Link?Quote:
Originally Posted by Erni
Printable View
Link?Quote:
Originally Posted by Erni
Laid over until the 13th.
Well I guess with the layover that makes the rally on Saturday viable? Agree that having a gun range location is kinda weird, should be somewhere much more visible though we all know how Denver as a whole is as well as the legislature. Sad.
Don't know the reasoning for the hold over but I would guess it was to get more time to make sure they have the votes to push it thru.
The anti-gun people seem very adept at working on politicians to get them back on the reservation. Not sure if it is money, political pressure or just old fashinioned arm twisting.Quote:
Originally Posted by WETWRKS
Hopefully this falls apart in the senate. The house is 120% potato and will pass anything that even hints of gun control.
https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/g...un-operations/Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
Maybe something to do with the new Executive Order Trump just signed recently today.
They probably drop their kids off with them for a weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
Enjoy the dog and pony show:
https://coloradochannel.net/watch-meetings/#tab2
Have been seeing posts online that one of the more anti gun dems will not be at the session today and that another dem has expressed serious concerns about this bill. Dems are concerned that they may not have the votes to pass this.
https://x.com/RMGOColorado/status/1890116645378822643
Ian Escalante says there may be a major amendment to the bill, striking the banning of weapons and be replaced with a firearm owners licensing system and registration of existing guns.
Good . . . freaking morons. Has to get killed in the Senate. The House is almost certainly too filled with whackos to turn down the chance for yet another "fix for gun violence". And I don't want to have to count on Polis for pretty much anything when it comes to common sense or the Constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by def90
A judge just struck down the long standing Illinois FOID card (which is their version of a firearms license) as being un constitutional.Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
Do you really think that the Constitution has any meaning to the idiots that write laws?Quote:
Originally Posted by def90
Can you provide a screen shot? Some of us don't sue social media.Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
It was a video.Quote:
Originally Posted by electronman1729
I just watched Sullivan screaming about this bill.
What a cocksucker. He parades his son's death like a badge of honor.
His "facts" are bullshit. He claims this personal crusade is in the name of safety, when it is obvious he hates guns and anyone that owns them.
What a piece of shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
Yup- Any sympathy I had for him has long turned into pure contempt.
Escalante posted another video. He is talking to Sullivan. Tells him he dropped off a box of signed petitions against the bill from Sullivan's district.
Sullivan refuses to open it and call it a "box of trash".
Sounds like still in the amendments shenanigans.
Looks like the Ds are proposing an amendment that would institute some kind of licensure/training scheme to own firearms that they disapprove of. The bill did not get voted on, has been pushed till tomorrow.
It passed.
"FIREARMS SAFETY COURSE ELIGIBILITY CARD"
Requires firearm owners to take a safety class with fees paid to the county sheriff and to Parks & Wildlife. Fingerprints and background check then the card is good for 5 years.
Parks can determine the fee, and can only raise it once per year.
It creates a new "FIREARMS TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND".
So not exactly an owners card, it's a proof of education card.
No word on how this could possibly reduce crime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
It passed 2nd reading (requires a 3rd) and supposedly the card is to purchase the naughty list guns. What a unconstitutional mess...
Nothing about concealed carry permit reciprocity. They already have background check and fingerprints on file for that.
They added a list of exempt rifles, including Mini 14 Ranch, Mini30 and C&Rs.
Still bullshit, you know the fees will skyrocket and the "safety card" will soon be required for all purchases including ammo and reloading components.
Has this 'law' just created a poll tax?
Page 18, section 8 eliminates the grandfathering of magazines:
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/defau...5a_003_eng.pdf
I think that just changes the penalty for possession outside of the grandfathering. The grandfathering section is not being amended.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brass
I agree with Hunter.Quote:
Originally Posted by .455_Hunter
https://cbi.colorado.gov/sites/cbi/files/18-12-302.pdf
Effectively the change preserves an affirmative defense, but makes it a de-facto violation that can be challenged with the possession date. Honestly, not any different than how SBR's are in Colorado - even with a tax stamp, it's a de-facto violation, the tax stamp creates a rebuttable defense.
TLDR: Not that big of an impact to the existing magazine ban.
The training thing, as mentioned, is a huge f'n mess.
On the flip side, at least we don't have Dudley around, demanding that there be no training exemption at all. After all, we're still waiting for the benefits of his influence in 2013 to be realized...
This whole thing is a fustercluck. Given that a federal judge just ruled the Illinois FOID card to be unconstitutional, this disaster clearly won't pass the smell test in light of Bruen, Heller, McDonald, etc. Unfortunately, none of that will deter the fuckwits occupying the state legislature, and it's gonna cost a fortune(borne by the taxpayers) to litigate it into its well deserved oblivion.
So fingerprinted and a background check to get the card but I'm sure that the card will not qualify you to actually be able to buy a firearm without another background check.
Yep, just like all the enhanced requirements, proficiency testing, fingerprints, and background check to carry a concealed handgun doesn't allow a person to buy a firearm without another background check or waiting period nor to satisfy all the BS of this new legislation.Quote:
Originally Posted by def90
Next up you'll need another card with similar requirements to buy ammo....on and on until you have a full 52 deck.
Is the card for new or existing firearms?
Doesn't matter. Shall not comply either way.
This used to be a really great state. If my sons and grandkids weren’t here I’d be gone when I retire in a few months-broken record and preaching to the choir I know.
It's not a FOID.Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
It is a card issued by a sheriff, after submitting two copies of the applicants fingerprints to the CBI to do a background check, that gives the holder permission to take a 12 hour, 2 day class and take a test. If passed with 90% or greater correct answers, the instructor enters that info into a database which an FFL can access during the purchase of a firearm that meet the criteria in other parts of the bill- for now.
The Director of the CBI gets to set the new background check fee and keep the fingerprints on file. The sheriffs get to set their own fees, but can't be too low, ya know. The Division of Parks and Wildlife get to set their own fee for the class. They also get to set the curriculum which will include information about safe storage and child safety, firearm deaths and extreme risk protection orders, along with victim awareness, and of course, empathy. The treasury gets to create the firearms training and safety course cash fund. The fees from the safety course go to this fund. What does the fund fund? Operation of the new system!
Simple!
The card is only for new firearms (after September 2025). And certain firearms are exempt from even that requirement, the list reads like an arbitrary list from a video game, for instance, M1 Carbine, G-43, SVT-40, Springfield M1A, are not subject to the "ban" and wouldn't need a training card. (Although most FFLs out of sheer regulatory terror would probably require one and check regardless). It also exempts C&R, which many of the weapons identified in the list are already.... so IDK, typical contradictory authoring by people inexperienced in drafting bills as well as understanding firearms.
ETA: Also Inheritance does not require a training card under this act. The way I read it on first pass, I believe the approved list of instructors for CCW can also provide these training courses. Some counties, that's VERY easy to get on the approved list of instructors.
Seems like this is a pay for your rights...
What about AR-15's that are now C&R?Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
Both C&R and Antique are exempt. No further cake cutting, so yes. However- like mentioned, getting a LGS or corp store clerk to understand the tossed word salad is a battle that might be unwinnable and they likely will want a card regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by electronman1729
Has anyone been able to decipher the difference between the "basic" and "Extended" safety courses other than the instruction time required?
From a legal perspective, what does the extended course provide that the basic does not?