Colorado to introduce Assault Weapons ban including semi-auto pistols & shotguns

People in Colorado own a lot of guns. It would not surprise me if there were over 1 million firearms that fall under their definitions already owned in-state by individuals of all walk of life. The proponents of these infringements try to give the impression that they are "rare", only owned by sociopathic losers (like the handful of spree killers), while disregarding the veterans, white collars, blue collars, farmers, ranchers, etc. who responsibly own the other 99.99%.

It's challenge when the majority of legislative membership view themselves as "Progressive Activists", regardless of the true beliefs of their constituents. Perhaps the rural "D" representatives will come to their senses, along with the supposedly pragmatic governor, who has indicated a previous dislike of a statewide restriction.

Sad times for our once (and relatively recent) freedom loving state.

Guessing sales of lowers to complete rifles spikes real good locally once this hits the news.

From reading through the excessive verbiage of the draft it appears to me that they would ban new sales of AR's, AK's, Mini 14's, Mini-30's, M-1A's, and M1 Carbines as well as most other semi-auto rifles or pistols with removable magazines with a possible capacity in excess of 15 rounds. Oddly it also bans grenade launcher attachments so that would include the Yugo SKS models. But, you may still buy, sell, or possess any other SKS or M1 Garand's. They also used the false assertion of rifles that fire rounds "designed to tumble" whatever that means. I always thought key holing was bad. It does have a grandfather clause, although you must carry proof of purchase date with you if you take them off of your own property. These guys are not only displaying their disdain for the Constitution they are also profiling their ignorance of firearms.

Robert: Thanks you for finding and posting the text for us as I am sure the Colorado media won't be any help.

Robert said:

It'll pass, even had the Clue Q shooting, which was less than two miles from my house, not happened it would have passed. Denver/Boulder control everything in the state. And I'd rather spend my tax dollars fighting this than spend them on the other crap they have planned.

Click to expand...

Problem is we who support 2A groups have to pay to fight against it.

Friggin liberal lawmakers don’t care and want to bleed us dry..

From my read, the standard Mini-14, M1 Carbine, old Ruger PC Carbine, Marlin Camp Carbine, and the like, with a fixed standard stock and no barrel device, would be exempt. Oh course, if you decide the short upper handguard on some of the above is a "shroud", then all bets are off. Transitional semi-auto pistols without threaded barrel seem exempt, with any AR or AK type pistol being right out.

What a bunch of crap....

Steel Horse Rider said:

It does have a grandfather clause, although you must carry proof of purchase date with you if you take them off of your own property.

Click to expand...

The way I read it, you must have proof of pre-enactment legal possession whether the gun is on or off your property. That could be a significant problem. I have AR's going back to 1968. I doubt that I could even find the purchase receipts today. And as for getting copies of the Form 4473's from defunct dealers? Forget it.

The proof-of-legal-possession requirement seems to be a "compomise" ostensibly favorable to gun owners, compared to the registration plan originally proposed. It would actually be more difficult for gun owners to comply with.

Frankly, this bill is insane. The Democrats must have a (political) death wish. If there's a sure way to lose the next election (in Colorado!), this is it.

Trying to keep up with Illinois? Ain't got a chance.

Therefore a huge rifle & handgun Buying surge is Now taking place among Colorado's "Subjects of the Peoples' Assembly and its Apparatchiks"?

At least a New gun - compared to old guns with No receipts- would have a sales receipt with the proposed necessary data.

Apparently, the FFLs must be very busy doing the transfers.

Thank you Robert, for your legwork. Much appreciated

Ignition Override said:

Apparently, the FFLs must be very busy doing the transfers.

Click to expand...

That's an idea -- transfer any guns without receipts, back and forth between buddies, through FFL dealers, to generate receipts and 4473's. This would be expensive, but at least you'd have your paper trail.

Whoever thought up this plan must be a demented idiot.

AlexanderA said:

That's an idea -- transfer any guns without receipts, back and forth between buddies, through FFL dealers, to generate receipts and 4473's. This would be expensive, but at least you'd have your paper trail.

Whoever thought up this plan must be a demented idiot.

Click to expand...

Or pawn them and pick-up a week later.

AlexanderA said:

That's an idea -- transfer any guns without receipts, back and forth between buddies, through FFL dealers, to generate receipts and 4473's. This would be expensive, but at least you'd have your paper trail.

Whoever thought up this plan must be a demented idiot.

Click to expand...

.455_Hunter said:

Or pawn them and pick-up a week later.

Click to expand...

It’s almost like a firearm registration…

SCOTUS is almost a joke. Almost. They can make decisions and direct people to follow til the cows come home from jumping over the moon, but they have no teeth with which to enforce the things which they decide are or are not lawful. The states just seem to shrug their shoulders and continue down the path with little or no change in behavior. At most it seems that heavily left leaning states may do a bit of lip service to the scotus rulings as they trample the constitution. I’m glad that my state not only has a 2A friendly governing body, but also one hell of a governor. Bill Lee for POTUS. The man even posts photos of him hunting.

