed "reps of the people" understand. When they're getting it, they think they're doing a good job. When they aren't getting it, they'll realize that some things need to change. I wish I had the money to wave it at some hunting outfitters in that state and then call them back with a "Thanks anyway" message, and let the know why it is I won't give them, or their state, my money.
OK, so when someone completely screws you over because of what someone else did, you'll feel ok about it....... right?
Screwing someone else over because someone screwed you over is not ok.
Again, punish those responsible.
How, exactly, do you plan on doing that? Please enlighten all us evil people that would screw someone over because their state is trying to screw the rest of the country by setting a precedence?
I never said it would be easy. Are you going to be ok if someone shoots you because it was easier than shooting the culprit? I won't be. Sometimes justice is evasive. but that's no reason to perpetrate another injustice. Two wrongs don't make a right.
It's sad, it really is. But the fact of the matter is that pols respond to money. When Magpul pulls out and lots of other revenue stops coming into the state, the pols will re-examine their decisions on gun-control. I'm glad MagPul is pulling out. Good for them, and I support them even more fully now. But not all of the businesses can do that.... and they shouldn't be killed off because of the bad actions of OTHER people.
Like someone else said, a true boycott needs to be organized. If it isn't, you'll have folks like BC that jump up and run to the state so they can get a good hunt...... Hell, they didn't ban hunting rifles, so it doesn't affect those "people", right?
Precedence, precedence, precedence. That is what's going on right now. If 2 states can get away with it, why can't more? If one of those states gets SLAMMED because of it, other states that want to trample on our rights will take a much closer look at what they're trying to do. I agree. We should not put up with it. Nor should we kill innocent people because of it.
Even at the federal level the Dems have backed off on their more draconian gun-control attempts. Why? Because they KNOW what is going to happen to them come election time. They KNOW that the American people don't want more gun-control and have realized that if they enact more laws, they're going to get their asses handed to them like they did in 1994. Agreed that we escaped again. They will keep coming for us... and we'll need to fight. But let's not kill innocents because we can't easily get to the culprits.
Post by: iusmc2002 on March 21, 2013, 06:27:25 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 21, 2013, 06:28:12 PM
So, following the prevailing crowd logic, lets turn a corner....
Look at the owner and most sponsors of this board. Small businesses trying to eek out a living in the hunting industry. Some great little businesses sponsor this board....
So, if some horrible whack job runs a terrible bill through our state legislature, should we take out our revenge on this site owner and the sponsors? NO! I say that's ludicrous......
Killing innocent people because you're mad is still wrong...... If that's not clear to you, just trade positions and it should be cleared right up.
Well, Dan-O..
What's YOUR idea?
You just asked the same question I was thinking!!
Dan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:28:20 PM
Stop buying anything in Washington. We have Patty Murray and several other very anti-gun politicians.
That doesn't wash because they didn't get anything into law. We stopped them.
Maybe Magpul will come here. :chuckle:
I say it washes just fine. Both of our senators voted for Obamacare.
If you're going to be consistent (assuming you think Obamacare is an Abomination), you need to boycott every business sin Washington.
Post by: bobcat on March 21, 2013, 06:31:45 PM
Quote
Dan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
:chuckle:
Dan, I've got room for another hunter in my truck.
I'm thinking I'll get a buck tag and a cow elk tag. :tup:
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:39:14 PM
Its the majority of those people in that state that put those politicians in office. The only way they understand the impact of their vote is for them to feel it as well.But what about when severely outnumbered? Think we can talk sense into Seattle regarding guns? hounds? bear baits?
Maybe now one of those gun owners will try to explain a little better, the impact, to their friends that voted for these idiots. If you have a friend that voted for someone that potentially effected your income/life wouldn't you do your best to explain the impact to your frined? If your friend still voted that way would you continue to support his business when he clearly doesn't care about you?
My thought is not boycott but encourage more business with the allies down there. When they get more money, they'll be able to employ more...and become more influential on their side of politics. Making them weaker makes the overall cause weaker and makes CO a stronger lib state.
Good point. "WE" voted to ban bait and hounds right? so should we boycott all of the site sponsors that live in this state? OF COURSE NOT. They site sponsors didn't vote for that and neither did hardly any of us.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:45:04 PM
So, following the prevailing crowd logic, lets turn a corner....
Look at the owner and most sponsors of this board. Small businesses trying to eek out a living in the hunting industry. Some great little businesses sponsor this board....
So, if some horrible whack job runs a terrible bill through our state legislature, should we take out our revenge on this site owner and the sponsors? NO! I say that's ludicrous......
Killing innocent people because you're mad is still wrong...... If that's not clear to you, just trade positions and it should be cleared right up.
Well, Dan-O..
What's YOUR idea?
You just asked the same question I was thinking!!
Dan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
Before I go with Bob, can I at least see if I draw Montana? :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
OK, so seriously, I would have no problem at all patronizing some good businesses in Colorado.
Again, I'll ask: Who thinks Obamacare was a horrible, despicable overreach of the Federal gov't (ushered in in a completely unethical manner) and a terrible idea? I DO!!!! If you do, are you boycotting all business in Washington because both of our senators voted for it?
Your boycott may in fact make a difference.... by hurting the wrong people. I want no part of it.
I do want to do some thinking about how to punish the guilty instead of the nearby innocent who are easy to get to.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 06:46:04 PM
QuoteDan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
:chuckle:
Dan, I've got room for another hunter in my truck.
I'm thinking I'll get a buck tag and a cow elk tag. :tup:
Hold my seat....... :tup:
Post by: Bob33 on March 21, 2013, 07:00:15 PM
Let's get with it.
Post by: Dan-o on March 21, 2013, 07:08:20 PM
I'm for boycotting any state with hunters that would allow its Fish and Game department to implement a wolf management plan that has the potential to severely impact big game herds.
Let's get with it.
I'm in, but I still fee the need to hunt.
Want to go to Colorado?
P.S. It was a joke. Lighten up a little. We can disagree agreeably and still be on the same side.... I think.
Post by: Bob33 on March 21, 2013, 07:37:12 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 21, 2013, 09:30:37 PM
QuoteDan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
:chuckle:
Dan, I've got room for another hunter in my truck.
I'm thinking I'll get a buck tag and a cow elk tag. :tup:
BC.......our mascot of the ME generation. Did you go to the house hearing on the wolf bills BC. It was in your back yard. I bet not!
Post by: JLS on March 21, 2013, 09:36:16 PM
QuoteDan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
:chuckle:
Dan, I've got room for another hunter in my truck.
I'm thinking I'll get a buck tag and a cow elk tag. :tup:
BC.......our mascot of the ME generation. Did you go to the house hearing on the wolf bills BC. It was in your back yard. I bet not!
The ME generation? :rolleyes:
Post by: Bean Counter on March 21, 2013, 09:37:00 PM
Stop buying anything in Washington. We have Patty Murray and several other very anti-gun politicians.
I sure did! :IBCOOL: In fact, I don't even live there anymore. Good riddance!
Post by: Bean Counter on March 21, 2013, 09:38:14 PM
... I hope that people contemplating a hunt in CO are reconsidering that as well.
...
I am. I had planned to open my wallet big and start building points there. Now, I think I may save the money for other states. Curious if anyone else is in the same boat.
Post by: washelkhunter on March 21, 2013, 10:21:52 PM
Post by: Noiro on March 21, 2013, 11:03:40 PM
http://store.magpul.com/category/64 (http://store.magpul.com/category/64)
Shipping Information
Recipient 1
United States
Comments: Tell Mr. Doug Smith I support him moving the company. My buddies all say come on down to TX.
Requested Ship Date: As soon as possible
Shipping Method: FedEx Ground
Qty Item # Description Price
1 MAG270-BLK Magpul logo® Ballcap BLACK $19.95
1 MAG270-SUBOD Magpul logo® Ballcap SUBDUED OD $19.95
1 MAG970-DTAN Magpul® 10th Anniversary Logo Patch DESERT TAN $5.95
1 MAG971-BLK Magpul® 10th Annniversary Logo 2 in. Vinyl Cut Sticker BLACK $0.95
1 MAG971-SIL Magpul® 10th Annniversary Logo 2 in. Vinyl Cut Sticker SILVER $0.95
Subtotal: $47.75
Shipping Rate: $8.99
Total: $56.74
Post by: Jingles on March 22, 2013, 12:10:04 AM
Example if say 1000 non resident hunters did not purchase the non resident license at say 500.00 each there is $500,000 the state doesn't get without really impacting the small business that merely operates out of CO.
I admit I do not know what the price for a non resident license is or how many licenses are sold the numbers were for the purpose of an example only
Post by: washelkhunter on March 22, 2013, 12:20:23 AM
Post by: csaaphill on March 22, 2013, 03:26:52 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on March 22, 2013, 04:49:27 AM
QuoteDan O..........whats the plan? Go to Colorado like Bobcat while the rest of us try and make a difference?
:chuckle:
Dan, I've got room for another hunter in my truck.
I'm thinking I'll get a buck tag and a cow elk tag. :tup:
Maybe you two can set up shop down there and stay. There will be a vacancy or two where Magpul is presently located.
:chuckle:
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 22, 2013, 05:44:03 AM
Post by: boneaddict on March 22, 2013, 06:11:40 AM
You have 3 ways to influence things in life. Your Time, Your Vote, Your $$$. I personally think that $ is the most powerful influence there is. ESPECIALLY with an economy that isn't so hot.:yeah:
Post by: Dave Workman on March 22, 2013, 04:46:56 PM
Figured it out
now VOTE...and go back into the Examiner column and click the "like" button and/or "Tweet" the durned thing...
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 22, 2013, 04:47:54 PM
Post by: Dan-o on March 22, 2013, 06:00:37 PM
"I'm so pissed off I don't mind using economic terrorism against innocent people in order to try to get my point across."
Post by: Dan-o on March 22, 2013, 06:09:30 PM
You can nitpik this issue to death; but the fact of the matter is that the only way to make CO. listen is to vote with your wallet! No one here wants to punish biz in Co. big or small. You have to decide whether you are going to stand with your brother and sister patriots in the Constitution of the USA, or you're gonna ride in Bobcats subaru.
But, of course, the businesses you'll be punishing most are the hunting-related businesses that you claim you don't want to hurt..... :bash: :bash:
That does not look like the act of a patriot to me. These patriots you refer to..... They fought the enemy, right? I don't think they set out to do intentional harm to people on their own side.
It sort of reminds me of mob mentality.
Post by: Dan-o on March 22, 2013, 06:13:23 PM
You are wrong. All must suffer, or none will know relief.
Where did you come up with that nonsense? I am certain you do not live your life with that philosophy..... unless you're a big fan of Chairman Mao.
Post by: Dan-o on March 22, 2013, 06:18:15 PM
You have 3 ways to influence things in life. Your Time, Your Vote, Your $$$. I personally think that $ is the most powerful influence there is. ESPECIALLY with an economy that isn't so hot.:yeah:
I agree with the quote.
But under your broad interpretation, I shouldn't buy anything from any site sponsors (like a truly epic calendar from Boneaddict) because after all, his senators both voted for Obamacare and he allowed it to happen. Right?!?!?!?
Post by: JJD on March 22, 2013, 06:25:36 PM
If they pass laws like this, do you think they give a rats patooty about what happens to hunting and all those businesses that support it?
