HB 13-1229: CO Universal Background Check Bill Thread

[Holger Danske]

From the Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22572461/major-battle-over-gun-bills-set-tuesday-at

[cofi]

so now what?

[merl]

there is no real chance of that one not becoming law.

[jackthewall81]

F....

[blacklabel]

there is no real chance of that one not becoming law.

What makes you say that?

[Mtn.man]

passed commitee,,, so what gotta get passed the fat ass dems that are coming up for re-election next year.

Glass half full.

[polski]

Except for the product liability bill, every gun control bill that passes thru committee will become law since the Dems control the show.

[rockhound]

this is the first step toward registering all gun owners, the 4473 will be held and a database collected. guaranteed.

the nibbling of your rights has begun.

[TEAMRICO]

so now what?
Well for one, don't follow the law.
I don't plan on playing.
They criminalizes me then I will just be one.

Thanks Colorado. I plan to move in the future now.

[merl]

What makes you say that?

Nothing is actually infringed, can still buy and sell just another hoop.


edit
before someone jumps all over me, that's the devils advocate speaking

[Bowtie]

This will lead to registration. How else will they prove the transaction happened after the law passed.

[hurley842002]

Nothing is actually infringed, can still buy and sell just another hoop.


edit
before someone jumps all over me, that's the devils advocate speaking

That's the problem, too many advocates......

[Tinelement]

When will the TP close??

[SA Friday]

When will the TP close??
this doesn't necessarily mean the TP will close. I've done person-to-person pistol sales TWICE in MD. You have to do a 4473. Gun stores will make more money over this, and the lines will be longer.

[Great-Kazoo]

this is the first step toward registering all gun owners, the 4473 will be held and a database collected. guaranteed.

the nibbling of your rights has begun.

The 4473's are held by federal law. Unless there is a valid reason / used in commission of a crime, they will not be granted access. The 4473 does not require serial #'s when called in.

[merl]

This will lead to registration. How else will they prove the transaction happened after the law passed.

the fiscal impact statement estimates 500 deals will be caught resulting in 1000 convictions/year, though most will also be charged with other crimes. Pretty much depends on catching in the act (no more meeting at the local walmart under the security camera) or someone admitting it.
That same fiscal statement admits that there has not been one prosecution for sale at a gun show without a check.

These folks see the govt as the good guys, registration is a good thing to them. That argument falls on deaf ears.

[hatidua]

That argument falls on deaf ears.

I'm beginning to wonder if every one of our arguments will have fallen on that same set of ears. I've made hundreds of calls, sent literally thousands of emails, donated money to NRA/ILA, GOA, SAF, RMGO, NAGR, and am wondering if I would have been better off spending that time/money working on my technique at the local pool hall with a couple of chilled Guinness.

[SA Friday]

the fiscal impact statement estimates 500 deals will be caught resulting in 1000 convictions/year, though most will also be charged with other crimes. Pretty much depends on catching in the act (no more meeting at the local walmart under the security camera) or someone admitting it.
That same fiscal statement admits that there has not been one prosecution for sale at a gun show without a check.

These folks see the govt as the good guys, registration is a good thing to them. That argument falls on deaf ears.
Wow. Talk about exaggerating numbers. CA numbers don't show anything close to this in firearm or ammo background checks.

[Bailey Guns]

I listened to some of the hearings today. It's obvious the dems (at least on the committees) have their minds made up and NOTHING is going to change them at this point.

I hate to say it, and I'll continue to call/email, but I think it's a waste of time. I hope I'm wrong.

[BigDee]

I listened to some of the hearings today. It's obvious the dems (at least on the committees) have their minds made up and NOTHING is going to change them at this point.

I hate to say it, and I'll continue to call/email, but I think it's a waste of time. I hope I'm wrong.

Have you found a realtor in Idaho yet?

[dwalker460]

Great, another unenforceable law.

[Tinelement]

this doesn't necessarily mean the TP will close. I've done person-to-person pistol sales TWICE in MD. You have to do a 4473. Gun stores will make more money over this, and the lines will be longer.

