I was part of a 32 person virtual meeting on CO gun legislation yesterday.

 It was organized by a gun-rights group that is affiliated with the NRA, but this was not an NRA sponsored event.

 During the meeting the primary sponsor indicated "CO is criminalizing theft victims.  If you have a gun stolen while on vacation for two weeks you can go to jail when you get back for not reporting it."

 It turns out I was the only person who actually had the legislation in front of me for the meeting.  I asked, nobody acknowledged that they read the actual legislation.  This of course could be incorrect and nobody chose to respond that they read the legislation.  No surprise there, why educate yourself about what you will be fighting against right?

 I brought up that the legislation states the following:

The bill requires an individual who owns a firearm to report the
loss or theft of that firearm to a law enforcement agency within 5 days
after discovering that the firearm was lost or stolen. A first offense for
failure to make such a report is a petty offense punishable by a $25 fine,
and a second or subsequent offense is a class 3 misdemeanor. The 5-day
reporting requirement does not apply to a licensed gun dealer.


 Again:  after discovering that the firearm was lost or stolen


 Once I lifted the document to the camera and showed I was reading verbatim what the legislation was I was then removed from the meeting.

 I get fighting against gun legislation, but why lie to everyone, and even worse why be ok with being lied to?

 
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021A/bills/2021a_078_...

"Please let us all know,
when that becomes the law of the  State.
and the after discovering has a strikethrough"

 First lets not pretend I am promoting the change.  By challenging the inaccurate claims of criminal prosecution, by using actual words from actual legislation, this does not mean one is all the sudden a gun-control activist.

 If people are ok being lied to by the one's that are supposed to be helping then the strikethrough will be pretty easy to do.

 As people fight a law that doesn't exist, the laws that do exist are ignored and more easily modified.  Use the frog in boiling analogy all day, none of it matters if gun rights activism uses duplicity to inspire people to fight legislation that doesn't even exist.  How valuable is it for someone to go complain about a criminal punishment that doesn't exist?  What level of credibility in court will that legal argument have?  

 But ignore today's lies because someday the law might change.  That makes sense.

 The question I have is would you kick someone out of a meeting for clarifying that there is no legislation that puts a citizen in jail for failing to report a gun theft when they were on vacation?

 Yeah but still I have the same question, would you kick someone out of a meeting for clarifying that there is no legislation that puts a citizen in jail for failing to report a gun theft when they were on vacation?

Choosing to not report a theft is the right of the property owner.

"Choosing to not report a theft is the right of the property owner."

 Can you elaborate on what legal grounds you would use to argue this?  What sections of what laws, or legislation dictates there is a "right" to not report a theft?

 I asked 14 law offices a question similar to this and the responses were all pretty much the same.  There are no "rights" guaranteed to any citizen regarding the dispersal of information when a crime is committed.  People claim all the time that they do not have to divulge information about a crime and are routinely prosecuted for hindering an investigation.

 Reporting a crime however is different, and this is the question really, do I have to report a crime?  The short answer is no, unless legislation requires it.  This type of thing exists all over the place but is typically when it involves harm or imminent harm to another.  For instance at the medical center I am required to report domestic violence, child prostitution, rape etc.  I am required by law to report that crime.

 There is an obvious difference between child prostitution and a missing gun, or TV, or anything I own.  But, there is no "right" that guarantees I will not have to report that.  There should be, but there isn't and declaring it means absolutely nothing.

Eegore wrote on 03/12/21 at 23:04:58:

 ...  there is no "right" that guarantees I will not have to report that.  ...

OK, can you point to the law or some other thing,
which says one HAS TO report something?

(Not a 'association' rule, like a lawyer telling a cop his client said he will murder a person)

Then one could fine/prosecute/put in jail,
someone looking out the window, and saw the car/people,
of the drive by killing.
Yet will not, 'Report', it,
because the person was the nephew of his/her, half brothers, former girlfriend.

"I think the law said "Dot approved helmet"'
not honest , but both side have used things like this as a rallying point."

 That sounds like one side is using this tactic.

 Did the legislative branch present duplicitous documentation then change it after voting?  Did the legislative branch go around with no helmets saying "Helmets Optional!!!"  ?

 Or did the legislative branch present the actual law in print as it was to be enforced?

 My point is to use the actual written documented law, and not lie about what it contains to collect money and waste that money creating arguments about legislative punishments that do not exist.

 Would you kick a guy out of a meeting for presenting the actual law in print?

Eegore wrote on 03/13/21 at 10:57:30:

... Would you kick a guy out of a meeting for presenting the actual law in print?

6 times out of 13 posts ?
WOW, those people in that meeting are sure ,'Living In Your Head, Rent Free', aren't they.