View Full Version : Colorado Legislator introduces ban on "multi shot trigger activators"
Not sure if this is a duplicate, but just in case:
Colorado legislator Michael Merrifield (D, Mordornitou) has introduced a law that would make it a felony to possess not only a bump stock, but anything that "increases the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle." Note that the law establishes no baseline, so it would conceivably apply to anything from a bump fire stock to a two stage target trigger for High Power, to a tube of grease.
Given that this law uses the same "increases the rate of fire" language as seen in several other proposed state laws, I can only assume that Merrifield has taken model legislation from Bloomberg's group (along with a campaign contribution.)
The law is available here:
http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb18-051 (http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb18-051)
Link to a PDF of the bill here:
http://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2018A/bills/2018a_051_01.pdf (http://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2018A/bills/2018a_051_01.pdf)
Bill Summary(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced and doesnot reflect any amendments that may be subsequently adopted. If this billpasses third reading in the house of introduction, a bill summary that applies to the reengrossed version of this bill will be available at http://leg.colorado.gov.)Under current law, possession of a dangerous weapon is a class 5 felony for a first offense and a class 4 felony for each subsequent offense.The bill amends the definition of "dangerous weapon" to include a"multi-burst trigger activator", which the bill defines as:!A device that attaches to a semiautomatic firearm and allows the firearm to discharge 2 or more shots in a burst when the device is activated; or A manual or power-driven trigger-activating device that, when attached to a semiautomatic firearm, increases the rate of fire of that firearm.
The bill also provides that a person who sells a multi-burst trigger activator to another person, or who purchases a multi-burst trigger activator from another person, commits a class 5 felony; except that each subsequent violation by the same person is a class 4 felony.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:
1
SECTION 1.
In Colorado Revised Statutes, 18-12-101, add
2 (1)(g.5) as follows:
3 18-12-101. Definitions - peace officer affirmative defense.
4 (1) As used in this article 12, unless the context otherwise requires:
5 (g.5) "MULTI-BURST TRIGGER ACTIVATOR" MEANS:
6 (I) A DEVICE THAT ATTACHES TO A SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARM AND
7 ALLOWS THE FIREARM TO DISCHARGE TWO OR MORE SHOTS IN A BURST
8 WHEN THE DEVICE IS ACTIVATED; OR
9 (II) A MANUAL OR POWER - DRIVEN TRIGGER - ACTIVATING DEVICE
10 THAT, WHEN ATTACHED TO A SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARM, INCREASES THE
11 RATE OF FIRE OF THAT FIREARM.
12
SECTION 2.
In Colorado Revised Statutes, 18-12-102, amend
13 (1) as follows:
14 18-12-102. Possessing a dangerous or illegal weapon -
15 affirmative defense - definitions.
(1) As used in this section, the term
16 "dangerous weapon" means a firearm silencer, machine gun, short
17 shotgun, short rifle, or ballistic knife, OR MULTI-BURST TRIGGER
18 ACTIVATOR.
19 SECTION 3.
In Colorado Revised Statutes, add 18-12-113 as 20 SB18-051 -2-
So he wants us to cut off our fingers. Yes, a duplicate, but I dunno that we can ever broadcast the stupid too much lest some person be caught unaware of the idiots masquerading as knowledgeable representatives.
No... 3000 rpm; available in CO compliant configuration with a binary trigger or slide fire stock to hamper rate of fire.
We need to make a Colorado manufactured AR-15 lower with an engraved rate of fire on the receiver that is something like 800 RPM, and sell it with a slide fire attached.
I love being devious.
I also had the thought of what happens if one is just sold that way from the factory?
Great-Kazoo
01-27-2018, 15:02
No... 3000 rpm; available in CO compliant configuration with a binary trigger or slide fire stock to hamper rate of fire.
Shouldn't that be a non-binary trigger? To go with the gender neutral appendix holster.
Sure, label it as high as you want. If the shooter can't actually obtain that rate, it's the operator's fault, not the mfrs.
Zundfolge
01-27-2018, 16:52
Colorado legislator Michael Merrifield (D, Mordornitou)...
Unfortunately anything I could add to this conversation about ole Mikey here (his parentage ... where he should end up, etc) would just get me banned so I'm just going to sit here and stew. [Mad]
So he wants us to cut off our fingers. Yes, a duplicate, but I dunno that we can ever broadcast the stupid too much lest some person be caught unaware of the idiots masquerading as knowledgeable representatives.
Not going to attribute to ignorance that which is clearly the result of malice ... he knows what he's doing.
One man, one atrocity. Blame it on the inanimate object. Or is the politician the inanimate object? Stinks of more Bloomberg.
This guy represents El Paso county. I wonder what his voters think of this.
Great-Kazoo
01-29-2018, 10:17
This guy represents El Paso county. I wonder what his voters think of this.
He did get elected, or was he the result of a recall. Either way, if he was a replacement even worse.