Totally get that!

Just don't want pepetoucher123 to join in, convince nynco he's a good dude and try sell him something under the counter and pepetoucher123 ends up being a sting. Not good juju for the forum.

[tinhat]

[asmo]

The 4473 does not require serial #'s when called in.

MSR requires serial numbers.

Can't we just agree to point people to the two other threads where this is discussed. [Bang]

[SA Friday]

Totally get that!

Just don't want pepetoucher123 to join in, convince nynco he's a good dude and try sell him something under the counter and pepetoucher123 ends up being a sting. Not good juju for the forum.

[tinhat]

I'm trackin. We will cross that bridge when we get to it. I'm sure it will require quite a round-table for the MODs on the site if it passes.

[merl]

Wow. Talk about exaggerating numbers. CA numbers don't show anything close to this in firearm or ammo background checks.

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2013a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/590C29B4C02AFC2F87257A8E0073C303?Open&file=HB1229_00.pdf

page 4
last paragraph is where they talk estimated prosecutions


the fiscal impact listed (1.5mil/yr) is primarily due to more people needed to run the BG checks. of course there is another sure to pass bill that will deal with that.

[ANADRILL]

FUCK NYNCO, his kind caused this bs...

[VDW]

Elections have consequences. If you believed the BS that the dems weren't for gun control or you sat at home because the other candidate wasn't perfect, you're to blame. Now we all have to reap the whirlwind.

[Great-Kazoo]

FUCK NYNCO, his kind caused this bs...

AMEN BROTHER AMEN

[Aloha_Shooter]

RECALL.

[crob1]

Elections have consequences. If you believed the BS that the dems weren't for gun control or you sat at home because the other candidate wasn't perfect, you're to blame. Now we all have to reap the whirlwind.

Exactly. Bunch of DB's who didn't vote are responsible for this mess.

[ANADRILL]

Exactly. Bunch of DB's who didn't vote are responsible for this mess.

Yeah but we all KNOW who the bitch ass NYNCO voted for.....If this were the 1800s, I would call for a tar and feather...

[Ronin13]

RECALL.
Why are we all not pushing for this!? Wasn't this discussed and outlined recently? Let's get moving on it!

[sniper7]

passed commitee,,, so what gotta get passed the fat ass dems that are coming up for re-election next year.

Glass half full.


here is to hopin.

[sniper7]

AMEN BROTHER AMEN


I'll second that.

[Melvin]

So hows all that talkin' about it workin' out for y'all?

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01243/auschwitz_1243899c.jpg

[Great-Kazoo]

So hows all that talkin' about it workin' out for y'all?

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01243/auschwitz_1243899c.jpg

Well at least we're not gorillas

[Melvin]

Well at least we're not gorillas

And "we" definitely aren't coherent either. Now go humble yourself before your libtard lords, you scary knee capper, you.[ROFL1]

[loveski]

Why are we all not pushing for this!? Wasn't this discussed and outlined recently? Let's get moving on it!

I agree, We need to start a thread on organizing a recall.

[Doubledamage]

anyone hear about the mag ban yet?

[Melvin]

I agree, We need to start a thread on organizing a recall.

Recall what?

[DavieD55]

BILL: HB13-1229
TIME: 04:32:58 PM
MOVED: Court
MOTION: Refer House Bill 13-1229 to the Committee on Appropriations. The motion passed on a vote of 7-4.
SECONDED: Buckner
VOTE
Buckner Yes
Court Yes
Gardner No
Lawrence No
McLachlan Yes
Murray No
Pettersen Yes
Salazar Yes
Wright No
Lee Yes
Kagan Yes

[Clint45]

It seems that the only way this would be enforceable would be through armslist stings. Post a rifle or shotgun for sale and conduct the transaction anywhere other than a FFL dealer you can potentially be arrested, fined thousands of dollars, and lose your right to possess firearms forever. That seems to be the sole intent of this bill.

[SuperiorDG]

So if this passes i can't even hand my gun to my son without breaking the law.

