Herpin and Rivera to introduce bills repealing mag ban and background check law on Jan. 8

[Justin]

http://www.krdo.com/news/new-local-state-senators-return-gun-control-issue-to-legislature/-/417220/23719930/-/7p4qdjz/-/index.html

I was under the impression that bills had to originate in the House. Is that not the case?

[merl]

Can start on either side. Sadly these will die in committee, only introduced to gather votes.

[Rabid]

Can start on either side. Sadly these will die in committee, only introduced to gather votes.
You may be right but we will at least know who voted on it in committee. I think we finally got our word out to them loud and clear so this is a start.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Can start on either side. Sadly these will die in committee, only introduced to gather votes.

I'm OK with the effort anyway. Any time spent on this is time NOT spent on more MJ stuff, more taxes, other ways to restrict freedom…..

[sniper7]

Glad to see it is out there, find out who the dems are that are still stupid enough to fight this, and hopefully get an opinion from Hicky

[Circuits]

I was under the impression that bills had to originate in the House. Is that not the case?
Only revenue/tax bills have to originate in the house.

[Circuits]

Glad to see it is out there, find out who the dems are that are still stupid enough to fight this, and hopefully get an opinion from Hicky
Hick has said he'll veto any attempt to roll back "gun safety measures".

[Justin]

Then I hope they make him put his veto where his mouth is.

A veto on repealing the laws is just going to further galvanize people against him.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

[Ronin13]

Senator Brophy was on 630 last week talking about this- a repeal right now, with the Dems still in control, will pass something like this on to die in a committee... I wouldn't call it a wasted effort, but it won't get much traction as we all learned regardless of how the people these [redacted] represent feel, they're still going with the Anit-gun Demonrat agenda... even if 99.9% of the voters from their district support the measure. This is the way politics now work for the left- "we don't care what our constituents think, we know what's best for them."

[O2HeN2]

Yhea, it'll never make it to Hick's desk, so he'll be able to continue to talk out of both sides of his mouth.

But it's not a wasted effort.

O2

[Ronin13]

Yhea, it'll never make it to Hick's desk, so he'll be able to continue to talk out of both sides of his mouth.

But it's not a wasted effort.

O2
Even if it did make it to his desk, his tongue is so far up Bloombergs tail-end that he'd never sign it.

[DavieD55]

Yhea, it'll never make it to Hick's desk, so he'll be able to continue to talk out of both sides of his mouth.

But it's not a wasted effort.

O2

The legislature could overide old hickenfluffer's veto if they wanted it bad enough, which probably wont happen either.

[Circuits]

The legislature could overide old hickenfluffer's veto if they wanted it bad enough, which probably wont happen either.
Dim majority? Miracle if it makes it through at all - no way to override a veto.

[Great-Kazoo]

You may be right but we will at least know who voted on it in committee. I think we finally got our word out to them loud and clear so this is a start.

you really need a vote to know who was against the mag and BGC bills?

[KAPA]

I would think that after all the recalls there has to be a dem or two that would flip. All it would take is one. With elections coming up one orb two will be more receptive.

[Rabid]

you really need a vote to know who was against the mag and BGC bills?
I want some more nails in their coffins, so yes.

[DavieD55]

Dim majority? Miracle if it makes it through at all - no way to override a veto.

You're right the bill will probably be killed in committee.

[brianakell]

Great, 2 more politician idiots, just trying to secure votes and doing nothing useful.

Naturally they'll propose this now, knowing it has no chance. And should Gov, and some seats go red next election, oddly, with this then having a chance in passing, it won't be proposed then! No no, propose junk, waste time, get a few more votes behind them for "trying". But when they have the chance to do something, stand up for the people, oh no, no chance in hell they'll do it then.

So yeah more of the same, yay. [mlp]

[TFOGGER]

Great, 2 more politician idiots, just trying to secure votes and doing nothing useful.

Naturally they'll propose this now, knowing it has no chance. And should Gov, and some seats go red next election, oddly, with this then having a chance in passing, it won't be proposed then! No no, propose junk, waste time, get a few more votes behind them for "trying". But when they have the chance to do something, stand up for the people, oh no, no chance in hell they'll do it then.

So yeah more of the same, yay. [mlp]

Any idea how many times "shall issue" CCW was proposed before it was passed in 2003? Sometimes they have to propose bills many times to gain awareness and support before they have enough backing to get them through. You may see this as political grandstanding, I prefer to see it as laying the groundwork for a more serious effort in the future.

[mcjhr]

Great, 2 more politician idiots, just trying to secure votes and doing nothing useful.