Post by: bobcat on March 22, 2013, 06:36:29 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on March 22, 2013, 06:54:47 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on March 22, 2013, 07:30:40 PM
Post by: mkcj on March 22, 2013, 07:34:47 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 22, 2013, 10:00:53 PM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno::stirthepot: You may be fooling some of the members on here Bob but those of us that have seen your posts concerning the costs of applying for even a sheep permit realize you are just stiring the pot and have zero chance of applying in Colorado, nice try though. :chuckle:
Post by: turkeyfeather on March 22, 2013, 10:03:46 PM
He seems to be doing that in several threads. He's either gone off the deep end or he's really bored.Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno::stirthepot: You may be fooling some of the members on here Bob but those of us that have seen your posts concerning the costs of applying for even a sheep permit realize you are just stiring the pot and have zero chance of applying in Colorado, nice try though. :chuckle:
Post by: Windwalker on March 22, 2013, 10:05:18 PM
Like almost HALF of the voting population of Washington that doesn't bother to vote. How many gun owners do you think are in Colorado? Did you hear the gnashing of teeth from the voters/gun owners in Colorado as loud as here in Washington?
They have the same problem with Denver we have with Seattle. A large contingency of anti-gun sheeple. To our credit the pro-gun, pro amendment/constitutional rights crowd woke up and saw the bills here in Washington as a dangerous threat and came out as a force to be reckoned with. In our case, the fact less anti-gunners vote or care about what happens to the Constitution, our contrasting passion won us a victory – for now.
On the other hand I do think the antis had a more grievous desire to “just do something” in Colorado.
Question stands, how many really cared in Colorado? Or did they just watch the news and bitch about it. Do you believe a majority were actively participating in the legislative process or hoping it would blow over and the hunters will come anyway -who cares about magazine capacity- only allowed 5 rounds to hunt anyway. Possibly they didn’t realize the ramifications of passing those bills which smacks of complacency on the majority of gun owners there burdening the few to fight for them. And now, jeopardizes the validity and interpretation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights in some of these twisted minds setting a precedent for more battles in other states.
Many will continue the fight and depending on the stance taken by the Sherriff’s in Colorado it may be a mute point. No perfect answer how to bust the legislator’s balls in Colorado without some collateral damage. Answer lies in the shortest path to restoring those rights. The fastest way to a liberals heart is through their wallet- hence the conundrum.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”- see any parallels in that statement?
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on March 22, 2013, 10:15:48 PM
You wanna make an omelet, you gotta crack a few eggs. I am voting against Co. policies with my discreationary income. Less spending with bizness in Co. means less tax revenue for state coffers, which means everything to politicians.
:yeah: The one truth I've learned over the years (among many lesser ones) is that EVERYTHING revolves around the Dollar.
Post by: bobcat on March 22, 2013, 10:25:17 PM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno::stirthepot: You may be fooling some of the members on here Bob but those of us that have seen your posts concerning the costs of applying for even a sheep permit realize you are just stiring the pot and have zero chance of applying in Colorado, nice try though. :chuckle:
Hey, I might go, not for sure yet, but it's a possibility. And I will be putting in for that sheep permit this year (with my 16 points.) Should be a sure thing! :tup:
Post by: huntnphool on March 22, 2013, 10:28:23 PM
So you were not completely honest when you said you don't apply for sheep hunts. ;) Which season are you planning on applying for in Colorado?Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno::stirthepot: You may be fooling some of the members on here Bob but those of us that have seen your posts concerning the costs of applying for even a sheep permit realize you are just stiring the pot and have zero chance of applying in Colorado, nice try though. :chuckle:
Hey, I might go, not for sure yet, but it's a possibility. And I will be putting in for that sheep permit this year (with my 16 points.) Should be a sure thing! :tup:
Post by: bobcat on March 22, 2013, 10:31:29 PM
So you were not completely honest when you said you don't apply for sheep hunts. ;) Which season are you planning on applying for in Colorado?Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno::stirthepot: You may be fooling some of the members on here Bob but those of us that have seen your posts concerning the costs of applying for even a sheep permit realize you are just stiring the pot and have zero chance of applying in Colorado, nice try though. :chuckle:
Hey, I might go, not for sure yet, but it's a possibility. And I will be putting in for that sheep permit this year (with my 16 points.) Should be a sure thing! :tup:
I never said I don't apply for sheep. I only didn't apply last year. Haven't done the research on Colorado yet. Would prefer otc tags.
Post by: bearpaw on March 22, 2013, 10:46:57 PM
However, I question the integrity of some who are posting in this topic, right now we have a chance to affect the makeup of the Washington Wildlife Commission who decide hunting seasons and policies for the WDFW here in Washington and only a handful of H-W members have even participated in the conversation. I'm not quite sure what to think.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,121284.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,121284.0.html)
Post by: turkeyfeather on March 22, 2013, 10:58:59 PM
Post by: huntrights on March 22, 2013, 11:12:13 PM
We are being attacked on many fronts. We need to work together with a unfied voice to support or oppose proposed legislation that affects hunting or gun ownership. We also may get rare opportunities to give input regarding the makeup of the WDFW Commission; they obviously have a significant amount of influence over everything having to do with hunting and fishing in this state. Our unified voices need to be heard loud and clear; we have to work together on all of these issues. :twocents:
Post by: bearpaw on March 22, 2013, 11:20:29 PM
Just cause someone doesn't comment on a thread doesn't mean they haven't read thru it or even sent out some emails trying to do something about it. And secondly I wasn't aware one had to comment on one thread to be able to have an opinion on another. :twocents:
Sorry if I offended you. :sry:
If a person had not seen that topic I understand, and you are correct a person may have contacted the senators and not posted about doing it. Obviously nobody has to comment anywhere, but that is not what I said.
I am saying that if a person saw the topic and did not act and then that person posted some of the comments I see in this topic it would call into question their integrity to complain about the hunters in Colorado doing nothing and then doing nothing themselves about the makeup of the commission that sets our hunting seasons and policy for WDFW. :dunno:
Just sayin....
Post by: bearpaw on March 22, 2013, 11:23:53 PM
We are being attacked on many fronts. We need to work together with a unfied voice to support or oppose proposed legislation that affects hunting or gun ownership. We also may get rare opportunities to give input regarding the makeup of the WDFW Commission; they obviously have a significant amount of influence over everything having to do with hunting and fishing in this state. Our unified voices need to be heard loud and clear; we have to work together on all of these issues. :twocents:
:yeah: Thanks for all your hard work, it is an inspiration. :tup:
Post by: csaaphill on March 22, 2013, 11:51:49 PM
Post by: Special T on March 23, 2013, 09:24:21 AM
I don't blame PNW arms for leaving WA to ID... do you blame businesses for leaving CO? If you really want to get surgical, talk to all the companies that don't have to be in CO or go there. Out door channel has said they will no longer film there.
Boycotts don't normally work, but they can if there are enough motivated people AND the are suitable substitutes. Since there are lots of other states with good elk hunting I would think that it may work.
My statement about Time, Vote,$ Is NOT a hard fast rule. IF you think something is wrong and needs to change, or prevent it, those 3 things are how YOU can influence the out come. Many people do not focus on what they can do to effect immediate change. I believe that that many of us look to far out trying to magnify our actions too much. We pass over the more immediate returns on our actions. Since MY state reps seem to always vote the way i think they should it COULD be easy for me to take them for granted. IF i take the time to re-affirm their good works it makes it much easier for them to stand up for me. By the same token many choose not to talk to their state reps BECAUSE they know they will never for for them...
Post by: Karl Blanchard on March 23, 2013, 12:16:49 PM
Post by: bow4elk on March 23, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Post by: wt on March 23, 2013, 12:53:04 PM
Post by: BullMagnet76 on March 23, 2013, 05:38:37 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 24, 2013, 06:38:44 AM
I would boycott this year but the tag has already been paid for. Goin for trophy pronghorn out of Trinidad.
I'd go, too. Good luck BH. :tup:
Post by: NWWA Hunter on March 24, 2013, 08:01:17 AM
Post by: Special T on March 24, 2013, 08:52:11 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on March 24, 2013, 09:35:31 AM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno:
Let's hear it for drunk bus drivers who text at the wheel.....
:chuckle: :bash: :chuckle:
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 24, 2013, 09:51:28 AM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno:
Let's hear it for drunk bus drivers who text at the wheel.....
:chuckle: :bash: :chuckle:
:yeah:
Post by: Dan-o on March 24, 2013, 02:23:08 PM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno:
Let's hear it for drunk bus drivers who text at the wheel.....
:chuckle: :bash: :chuckle:
So, is this the part where I'm supposed to say something like: "May the bus find you early in it's journey."?
Making stupid statements like yours does absolutely nothing to bring decent people to understanding.
so, let me ask: Do you own a small business? If so, what kind? Perhaps we should boycott you out of business in the name of some other good cause we both agree on..... You could feel good knowing that we were indignant when we put you out of business because of something you didn't vote for. Although, something just tells me, you don't own your own business. My guess is you suck on the gov't teet....
Post by: Dave Workman on March 24, 2013, 05:09:32 PM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno:
Let's hear it for drunk bus drivers who text at the wheel.....
:chuckle: :bash: :chuckle:
So, is this the part where I'm supposed to say something like: "May the bus find you early in it's journey."?
Making stupid statements like yours does absolutely nothing to bring decent people to understanding.
so, let me ask: Do you own a small business? If so, what kind? Perhaps we should boycott you out of business in the name of some other good cause we both agree on..... You could feel good knowing that we were indignant when we put you out of business because of something you didn't vote for. Although, something just tells me, you don't own your own business. My guess is you suck on the gov't teet....
Actually, as many on this forum will attest, I do own a small business.
And the government sucks, alright. It vacuums out my wallet at every opportunity. I know a lot of decent people who think your approach is pure bull$#!+. I spent several hours with them Saturday at the Washington Arms Collectors' Puyallup gun show.
You want "understanding" with people who are gutting your gun rights? Understand this: Those people understand you real good. They understand how you just want to be friends and they love that sort of mentality because they will eat you alive.
There is no reasoning with those people. Theirs is a campaign of attrition and piecemeal erosion of your rights.
You think its clever to trot off to Colorado and help these people "prove" that a "little" gun control isn't so bad, fine. What will you do when they decide it's time to ban "sniper rifles." You know, those dirty old high-power bolt-action rifles with telescopic sights. That's on their radar screen, or didn't you know that?
Handguns? They hate 'em.
But go have a good time in Colorado. Ignorance is bliss.
Now, for your further reading edification, if not enjoyment....
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/legal-political/129855-outdoor-channel-pulls-production-colorado.html (http://www.northwestfirearms.com/legal-political/129855-outdoor-channel-pulls-production-colorado.html)
OUTDOOR CHANNEL PULLS PRODUCTION FROM COLORADO DUE TO CO. SENATE BETRAYING 2ND RIGHTS!
PLEASE SHARE FAR AND WIDE!
From: Michael Bane
Date: Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:09 PM
Subject: OUTDOOR CHANNEL Pulls Productions from Colorado
To: Steve King
Dear Senator King;
I met you yesterday after the so-called "public hearings" on the antigun bills; as I mentioned, I am an Executive Producer for OUTDOOR CHANNEL. I currently have four series in production, including GUN STORIES, the top show on OC, with several additional series in development. My series focus on guns, hunting, shooting and the outdoors.
This morning I met with my three Producers, and we made the decision that if these antigun bills become law, we will be moving all of our production OUT of Colorado. We have already cancelled a scheduled filming session for late this month. Obviously, part of this is due to our own commitment to the right to keep and bear arms, but it also reflects 3 lawyers' opinions that these laws are so poorly drafted and so designed to trap otherwise legal citizens into a crime (one of our attorneys referred to them as "flypaper laws") that it is simply too dangerous for us to film here.