[Jer]

So if this passes i can't even hand my gun to my son without breaking the law.

You got it.

[Clint45]

So if this passes i can't even hand my gun to my son without breaking the law.

In order for it to pass, they will need to have an exemption for immediate family members . . . to prove it is not "unreasonable."

[merl]

In order for it to pass, they will need to have an exemption for immediate family members . . . to prove it is not "unreasonable."

it is already in there

[thebolt]

Please send emails today as the vote on HB 1224 is tomorrow.

For those of you who want a copy-and-paste list of those who need an e-mail, here you go:


House:

john.buckner.house@state.co.us; perrybuck49@gmail.com;
kathleen.conti.house@state.co.us; don.coram.house@state.co.us;
lois.court.house@state.co.us; brian@briandelgrosso.com;
tim.dore.house@state.co.us; crisanta.duran.house@state.co.us;
justin.everett.house@state.co.us; thomas.exum.house@state.co.us;
mferrandino@yahoo.com; rhonda.fields.house@state.co.us;
randyfischer@frii.com; mike.foote.house@state.co.us;
leroy.garcia.house@state.co.us; bob.gardner.house@state.co.us;
cheri.gerou@gmail.com; joann.ginal.house@state.co.us;
millie.hamner.house@state.co.us; chris.holbert.house@state.co.us;
dl.hullinghorst.house@state.co.us; rephumphrey48@yahoo.com;
janak.joshi.house@state.co.us; repkagan@gmail.com;
reptracy29@gmail.com; jeanne.labuda.house@state.co.us;
lois.landgraf.house@state.co.us; polly.lawrence.house@state.co.us;
steve.lebsock.house@state.co.us; pete.lee.house@state.co.us;
claire.levy.house@state.co.us; jenise.may.house@state.co.us;
beth.mccann.house@state.co.us; mike.mclachlan.house@state.co.us;
jovan.melton.house@state.co.us; diane.mitschbush.house@state.co.us;
dominick.moreno.house@state.co.us; murrayhouse45@gmail.com;
clarice.navarro.house@state.co.us; dan.nordberg.house@state.co.us;
dan.pabon.house@state.co.us; cherylin.peniston.house@state.co.us;
brittany.pettersen.house@state.co.us;
dianne.primavera.house@state.co.us; kpriola@gmail.com;
bob.rankin.house@state.co.us; paul.rosenthal.house@state.co.us;
su.ryden.house@state.co.us; lori.saine.house@state.co.us;
joseph.salazar.house@state.co.us; sue.schafer.house@state.co.us;
ray.scott.house@state.co.us; jonathan.singer.house@state.co.us;
jerry@repsonnenberg.com; amy.stephens.house@state.co.us;
spencer.swalm.house@state.co.us; libby.szabo.house@state.co.us;
max@maxtyler.us; edvigil1@gmail.com; mark.waller.house@state.co.us;
angela.williams.house@state.co.us; james.wilson.house@state.co.us;
jared.wright.house@state.co.us; dave.young.house@state.co.us

Senate:

irene.aguilar.senate@state.co.us; david.balmer.senate@state.co.us;
randy.baumgardner.senate@state.co.us; greg@gregbrophy.net;
bill.cadman.senate@state.co.us; morgan.carroll.senate@state.co.us;
larry.crowder.senate@state.co.us; angela.giron.senate@state.co.us;
kevin.grantham.senate@state.co.us; lucia.guzman.senate@state.co.us;
ted.harvey.senate@state.co.us; rollie.heath.senate@state.co.us;
owen.hill.senate@state.co.us; mary.hodge.senate@state.co.us;
senatorhudak@gmail.com; cheri.jahn.senate@state.co.us;
mike.johnston.senate@state.co.us; senatormattjones@gmail.com;
john.kefalas.senate@state.co.us; andy.kerr.senate@state.co.us;
steve.king.senate@state.co.us; senatorlambert@comcast.net;
kevin@kevinlundberg.com; vicki.marble.senate@state.co.us;
john.morse.senate@state.co.us; linda.newell.senate@gmail.com;
jeanne.nicholson.senate@state.co.us; senatorrenfroe@gmail.com;
ellen.roberts.senate@state.co.us; mark.scheffel.senate@state.co.us;
gail.schwartz.senate@gmail.com; pat.steadman.senate@state.co.us;
lotochtrop@aol.com; nancy.todd.senate@state.co.us;
jessie.ulibarri.senate@state.co.us

[DHCO]

So if this passes i can't even hand my gun to my son without breaking the law.

