Colorado Weapons Ban

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regina English (D) tried getting a bill through for pet registration. Colorado House Bill 24-1163.

Literally EVERYTHING that could be considered a pet would require registration AND would require owners to have a designated pet caretaker in the event they passed away or otherwise are unable to take care of their pets.

And all for the low, low cost of $8.50 to $25 per pet. And that's per year. $8.50 (with a registered caretaker), $16 (for an un-neutered dog or cat with a caretaker), or $25 (for a per without a caretaker)

With a $100 fine per pet for non-compliance.

They can fine me all they want when I am dead..
 
The bill passed the house
The bill may pass the legislature and be signed by the governor, but then it will fail spectacularly to achieve its intended purpose (which presumably is to prevent mass shootings). It doesn't take a crystal ball to foresee this. Plus, it will promote disrespect for the law in general. Haven't we learned the lesson from the "well-meaning" attempt at alcohol Prohibition?

And, once again, the U.S. Supreme Court will fail to promptly knock it down.

The only silver lining that I see is that it will be a clear example of what not to do, for the benefit of other states.
 
The bill may pass the legislature and be signed by the governor, but then it will fail spectacularly to achieve its intended purpose (which presumably is to prevent mass shootings). It doesn't take a crystal ball to foresee this. Plus, it will promote disrespect for the law in general. Haven't we learned the lesson from the "well-meaning" attempt at alcohol Prohibition?

And, once again, the U.S. Supreme Court will fail to promptly knock it down.

The only silver lining that I see is that it will be a clear example of what not to do, for the benefit of other states.
But it will make paper criminals out of law abiding citizens, subject to fines prison loss of gun rights. Anties are giddy today
 
It's intended purpose is to disarm the citizenry. I'm fairly certain it will be very successful at that
Even granting that, it won't be successful. It's Colorado, and are there are a lot of guns already out there. All the bill does is freeze the existing situation. It will take many years before the existing supply is significantly affected. (And transfers will continue, even though illegal, because there's no registration.) In reality, this is a toothless bill with full grandfathering and no registration. Not that I'm trying to justify it -- quite the contrary.
 
But the language in Colorado's proposal bans most firearms, not just so called Assault Weapons.

With the "shroud" stipulation, I agree it gets pretty nebulous in the semi-auto rifle regime, but the versions I have seen have no impact on traditional semi-auto pistols without threaded barrels. It also has zero impact on any manually operated repeating arms (bolt, lever, pump, revolver) besides the "evil .50 BMG". If we are going to discuss these wretched bills, we need to understand what they specifically say, and what they don't say. RMGO is currently doing good work, sometimes they need to control the hyperbole a bit.
 
Last edited:
It is an interesting map. Arizona has less native born people than Colorado yet we have some of the best pro gun laws in the Union. So maybe it's not just the newcomers.

The AZ timeline in just a bit behind CO. How many R's have won statewide races recently in AZ? Once those flip to a reliable blue, everything else starts to fall in line.
 
Last edited:
I had to read what qualifies as an 'assault rifle'.
My Ruger bolt action rifles are 'assault rifles' cause they have detachable mags and muzzle devices.
My Sub2k 9mm carbine is specifically listed as assault.
My SKS is NOT considered assault based on their criteria.

I also didn't see any specifics on the muzzle devices. So if I remove the muzzle device from my Mini-14, is that acceptable since it has no pistol grip?

And is this a ban on selling/transferring, or does it include possession? It's easier to enforce a ban on transfers than outright seizure.

I'm just glad I'm in S.C.
 
My Ruger bolt action rifles are 'assault rifles' cause they have detachable mags and muzzle devices.

No, they are not included. "Semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" is the key potential qualifier.

I also didn't see any specifics on the muzzle devices. So if I remove the muzzle device from my Mini-14, is that acceptable since it has no pistol grip?

It's verboten by the bill if it has a threaded muzzle.


And is this a ban on selling/transferring, or does it include possession? It's easier to enforce a ban on transfers than outright seizure.

Existing ownership is grandfathered in the bill, for now...
 
I PCS'd to Colorado in 1992. I used to say that all the time "I'm sure glad I'm in Colorado not wherever the gun grabbers were running wild".

Then Colorado legalized weed and turned HARD BLUE almost overnight.

Don't you think for a second that you can't happen to you.

Other than a BCG requirement for gun shows (as a result of Columbine and was easily handled at the venue), Colorado was one of the best places in the country for adult gun rights and shall-issue concealed carry in the 2003-2013 timeframe. Then legal pot happened and it all went downhill. The state legislature and governor, usually a healthy mix of D & R, became the dreaded "Triple D". Other statewide offices (AG, S of S, etc.), usually somewhat split, became solid blue every election.

I read somewhere recently that some like a total of 170K's worth of progressives moving to strategic states like MT, WY, ID (perhaps even SD and ND) could completely and permanently shift the nation's balance of power. It can happen to you too....
 
TY .455Hunter for clarifying that.

And you're right about Colorado, I have relatives there and if you go back a few decades the political climate was much different than it is today. We'll see if this ban stands the test of time.
 
According to NRA-ILA, the Assault Weapons (All Weapons?) ban bill has been removed from the legislative calendar.

"For the time being, Colorado gun owners have received a temporary respite, as House Bill 24-1292, the semi-auto ban, has been removed from the calendar. However, we must stay vigilant because gun control advocates can bring it up for a vote at any time!"

As extreme and poorly written as that was, could it have never been intended to be voted on, just to be a diversion and distract from other bills?
 
So the language in the bill actually bans all threaded barrels, not specifying muzzle. This could be construed to mean literally any barrel that has threading for fixation to an action, such as Mini-14 barrels and most other centerfire rifle barrels.

No, just semi-autos with detachable mag. I should have been clearer.
 
Yes yes, autoloading, detachable magazine rifles. But even without a threaded muzzle, if the barrel is threaded on the action end, it could be construed as banned by this bill as-written.

Remember, these bills are written by wacked gun control activists, not competent firearms owners. If you literally interpret the "shroud" definition, an old Remington 740 with a wooden forend is just a bad as the latest m-loc kitted full rail AR, because it fully or partially encloses the barrel to prevent burning of the support hand. It's all completely moronic, or brilliant, depending on your agenda.
 
Remember, these bills are written by wacked gun control activists, not competent firearms owners. If you literally interpret the "shroud" definition, an old Remington 740 with a wooden forend is just a bad as the latest m-loc kitted full rail AR, because it fully or partially encloses the barrel to prevent burning of the support hand. It's all completely moronic, or brilliant, depending on your agenda.
Wait, not the "shoulder thing that goes up"? :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top