Stinks of more Bloomberg.
Every state/municipality pushing for more restrictions has that same smell. He must be very proud of himself.
So sad that they are trying this stuff again. Its the pax 13 from that movie. Sooner or later someone will try it again thinking they have it all figured out. We need state reps that actually rep the state.
So sad that they are trying this stuff again. Its the pax 13 from that movie. Sooner or later someone will try it again thinking they have it all figured out. We need state reps that actually rep the state.
We need that plus the law to mean what it says it means.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
68Charger
01-29-2018, 12:21
This guy represents El Paso county. I wonder what his voters think of this.
Umm, no... he represents District 11, which is a Gerrymandered liberal subset of El Paso County (specifically designed to include Manitou, Colorado College, Stratmoor and other low-income areas near downtown while specifically avoiding Broadmoor, Kissing Camels, Ft. Carson, etc which would lean much more right.)
https://statisticalatlas.com/state-upper-legislative-district/Colorado/District-11/Overview
I remember this specifically, because it's the district that John Morse held before he was recalled.
kidicarus13
01-29-2018, 13:08
I don't see anything about "grandfathering" either.
We are up for a fire mission to call our reps to reject this filth.
Zundfolge
01-29-2018, 14:18
Umm, no... he represents District 11, which is a Gerrymandered liberal subset of El Paso County (specifically designed to include Manitou, Colorado College, Stratmoor and other low-income areas near downtown while specifically avoiding Broadmoor, Kissing Camels, Ft. Carson, etc which would lean much more right.)
https://statisticalatlas.com/state-upper-legislative-district/Colorado/District-11/Overview
I remember this specifically, because it's the district that John Morse held before he was recalled.
He also ran against (and replaced) Bernie Herpin, the Republican that displaced Senator Morse in the recall.
How can we get a pro gun rep when there is an honest election and a liberal when mail in ballots and any ID or no ID elections happen? hmmmm.
*coughs politely*
*points to sig line*
The second one is what I meant.
kidicarus13
02-16-2018, 12:14
B
26
http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb18-051
Under current law, possession of a dangerous weapon is a class 5 felony for a first offense and a class 4 felony for each subsequent offense. The bill amends the definition of 'dangerous weapon' to include a 'multi-burst trigger activator', which the bill defines as:
A device that attaches to a semiautomatic firearm and allows the firearm to discharge 2 or more shots in a burst when the device is activated; or
A manual or power-driven trigger-activating device that, when attached to a semiautomatic firearm, increases the rate of fire of that firearm.
The bill also provides that a person who sells a multi-burst trigger activator to another person, or who purchases a multi-burst trigger activator from another person, commits a class 5 felony; except that each subsequent violation by the same person is a class 4 felony.
Great-Kazoo
02-16-2018, 12:39
just made my investment worth that much more. Besides they are not (as we know) multi burst. 1 trigger movement, 1 shot. Never going to understand a person not knowledgeable in or on a subject trying to restrict those who do, from owning an item
This worries me:
A manual or power-driven trigger-activating device that, when attached to a semiautomatic firearm, increases the rate of fire of that firearm.
It will be stretched to cover spring changes and trigger/action tuning.
kidicarus13
02-16-2018, 13:05
just made my investment worth that much more.
Or worth nothing if they add no grandfathering.
What's a class 5 felony worth?
Great-Kazoo
02-16-2018, 13:44
This worries me:
A manual or power-driven trigger-activating device that, when attached to a semiautomatic firearm, increases the rate of fire of that firearm.
It will be stretched to cover spring changes and trigger/action tuning, Fingers etc
The current rate of fire of a semi auto firearm is 0 rounds per second. Attach a finger to it and its rate of fire is infinitely increased.
Anyone else see a ban of semi auto guns in this law?
Silly do nothing, unenforceable laws made up by idiots.
I'm confused, did this pass?
kidicarus13
02-16-2018, 15:43
I'm confused, did this pass?
No but on Monday, Feb 26 at 1:30PM the Senate State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee will toss it around.
KevDen2005
02-16-2018, 20:01
Don't really like the wording on this one at all
Now we can all pull the Steven Seagal line of our hands are deadly weapons? Cus fingers make triggers go fast.
Reading these gun bills is painful. It's like a 5 year old writing a biology book.
hollohas
02-19-2018, 21:04
Pull and release a binary trigger slow, it shoots slow.
Pull and release a normal trigger slow, it shoots slow.
Pull and release a binary trigger faster, it shoots faster.
Pull and release a normal trigger faster, it shoots faster.
How in the world are they going to prove a "increased rate of fire"?
I mean seriously. If they charge someone for this, are they going to submit a YouTube video of someone shooting a binary trigger fast as proof it increases the rate of fire? Then the defense can show a YouTube video of Jerry Micluk shooting a standard AR just as fast.