I can give you chapter and verse on the legal implications if you need, but suffice to say that the first legal opinion was so scary we went out and got two others. Al three attorneys agreed.
We are relatively small potatoes in television, but our relocation of production will cost Colorado a little less than a million dollars in 2013.
Secondly, we have proudly promoted Colorado in our productions (and have been moving more and more production into the state); now we will do exactly the opposite. What does this mean for Colorado? The community of television producers is a small one. Last week I had lunch with a major network producer who was looking to locate his new reality series in Colorado. That producer is also a shooter, and the new reality series will now be based out of Phoenix. That lunch cost Colorado over a million in economic impact.
Thirdly, according to numbers I received from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (for whom I used to work) yesterday, hunting had an almost $800,000,000 impact on Colorado in 2012, driving as many as 8330 jobs. Next month I will be in Texas meeting with most of the top outdoor/hunting producers, and the Number One agenda item will be Colorado. Already, hunting organizations and statewide hunting clubs around the country are pulling out of Colorado, and we expect this trend to accelerate rapidly.
The message we will take to our viewers and listeners is that these proposed laws are so dangerous to hunters and any other person, be she a fisherman or a skier who brings a handgun into the state for self-defense, that we cannot recommend hunting, fishing or visiting Colorado. We reach millions of people, and, quite frankly, we have a credibility that Colorado government officials can no longer match. Colorado Division of Wildlife is already running ads trying to bring more out-of-state hunters to Colorado...in light of the flood of negative publicity about these proposed laws, I can assure you those ads will fail.
We estimate that as many as one-quarter to one-third of out-of-state hunters will desert Colorado in the next 18-24 months, which will quite frankly be a disaster for the hunting industry in Colorado and have a devastating effect on our western and northern communities (certainly citieslike Grand Junction).
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 within 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. Thank you, sir, for your support.
Best.
Michael Bane
OUTDOOR CHANNEL mbane@outdoorchannel.com
Michael Bane is a small businessman, too, Dan-O. I know him. He lives in Colorado, and this is a rather big decision.
But you and Bobcat and your pals can be smug, make light of this and enjoy your road trip.
Bowhunter: Good luck with your hunt. Notch a tag and fill your freezer. :tup:
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 05:19:16 PM
Quote
But go have a good time in Colorado. Ignorance is bliss.
:rolleyes: :chuckle:
Post by: whacker1 on March 24, 2013, 05:21:19 PM
I would like to know who else is leaving Colorado, so I can extend the invitation.
Post by: Dave Workman on March 24, 2013, 05:29:26 PM
the businesses within Colorado that are capable of relocating are in the position to have the greatest impact. MagPul has set the bar high. It is in our best interest to recruit them to the Northwest. Washington and Oregon are probably not high on the list for future locations, but I bet Idaho, Montana, & Wyoming are.
I would like to know who else is leaving Colorado, so I can extend the invitation.
See Above. Producer Michael Bane is pulling out with Outdoor Channel. He lives in Colorado
Post by: snowpack on March 24, 2013, 06:05:17 PM
Actually, as many on this forum will attest, I do own a small business.
And the government sucks, alright. It vacuums out my wallet at every opportunity. I know a lot of decent people who think your approach is pure bull$#!+. I spent several hours with them Saturday at the Washington Arms Collectors' Puyallup gun show.
You want "understanding" with people who are gutting your gun rights? Understand this: Those people understand you real good. They understand how you just want to be friends and they love that sort of mentality because they will eat you alive.
There is no reasoning with those people. Theirs is a campaign of attrition and piecemeal erosion of your rights.
You think its clever to trot off to Colorado and help these people "prove" that a "little" gun control isn't so bad, fine. What will you do when they decide it's time to ban "sniper rifles." You know, those dirty old high-power bolt-action rifles with telescopic sights. That's on their radar screen, or didn't you know that?
Handguns? They hate 'em.
But go have a good time in Colorado. Ignorance is bliss.
I don't think it is the case of befriending the anti's. We know they won't stop until all guns and private property are controlled by the state.
But supporting the guys that voted AGAINST the gun control is IMO better than boycotting everybody. The long term of boycotting everyone would just be abandonment by the gunowners nationwide. The liberals aren't going to boycott--they will be rewarding Colorado--taking more of their hiking-mt biking-flower sniffing-bunny petting tourism there because they will feel safer and buying more products from Colorado. So over time, you will be letting more liberal influence in. The hunting guides will switch to birding guides or stargazing trips. So the people will start to be immersed more and more in liberal culture and it will rub off...and then by the next election cycle Colorado will move a few more percent to the liberal Dems. Then the next one it will be a few more percent. Eventually they are going to be a lost cause. If you keep supporting the guys that DO WANT high cap mags and semi-autos, etc. They might be able to turn around the next cycle and not switch over their businesses to cater to smug, wine sniffing rainbow watchers. OR they have to move to another state which means Colorado loses those votes and shifts more to the lib Dems. Giving them more Reps/Sens to the US Congress to inflict this nationwide. Just seeing this different than some of you guys I guess.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 24, 2013, 06:43:32 PM
Killing innocent people because you're mad is still wrong...... If that's not clear to you, just trade positions and it should be cleared right up.
Nobody is being killed. You're being over dramatic.
Citizens and businesses of Colorado are responsible for what their government does. Refusing to spend money in Colorado or with Colorado businesses is really the only way a non resident has to show their displeasure. Colorado citizens and businesses need to realize that if they don't hold their government accountable it's going to cost them money. If business goes on as usual, they have no reason to create waves and challenge their government. They always have the choice to move to another State that supports thr 2nd Amendment.
Another benefit of a successful hunter/shooter boycott of Colorado would be to put other State's governments on notice that going after 2nd Amendment rights is going to harm THEIR economy and tax base. Washington is a State that needs a warning like that.
Post by: Bob33 on March 24, 2013, 06:51:18 PM
Citizens and businesses of Colorado are responsible for what their government does...Washington is a State that needs a warning like that.I take it that as a Washington citizen you're responsible for what Washington needs a warning about?
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 24, 2013, 07:04:49 PM
Citizens and businesses of Colorado are responsible for what their government does...Washington is a State that needs a warning like that.I take it that as a Washington citizen you're responsible for what Washington needs a warning about?
Yup, and I'm close to taking my income and discretionary money to another State. And trust me, If Washington passed sweeping gun control, I wouldn't blame people from out of State for boycotting Washington, even if it cost me money. I'd be out of this State in a heartbeat myself. As it is, my biggest problems with this state are with taxes, fees, and access.
Post by: Dan-o on March 24, 2013, 07:34:24 PM
Dan, I'm now thinking of renting a bus to haul us and all the other hunters on our Colorado deer and elk hunt. Sounds like you're still in? We actually may want to contact an outfitter, as we could possibly get a guided hunt at a fraction of the normal cost, since everyone's bailing out of their Colorado hunts this year. :dunno:
Let's hear it for drunk bus drivers who text at the wheel.....
:chuckle: :bash: :chuckle:
So, is this the part where I'm supposed to say something like: "May the bus find you early in it's journey."?
Making stupid statements like yours does absolutely nothing to bring decent people to understanding.
so, let me ask: Do you own a small business? If so, what kind? Perhaps we should boycott you out of business in the name of some other good cause we both agree on..... You could feel good knowing that we were indignant when we put you out of business because of something you didn't vote for. Although, something just tells me, you don't own your own business. My guess is you suck on the gov't teet....
Actually, as many on this forum will attest, I do own a small business.
And the government sucks, alright. It vacuums out my wallet at every opportunity. I know a lot of decent people who think your approach is pure bull$#!+. I spent several hours with them Saturday at the Washington Arms Collectors' Puyallup gun show.
You want "understanding" with people who are gutting your gun rights? Understand this: Those people understand you real good. They understand how you just want to be friends and they love that sort of mentality because they will eat you alive.
There is no reasoning with those people. Theirs is a campaign of attrition and piecemeal erosion of your rights.
You think its clever to trot off to Colorado and help these people "prove" that a "little" gun control isn't so bad, fine. What will you do when they decide it's time to ban "sniper rifles." You know, those dirty old high-power bolt-action rifles with telescopic sights. That's on their radar screen, or didn't you know that?
Handguns? They hate 'em.
But go have a good time in Colorado. Ignorance is bliss.
Now, for your further reading edification, if not enjoyment....
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/legal-political/129855-outdoor-channel-pulls-production-colorado.html (http://www.northwestfirearms.com/legal-political/129855-outdoor-channel-pulls-production-colorado.html)
OUTDOOR CHANNEL PULLS PRODUCTION FROM COLORADO DUE TO CO. SENATE BETRAYING 2ND RIGHTS!
PLEASE SHARE FAR AND WIDE!
From: Michael Bane
Date: Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:09 PM
Subject: OUTDOOR CHANNEL Pulls Productions from Colorado
To: Steve King
Dear Senator King;
I met you yesterday after the so-called "public hearings" on the antigun bills; as I mentioned, I am an Executive Producer for OUTDOOR CHANNEL. I currently have four series in production, including GUN STORIES, the top show on OC, with several additional series in development. My series focus on guns, hunting, shooting and the outdoors.
This morning I met with my three Producers, and we made the decision that if these antigun bills become law, we will be moving all of our production OUT of Colorado. We have already cancelled a scheduled filming session for late this month. Obviously, part of this is due to our own commitment to the right to keep and bear arms, but it also reflects 3 lawyers' opinions that these laws are so poorly drafted and so designed to trap otherwise legal citizens into a crime (one of our attorneys referred to them as "flypaper laws") that it is simply too dangerous for us to film here.
I can give you chapter and verse on the legal implications if you need, but suffice to say that the first legal opinion was so scary we went out and got two others. Al three attorneys agreed.
We are relatively small potatoes in television, but our relocation of production will cost Colorado a little less than a million dollars in 2013.
Secondly, we have proudly promoted Colorado in our productions (and have been moving more and more production into the state); now we will do exactly the opposite. What does this mean for Colorado? The community of television producers is a small one. Last week I had lunch with a major network producer who was looking to locate his new reality series in Colorado. That producer is also a shooter, and the new reality series will now be based out of Phoenix. That lunch cost Colorado over a million in economic impact.
Thirdly, according to numbers I received from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (for whom I used to work) yesterday, hunting had an almost $800,000,000 impact on Colorado in 2012, driving as many as 8330 jobs. Next month I will be in Texas meeting with most of the top outdoor/hunting producers, and the Number One agenda item will be Colorado. Already, hunting organizations and statewide hunting clubs around the country are pulling out of Colorado, and we expect this trend to accelerate rapidly.
The message we will take to our viewers and listeners is that these proposed laws are so dangerous to hunters and any other person, be she a fisherman or a skier who brings a handgun into the state for self-defense, that we cannot recommend hunting, fishing or visiting Colorado. We reach millions of people, and, quite frankly, we have a credibility that Colorado government officials can no longer match. Colorado Division of Wildlife is already running ads trying to bring more out-of-state hunters to Colorado...in light of the flood of negative publicity about these proposed laws, I can assure you those ads will fail.
We estimate that as many as one-quarter to one-third of out-of-state hunters will desert Colorado in the next 18-24 months, which will quite frankly be a disaster for the hunting industry in Colorado and have a devastating effect on our western and northern communities (certainly citieslike Grand Junction).