While they have exempted the check on the gun, if the gun has a 16 or greater round magazine in it, you're transferring a high capacity magazine and committing a class 2 misdemeanor. So if you hand your son a Glock 17, you've both just committed a crime.

[Raul Duke]

We got f%cked on HB1224, lets see how HB1229 goes...

[Jer]

We got f%cked on HB1224, lets see how HB1229 goes...

Spoiler alert.. this movie ends the same.

[Raul Duke]

Damnit. Well, at least we are still lubed up from the last f%cking.
...Oh, wait, that was a dry hump.

[Jer]

Yeah, I can't even listen to this anymore.

[Raul Duke]

36-29 Passed. Fucked Again.

[ray1970]

When would this actually go into effect if (when) it's passed?

[Jer]

When would this actually go into effect if (when) it's passed?

July 1st.

[Raul Duke]

And we get to pay for it. HB1228 passed 33-31.

[Clint45]

Will it be a felony with a $5000 fine to sell a .22 rifle to a co-worker without a FFL transfer, like folks were claiming?

[Jer]

Will it be a felony with a $5000 fine to sell a .22 rifle to a co-worker without a FFL transfer, like folks were claiming?

These are the types of questions that should have been asked BEFORE these became bills/laws. It amazes me how many people begin to care enough after it's too late. If we had enough people caring about our rights BEFORE they were opposed we would still have them.

[hammer03]

So since they say we need to pay for a required action, isn't that a tax? Didn't the Supreme Court just approve Obamacare as a tax?

Wouldn't levying a new tax without voter approval constitute a violation of TABOR? (Grasping at straws here)

[Raul Duke]

So since they say we need to pay for a required action, isn't that a tax? Didn't the Supreme Court just approve Obamacare as a tax?

Wouldn't levying a new tax without voter approval constitute a violation of TABOR? (Grasping at straws here)

That was one of the many arguments against HB1228 - and rightfully so.

[losttrail]

These are the types of questions that should have been asked BEFORE these became bills/laws. It amazes me how many people begin to care enough after it's too late. If we had enough people caring about our rights BEFORE they were opposed we would still have them.

Many of us have been emailing, writing, calling our state "representatives" for several months now.

The problem is that the "representatives" with a (D) behind their name care nothing about logic, sanity, common sense or actually saving lives. They only care about power and controlling the masses. The modern Democrat is a Marxist.

[Jer]

Many of us have been emailing, writing, calling our state "representatives" for several months now.

Then you're not who I'm talking about. I'm talking about the 'recreational gun owner' that makes up the majority of us that knows nothing about these laws or how they will affect them until AFTER they're signed into law. If more of these types would have got involved sooner then we wouldn't be looking at this becoming law.

[Ronin13]

The problem is that the "representatives" with a (D) behind their name care nothing about logic, sanity, common sense or actually saving lives. They only care about power and controlling the masses. The modern Democrat is a Marxist.
Quoted for truth! Seriously- fuck the Dems, every last one of them- I don't give two shits if any of them own guns, they should sell all their guns if they're going to vote for people who will pass this crap. The democratic party even stated they're anti-gun in their official stance.

[spqrzilla]

I didn't see the introduced bill was amended. As introduced, there were target shooting loan and hunting loan exceptions, but they were very narrow. As an example, the target shooting exemption only applied at a range owned/occupied by an organization specifically incorporated for conservation or target shooting purposes. So no loaning a gun to a friend while out plinking at the grasslands as an example.

