Printable View
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1219
I guess this is up for hearing Monday. That will make private transfers with FFLs a PITA because now they will have to store it, and we'll have drive to the FFL twice to buy it. I'm sure a lot will stop doing private transfers and will charge even more now if they keep doing them. Another feel good emotional law that screws over the people who don't commit crimes. 2026 can't come soon enough; I'm so ready to get out of the shit hole of a state.
I wonder if there are any exceptions? Texas has (or had) a waiting period for handguns. If you had a concealed carry license you were exempt from the waiting period and could walk out with your new toy right after the purchase. My memory isn?t that good but there may have been an exception for someone who had a current restraining order against someone else.
This is Colorado; there will be no exceptions for concealed carry. I listened to that reasoning during the hearings for the mandatory background check; these people don't care. They will do what they want to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
They haven't had a waiting period in Texas as far as I know... My brother in law purchased a gun in texas 4 or 5 years ago and didn't have a waiting period. Definitely not one now.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
But they do let conceal carry holders bypass the background check when buying a gun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
The only exception will be for law enforcement/military which is surprising seeing how much they hate those groups as well.
THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO:Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
(a)
THE SALE OF AN ANTIQUE FIREARM, AS DEFINED IN 18 U.S.C. SEC. 921 (a)(16), AS AMENDED, OR A CURIO OR RELIC, AS DEFINED IN 27 CFR 478.11, AS AMENDED;
(b)
THE SALE OF A FIREARM BY A PERSON SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES WHO WILL BE DEPLOYED OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE NEXT THIRTY DAYS TO ANY IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER, WHICH IS LIMITED TO A SPOUSE, PARENT, CHILD, SIBLING, GRANDPARENT, GRANDCHILD, NIECE, NEPHEW, FIRST COUSIN, AUNT, OR UNCLE OF THE PERSON; OR
(c)
A FIREARM TRANSFER FOR WHICH A BACKGROUND CHECK IS NOT REQUIRED PURSUANT TO STATE OR FEDERAL LAW.
Just the black market sales, or finding them in cars, or in unlocked gun stores... to name a few.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
Firearms made prior to 1973 are considered C&R. Old school transfers…
Using DeGette logic, those are old and non-functional.Quote:
Originally Posted by wctriumph
Because the clip ran out.Quote:
Originally Posted by .455_Hunter
So the law allowing people to sue gunstores... could the ultimate defense be that the government said the purchaser was an outstanding citizen deserving thier 2A rights in purchasing the firearm?
If you get sued, just ad CBI as a 3rd party defendant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric P
New Mexico is attempting to pass a 14 day waiting period.
The far left is very organized and has deep pockets. These bills are not a coincidence.
They are also looking to enact an "assault weapons" ban, and strip dealers and manufacturers of liability protections. Sound familiar?
While I have not compared the bills, my guess is that they are almost identical. They are likely written by a third-party, probably MDA/ Everytown.
Everytown writes all of these laws. The Boulder City Council flat out said at the meeting during their first awb that the text of the law came from Everytown/MDA and that the city attorney reviewed it and deemed it to be free from litigation.
If true, how can we fight it?Quote:
Originally Posted by def90
Can't, I don't know of a law that says that the text of a law has to be dreamed up or written by a member of a particular legislative body. All of our laws at all levels are written by lawyers and outsiders. Nancy Pelosi doesn't write the legislation she introduces or sponsors.Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
https://www.thecentersquare.com/colo...69c3dcbea.html
Passed committee. One more vote before the final.
We're doomed.
still has to go to the senate. Sounds like there are a few Dems in the Senate that have been voting no on most of these.
Vote on this garbage today.
I looked at the final text. It looks like it has been amended with some good news.
SECTION 3. Act subject to petition - effective date -
applicability. (1) This act takes effect October 1, 2023; except that, if a
referendum petition is filed pursuant to section 1 (3) of article V of the
state constitution against this act or an item, section, or part of this act
within the ninety-day period after final adjournment of the general
assembly, then the act, item, section, or part will not take effect unless
approved by the people at the general election to be held in November
2024 and, in such case, will take effect on the date of the official
declaration of the vote thereon by the governor.
Which means we have 90 days to file a petition to put it to the voters.
Judging by the previous several elections, the dopey masses will likely vote it into law. However, that is the way it should be. Allow the voters to decide instead of the legislature ramming it down our throats.
It still has this crap line-
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY GRANTED IN SECTION
29-11.7-103, A LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAY ENACT AN ORDINANCE,
REGULATION, OR OTHER LAW CONCERNING A WAITING PERIOD.
Which means local municipalities can implement their own waiting period, effectively pausing transfer, since there is no maximum mentioned. Look for Boulder to enact a 9999 day waiting period.
I always thought that ballot inniatives/referendums were harder to overturn down the road than regular legislation though.Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiememphis
They are.Quote:
Originally Posted by def90
Yeah, so we are better off if the legislature makes this law than for them to throw it out as a ballot iniative then. Wolves got voted in via ballot initiative so this probably would as well. People are stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by newracer
This kind of crap is just going to snowball now that the Dems have big majorities locked in. And none of it will make a difference with criminals. Sucks.
https://www.denverpost.com/2023/04/0...emocrats-west/
The bills may feel reactive, Bacon, the Denver lawmaker, said, because the tragedies happen so frequently. But she and other pro-gun reform legislators said they want to undertake a years-long, strategic approach.
“It’s my hope that we bring two, three, four bills every single session till we don’t have to do it anymore,” said Democratic Rep. Meg Froelich, a member of the party’s gun violence prevention caucus and the co-sponsor of the waiting period bill.
And just what will it take to not have to do it anymore? Gun laws like Japan?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsker
I've used them as an example when the gun grabbers say WE NEED TOUGH GUN LAWS, LIKE JAPAN! Ok, i agree. BUT if we want to follow their way of doing things. Japan also forbids abortions, after week 15, as in illegal. Silence is all i see, after that. Or the usual WELL. THAT'S DIFFERENT! They don't liek we're either all in, or not approach. Throw in that pesky Constitution & BOR, really gets them frothing at the intake orifice. Ok 1 one of their intake orifices. who knows what else they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rucker61
They also would not approve of Japans racisis Nationalistic immigration policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
get a three day waiting period installed on alcohol, marijuana, and the future injection sites and see how fast the waiting period goes away...