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 within 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. Thank you, sir, for your support.
Best.
Michael Bane
OUTDOOR CHANNEL mbane@outdoorchannel.com
Michael Bane is a small businessman, too, Dan-O. I know him. He lives in Colorado, and this is a rather big decision.
But you and Bobcat and your pals can be smug, make light of this and enjoy your road trip.
Bowhunter: Good luck with your hunt. Notch a tag and fill your freezer. :tup:
I am in total agreement that the law Colorado is horrible. It's indefensible. I've never said anything else.
I'm glad to see Companies like MagPro and Outdoor Channel pull out of Colorado. I applaud it. It's the right thing to do. But not all Colorado-based sportsman's businesses can do that. And they are the ones who would feel this boycott first and hardest. The bunny huggers will not feel it, but it will have killed off some of our allies. That makes no sense.
You, however, are COMPLETELY MISREPRESENTING what I said:
I NEVER said that I wanted to reason with "those People" (the anti-2A folks).
I NEVER said anything even remotely similar to "A little gun control won't hurt anybody".
I NEVER said I was for any form of gun control. I believe the control we have now is too restrictive and nonsensical in many areas.
I NEVER said anything good about the law Colorado passed. It's a terrible overreach of their constitutional authority..... and it's WRONG.
I NEVER said that I sought understanding with "them". I was hoping that "we" 2A people might seek to understand the other pro-2A guy's views instead of just bashing.
I tell you what: You quit lying about me, and I'll quit asking you if you still beat your wife.
So, my question (that you've so far refused to answer) stands:
If the pro-2A side decided to boycott your business because of what some other people in your state did, you'd agree and just go out of business?????? If not, why not? That is EXACTLY what you seem to expect of others...
Post by: washelkhunter on March 24, 2013, 07:37:27 PM
Post by: Dan-o on March 24, 2013, 07:49:35 PM
Killing innocent people because you're mad is still wrong...... If that's not clear to you, just trade positions and it should be cleared right up.
Nobody is being killed. You're being over dramatic.
Citizens and businesses of Colorado are responsible for what their government does. Refusing to spend money in Colorado or with Colorado businesses is really the only way a non resident has to show their displeasure. Colorado citizens and businesses need to realize that if they don't hold their government accountable it's going to cost them money. If business goes on as usual, they have no reason to create waves and challenge their government. They always have the choice to move to another State that supports thr 2nd Amendment.
Another benefit of a successful hunter/shooter boycott of Colorado would be to put other State's governments on notice that going after 2nd Amendment rights is going to harm THEIR economy and tax base. Washington is a State that needs a warning like that.
Fine. Killing the businesses of innocent people (and therefore killing off their ability to sustain their families) is still wrong.
And for the record, I in no way, shape or form accept responsibility for what Patty Murray or Maria Cantwell do as Washington's Senator's. They do not represent my views.
You, however, may feel free to feel responsible for their actions.
Post by: Dan-o on March 24, 2013, 07:55:48 PM
Thank you Mr. Workman. I hadnt a hunt or trip planned to Co. I am boycotting by not buying goods and services out of there. Sure its miniscule, but every little bit hurts. Oh and dan-0, theres this thing in nature and politics called cause and effect.
So, school me up on cause and effect.
Is that where the "cause" is some slimy anti-2A people passing a bad law and the "effect" is that the pro-2A people react by punishing some of their pro-2A allies?
Seems that your theory works out well for the anti-2A folks, but not so good for the pro-2A folks.
I'll pass.
Post by: washelkhunter on March 24, 2013, 08:04:52 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 24, 2013, 08:15:39 PM
i can see your point on this Dan-o but its this same mentality that has this country in the financial situation it's currently in as well. Do we keep down the road of entitlement spending until we reach a Greece/Egypt situation, because we don't want to effect the few, or do we suck it up, make the cuts that need to be made in order to save the rest?Thank you Mr. Workman. I hadnt a hunt or trip planned to Co. I am boycotting by not buying goods and services out of there. Sure its miniscule, but every little bit hurts. Oh and dan-0, theres this thing in nature and politics called cause and effect.
So, school me up on cause and effect.
Is that where the "cause" is some slimy anti-2A people passing a bad law and the "effect" is that the pro-2A people react by punishing some of their pro-2A allies?
Seems that your theory works out well for the anti-2A folks, but not so good for the pro-2A folks.
I'll pass.
Post by: Special T on March 24, 2013, 08:16:18 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on March 24, 2013, 08:20:20 PM
Post by: Dan-o on March 24, 2013, 09:12:32 PM
i can see your point on this Dan-o but its this same mentality that has this country in the financial situation it's currently in as well. Do we keep down the road of entitlement spending until we reach a Greece/Egypt situation, because we don't want to effect the few, or do we suck it up, make the cuts that need to be made in order to save the rest?Thank you Mr. Workman. I hadnt a hunt or trip planned to Co. I am boycotting by not buying goods and services out of there. Sure its miniscule, but every little bit hurts. Oh and dan-0, theres this thing in nature and politics called cause and effect.
So, school me up on cause and effect.
Is that where the "cause" is some slimy anti-2A people passing a bad law and the "effect" is that the pro-2A people react by punishing some of their pro-2A allies?
Seems that your theory works out well for the anti-2A folks, but not so good for the pro-2A folks.
I'll pass.
Yeah, I see the issue. It's tough.
And I admit that I don't have a good solution..... If I did i wouldn't have Murray and Cantwell as my senators!!!!
This approach just bothers me.
Phool, I respect you based on lots of previous posts. What would you do? Are you ok with boycotting Colorado hunting-industry businesses because their city folk screwed them over with this law?
I'm still waiting for someone to step up and say that they'd be ok with getting boycotted out of business by a bunch of pro-2A people who were upset at someone else (the anti-2A people). Killing your allies is a tough way to build a power base.... Anybody willing to step up and declare that they'd give away their livelihood because of how someone else voted?........ anyone?
EDITORIAL NOTE FOR THE EMOTIONALLY IMPAIRED:
I NEVER said that I wanted to reason with "those People" (the anti-2A folks).
I NEVER said anything even remotely similar to "A little gun control won't hurt anybody".
I NEVER said I was for any form of gun control. I believe the control we have now is too restrictive and nonsensical in many areas.
I NEVER said anything good about the law Colorado passed. It's a terrible overreach of their constitutional authority..... and it's WRONG.
I NEVER said that I sought understanding with "them". I was hoping that "we" 2A people might seek to understand the other pro-2A guy's views instead of just bashing.
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 09:18:12 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 09:28:16 PM
What's funny to me is that the only people boycotting Colorado are the ones who had no plans to go there and no plans to do business with any Colorado businesses. :chuckle:Wrong again Bob...........I'm not putting in and I have 5 points for deer.....its killing me, but I feel I have to stand my ground for what I believe in.
Post by: ShooterBull on March 24, 2013, 09:28:22 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 09:32:31 PM
I was wrong I had 4 points and this year would have been 5.What's funny to me is that the only people boycotting Colorado are the ones who had no plans to go there and no plans to do business with any Colorado businesses. :chuckle:Wrong again Bob...........I'm not putting in and I have 5 points for deer.....its killing me, but I feel I have to stand my ground for what I believe in.
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 09:36:00 PM
There are always some exceptions to the rule.
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 09:38:31 PM
Post by: ShooterBull on March 24, 2013, 09:42:23 PM
Okay, so my statement wasn't quite 100% correct. I should have said MOST of the people claiming to boycott Colorado, had no plans to go there or do business there.10-4 I certainly am not happy about boycotting the "mom and pop" establishments that I'm sure we would have spent $ with on our trip, but I'm also not willing to "justify" what the politicians are doing to the "good people" of Colorado, I can't do much for them, but I can do this... I'm bummed though, really was excited to go.
There are always some exceptions to the rule.
Post by: ShooterBull on March 24, 2013, 09:45:21 PM
By the way, I hope you guys who are giving up your Colorado hunts, enjoy your hunts in good old Washington state. Somehow I just don't think your experience will be anywhere close to what you could have had in Colorado.Depends on where you are going? The "honey hole" is 100% for elk so far. Just trying to fill the freezer, a nice set of antlers for the rafters are only a bonus. :-)
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 09:49:18 PM
By the way, I hope you guys who are giving up your Colorado hunts, enjoy your hunts in good old Washington state. Somehow I just don't think your experience will be anywhere close to what you could have had in Colorado.Depends on where you are going? The "honey hole" is 100% for elk so far. Just trying to fill the freezer, a nice set of antlers for the rafters are only a bonus. :-)
I'd be happy going to Colorado and killing a cow elk. I wouldn't be going for the antlers but for the experience of hunting in a different type of country. And actually, I probably would spend very little money while in the state of Colorado, other than gas for my truck.
Post by: huntrights on March 24, 2013, 09:49:53 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 09:51:06 PM
By the way, I hope you guys who are giving up your Colorado hunts, enjoy your hunts in good old Washington state. Somehow I just don't think your experience will be anywhere close to what you could have had in Colorado.Thats for sure. I hope you have fun.
I think people are WAY over exaggerating the impact to the "little guy". IF 1000 people boycott, that's about 1/2 million $ hit to the state. Spread those 1000 people across the state, are those businesses even going to notice? I have never spent a lot of money there other than a meal or two and gas. I know most people are the same. The state will take the brunt. :twocents:
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 09:51:33 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 24, 2013, 09:53:24 PM
Quote
I think people are WAY over exaggerating the impact to the "little guy". IF 1000 people boycott, that's about 1/2 million $ hit to the state. Spread those 1000 people across the state, are those businesses even going to notice? I have never spent a lot of money there other than a meal or two and gas. I know most people are the same. The state will take the brunt.
So if it's not going to have any affect, why go along with the so called boycott?
Post by: JLS on March 24, 2013, 09:53:35 PM
By the way, I hope you guys who are giving up your Colorado hunts, enjoy your hunts in good old Washington state. Somehow I just don't think your experience will be anywhere close to what you could have had in Colorado.Depends on where you are going? The "honey hole" is 100% for elk so far. Just trying to fill the freezer, a nice set of antlers for the rafters are only a bonus. :-)
I'd be happy going to Colorado and killing a cow elk. I wouldn't be going for the antlers but for the experience of hunting in a different type of country. And actually, I probably would spend very little money while in the state of Colorado, other than gas for my truck.
Don't forget the mandatory stop at a local greasy spoon for a cheeseburger and fries, followed by peach pie a la mode. No better way to finish off a good week of hunting. :tup:
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 09:55:11 PM
By the way, I hope you guys who are giving up your Colorado hunts, enjoy your hunts in good old Washington state. Somehow I just don't think your experience will be anywhere close to what you could have had in Colorado.Depends on where you are going? The "honey hole" is 100% for elk so far. Just trying to fill the freezer, a nice set of antlers for the rafters are only a bonus. :-)
I'd be happy going to Colorado and killing a cow elk. I wouldn't be going for the antlers but for the experience of hunting in a different type of country. And actually, I probably would spend very little money while in the state of Colorado, other than gas for my truck.
Don't forget the mandatory stop at a local greasy spoon for a cheeseburger and fries, followed by peach pie a la mode. No better way to finish off a good week of hunting. :tup:
Actually its a bacon cheeseburger fries and a coke. :)
Post by: ShooterBull on March 24, 2013, 09:59:03 PM
Well said jshunt!+1 Well said Jshunt! I hope there is a MAJOR change in the political climate in Colorado! Side note: had the pleasure of meeting Jshunt this weekend! Great guy! I need to become more involved in the issues that are at hand. Jshunt has great views on the subjects, count me as an avid fan!