The hunting exemption allowed one to loan a gun for hunting, but the gun could only be possessed by the lendee on places where hunting was legal. So step across the road to get to another field while carrying a borrowed gun? A misdemeanor.

[DYoung]

Greg Brophy wrote a good column in today's Denver Post Op-Ed page describing some of the many consequences of this terrible bill.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_22673810/gun-bill-dangerous-unnecessary



The seemingly innocuous House Bill 1229, which proposes a de facto ban on private sales, is ridiculous, unnecessary and dangerous.
Ridiculous, you ask? How can a bill dealing with firearms safety be ridiculous? The bill sends you to jail for six to 18 months for loaning a shotgun to your nephew without getting a background check on him.
How about this: Your neighbor, who you've known for 20 years, wants to borrow your rifle to take on a trip to Nucla to shoot prairie rats. Bang, both of you wind up in jail for six to 18 months. You should have gotten a background check on him. Don't bother the government with the fact that you know he already has 10 guns. Just call up the dealer, make the arrangements and pay for the check. Absurd. And it doesn't do a single thing to make anyone safer.
There is no way for the proponents of this bill to fix these problems. They can't write enough exemptions into the bill to alleviate these problems. If they do, every transfer of a firearm is exempt.
The bill is unnecessary. It is already illegal to transfer a firearm to a person who you know or reasonably should know is ineligible to possess a firearm. It's in the Colorado Revised Statutes, 18-12-111. Look it up.
And this bill is dangerous.
How do you know that a firearm possessed by anyone was obtained with a background check? You don't. You can't. That's the problem. There's no way to enforce universal background checks.
Well, there is one way. Let's say you are driving from your house to the farm for a day of work and you happen to have a couple of firearms in your truck with you. Let's say you neglect to use your signal when making that turn to head out of town and get pulled over by a city policeman. The officer sees your guns and asks if you legally obtained those weapons with a background check.
You say, "Yes." He says, "Prove it." You can't. The paperwork, for one, is in the file cabinet of a now-defunct hardware store and the former owner/dealer is working on a drilling rig in North Dakota. The other was a gift from your mom 30 years ago and the paperwork was legally shredded 10 years ago.
The police officer says, "OK, I'll just hold on to these things until you provide me with proof that you obtained them with a background check." You can get the proof of the background check on the firearm you purchased, eventually. The former dealer still has his FFL (federal firearms license), so he has the files; it just may take a few days.
I have no idea how you prove you obtained the gun your mom legally gave you 30 years ago, as those records no longer exist.
No worries. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his minions, the authors of and proponents of this bill, have an idea for you. Actually, gun owners will come up with the idea themselves to avoid the hassle of waiting three days to prove they own a firearm legally: a gun registry.
A centralized database of lawful gun owners and all the guns they own so that a law enforcement officer can check to make sure everyone who has a firearm has passed the government approval for gun ownership.
All the government needs to know is: What guns do you possess? Give them the serial numbers and manufacturer's names, please, and they'll be happy. Heck, they'll probably even give you a six-month grace period to just come clean and register every firearm, even the ones you got without a background check.
The only way to enforce a policy of universal background checks would be to register every firearm in the state of Colorado. And history has shown that gun registries are always the first step toward confiscation.
Ridiculous. Unnecessary. Dangerous.

State Sen. Greg Brophy is a Republican from Wray.

[colblaster]

Question : HB-1229 says that a maximum fee of 10.00 dollars can be charged by FFL for conducting the background check on private party in state transfer.
HB-1228 also applies a fee, which does not seem to be specified in the text of the bill.

So, after July 1, if I purchase a firearm private party and I follow all the rules, I go to an FFL dealer, pay a max 10 fee to the dealer, and then also pay an additional X dollar fee ( doesn't seem to be defined ) to cover the background check for the state.

Additionaly, ANY FIREARM I purchase from a dealer after July 1 has that additional X dollar fee in addition to sales tax.

Anyone have any more documentation / facts on this?

Thanks

[Trisha]

This gets signed into law, we're all going to need an attorney in our hip pocket.

Seriously, I hope someone will write an app to search and cross-reference all gun control laws for gun owners!