Some bullets are designed to tumble or yaw upon hitting flesh. The 5.45x39 is an example with such bullets. They have an air pocket placed in a position that causes easy yawing specifically for increased wounding effect. I’m not familiar with any others that are made this way.

I'm not an attorney but I'm thinking the burden to prove you didn't own the firearm before the law goes into effect would be on the prosecutor. How exactly are they going to do that when in fact you did own it before the law goes into effect. Our magazine restrictions went into effect last summer and I don't see many people worried about that. Nobody keeps records on their magazine purchases.

The law will stop the sales in the future and that's about it.

BreechFace said:

It’s almost like a firearm registration…

Click to expand...

Exactly...

In the media now...

https://www.9news.com/article/news/...eaker/73-d15b096d-6c6d-409c-9412-e72658206d17

Over the weekend, the gun lobby group, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, received a draft copy of a bill entitled "Mass Shooting Prevention Act of 2023."

The draft bill is shown to be sponsored by Democratic State Reps. Andrew Boesenecker and Elisabeth Epps.

Neither wanted to talk about the bill on Monday.

The bill would define "assault weapon" and then make it illegal to buy, sell or possess once the bill becomes law. Though, existing "assault weapons" would be allowed to be legally kept under specific circumstances.

Of course, the other stuff they want to do is also infringement and disenfranchisement.

AlexanderA: My naiive conclusion was that people would simply buy New guns from GB or regular retailers , to have a clear receipt, proof of purchase.

Hence the typical FFL transfers.

You are much more clever than I, and your idea of owners transferring guns To Each Other (from person A to B, then back to A?) is as Bright as a supernova. Nothing can prevent a gift.



Whether such transfers would be practical or not, I came very close to buying this best example of the imported AKMs, and would certainly buy a WBP Fox or Beryl-- right now -- if I lived in the Peoples' Demokratik Republik of Colorado,

especially if I lived in a Blue City which might be the only type of area where the future law (or watered-down versions) will likely apply (?).

Fox-Russian-Sunburst-696x435.jpg (696×435) (gundigest.com) This is a very-high quality Polish sporting rifle, both grade of steel and assembly QC. Don't just assume that a type of "stain" represents a firearm's origin.

Ugh.

Kopel wrote an article on the topic, found here: https://denvergazette.com/opinion/c...cle_99c09e33-0d46-5bcd-99d2-1254ab21685f.html

Here is an article with the Scribd text at the bottom, as well as highlights on the potential bill.

https://pagetwo.completecolorado.co...to-ban-entire-class-of-semiautomatic-weapons/

Like the mag ban, the idea isn't to ban you from owning what you have, but to keep anyone born after that date +18 years from buying/owning/possessing them. Its also to limit what and where you can have them, and how they are to be stored. If you get caught with one,, the burden of proof is on you to prove within three days it's legally yours, or it is to be destroyed.

In 20-30 years, the only people still owning a semiautomatic rifle or pistol will be in their 40s-50s, at the youngest. In 50 years, they'll be in their 70s.

I heard a news report tonight about the new legislative session in Colorado. There are 46 Democrats and 19 Republicans. If this bill makes it to a vote it's going to pass.

''Problem is we who support 2A groups have to pay to fight against it.''
My ancestors came here in the early 1600s, and didn't glide off the ship and, while fluttering down to a cup of tea casually threw seeds to the wind. And thereafter, had servants feed them for 3 months. Many died in various wars for freedom and as mentioned before in another thread, one as officer served via transfer (by request) directly under George Washington.

Others here have similar backgrounds I'm sure, military service AND sacrifice etc. and thanks to one & all. The motto remains, ''freedom isn't free.'' DONATE SOME $$ TO A REPUTABLE organization fighting this stuff.


'' I'm not an attorney but I'm thinking the burden to prove you didn't own the firearm before the law goes into effect would be on the prosecutor. How exactly are they going to... ''
Yes this is correct now notice, in order for this to happen you've lost your stuff, FIRST. THEN fight for it. Best to fight FIRST.

AGAIN, a viable solution is plain and has a VERY good track record of WINNING; donate to a reputable organization fighting this stuff.

Good luck Colorado!!

BreechFace said:

It’s almost like a firearm registration…

Click to expand...

As I said, registration would actually be easier and cheaper for gun owners.... if they decided to comply.

CoalTrain49 said:

I'm not an attorney but I'm thinking the burden to prove you didn't own the firearm before the law goes into effect would be on the prosecutor.

Click to expand...

The Colorado bill specifically provides that prior possession is an affirmative defense. That means that the burden of proof would be on the gun owner.

Ignition Override said:

You are much more clever than I, and your idea of owners transferring guns To Each Other (from person A to B, then back to A?) is as Bright as a supernova. Nothing can prevent a gift.

Click to expand...

This would be very expensive for the gun owners (transfer fees), and would be a windfall for the FFL's. I'll bet most people would just sit on their pre-existing guns, and hope that they can find a receipt if LE comes snooping.