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 10:12:39 PM
Read it again, little effect to the "little guy", some effect to the state.QuoteI think people are WAY over exaggerating the impact to the "little guy". IF 1000 people boycott, that's about 1/2 million $ hit to the state. Spread those 1000 people across the state, are those businesses even going to notice? I have never spent a lot of money there other than a meal or two and gas. I know most people are the same. The state will take the brunt.
So if it's not going to have any affect, why go along with the so called boycott?
Post by: Bob33 on March 24, 2013, 10:27:47 PM
Using Washington as an example, would Jay Inslee or Patty Murray soften their anti gun stances if hunter numbers drop?
If anything that would encourage them to pass more anti gun laws.
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 10:29:07 PM
Explain to me again how an anti-gun government will be influenced by a minor drop in hunter numbers.Tell me what you have done??
Using Washington as an example, would Jay Inslee or Patty Murray soften their anti gun stances if hunter numbers drop?
TeIf anything that would encourage them to pass more anti gun laes.
Post by: Bob33 on March 24, 2013, 10:33:48 PM
For one, I asked a pertinent question:Explain to me again how an anti-gun government will be influenced by a minor drop in hunter numbers.Tell me what you have done??
Using Washington as an example, would Jay Inslee or Patty Murray soften their anti gun stances if hunter numbers drop?
TeIf anything that would encourage them to pass more anti gun laes.
"Explain to me again how an anti-gun government will be influenced by a minor drop in hunter numbers."
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 10:40:39 PM
Sounds like a closet liberal.
Post by: Bob33 on March 24, 2013, 10:43:17 PM
Carry on.
Post by: bearpaw on March 24, 2013, 10:43:57 PM
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
Currently I am thinking what if everyone starts boycotting WA for all the gun control schemes that Murray and Cantwell vote for that would affect everyone across the country. :dunno:
There are members of this forum that vote for Murray, Cantwell, and Obama. Should CO sportsmen pay the price when WA is just at fault on the national level?
Post by: JLS on March 25, 2013, 07:03:24 AM
So your answer is "nothing" I see the same thing from the same people, they don't like the idea of a boycott when it could affect (or not) the little guy, but they have no idea themselves of what might help. Instead they keep crying that its not fair.
Sounds like a closet liberal.
Does a quasi intelligent statement like this make you a closet rocket scientist?
Post by: actionshooter on March 25, 2013, 09:58:17 AM
So your answer is "nothing" I see the same thing from the same people, they don't like the idea of a boycott when it could affect (or not) the little guy, but they have no idea themselves of what might help. Instead they keep crying that its not fair.
Sounds like a closet liberal.
Does a quasi intelligent statement like this make you a closet rocket scientist?
Seriously, The question Bob has asked has been pointed out several times through the thread.
Its all about money going to the state. The politicians will change position based on money. They went from a 10 round ban to a 15 round magazine overnight b/c Magpul threatened to leave, yes this was about the dollar.
I want to know what his ideas are? I see lots of disagreement but no suggestions. I would love to see another way so I can keep gathering points. :)
I agree its not fair to the guys who work in the outdoor industry and I don't like it either, but I can't give money to a state that has passed these laws.
At the same time everyone who is against a boycott cheers Magpul for moving, yet it seems its OK that hundreds of people will lose their jobs. I'm positive those people did not vote for those who pushed the laws.
Doesn't that seem a little hypocritical?
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 25, 2013, 10:09:07 AM
We all have a lot of anger and frustration over the attacks on the 2nd Amendment, I understand and share that anger and frustration. I completely support Magpul and the Outdoor Show for moving out of CO and encourage others to do the same. Hit the state of CO in the pocketbook. :tup:
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
Currently I am thinking what if everyone starts boycotting WA for all the gun control schemes that Murray and Cantwell vote for that would affect everyone across the country. :dunno:
There are members of this forum that vote for Murray, Cantwell, and Obama. Should CO sportsmen pay the price when WA is just at fault on the national level?
If this happened, maybe the voters of WA would realize how stupid their choice of candidates has been up until now. As it is, we're not exactly a hunter-friendly state. :dunno:
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on March 25, 2013, 10:28:58 AM
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
To quote Gus Mcrae in Lonesome Dove--"You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw". If the owners of the small businesses feel that strongly about the Constiution they'd move out too. Only a mass exodus from the State will show the liberal politicians how wrong they were. As long as the majority of voters buys into the "Go along to get along" BS, it will only get worse. :twocents:
Post by: bearpaw on March 25, 2013, 10:33:48 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 25, 2013, 10:39:22 AM
We actually have some very good state legislators and US Representatives. It's our two US Senators who are always anti-gun, anti-constitution.
Yes, and it's the US Senate that's been writing the bills, spearheaded by Feinkenstein and supported by her close friends, Patty and Maria. I gotta tell you, Dale, I'm very tempted to roll up my tent and take it to MT or WY. The softies in this state have no idea of what could happen to their rights and don't care. West of the Cascades, there's no such thing as a government too big.
Post by: JLS on March 25, 2013, 10:40:47 AM
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
To quote Gus Mcrae in Lonesome Dove--"You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw". If the owners of the small businesses feel that strongly about the Constiution they'd move out too. Only a mass exodus from the State will show the liberal politicians how wrong they were. As long as the majority of voters buys into the "Go along to get along" BS, it will only get worse. :twocents:
So under this logic, we punish anyone who chooses to stay and try to make a difference? After all, it's better to tuck your tail and leave.
Kind of a stretch of logic in my opinion :dunno:
Post by: huntnphool on March 25, 2013, 10:43:53 AM
+1, we are researching the same thing.We actually have some very good state legislators and US Representatives. It's our two US Senators who are always anti-gun, anti-constitution.
Yes, and it's the US Senate that's been writing the bills, spearheaded by Feinkenstein and supported by her close friends, Patty and Maria. I gotta tell you, Dale, I'm very tempted to roll up my tent and take it to MT or WY. The softies in this state have no idea of what could happen to their rights and don't care. West of the Cascades, there's no such thing as a government too big.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 25, 2013, 10:49:39 AM
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
To quote Gus Mcrae in Lonesome Dove--"You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw". If the owners of the small businesses feel that strongly about the Constiution they'd move out too. Only a mass exodus from the State will show the liberal politicians how wrong they were. As long as the majority of voters buys into the "Go along to get along" BS, it will only get worse. :twocents:
So under this logic, we punish anyone who chooses to stay and try to make a difference? After all, it's better to tuck your tail and leave.
Kind of a stretch of logic in my opinion :dunno:
Do you think there's a chance that by staying, I'll be able to convert the people on the wet side to conservatism? I've been here for 25 years. The stench of socialism is thick in the air. The liberal whiners who don't think but jump on the anti-gun bandwagon are pouring into our state from the south by carloads. I'm lucky to live in Clark Co., which is a small bastion of conservatism on the wet side, but going closer to the left with every election. I'm not tucking anything. I'm just considering the fact that we can't elect a conservative governor or senators to save our lives. Maybe I belong somewhere that more represents who I am and for what I give a damn.
Post by: huntnphool on March 25, 2013, 10:58:17 AM
:yeah: This is exactly what has happened to Colorado as well. I have relatives that have watched the same thing happen there, their business has seen a huge migration of workers from California.
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
To quote Gus Mcrae in Lonesome Dove--"You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw". If the owners of the small businesses feel that strongly about the Constiution they'd move out too. Only a mass exodus from the State will show the liberal politicians how wrong they were. As long as the majority of voters buys into the "Go along to get along" BS, it will only get worse. :twocents:
So under this logic, we punish anyone who chooses to stay and try to make a difference? After all, it's better to tuck your tail and leave.
Kind of a stretch of logic in my opinion :dunno:
Do you think there's a chance that by staying, I'll be able to convert the people on the wet side to conservatism? I've been here for 25 years. The stench of socialism is thick in the air. The liberal whiners who don't think but jump on the anti-gun bandwagon are pouring into our state from the south by carloads. I'm lucky to live in Clark Co., which is a small bastion of conservatism on the wet side, but going closer to the left with every election. I'm not tucking anything. I'm just considering the fact that we can't elect a conservative governor or senators to save our lives. Maybe I belong somewhere that more represents who I am and for what I give a damn.
Post by: whacker1 on March 25, 2013, 11:01:50 AM
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
To quote Gus Mcrae in Lonesome Dove--"You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw". If the owners of the small businesses feel that strongly about the Constiution they'd move out too. Only a mass exodus from the State will show the liberal politicians how wrong they were. As long as the majority of voters buys into the "Go along to get along" BS, it will only get worse. :twocents:
So under this logic, we punish anyone who chooses to stay and try to make a difference? After all, it's better to tuck your tail and leave.
Kind of a stretch of logic in my opinion :dunno:
Do you think there's a chance that by staying, I'll be able to convert the people on the wet side to conservatism? I've been here for 25 years. The stench of socialism is thick in the air. The liberal whiners who don't think but jump on the anti-gun bandwagon are pouring into our state from the south by carloads. I'm lucky to live in Clark Co., which is a small bastion of conservatism on the wet side, but going closer to the left with every election. I'm not tucking anything. I'm just considering the fact that we can't elect a conservative governor or senators to save our lives. Maybe I belong somewhere that more represents who I am and for what I give a damn.
I have said this many times and have to repeat it to myself to remain sain: Where does your vote mean the most? For me, I live in the 3rd legislative district, which is mostly made up of the City of Spokane and the only liberal legislative district in Eastern Washington. I have pondered moving to Idaho where my conservative vote means very little, because the large majority already thinks like I do. Does it still mean something? yes. Or do I stay where I am at, because my vote means very little, because it 65% democrat vote and I can't raise the bar with my one vote to get close enough to 50/50. The only conclusion is that your vote means the most and has the most impact in a swing district. For Spokane that is District 6 typically that is close to 50/50. So my vote every election will help a conservative candidate.
Senator Don Benton in Clark County was testament to the swing district in this last election, winning his state senate race by less than 100 votes. So pianoman, while the outcome in Washington may not be what you want, your vote did make a different for Don Benton.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 25, 2013, 11:10:49 AM
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
To quote Gus Mcrae in Lonesome Dove--"You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw". If the owners of the small businesses feel that strongly about the Constiution they'd move out too. Only a mass exodus from the State will show the liberal politicians how wrong they were. As long as the majority of voters buys into the "Go along to get along" BS, it will only get worse. :twocents:
So under this logic, we punish anyone who chooses to stay and try to make a difference? After all, it's better to tuck your tail and leave.
Kind of a stretch of logic in my opinion :dunno:
Do you think there's a chance that by staying, I'll be able to convert the people on the wet side to conservatism? I've been here for 25 years. The stench of socialism is thick in the air. The liberal whiners who don't think but jump on the anti-gun bandwagon are pouring into our state from the south by carloads. I'm lucky to live in Clark Co., which is a small bastion of conservatism on the wet side, but going closer to the left with every election. I'm not tucking anything. I'm just considering the fact that we can't elect a conservative governor or senators to save our lives. Maybe I belong somewhere that more represents who I am and for what I give a damn.