I'm going to end up with an ulcer at this rate.

[Rucker61]

Looking for feedback:

Dear Representative,

I apologize in advance for the length of this missive, especially in this busy time. I’m writing you in reference to three bills currently in the Senate awaiting the third reading on Monday. I’m a husband, father, former military officer and businessman who has voted Democrat for 32 years. I watched all of the House and Senate committee and general discussion online for all of the gun control legislation, so I am aware of all of the discussion and testimony that were available through that means.
I am against violence and crime, as are all good citizens, and I believe strongly in the rights of the citizens of the USA, but I don’t believe that three of the hastily written and seriously flawed bills that you will vote on will accomplish the desired goal of reducing violence in Colorado. I urge a No vote on HB-1224 and HB-1229. I know that voting against the party line will require a significant amount of moral courage, and I trust that you will do the right thing.



HB 1229 Universal Background Checks


1. It’s unenforceable. The collective Sheriffs of Colorado testified multiple times that there is no way to enforce it without a gun/owner registry. As we don’t currently have one, and it is illegal according to federal law to create one, we’re left with a law that our law enforcement officials cannot enforce. True, the various Police Chiefs said that they were in favor of this bill, but they never said why, and in what manner they would enforce this law. The Sheriffs were very specific in how the law wouldn’t work.

2. It doesn’t stop criminals from purchasing firearms. It saddens me that the oft-debunked claim that 40% of gun sales don’t go through a licensed FFL and background check is still used as a justification for this bill. According to The Washington Post, the contentious statistic (actually 35.7 percent) comes from a 1994 survey of 251 people that was cited in a 1997 Institute of Justice report. The report's claims were revived in a 2011 study by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's office, which claimed that “40 percent of guns are sold through private sellers.”

a. Most of the survey covered sales before the Brady Act instituted mandatory federal background checks in early 1994. Included in that 35.7 percent of sales or transfers conducted without background checks are firearms given as inheritances or as gifts among family members, which would remain exempt under Obama's universal background checks system.

b. According to economist and author John Lott, "unless you include family inheritances and gifts as 'purchases,' [the 40 percent claim] is simply false." He maintains the "true number of guns 'sold' without check is closer to 10 percent."

c. Criminals will purchase from other criminals without using the background check system.


3. Proponents cite that a large number of people were denied purchases due to failing a background check, keeping them from buying firearms.

a. Actually, it only kept them from buying those particular firearms. Unless they were incarcerated, and I think you’ll find that the levels of incarceration were statistically insignificant, those denied were free to purchase a weapon on the black market.

b. How many of these were actually false positives?

c. How many false negatives did we have? The killers at Aurora and Virginia Tech easily passed their BGCs. Unless we strengthen the check to filter out those mentally disturbed individuals, they will continue to have access to firearms, criminals will continue to purchase on the black market, and we will have create an undue burden on our citizens.


4. This bill doesn’t account for the necessary infrastructure outside of the State’s system. For a mandated maximum fee of $10 (note: the State isn’t so limited), the FFL may, not must, conduct the transfer with the associated BGC. Testimony from at least one gun shop owner included seemingly ignored problems.

a. FFLs aren’t staffed for this increase in BCGs and associated tasks.

b. FFLs aren’t adequately remunerated for this increase. Staff spending time doing transfers aren’t doing their primary job of selling for-profit goods, and ten dollars, according to the actual business being asked to provide this service, does not cover their direct and indirect costs.

c. FFLs don’t have the storage for this increase. The firearm(s) being transferred are required to remain in the control of the FFL until the transfer is complete, which could be up to 3 days or longer, and the transfer records are required to be stored for 20 years.

d. FFLs aren’t actually required to do this. Citizens may find it difficult to legally transfer firearms if there are insufficient FFLs available and willing to participate in this program.

e. FFLs can limit transactions to one firearm per transaction, which in some not uncommon cases can place an undue burden on the transferee:

As an example of how this bill would work in practice, let me demonstrate a personal concern. I work for a large, international company and frequently travel to Asia for work. These trips are in excess of ten days. As I have 10 guns in my safe, and my wife will need access to those guns to protect our family, we will need to transfer them. Since I'm fully expecting to retain ownership of those guns upon my return, I can't bona fide gift those to her, and even though the sponsor in committee said to “temporarily gift” them, that is a Class 1 Misdemeanor. So, we have to go to an FFL, with all my guns, and transfer them, at a cost of both the FFL transfer fee and the CBI BGC fee. Nothing prevents the FFL from charging per gun, and given that this transaction is a negative margin transaction for the FFL, a smart FFL will charge by the gun. That’s $200+ to allow my wife to protect herself using her 2A rights. Upon my return we do the same thing all over again in reverse, paying another $200 to the FFL for the pure purpose of retaining my constitutionally protected rights. I travel multiple times per year, so this bill would require me to pay over $1600 per year to keep my property and protect my family.



5. It criminalizes common, non-dangerous behavior.

a. The entire transfer amendment is not aimed at criminals; it’s directly aimed at citizens. The disallowing of a trust transfer is an obvious tip-off, as criminals won’t spend the $1000 to create a trust to purchase a $400 handgun.

b. It would require a background check and associated fees to loan a hunting rifle to my best friend for a period longer than 72 hours, and the same BGC and fee payment upon its return.

c. If I loan a hunting rifle to my best friend for the exempted less than 72 hour period, and for some reason (illness, weather, etc.) he is unable to return it in time, he has committed a Class 1 Misdemeanor, which would prevent him from owning firearms for two years if convicted, once he serves his 18 month jail sentence.

6. Please vote No on HB-1229

[merl]

Question : HB-1229 says that a maximum fee of 10.00 dollars can be charged by FFL for conducting the background check on private party in state transfer.
HB-1228 also applies a fee, which does not seem to be specified in the text of the bill.

So, after July 1, if I purchase a firearm private party and I follow all the rules, I go to an FFL dealer, pay a max 10 fee to the dealer, and then also pay an additional X dollar fee ( doesn't seem to be defined ) to cover the background check for the state.

Additionaly, ANY FIREARM I purchase from a dealer after July 1 has that additional X dollar fee in addition to sales tax.

Anyone have any more documentation / facts on this?

Thanks

you have it mostly right. The $10 fee to the FFL, they can charge per gun. The $X fee to CBI is per BG check, unlimited number of guns can be bought at once.

$X will increase every year as CBI becomes more and more bloated.

[OneGuy67]

Good articulation Ruck61!

[Gman]

These issues are won or lost at the polls. Once you've lost control of all of the branches of government to an opposing doctrine, it's pretty much over. Blaming people in the 11th hour of the implementation of the majority party's agenda isn't very productive.

If the majority of this country embraces self-destruction, it's going to be an ugly ride.

Sent from my tactical android.

[Aloha_Shooter]

You know, it just occurred to me that under this POS bill, I will actually have to go through an FFL to return the Bushmaster AR-15 that a buddy asked me to store for him while he and his family are stationed overseas. Not only that, we'll have to pay for a damned background check under the other law to return something HE paid for. As if freaking CBI is going to pick up something the DSS investigators doing his periodic reinvestigations won't pick up. [Bang]

[Clint45]

You know, it just occurred to me that under this POS bill, I will actually have to go through an FFL to return the Bushmaster AR-15 that a buddy asked me to store for him while he and his family are stationed overseas. Not only that, we'll have to pay for a damned background check under the other law to return something HE paid for. As if freaking CBI is going to pick up something the DSS investigators doing his periodic reinvestigations won't pick up. [Bang]

Next step is mandatory registration for all firearms, likely with something similar to the Illinois FOID card. It is the only way they can "prove" ownership, since they damn sure won't take our word and cannot effectively prosecute based upon suspicion or assumption. There is no way to "prove" who owns what, how long they've owned it, or if a transfer took place. Mandatory registration bill should be on the way by August of this year.

[losttrail]

The Marxists in charge now have the ultimate goal of total firearms confiscation.