Naturally they'll propose this now, knowing it has no chance. And should Gov, and some seats go red next election, oddly, with this then having a chance in passing, it won't be proposed then! No no, propose junk, waste time, get a few more votes behind them for "trying". But when they have the chance to do something, stand up for the people, oh no, no chance in hell they'll do it then.

So yeah more of the same, yay. [mlp]

My dad always told me there's more than one way to skin a cat.

Politics can be like chess. Let's give these guys some time before badmouthing them.

[wctriumph]

I'm going to take the optimistic path and say that the mag ban will be repealed in an attempt to placate some and the Governor will sign it if it gets to his desk. The BGC law will not get to his desk. This is politics - compromise.

Loan me $20 and here, I'll give you back $10, that makes us even, we both lost $10. That is how it works.


TEA

III

[JohnnyDrama]

Thanks for the heads up Justin. At least now I can e mail and fax some of the appropriate parties and let them know to support these repeals.

[hurley842002]

Great, 2 more politician idiots, just trying to secure votes and doing nothing useful.

Naturally they'll propose this now, knowing it has no chance. And should Gov, and some seats go red next election, oddly, with this then having a chance in passing, it won't be proposed then! No no, propose junk, waste time, get a few more votes behind them for "trying". But when they have the chance to do something, stand up for the people, oh no, no chance in hell they'll do it then.

So yeah more of the same, yay. [mlp]

So two senators are recalled for mag ban/background check bills, and replaced by two new senators, and you are bitching because the new senators are trying to fix the very reason they were put into office. How much sense does this make?

I'd also like to propose the idea that this topic needs to be "refreshed" from time to time, do you realize the memory span of many folks that were "up in arms" over the bills when they first went into affect?

[Uberjager]

I'd squeal with joy if it got out of committee...

[james_bond_007]

I would wonder if some of the Dems might be reluctant to vote Aye/Nay, and just abstain to try and keep a low profile ?
Now that they (the Dems in office) have seen proof that even strongly and traditionally Democratic districts are willing to take action against anti-gun legislators,
and even go to great lengths to mount campaigns to get them successfully recalled, they MAY be afraid to "speak up" against such non-partisan legislation.

When voting to repeal,
one might NOT be surprised at the number of AYEs, but MIGHT BE surprised and the sparse number of Nays and numerous abstentions.

[james_bond_007]

Are Herpin and Rivera sincere about the "repeal mag ban" position, or is it all just an act ?

Either way, the issue is getting attention.

"Any press is GOOD press", they say.

[Ronin13]

I'm going to take the optimistic path and say that the mag ban will be repealed in an attempt to placate some and the Governor will sign it if it gets to his desk. The BGC law will not get to his desk. This is politics - compromise.

Loan me $20 and here, I'll give you back $10, that makes us even, we both lost $10. That is how it works.


TEA

III
I don't recall a time in the last 10 years that Democrats have given anything up in the name of "compromise." I have, however, seen US (those that know what "shall not be infringed" in the 2A means) lose ground due to (R)'s "compromising"- which oddly looks like surrender. [2cents]

[Zundfolge]

I don't recall a time in the last 10 years that Democrats have given anything up in the name of "compromise." I have, however, seen US (those that know what "shall not be infringed" in the 2A means) lose ground due to (R)'s "compromising"- which oddly looks like surrender. [2cents]

Compromise:

http://hsgca.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/compromise_v21.png

[Ronin13]

Compromise:
[PIC]
My point exactly! [Beer]

[Kmanbay]

Compromise:

http://hsgca.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/compromise_v21.png

Exactly as I see it.

[Hound]

I love that explanation.

[JohnnyDrama]

That's awesome. The best explanation I've seen yet.

[SenHolbert]

I would wonder if some of the Dems might be reluctant to vote Aye/Nay, and just abstain to try and keep a low profile ?
Now that they (the Dems in office) have seen proof that even strongly and traditionally Democratic districts are willing to take action against anti-gun legislators,
and even go to great lengths to mount campaigns to get them successfully recalled, they MAY be afraid to "speak up" against such non-partisan legislation.

When voting to repeal,
one might NOT be surprised at the number of AYEs, but MIGHT BE surprised and the sparse number of Nays and numerous abstentions.

==== FYI ====

In the Colorado legislature, the only opportunity to abstain from a vote is if/when there would be personal financial gain by voting on the measure. Yes, the rules of other legislative bodies apparently allow members to abstain or vote "present." However, that is not the case in the Colorado General Assembly. The options are: Yes, No, Excused, or Absent. In order to be excused, a member must request that in advance from the Majority and Minority Leaders and announce it to the body prior to the excused absence.

Keep in mind that all 65 seats in the House and 18 seats in the Senate are up for election this year. How that might affect voting in committee or on the floor is yet to be seen.

