PDA

View Full Version : Constitutional Carry Law in CO?



KAPA
05-20-2014, 00:20
Just got to reading about this one...

"Legislation was introduced in Colorado (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado) to allow Constitutional Carry in early 2011. The bill passed the House with a vote of 40-25 but did not move in the Senate. Currently Colorado issues CCWs on a shall-issue basis and open carry is legal without a permit.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Carry#cite_note-22) The Colorado Legislature begins its 2012 session on January 11."

So what happened with this? I dont recall it making much news at the time. I am sure it died at the hands of the dems but is the push for it over now or is there renewed momentum coming for this soon? I would hope there is something in the works so that when the Rs control things after November this can be pushed through.

Rabid
05-20-2014, 01:30
More then likely killed in committee. Brophy and a few others have run some sort of a Constitutional carry bill almost every year for about the past 5 years.

Hound
05-20-2014, 06:47
My bet is Morse was president of the Senate and simply never brought it forward.

Ranger353
05-20-2014, 09:18
Morse was a tool. Hard to believe he actually wore a badge for a living at one time, but not surprising he was pushed out before retiring. He says it was to pursue a higher calling. Libtard idiot!

KAPA
05-20-2014, 13:11
What do you guys think of its chances next winter?

Bailey Guns
05-20-2014, 13:43
I'll let you know on Nov 5th.

spqrzilla
05-20-2014, 13:56
Its chances are zero. There is no chance we'd take control of enough seats in state senate and house to pass. I don't see a serious governor's candidate with a chance of election supporting it.

Next winter, we need to focus on more achievable advances. And this November, the odds are good we'll have to campaign against a ballot initiative on college campus carry.

Ranger353
05-20-2014, 14:21
Its chances are zero. There is no chance we'd take control of enough seats in state senate and house to pass. I don't see a serious governor's candidate with a chance of election supporting it.

Next winter, we need to focus on more achievable advances. And this November, the odds are good we'll have to campaign against a ballot initiative on college campus carry.

Agree that the chances of a new bill advancing are slim to nil, but it's not because we will not take the Senate. The Senate will have a GOP majority in January, that I am certain, but the House is what I am unsure about. For all the outrage that has been expressed about the background check law and the magazine capacity limitation, unless the demographics of the Denver Metro area have changed significantly since last election, those same voters that leaned liberal last time will do so again this time.

I hate to be a pessimist but that is how I see this, there are simply too many voters that lean towards the anti-gun politicians. And the sad thing is it's got nothing to do with the position of those politicians on guns, but more about their positions on other social programs.

The bottom line is if they are pushing an agenda of more free stuff and benefits, then more people are going to vote for them. The average voter is simply too misinformed and too lazy to do their own research to make an informed decision in the ballot box, and they rely on a 30 second commercial on TV to make their decisions, regardless of how truthful those commercials really are.

spqrzilla
05-20-2014, 14:37
You would also have significant GOP state senate and house votes that won't go so far as constitutional carry at this time in Colorado.

SenHolbert
07-20-2014, 16:35
"What happened with this?"

Well, KAPA… after your state Representative [Coffee] worked his butt off to pass the bill through the House on a vote of 40-25 (all 33 Republicans, plus 7 Democrats at the time voted "Yes"), the bill went to the Democrat-controlled Senate and was assigned to the State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee (aka the "Kill Committee"), which was - and still is - comprised of five members: three Democrats and two Republicans. Senator Greg Brophy was my Senate sponsor. After a bi-partisan group of 40 state Representatives said "Yes" to that common sense measure, three Democrat Senators voted "No" and the bill was dead in that Committee.

Proud to serve!

- Chris

Edit: KAPA, I see that your profile lists Parker as your place of residence. After posting my reply, it occurred to me that 1) you may not have lived in Parker in 2011. 2) If you did live in Parker in 2011, then you might have lived (or still live) in the Pinery, which was the only portion of Douglas County that had/has a "Parker" address that was not in the old House District 44. After redistricting in 2011 and effective for the 2012 election, House District 44 includes Lone Tree, incorporated Parker, and the bridge of unincorporated Doulas County that connects the two (Grand View estates, StoneGate). If I wasn't or am not your current Rep, then I apologize for my spontaneity and presumptuousness. The passage of Constitutional Carry through the state House in 2011 was a first and I'm rather *PROUD* of that one. We'll try again in 2014, this time from the Senate if I'm successful in November. If I was or still am your Rep, then thank you for the opportunity to serve in that capacity. Respectfully yours, - Chris

KAPA
07-20-2014, 22:41
"What happened with this?"

Well, KAPA… after your state Representative [Coffee] worked his butt off to pass the bill through the House on a vote of 40-25 (all 33 Republicans, plus 7 Democrats at the time voted "Yes"), the bill went to the Democrat-controlled Senate and was assigned to the State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee (aka the "Kill Committee"), which was - and still is - comprised of five members: three Democrats and two Republicans. Senator Greg Brophy was my Senate sponsor. After a bi-partisan group of 40 state Representatives said "Yes" to that common sense measure, three Democrat Senators voted "No" and the bill was dead in that Committee.

Proud to serve!

- Chris

Edit: KAPA, I see that your profile lists Parker as your place of residence. After posting my reply, it occurred to me that 1) you may not have lived in Parker in 2011. 2) If you did live in Parker in 2011, then you might have lived (or still live) in the Pinery, which was the only portion of Douglas County that had/has a "Parker" address that was not in the old House District 44. After redistricting in 2011 and effective for the 2012 election, House District 44 includes Lone Tree, incorporated Parker, and the bridge of unincorporated Doulas County that connects the two (Grand View estates, StoneGate). If I wasn't or am not your current Rep, then I apologize for my spontaneity and presumptuousness. The passage of Constitutional Carry through the state House in 2011 was a first and I'm rather *PROUD* of that one. We'll try again in 2014, this time from the Senate if I'm successful in November. If I was or still am your Rep, then thank you for the opportunity to serve in that capacity. Respectfully yours, - Chris


You were right on the first time, I voted for you before and I will gladly do it again.

Glad to hear this will be given another go in 2014. What can members do to help push this along? Sometimes I feel a bit hamstrung as my reps in Douglas County already align with my philosophies but like you said if the kill committee just shoots it down, there isn't much we can do outside of moving into Rhonda Field's backyard and voting her out.

Thanks for the reply!

Gman
07-20-2014, 23:31
Doesn't the majority party get to make those committee assignments? Couldn't the 'kill committee' cease to be such an obstacle?

Bailey Guns
07-21-2014, 07:33
Doesn't the majority party get to make those committee assignments? Couldn't the 'kill committee' cease to be such an obstacle?

Yes. The majority party will always hold a majority in all committees. That's why, again, party trumps person.

Gman
07-21-2014, 14:31
Yeah, I vote my conscience in the primaries for whom I want to represent me. If my guy doesn't win, I'll vote my mind to make sure the radically opposing view gets less of an opportunity to impose their will.

Elections have consequences.