They full well understand what the framers of our Constitution meant with the 2nd Amendment as well as what is written in the Federalist Papers. That "we, the people" should be armed the same as the militia and be able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government that is out of control.

We now have that government and it will get worse.

The Marxists know that until they get guns out of the hands of the people, they cannot gain full totalitarian control over the populace. Decades of incrementalism in dumbing down education, increasing reliance on government services, infiltrating media so that media no longer questions, vets or investigates, slowly introducing more and more regulations bits and pieces at a time, have led to where we are today.

Colorado is in a vise between east & west coasts and is being used as a test bed for further expansion of the "progressive Democrat" agenda. We who believe in freedom, personal responsibility, limited government, fiscal responsibility are now in the minority. We have a majority of people that want to be regulated, told what to do and when to do it. We have at least two generations that have become lazy and apathetic towards being involved in government and understanding history. They have been educated in the statist system.

Liberals of the 1960's were skeptical and distrusted of government. Modern liberals want the "nanny state" to take care of them.

If we as the last defenders of freedom, do not do our part to get and stay involved, educate our friends, neighbors, co-workers and fellow citizens, we are lost and the Republic will fall. Just as Marxist-Muslim Obama and his minions and handlers want.

[Clint45]

http://www.examiner.com/article/universal-background-check-bill-is-designed-to-land-you-prison
(http://www.examiner.com/article/universal-background-check-bill-is-designed-to-land-you-prison)
It gets worse. What is a shooting range? Under the bill, it is only a shooting range if it is owned or occupied by a "duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms."

Is the shooting range owned by a natural person? Prison.
Is the shooting range owned by a corporation dedicated to turning a profit, rather than conservation or fostering the aims in the bill? Prison.
What about loaning a firearm for shooting at a Georgia DNR range? Prison.
While there is an exception for shooting competitions organized by the Georgia DNR, there is no exception for loaning a firearm just for recreational target shooting practice.
There is much more to the bill. For instance, it does away with the Georgia Weapons Carry License as an exception to the NICS check. It permits Eric Holder to set the cost of the transfer fee when you loan your weapon. It mandates reporting the theft or loss of a firearm within 24 hours, the failure of which will put you in prison, and this part of the bill is a felony punishable by 5 years imprisonment.

The bill claims Congressional power to make these laws under the Constitution's Commerce Clause.

[twitchyfinger]

Just heard HB-1229 just passed the house! :(


http://bigstory.ap.org/article/colo-legislature-oks-expansion-firearms-checks

[cjmore]

When does this go into effect? July 1st correct?

[roberth]

The Marxists in charge now have the ultimate goal of total firearms confiscation.

They full well understand what the framers of our Constitution meant with the 2nd Amendment as well as what is written in the Federalist Papers. That "we, the people" should be armed the same as the militia and be able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government that is out of control.

We now have that government and it will get worse.

The Marxists know that until they get guns out of the hands of the people, they cannot gain full totalitarian control over the populace. Decades of incrementalism in dumbing down education, increasing reliance on government services, infiltrating media so that media no longer questions, vets or investigates, slowly introducing more and more regulations bits and pieces at a time, have led to where we are today.

Colorado is in a vise between east & west coasts and is being used as a test bed for further expansion of the "progressive Democrat" agenda. We who believe in freedom, personal responsibility, limited government, fiscal responsibility are now in the minority. We have a majority of people that want to be regulated, told what to do and when to do it. We have at least two generations that have become lazy and apathetic towards being involved in government and understanding history. They have been educated in the statist system.

Liberals of the 1960's were skeptical and distrusted of government. Modern liberals want the "nanny state" to take care of them.

If we as the last defenders of freedom, do not do our part to get and stay involved, educate our friends, neighbors, co-workers and fellow citizens, we are lost and the Republic will fall. Just as Marxist-Muslim Obama and his minions and handlers want.

Excellent and spot on! Thank you.

[sniper7]

When does this go into effect? July 1st correct?

Correct, this and the magazine ban. The fee was immediate.