[SenHolbert]

I will also be running a repeal of 13-1224, the "mag ban" bill. Rep. Lori Saine is a prime co-sponsor. That bill will be introduced during late January or early February.

Keep in mind that all 65 seats in the House and 18 of the 35 Senate seats are up for election this year. That may affect voting in committee and on the floor.

Also, for those who might suggest that such bills are run only when they won't pass, please consider that I passed "Constitutional Carry" through the House in 2011 on a vote of 40-25. All 33 Republican Representatives at that time, plus seven Democrats, voted in favor of allowing a law-abiding citizen to carry a handgun concealed without a permit for any purpose other than the commission of a crime. In 2012, I passed "Make My Day Better" (Castle doctrine in the workplace) through the House, also with bi-partisan support. Both of those bills were then killed by the three Democrat members of the Senate "kill committee."

You're entitled to doubt. In this case, however, you are wrong. Such bills will be introduced if/when they could pass both chambers and be signed into law.

[Hound]

RepHolbert

Please continue to introduce the parts of the bill already planned but also include the repeal of HB1043. The others are bad but HB1043 is the worst of them all, passed before any of us knew it was coming as a simple definition change. They changed the definition of a deadly weapon to no longer require intent. This makes it so that assault can easily become assault with a deadly weapon even if no threat was commited or any other infraction of law. I never intended to use my gun when I [input infraction of the law] but since I was in possession, sombody saw it, it was in my truck and I could have gotten it, etc my .... "trespassing" just became "trespassing with a deadly weapon" only because I "could" have used it. This is an add-on to any infraction that could easily make any gun owner suffer under the 'lose your guns for two years' type of penalties. I would hate to have to deal with a domestic distrubance where this card is falsely played. Intent has always been a foundation of gun laws and while it is a high bar to meet in court that was the purpose to not infringe on gun owners 2nd ammendment rights. HB1043 made that bar WAY to low and nobody seems to realize how dangerous it is. If/when they 'come for our guns' this is the law they will use. PLEASE include it in your bill to repeal this and the other laws!!!!!

Thank you

http://legiscan.com/CO/text/HB1043/id/773087

[sniper7]

Keep up the good fight RepHolbert. We appreciate you guys fighting off the disease that is anti-gun democrats. Hopefully we can help you guys out by getting in much better people this year.

[SenHolbert]

[QUOTE=Hound;1475577]RepHolbert

Please continue to introduce the parts of the bill already planned but also include the repeal of HB1043. The others are bad but HB1043 is the worst of them all, passed before any of us knew it was coming as a simple definition change.

….PLEASE include it in your bill to repeal this and the other laws!!!!!

/QUOTE]

A repeal of HB 13-1043 could not be included in the repeal of HB 13-1224. The reason for this is that the subject of each bill was/is not the same. In DC, they have "pork barrel" spending, meaning that odd, unrelated issues and spending are combined in one bill. That doesn't happen in the Colorado legislature because the state Constitution, statute, and rules of the legislature don't allow it. Everything in a bill must fit under a single subject.

That is a very good reason to NOT reduce the five bills per session that each member is allowed to introduce. Those of us who are trying to remove bad laws ought not be limited to a lower number of "good" efforts to offset a larger number of "bad" efforts. While that may not be obvious absent media coverage for such "good" efforts, it is true.

[BPTactical]

Thank you Mr Holbert.

[Brian]

Thank you for your efforts, and thank you for your updates as well.

[Ronin13]

Keep up the good fight Rep Holbert! If we can get 1224 repealed and return to some sort of rationality again, I would be that much happier.

[muddywings]

Keep up the good fight Rep Holbert! If we can get 1224 repealed and return to some sort of rationality again, I would be that much happier.

+1

[Gcompact30]

Hope they get rid of that universal background (private sells) and magazine capacity limits. It sucks... private sells your now paying for back ground and FFL transfer fees. YUCK..... Why don't Colorado do like some other States as it relates to CCW permit holders. They don't have to do a background every time to purchase a gun. They just show the CCW permit.

[james_bond_007]

Thank you for explaining the details.

Thank you for your help and efforts.


==== FYI ====

In the Colorado legislature, the only opportunity to abstain from a vote is if/when there would be personal financial gain by voting on the measure. Yes, the rules of other legislative bodies apparently allow members to abstain or vote "present." However, that is not the case in the Colorado General Assembly. The options are: Yes, No, Excused, or Absent. In order to be excused, a member must request that in advance from the Majority and Minority Leaders and announce it to the body prior to the excused absence.

Keep in mind that all 65 seats in the House and 18 seats in the Senate are up for election this year. How that might affect voting in committee or on the floor is yet to be seen.

[brianakell]

You're entitled to doubt. In this case, however, you are wrong. Such bills will be introduced if/when they could pass both chambers and be signed into law.