If they argue that Jerry's speed is particular to that individual, then the defense could argue the video of the fast binary is particular to the individual in that video. Still no proof it increased anything.
How will anyone prove a binary trigger increased the rate of fire without having verification/proof of the rate of fire for the original trigger in the exact gun the individual is being charged for? The term "increase" means nothing without a baseline.
CoGirl303
02-21-2018, 20:26
I'm not taking my trigger out of my AR. they can kiss my pale white cheeks!
A binary trigger doesnt increase rate of fire. its still semi-auto.
Lower lb spring triggers dont increase rate of fire.
That said, the BFS Gen III trigger is completely insane and awesome.
https://youtu.be/CcLGRZfX5C0
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
theGinsue
02-21-2018, 20:36
Merged threads
Hi All,
https://leg.colorado.gov/committees/state-veterans-military-affairs/2018-regular-session
This is the committee that will hear this bill.
Write the 3 Republicans. They can end the bill in committee. Write them today. The hearing is coming up.
I have had promising responses from them when writing them. Let them know you support them in their efforts to not expand control laws.
I mean seriously. If they charge someone for this, are they going to submit a YouTube video of someone shooting a binary trigger fast as proof it increases the rate of fire? Then the defense can show a YouTube video of Jerry Micluk shooting a standard AR revolver just as fast.
FIFY
Hi All,
https://leg.colorado.gov/committees/state-veterans-military-affairs/2018-regular-session
This is the committee that will hear this bill.
Write the 3 Republicans. They can end the bill in committee. Write them today. The hearing is coming up.
I have had promising responses from them when writing them. Let them know you support them in their efforts to not expand control laws.
Not sure what good it will do, but I wrote all five senators at that link.
I wrote them and got a response back from 2. The other mealy mouthed reps must still be in their safe spaces (e.g. a coffin deep underground resting in the dirt from their home state of Commieforya until sundown) The responses I got back were encouraging to say the least. But we can all do more. I kept my email short and sweet.
The responses I got back were encouraging to say the least.
Same as I had from the REPS.
Write them. Let them know how you feel. If you dont write them, you cant really complain.
Zundfolge
03-19-2018, 22:15
Looks like the Colorado bump stock ban is dead :)
http://gazette.com/colorado-senate-republicans-sink-bump-stock-ban-advance-magazine-limit-repeal/article/1622955
(http://gazette.com/colorado-senate-republicans-sink-bump-stock-ban-advance-magazine-limit-repeal/article/1622955)
Owen Hill seems to be doing some good.
Merrifield said. "It's time for us to stand up for our fellow Coloradans."
This maybe a shock to his female like mindset. But he doesn't speak for this Coloradan.
buffalobo
03-20-2018, 00:02
Boulder County Sheriff Joe Pelle testified in favor of a Colorado ban on bump stocks.
"They present a tremendous challenge to law enforcement when in use," he told the committee. "I think this is a no-brainer."
My nomination for douchebag of the year.
Is he referring to dealing with a criminal committing a crime?
Great-Kazoo
03-20-2018, 00:16
Boulder CTY Sheriff testified Against them. Anyone surprised at that? Didn't see any other sheriff quoted as in favor, for now.
Yo Sheriff Joe how's that mag ban going .
kidicarus13
03-20-2018, 15:35
Rejected 3-2 along party lines.
http://www.timescall.com/breakingnews/ci_31746043/colorado-bump-stock-ban-is-rejected-by-republicans
BlasterBob
03-20-2018, 15:58
The banning (or attempted banning) of “bump stocks” really gets me riled up. I have no interest in ever having one as I couldn’t afford ammo to feed one of these toys. The BATF had more or less indicated they were OK with them for the general public. Then one nut case uses one for his evil deed and now this mechanism is probably going to be outlawed for everyone and if individuals hang on to theirs, they will be branded a felon.. I guess it’s “for the good of the children”. Typical knee-jerk reaction by many more Politicians than I thought ever possible. [blaster]
CoGirl303
03-20-2018, 17:09
most excellent news! :)
Rejected 3-2 along party lines.
http://www.timescall.com/breakingnews/ci_31746043/colorado-bump-stock-ban-is-rejected-by-republicans
Sanity prevailed?!? In CO?!?
Another reminder that both parties are the same. Or not.
Great-Kazoo
03-20-2018, 23:49
Sanity prevailed?!? In CO?!?
Another reminder that both parties are the same. Or not.
A line vote won out, with the R's having a majority to do it. Come 1/19 don't be surprised if it's back for a vote, again and again.
Till the D's get what they want, again.
A line vote won out, with the R's having a majority to do it. Come 1/19 don't be surprised if it's back for a vote, again and again.
Till the D's get what they want, again.
No doubt.
We just have to keep voting hard so the Constitution means what the words say it means. Because rights in a Constitutional Republic Democracy are decided by popular elections and reevaluated every 2-4 years.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.