I have said this many times and have to repeat it to myself to remain sain: Where does your vote mean the most? For me, I live in the 3rd legislative district, which is mostly made up of the City of Spokane and the only liberal legislative district in Eastern Washington. I have pondered moving to Idaho where my conservative vote means very little, because the large majority already thinks like I do. Does it still mean something? yes. Or do I stay where I am at, because my vote means very little, because it 65% democrat vote and I can't raise the bar with my one vote to get close enough to 50/50. The only conclusion is that your vote means the most and has the most impact in a swing district. For Spokane that is District 6 typically that is close to 50/50. So my vote every election will help a conservative candidate.
Senator Don Benton in Clark County was testament to the swing district in this last election, winning his state senate race by less than 100 votes. So pianoman, while the outcome in Washington may not be what you want, your vote did make a different for Don Benton.
My vote absolutely made a difference for Don Benton's race (and Jaime Herrera), and did absolutely nothing for US Senate or governor. Hopefully, Benton will keep winning but I don't see it happening. The governor's mansion will never see a Republican or Libertarian again, and our US Senate seats are also lost. I want to live somewhere where it's not a constant battle to reign in the government or retain my rights. I want to live somewhere where common sense exists and when you walk down the street with an open carry, someone is more likely to ask "what model is that?", than to say, "why do you need that? Are you some kind of gun nut?".
Post by: whacker1 on March 25, 2013, 11:12:41 AM
Post by: Dave Workman on March 25, 2013, 11:14:18 AM
I get it. Because Actionshooter and Dave tell me to do something, I should do it even if I don't believe it will have any positive effect.I don't believe anybody is telling anyone else what to do here. It's obvious nobody would listen :chuckle:
Carry on.
I reported the situation and explained it is a cause and effect situation. Tom Gresham is no lightweight in the outdoors, and neither is Michael Bane. Everyone here appears to have their own course.
As for the boycott idea...it boils down to this. Colorado has adopted some draconian gun laws.
Washington did not and I can claim to have had a hand in that.
Colorado — unlike Washington — rakes in a ton of loot annually from non-resident hunters. Their tax revenue and ripple effect economic benefit is in the tens if not hundreds of millions. If that suddenly dries up because gun owning hunters decide to go elsewhere, the state is going to notice that fast.
It would be like Washington suddenly losing revenue from, say, whale watchers or Mount Rainier / Oly National Park visitors staying home because the state allowed whale hunting or did something else that made the environmental community go berserk. It amounts to a ton of lost revenue that the state would notice and that could compel the legislature to do an about face.
Ditto Colorado.
Yes, there is no denying that this is going to hurt some small business people, and maybe big business people too, who depend on hunters and anglers. I have no idea how they voted in the last election, but as Bearpaw has noted, some folks here probably voted for Obama, Murray and Cantwell...and other gun grabbers.
That's their right, but be prepared to accept the consequences.
In this thread, I've gone from being someone who "sucks on the gov't teet" to someone who ought to have his small business boycotted because, when you get right down to it, because I don't agree with what a couple of people are saying. Thats really what this is all about.
It's an awful mess and a lot of people will be hurt who didn't go along with any of this. Sportsmen and women, the Parks and Wildlife agency, all the motels, hotels, gas stations, fast food places, sporting goods stores, butcher shops, guides and outfitters...yeah, this is going to hurt.
So, the question still stands and I asked first:
What other plan / option is there?
We can't take a mob to Colorado and hang the rats. Since we don't vote in Colorado we can't vote them out of office or run against them.
We can shrug and say "there's nothing we can do about it" and continue spending money in Colorado, and at the end of the day, the people who shoved these laws through will stand up and shout, "See, we TOLD you this wouldn't have any detrimental impact!" And they would be right and it would embolden the gang from Seattle to troop back to Olympia and try again.
Gresham's idea is his reaction and others appear to be following his lead.
Magpul is pulling its business out
Michael Bane and Outdoor Channel are pulling out.
I have not seen a single other idea expressed here, only people who say boycotting is not a good one. So, you have a better idea? Let's hear it. I'm sure Gresham would be delighted to hear it, too. He's watching this thread.
I will add this bit of history about Boycotts of Colorado, from the pages of the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/21/opinion/the-case-for-the-colorado-boycott.html (http://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/21/opinion/the-case-for-the-colorado-boycott.html)
"Admittedly, an economic boycott is not a precision weapon. Targeting Colorado's $5 billion tourist industry stands to hurt not just the unenlightened, but also the progressive towns of Denver, Aspen, and Boulder, where most voters opposed the anti-gay amendment.
But that is no reason to let Colorado off the hook. A successful boycott can help energize the most progressive Coloradans to overturn their new law. And it would send a potent warning to other states that may soon consider similar measures."
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on March 25, 2013, 01:00:27 PM
Post by: Dave Workman on March 25, 2013, 05:37:16 PM
Elections have consequences, and so do Dollars. The State of Washington found out the power of the Dollar when less than half of the people refused to grab their wallets (and other lower body parts) and shell out $30 for a Discover Pass. Now, instead of admitting defeat, the legislature is looking for other means of ripping us off "for the public good".
There ya go!
Post by: washelkhunter on March 26, 2013, 09:43:24 AM
Elections have consequences, and so do Dollars. The State of Washington found out the power of the Dollar when less than half of the people refused to grab their wallets (and other lower body
parts) and shell out $30 for a Discover Pass. Now, instead of
admitting defeat, the legislature is looking for other means of
ripping us off "for the public good".
There ya go!
And thats the truth. Boycotting the DP had a massive affect on the state parks budget. Boycotts work. The job now is to steer the fix in the right direction.
Post by: Bob33 on March 26, 2013, 10:04:51 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on March 26, 2013, 10:56:08 AM
Sad. But this is what it has come to. I hope that people contemplating a hunt in CO are reconsidering that as well.
As far as CO companies go, Warbonnet is a maker of high-quality hammocks and accessories. Sadly, they have the misfortune of residing in CO.
http://www.warbonnetoutdoors.com/contact_us.php (http://www.warbonnetoutdoors.com/contact_us.php)
Here is a message I left on their contact page.QuoteI was considering purchasing one of your hammocks and accessories after seeing my brother's in action. Sadly, after your Governor's signing of laws that fail to respect the rights of its citizens under the Second Amendment, I must reconsider supporting the many economies of Colorado.
While I realize that the effect on your potential sales is an unfair economic consequence, the effects should be communicated through to your elected representatives. My apologies.
Please keep me on your mailing list, in the event that you relocate to a Second Amendment friendly locale, or in the event that steps are taken to repeal and/or overturn these infringements, as I am still interested in your products or suitable alternatives.
Kind regards.
An understanding reply from Brandon at Warbonnet. He is a top notch guy, and if you are inclined to not boycott CO currently, consider him for your backcountry shelter needs. Even if you are inclined to boycott CO currently, consider him in the future.
Quote
Thanks for the email, i understand your position, and i am in agreement with you. Please also know that we currently have petitions to recall 3 of the state representatives that were the most responsible for these bills. They just forced them through, it was not the will of the people, in fact every sheriff in colorado refused to enforce any of the laws in question but they pushed them through anyway. We are not happy about this here in colorado and hopefully there's enough people upset that we can do something about it.
regards,
Brandon
Warbonnet Outdoors
Post by: huntnphool on March 26, 2013, 10:59:19 AM
That was a very well thought out and written letter Flounder, well done. :tup:Sad. But this is what it has come to. I hope that people contemplating a hunt in CO are reconsidering that as well.
As far as CO companies go, Warbonnet is a maker of high-quality hammocks and accessories. Sadly, they have the misfortune of residing in CO.
http://www.warbonnetoutdoors.com/contact_us.php (http://www.warbonnetoutdoors.com/contact_us.php)
Here is a message I left on their contact page.QuoteI was considering purchasing one of your hammocks and accessories after seeing my brother's in action. Sadly, after your Governor's signing of laws that fail to respect the rights of its citizens under the Second Amendment, I must reconsider supporting the many economies of Colorado.
While I realize that the effect on your potential sales is an unfair economic consequence, the effects should be communicated through to your elected representatives. My apologies.
Please keep me on your mailing list, in the event that you relocate to a Second Amendment friendly locale, or in the event that steps are taken to repeal and/or overturn these infringements, as I am still interested in your products or suitable alternatives.
Kind regards.
An understanding reply from Brandon at Warbonnet. He is a top notch guy, and if you are inclined to not boycott CO currently, consider him for your backcountry shelter needs. Even if you are inclined to boycott CO currently, consider him in the future.QuoteThanks for the email, i understand your position, and i am in agreement with you. Please also know that we currently have petitions to recall 3 of the state representatives that were the most responsible for these bills. They just forced them through, it was not the will of the people, in fact every sheriff in colorado refused to enforce any of the laws in question but they pushed them through anyway. We are not happy about this here in colorado and hopefully there's enough people upset that we can do something about it.
regards,
Brandon
Warbonnet Outdoors
Post by: Fl0und3rz on March 26, 2013, 11:29:38 AM
How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?
Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression). I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.
Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president). A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company. Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.
CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety. A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly. Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions).
If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott. Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons. But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.
Post by: whacker1 on March 26, 2013, 11:34:28 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 26, 2013, 08:30:04 PM
Just curious Mike how you feel about the new Colorado Gun laws, and the boycott ideas that are going around because of them?
Unlike · · Unfollow Post ·
You and Michael like this.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/board,79.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/board,79.0.html) here is an example
Gun Rights & Hunters Alerts
hunting-washington.com
Gun Rights & Hunters Alerts
Sunday at 8:27pm · Like · Remove Preview
Hi Jim, not happy at all, it was shoved down our throats....HB 1224 will cost many dems in the election in 2014...
3 hours ago · Unlike · 1
Sounds like Magpul is leaving
about an hour ago · Like
Hope you are right about the dumbocrats!
about an hour ago · Like
s Magpul is outta here in July..can't blame them.....hunters don't want to
about an hour ago via mobile · Like
several recalls started on dems ...
about an hour ago via mobile · Like
Post by: Bob33 on March 26, 2013, 08:50:43 PM
Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?
Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression). I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.
Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president). A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company. Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.
CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety. A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly. Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions).
If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott. Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons. But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.
I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Post by: actionshooter on March 26, 2013, 09:28:55 PM
Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses. Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?
Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression). I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.
Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president). A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company. Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.
CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety. A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly. Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions).
If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott. Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons. But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.
I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on March 26, 2013, 10:05:42 PM
Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Hear. Hear. Hope you did not get that "closet liberal" idea from my posts. I can agree to disagree, respectfully.
Post by: huntnphool on March 26, 2013, 10:12:15 PM
Post by: 6x6in6 on March 26, 2013, 10:29:24 PM
Cash is king, maybe the outfitters will offer "free" hunts. :chuckle::chuckle:
Post by: Bob33 on March 26, 2013, 10:32:08 PM
Not from you. Respectfully :tup:Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Hear. Hear. Hope you did not get that "closet liberal" idea from my posts. I can agree to disagree, respectfully.
Post by: whacker1 on March 27, 2013, 08:17:20 AM
Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses. Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?
Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression). I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.
Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president). A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company. Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.
CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety. A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly. Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions).
If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott. Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons. But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.
I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Bob, I think your comments about "thinking this through" is very real. The heavy lifting with regard to changing the public and political official opinions changed in Colorado needs to come from within Colorado. Several have mentioned in small components that recall efforts for certain individuals are already moving forward, public outcry to vote out some democrats at the 2014 election, as well as the businesses themselves moving to new states. Our component will not be huge, but needs to be consistent with what is going on within the state, and support what they themselves have initiated. With regard to Colorado, we can only vote with our dollars and recruit their businesses and make sure that those businesses know why we aren't going to go there. Those businesses need to be able to relay to their elected officials how many customers they have lost due to the decisions made by those and other elected officials. Boycott with no information is a recipe for failure. Boycott with information may still fail, but has a better chance of long term success.