I am a doubting person, and I would LOVE to be proven wrong, and there are actually folks not "playing politics" but actually making good, simple, clean laws or repeals of unenforceable laws.

Get the bills thrown out, and permantly, and Ill send some $ to support politicians running in the appropriate category. Til then, Ill keep doubting, and hoping. Best of luck to you and your goals.

[UrbanWolf]

Keep up the good work Rep. Holbert.

[KAPA]

How is this going? I try and follow the dems on twitter but I go overwhelmed with all the school shooting talk today and couldn't figure out what really happened. Sounds like they sent this to some "kill committee" and then complained that the Rs are not proposing anything they will agree on. Since they have the majority and kept Hudak's seat it doesn't look like anything can be done right?

[Circuits]

Since they have the majority and kept Hudak's seat it doesn't look like anything can be done right?
Pretty much, til after 2014.

[mtnrider]

I heard on Grassroots Radio on the way home tonight that the Dems are already up to their old tricks and the recall elections have not changed their attitude or tactics one bit. Apparently the Senate majority leader already made up her own rules and delayed the bill. Coincidence it will come up right about the time of the Columbine anniversary now.

It appears to me that we have no hope until we get control of the Senate again.

[merl]

Did you expect anything else? They have complete control, why waste it.

[sniper7]

They are going to be screaming for bipartisan politics come the 2015 session. Then it will be time to jam a ton of bills down their throat, not listen to the libtards who come down on their day off or take time off work, and gloat about it when we are done.

[merl]

They are going to be screaming for bipartisan politics come the 2015 session. Then it will be time to jam a ton of bills down their throat, not listen to the libtards who come down on their day off or take time off work, and gloat about it when we are done.

oh yay, libtard... that word adds so much to a statement.

Much more likely there will not be a dominant party and it is back to the way the state should be run, nobody's pet agendas can get through. I want to see a full R government so there is a chance of repeal but there are many that do not want the rest of the R platform enacted unilaterally, even if they agree on guns.

[SenHolbert]

Meet House Bill 14-1151: The BI-PARTISAN bill to repeal the "mag ban," the statute that was created by HB 13-1224. Thank you to Senator Lois Tochtrop (D-Adams County) for adding her name to the list of co-sponsors and making this a bi-partisan effort.

The Bill: HB14-1151.pdf (http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/CLICS2014A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/E288C7EF72ADFAB887257C300005C225?Open&file=1151_01.pdf)

Watch the House Calendar for when the bill is scheduled to be heard in committee and please come to the Capitol to be heard.

Calendars Available Here: http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2014A/csl.nsf/Calendars?OpenFrameSet

If you see your State Representative and/or State Senator's name listed as a co-sponsor, please contact him/her to offer your thanks for his/her support. You DON'T have to contact those people to explain why each should support the bill -- because they already support it.

[kidicarus13]

RIGHT ON!

[TFOGGER]

That is wonderful new, Rep. Holbert. Any idea which committee it will be sent to first?

[SenHolbert]

Just click on the link and your question will be answered.

HB14-1151.pdf (http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/CLICS2014A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/E288C7EF72ADFAB887257C300005C225?Open&file=1151_01.pdf)

Teach a man to click and he'll learn for life. ;-)

[merl]

So this one pops off to "State, Veterans, and Military affairs" while last years headed to the Judiciary Committee.

I love one sentence bills though.

[TFOGGER]

Ok...so doing a little homework before I open my piehole again... It would appear that there are 4 Republicans on the committee, out of 11 members. Of the 7 Democrats on the committee, who would you say is the most amenable to actually listening to their constituents? We all expended considerable effort last year to try to stem the tide of these horrible bills, and I think that this year if we can focus those efforts on the potential swing votes, we may see a better outcome.

[mikedubs]

I like that Lois Tochtrop is a cosponsor, but I fear that the Dem Senate will listen to her this year like they did last year.

So this seems like another open and shut case of Irene, Matt and Jesse saying "no"

Gorram committees...

ETA: TFOGGER, it looks like there are 5 Senators on this committee, in a 3-2 split

[Justin]

There are "State, Veterans, and Military affairs" committees in both the House and Senate.

[TFOGGER]

I like that Lois Tochtrop is a cosponsor, but I fear that the Dem Senate will listen to her this year like they did last year.

So this seems like another open and shut case of Irene, Matt and Jesse saying "no"

Gorram committees...

ETA: TFOGGER, it looks like there are 5 Senators on this committee, in a 3-2 split

I was looking at the House committee, since that is where the bill was introduced. One hurdle at a time...

[mikedubs]

I was looking at the House committee, since that is where the bill was introduced. One hurdle at a time...

Damn, I am getting way ahead of myself[fail]