Will there be opportunists that take advantage of the lower than usual Non-resident participation? sure, but we can only influence those that are willing to stand up for what they believe in.
I myself was planning a trip for 2014, which has been shelved, while that won't be an immediate impact, it is all I can do in the way of my own dollars. I will be purchasing about 1500 worth of gear this spring and will only be supporting those in 2nd Amendment friendly states, and will let those that are front runners within the state of Colorado why I chose not to purchase their products.
On the sidelines, I have been in touch with a couple different companies including MagPul to let them Spokane & North Idaho would be very interested in having them relocate here. I have also exchanged e-mails with the CEO of Greater Spokane Incorporated explaining which companies have expressed interest in leaving Colorado, and he two is making contact with MagPul and others.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on March 27, 2013, 08:29:45 AM
Quote
Everyone knew Magpul was going to take its jobs and nearly $90 million in taxes elsewhere as a result of the state’s recent gun control laws. That was just the beginning of the rebellion. The blowback that has begun against Michael Bloomberg’s Colorado gun control bills is so massive that even the Washington Post is noticing it.
United we stand . . .
Post by: JJD on March 28, 2013, 07:22:52 AM
Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses. Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?
Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression). I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.
Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president). A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company. Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.
CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety. A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly. Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions).
If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott. Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons. But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.
I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Bob, I think your comments about "thinking this through" is very real. The heavy lifting with regard to changing the public and political official opinions changed in Colorado needs to come from within Colorado. Several have mentioned in small components that recall efforts for certain individuals are already moving forward, public outcry to vote out some democrats at the 2014 election, as well as the businesses themselves moving to new states. Our component will not be huge, but needs to be consistent with what is going on within the state, and support what they themselves have initiated. With regard to Colorado, we can only vote with our dollars and recruit their businesses and make sure that those businesses know why we aren't going to go there. Those businesses need to be able to relay to their elected officials how many customers they have lost due to the decisions made by those and other elected officials. Boycott with no information is a recipe for failure. Boycott with information may still fail, but has a better chance of long term success.
Will there be opportunists that take advantage of the lower than usual Non-resident participation? sure, but we can only influence those that are willing to stand up for what they believe in.
I myself was planning a trip for 2014, which has been shelved, while that won't be an immediate impact, it is all I can do in the way of my own dollars. I will be purchasing about 1500 worth of gear this spring and will only be supporting those in 2nd Amendment friendly states, and will let those that are front runners within the state of Colorado why I chose not to purchase their products.
On the sidelines, I have been in touch with a couple different companies including MagPul to let them Spokane & North Idaho would be very interested in having them relocate here. I have also exchanged e-mails with the CEO of Greater Spokane Incorporated explaining which companies have expressed interest in leaving Colorado, and he two is making contact with MagPul and others.
There must be another Spokane somewhere? Considering the crackpots the west siders keep voting into office, why in Gods name would anyone in that industry want to relocate to WA?
They will likely be facing the same issues in the near future, plus they would be moving into a state with a hostile business environment. Businesses like Boeing would have pulled out of WA a long time ago had they been allowed to do so. Probably the only big ones that would be left would Microsoft in the head and that outfit that sells crappy coffee.
Post by: magnanimous_j on March 28, 2013, 07:55:15 AM
There must be another Spokane somewhere? Considering the crackpots the west siders keep voting into office, why in Gods name would anyone in that industry want to relocate to WA?
They will likely be facing the same issues in the near future, plus they would be moving into a state with a hostile business environment. Businesses like Boeing would have pulled out of WA a long time ago had they been allowed to do so. Probably the only big ones that would be left would Microsoft in the head and that outfit that sells crappy coffee.
Oh look, another Eastsider whose entire half of the state is carried by the west is criticizing the side of the state that has some of the biggest and most important companies on the planet.
Isn't that new and different.
Post by: whacker1 on March 28, 2013, 10:57:00 AM
Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses. Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?
Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression). I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.
Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president). A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company. Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.
CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety. A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly. Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions).
If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott. Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons. But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.
I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.
Bob, I think your comments about "thinking this through" is very real. The heavy lifting with regard to changing the public and political official opinions changed in Colorado needs to come from within Colorado. Several have mentioned in small components that recall efforts for certain individuals are already moving forward, public outcry to vote out some democrats at the 2014 election, as well as the businesses themselves moving to new states. Our component will not be huge, but needs to be consistent with what is going on within the state, and support what they themselves have initiated. With regard to Colorado, we can only vote with our dollars and recruit their businesses and make sure that those businesses know why we aren't going to go there. Those businesses need to be able to relay to their elected officials how many customers they have lost due to the decisions made by those and other elected officials. Boycott with no information is a recipe for failure. Boycott with information may still fail, but has a better chance of long term success.
Will there be opportunists that take advantage of the lower than usual Non-resident participation? sure, but we can only influence those that are willing to stand up for what they believe in.
I myself was planning a trip for 2014, which has been shelved, while that won't be an immediate impact, it is all I can do in the way of my own dollars. I will be purchasing about 1500 worth of gear this spring and will only be supporting those in 2nd Amendment friendly states, and will let those that are front runners within the state of Colorado why I chose not to purchase their products.
On the sidelines, I have been in touch with a couple different companies including MagPul to let them Spokane & North Idaho would be very interested in having them relocate here. I have also exchanged e-mails with the CEO of Greater Spokane Incorporated explaining which companies have expressed interest in leaving Colorado, and he two is making contact with MagPul and others.
There must be another Spokane somewhere? Considering the crackpots the west siders keep voting into office, why in Gods name would anyone in that industry want to relocate to WA?
They will likely be facing the same issues in the near future, plus they would be moving into a state with a hostile business environment. Businesses like Boeing would have pulled out of WA a long time ago had they been allowed to do so. Probably the only big ones that would be left would Microsoft in the head and that outfit that sells crappy coffee.
Nope, same Spokane...... Buck knives, Cabelas, and several others all looked at Spokane, but ultimately decided that Idaho on the other side of the border was better for them in many respects. But Greater Spokane Inc, Spokane Valley Chamber, and the similar organizations are what bring them to the area. I don't think they will move to Spokane, but I would say North Idaho is highly probable. All this is good for Spokane, as many of the employees for Buck knives and Cabelas live and spend money in Spokane.
If we can't get what we want in Washington, we can at least get it for our neighbors next door.
And if you didn't realize it Caterpillar just opened their major parts distrbuition facility just west of Spokane in 2012, which added 150 jobs to the community and many, many more in the construction of the facility. So, stranger things have happened...
Post by: washelkhunter on March 28, 2013, 11:16:13 AM
Post by: Bean Counter on March 28, 2013, 11:18:42 AM
Post by: huntnphool on March 28, 2013, 11:23:07 AM
As reported on the blaze, outfitters there understand the reason and are hopeful the effort helps in their efforts to effect change in Co.:yike: What? Are you saying the outfitters are not blaming the hunters for taking a stand and think it will help? :chuckle:
Post by: actionshooter on March 28, 2013, 11:38:12 AM
As reported on the blaze, outfitters there understand the reason and are hopeful the effort helps in their efforts to effect change in Co.:yike: What? Are you saying the outfitters are not blaming the hunters for taking a stand and think it will help? :chuckle:
AMAZING!!!
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 28, 2013, 11:44:29 AM
"Hey John,
We certainly will. Sportsmen represent a multi-billion-dollar industry in Colorado and none of us are happy about it. That's no small impact. It was a purely emotional response to another unfortunate tragedy here.
Take care,
Ryan McSparran
Winterhawk Outfitters"
A good group of guys who understand they're stuck in an unfortunate situation because of their idiot governor. Pressure applied by business in that state WILL make a difference in helping them see the light.
Post by: huntnphool on March 28, 2013, 11:47:27 AM
I had received a marketing email from Winterhawk Outfitters in CO and responded to them that we'd be looking at other states for our hunt in 2014. Here's their response after I suggested they communicate with their governor on the issue::tup:
"Hey John,
We certainly will. Sportsmen represent a multi-billion-dollar industry in Colorado and none of us are happy about it. That's no small impact. It was a purely emotional response to another unfortunate tragedy here.
Take care,
Ryan McSparran
Winterhawk Outfitters"
A good group of guys who understand they're stuck in an unfortunate situation because of their idiot governor. Pressure applied by business in that state WILL make a difference in helping them see the light.
Post by: bobcat on March 28, 2013, 11:50:44 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 28, 2013, 11:51:38 AM
Post by: whacker1 on March 28, 2013, 11:51:53 AM
Pman, can I get a phone number and/or an email address for Winterhawk Outfitters?
:stirthepot: :stirthepot: :stirthepot: :stirthepot:
Post by: whacker1 on March 28, 2013, 11:52:53 AM
Post by: csaaphill on March 29, 2013, 01:02:12 AM
Hunters Threaten Boycott While Gun Grabbers Run Colorado
March 28, 2013 by Ben Bullard
PHOTOS.COM
Following last week’s passage of three pieces of legislation making Colorado a pretty unfriendly place for guns owners and the exercise of 2nd Amendment powers, some hunters are uniting to deny the State something very empowering indeed: revenue.
Websites where gun and hunting enthusiasts share ideas have now become bulletin boards where word of the boycott has begun gaining momentum, according to a Gazette story Wednesday.
Outfitters have also begun reporting cancelled trips from out-of-State hunters, though not in devastating numbers — so far. One hunting guide said it’s likely the trend will grow.
“There’s a united front of sportsmen that are tired of having their freedoms and liberties and fundamental rights taken away from them,” said Chris Jurney, who offers support and guidance for hunters in the State’s northwest corner. “That kind of unity among sportsmen is going to be big, and unfortunately for those of us who live here, we’re going to suffer the consequences of this misguided legislation.”
Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, signed the three pieces of controversial gun control legislation into law on March 20. The laws limit the size of ammo magazines to 15 rounds, require universal background checks for gun transactions and force customers to pay for the background checks.
You already know about Magpul, the Erie-based business who’s in the process of moving its operations out of the State in response to the ban. The Outdoor Channel’s Michael Bane is following suit, declining to film his hunting programs in Colorado while the State’s new gun laws remain.
Post by: Dave Workman on March 29, 2013, 07:38:41 AM
A controversial advertisement paid for by anti-gun New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is not all many of its critics have claimed, specifically that an actor holding a shotgun in the spot has his finger on the trigger of the Remington Model 870 pump shotgun he is holding.
http://www.examiner.com/article/bloomberg-ad-not-all-its-critics-claim-colorado-boycott-update?cid=db_articles (http://www.examiner.com/article/bloomberg-ad-not-all-its-critics-claim-colorado-boycott-update?cid=db_articles)
Post by: huntnphool on March 29, 2013, 09:29:11 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on April 01, 2013, 10:07:35 PM
http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/04/hiviz-the-latest-gun-accessory-company-to-bolt-from-anti-liberty-colorado/#comments (http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/04/hiviz-the-latest-gun-accessory-company-to-bolt-from-anti-liberty-colorado/#comments)
Post by: whacker1 on April 02, 2013, 08:54:53 AM
HiViz taxing their tax base out of CO.
http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/04/hiviz-the-latest-gun-accessory-company-to-bolt-from-anti-liberty-colorado/#comments (http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/04/hiviz-the-latest-gun-accessory-company-to-bolt-from-anti-liberty-colorado/#comments)
Thank you for sharing.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on April 02, 2013, 09:16:36 AM
http://www.boston.com/news/education/2013/04/01/conn-proposals-guns-other-items-after-newtown/0Qn1nJQI3223inrmQWfMFI/story.html (http://www.boston.com/news/education/2013/04/01/conn-proposals-guns-other-items-after-newtown/0Qn1nJQI3223inrmQWfMFI/story.html)
Quote
GUN LAWS
—Ban sales of high-capacity ammunition magazines;
—Background checks for private gun sales;
—New registry for existing magazines that carry 10 or more bullets;
—Statewide dangerous weapon offender registry, which lawmakers said is the nation’s first;
—Immediate universal background checks for all firearms sales;
—Expansion of Connecticut’s assault weapons ban;
—Safety training and other requirements to buy any rifle, shotgun or ammunition;
—Increases minimum age eligibility for purchase of some semi-automatic rifles to 21;
— Expands requirements for safe storage of firearms;
— Increases penalties for firearms trafficking and illegal possession offenses.
Those are just the firearm laws. There are others at the link directed to school safety and mental health and firearms possession, though, sadly, not a one of them could be or in combination could be said to guarantee another Sandyhook-like massacre by an evil individual intent on mayhem. Way to go, CT, for sacrificing individual liberty for the illusion of safety.
Post by: Noiro on April 04, 2013, 09:56:20 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/morning_call/2013/04/hiviz-intends-to-follow-magpuls.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/morning_call/2013/04/hiviz-intends-to-follow-magpuls.html)
Post by: ChadH on April 09, 2013, 05:14:44 AM
We all have a lot of anger and frustration over the attacks on the 2nd Amendment, I understand and share that anger and frustration. I completely support Magpul and the Outdoor Show for moving out of CO and encourage others to do the same. Hit the state of CO in the pocketbook. :tup:
But I am struggling to see the wisdom in turning on our friends who are stuck living in CO, I do think there have been some pretty valid points brought up about hurting the small businesses that support the 2nd Amendment.
Currently I am thinking what if everyone starts boycotting WA for all the gun control schemes that Murray and Cantwell vote for that would affect everyone across the country. :dunno:
There are members of this forum that vote for Murray, Cantwell, and Obama. Should CO sportsmen pay the price when WA is just at fault on the national level?
I wrestle with the same thing Bearpaw. But here is the deal, While I don't want to "hurt" those innocent people in CO, who didn't have a choice about this new law because they don't live in the I-25 corridor, in my mind there comes a time when enough is enough. Many of these people voted for this new law when they voted for their current state government. They may not have had a choice in all the senate and house races in Colorado, but they DID have a voice in who became Governor, and only about 46% of the state voted in the 2010 election when Hickenlooper was elected. So, statistically there are a BUNCH of people in those small towns like Craig, and a BUNCH of outfitters and other businesses, now wanting us to keep coming to their state, that voted for Hickenlooper either outright or by NOT voting for the other guy and staying home. I am sorry, but staying home was a bad decision. And the same goes for Washington. Some of us may be hurt down the line here as well (actually, to some degree we already are). So we had better see a huge turnout from "our side" in the next election. There was only about 58% turnout in 2012 (actually pretty good compared to other sates, but probably driven by a couple ballot issues, not general election interest), and Jay Inslee won by 3%. Murray's last election she won by 3.8%, and in 2010 there was 47% turnout. That is a lot of votes on the table. We may not control who wins all the house and senate races, but we CAN impact the state wides... voter turnout needs to be huge on our teams part to do it.
Post by: Special T on April 09, 2013, 07:38:27 AM
Post by: huntrights on April 09, 2013, 09:47:40 AM
There are about 275,000 hunters in Washington State; if they all voted, hunters would definitley have an impact in the elections. Those hunters that vote just have to vote for representatives that are committed to protecting and defending our rights and freedoms; not for gun grabbers like Obama and many of the state and federal representatives in our state that are sponsoring and/or supporting the flood of anti-gun bills.
Post by: ChadH on April 09, 2013, 11:49:26 AM
There are about 275,000 hunters in Washington State; if they all voted, hunters would definitley have an impact in the elections. Those hunters that vote just have to vote for representatives that are committed to protecting and defending our rights and freedoms; not for gun grabbers like Obama and many of the state and federal representatives in our state that are sponsoring and/or supporting the flood of anti-gun bills.
Exactly, and there are a good many more people who don't hunt, but are not "anti". So every time you are out in public (in the woods or on the town) you represent "hunters" do it in such a way that those "NON Antis" will side with us. If we could turn out the vote like the Democratic machine in this country, a good many things would change. This is still, basically, a 50/50 split on conservative/liberal nationally as well as in the most liberal states in the country.
Post by: Dave Workman on May 06, 2013, 04:16:58 PM
interesting update from HOUSTON/NRA
Colorado battle heats, says Schreiner
Northwest sportsmen and women may not recognize Steve Schreiner’s name, but the Colorado activist and newly-elected board member of the National Rifle Association, has a message for hunters in Washington and Oregon: You can fight back.
http://www.examiner.com/article/colorado-battle-heats-says-schreiner (http://www.examiner.com/article/colorado-battle-heats-says-schreiner)
Post by: actionshooter on May 06, 2013, 04:33:55 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 06, 2013, 04:45:12 PM
Post by: Dave Workman on May 17, 2013, 08:02:17 AM
http://www.examiner.com/article/colo-sheriffs-sue-to-overturn-new-state-gun-magazine-limit-laws (http://www.examiner.com/article/colo-sheriffs-sue-to-overturn-new-state-gun-magazine-limit-laws)
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 17, 2013, 09:19:32 AM
Post by: huntrights on May 20, 2013, 12:10:02 AM
OUTDOOR CHANNEL Pulls Productions from Colorado
Link to email:
http://coloradosenatenews.com/Downloads/MichaelBane.pdf
Post by: whacker1 on June 06, 2013, 05:49:21 AM
recall petition gathers double the signatures needed for recall.
Post by: huntrights on June 10, 2013, 12:41:57 PM
http://www.guns.com/2013/06/04/recall-petition-gathers-double-the-signatures-needed-for-anti-gun-colorado-senate-president/ (http://www.guns.com/2013/06/04/recall-petition-gathers-double-the-signatures-needed-for-anti-gun-colorado-senate-president/)
recall petition gathers double the signatures needed for recall.
That's great news!
Post by: whacker1 on June 18, 2013, 10:07:30 AM
Another article about the other issues Colorado is dealing with.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on June 22, 2013, 10:02:32 AM
http://conservativefiringline.com/colorado-is-really-swinging/?fb_source=pubv1 (http://conservativefiringline.com/colorado-is-really-swinging/?fb_source=pubv1)
Another article about the other issues Colorado is dealing with.
Pasquinel, Alexander McKeag, and Levi Zent would be proud!
http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/county-wants-to-be-51st-state/ (http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/county-wants-to-be-51st-state/)
GREELEY, Colo. – A county in Colorado that was immortalized in the novel and 1978 miniseries “Centennial” once again could achieve fame as it finds itself in a unique position among America’s counties – considering a bid to become the 51st state.
Weld County is one of the nation’s largest counties, and at nearly 3,000 square miles it is larger than the combined land areas of Rhode Island, Delaware and the District of Columbia. The county was also immortalized in James Michener’s “Centennial,” a novel about a fictitious town whose history mirrored the history of the state.
County officials have made national news several times in recent months for their strong stand for constitutional rights including the Second Amendment. However, following a particularly contentious legislative session where Democrats controlled both chambers of the legislature as well as the governorship, the divide has gotten so great that county commissioners are seriously entertaining asking voters to decide if they want to secede and form the state of North Colorado.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/county-wants-to-be-51st-state/#1BktVvr1Y8f2Atwe.99 (http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/county-wants-to-be-51st-state/#1BktVvr1Y8f2Atwe.99)
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on July 27, 2013, 07:34:46 PM
http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/law-shuts-down-gun-buyback-effort/ (http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/law-shuts-down-gun-buyback-effort/)
WEAPONS OF CHOICE
Law shuts down gun buyback effort
New state demand for background checks hit books July 1
Published: 5 hours ago
A new Colorado law aimed at shutting down access to guns – by imposing an across-the-board requirement for background checks for all gun deals – has closed down a favorite tool of those opposing firearms rights – the gun buyback program.
The situation has been reported by the Denver Post, which said organizers canceled a planned buyback effort after Boulder County Sheriff Joe Pelle said the event, set for Aug. 4, would be nearly impossible to do.
“Procedurally we can’t follow through at this time,” the sheriff told the newspaper, even though he said the effort would be legal.
Colorado’s government, controlled by Democrats in the state House, Senate and the governor’s office, over the last session rammed through a slew of new gun restrictions, regulations and requirements.
One of them demands that buyers go to a licensed firearms dealer and undergo a background check for even private sales.
But officials report the “InstaCheck” systems are not mobile.
So for each purchase in a buyback program, the “purchaser” would have been required to travel to a gun dealer for the check.
Pelle told the Post one solution would be for the group organizing the buyback – in this case a private group called “Together Colorado” – to find a licensed gun dealer willing to hold an event to buy back guns to be turned over to the sheriff’s office for destruction.
Authorities had said members of the organization would be required to pass a background check for each gun purchase.
The incident is just the latest wave to hit the state from the Democrats’ work this year.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/law-shuts-down-gun-buyback-effort/#ulcsmVIapSM5dQvw.99 (http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/law-shuts-down-gun-buyback-effort/#ulcsmVIapSM5dQvw.99)
Post by: whacker1 on July 27, 2013, 09:51:58 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 10, 2013, 08:36:11 PM
COLORADO SENATE PRESIDENT MORSE RECALLED
Quote
Statistically impossible for him to climb back, down 800 votes with only about 2400-2500 still left to be counted. Race called about 10 minutes ago.
One down, hopefully one more to go.
Update: Morse concedes, Giron appears recalled as well - conceded. Way to go CO.
Post by: whacker1 on October 16, 2013, 05:35:48 AM
Denver – When two Colorado lawmakers were recalled last month in a referendum on gun control, opponents of the recall election had this to console them: At least, they said, the twin defeats did not alter the balance of power in Denver, the state capital.
Now gun rights advocates are looking to change that.
Organizers have received official go-ahead to start gathering signatures in a bid to oust state Sen. Evie Hudak, a Democrat from the Denver suburb of Westminster, who was the target of a failed recall petition drive earlier this year. The group, certified by Colorado’s secretary of state, has until Dec. 3 to collect just over 18,900 signatures to force a vote.
The stakes: control of the state Senate, which Democrats hold by a tenuous 18-17 edge.
Post by: huntnphool on October 16, 2013, 10:43:04 AM
Colorado group seeks another recallHudak is another liberal gun control freak, good choice!
Denver – When two Colorado lawmakers were recalled last month in a referendum on gun control, opponents of the recall election had this to console them: At least, they said, the twin defeats did not alter the balance of power in Denver, the state capital.
Now gun rights advocates are looking to change that.
Organizers have received official go-ahead to start gathering signatures in a bid to oust state Sen. Evie Hudak, a Democrat from the Denver suburb of Westminster, who was the target of a failed recall petition drive earlier this year. The group, certified by Colorado’s secretary of state, has until Dec. 3 to collect just over 18,900 signatures to force a vote.
The stakes: control of the state Senate, which Democrats hold by a tenuous 18-17 edge.