Attempt to Repeal Colorado Anti-gun Law

Not open for further replies.


Mar 22, 2008
Well, I'll admit that this bill doesn't have much chance of passing at the moment, but at least it's being thrown before our legislators once again, in an attempt to repeal that ridiculous "universal background check" law we picked up last year:

I think the Democrats are going to lose their very slight majority during the next election cycle, but they still have the votes to stop this at the moment.
Stay in their faces! Remember to hit where and howit hurts the most, is the least expected, and the hardest to block.
I heard on the news this morning that it had been assigned to the Veteran Affairs committee which is where the Dem's send bills to die a quiet death. There they are "PI'ed" (postponed indefinitely) so that members won't have to make any potentially revealing votes or statements concerning the issue.
Committee on State, Veteran, and Military affairs.

One assumes it fits in that part about "state."
so why would a gun law bill get referred to the veterans committee? just curious since one has nothing to do with the other

It dosen't matter. The legislators in question want to kill the bill without having to go on record by having to vote. In some quarters a "wrong vote" could cost them their jobs, as 3 Democrat senators learned the hard way.

However when the November elections come up... :evil:
Yep, the Veteran's Affairs Committee is just a kill committee that the Colorado Democrats use whenever they want to do something like this.

By the way, they already killed this bill (no surprise). Obviously they didn't learn after we kicked three of their party members out of office. I can't wait until November, and I sure hope that every red-blooded American who owns a gun in this state has a memory that is as good as mine!
NO small chance of that happening Kevin ! Our gun club has sent out emails to members, telling them to tell whomever, whenever about getting out to vote this year, we need to clean house this year, enough is enough !
It was disturbing to see footage of the CBI Director testifying about this bill. Me thinks she has no idea how to do anything but sit behind a desk. I am willing to bet that she does not represent the views of the agents underneath her command.
It was disturbing to see footage of the CBI Director testifying about this bill. Me thinks she has no idea how to do anything but sit behind a desk. I am willing to bet that she does not represent the views of the agents underneath her command.
You just described 3/4th of our state and federal elected officials.
I don't see the point of introducing a bill if the sponsor knows it has no chance of passage. I guess they do it so they can tell their supports they tried. Seems like a waste of time to me and we have plenty of problems that need attention without gumming up the works with bills with not hope of passage.
While the bill may have little chance of passing, a bill not introduced has no chance of passing
Do the colorado house or senate rules allow for a motion to dislodge? In WV, a delegate or senator can force a floor vote on a motion to dislodge a bill from a committee. Sometimes those motions require 2/3 or even 3/4 majority to force a bill out of committee, if it's an option at all. But if it is, the motion itself can shine light on the cockroaches hiding behind a committee chair's desk drawer veto.
Maybe I'm just sensitive to this because of the messed up way my State legislature works. The Alabama legislature can only meet 30 days per year and those days must be within a 105 day window. Every year at the first couple of weeks are wasted as individual legislators introduce a flurry of bills, many of which they know will never pass and many that get introduced every year to the same result. Then the last couple of days they try to get all the important bill passed. They run out of time and bills are tabled until next year or the Governor has to call a special session for them to finish.
Sounds like a good plan to me! The less a legislature can pass the less they can screw things up. The minority should never surrender their intentions to the majority as that would result in a quasi-dictatorship (which is unfortunately the way things are operating now for the most part). Those who have an agenda that is contrary to the Constitution of the state or the will of the people should always be shown that there are countering views to their version of utopia, that is the way governance by committee is supposed to work. The Republicans tried mightily last year to stop the Second Amendment infringment put forth by the Dem's and they knew their bills didn't have a snowballs chance of passing but it is their duty to defend the Constitution of the state as the loyal opposition. "Can't we all just get along" only smoothes the path south.....
Last edited:
I would rather have the legislature work. It seems to me that they should work on the bills that they are mandated by law to complete first (like the budget) and leave the grandstanding for after the real work is done. A special session costs an extra $250K to $500K depending on length.

In Alabama the Republicans have no one to blame but themselves. They control both houses of the legislature and the governor's office. All the tiny minority of Democrats can do is slow things down by requiring every bill be read aloud.
JSH1, I think you are new to politics. Doing what they are tasked to do by some old document is not on the radar screen any longer, and it is unpleasant because it usually means some of their benefactors are going to lose some taxpayer financed cookies they are accustomed to eating so they leave it until last and hopefully pass it late at night and very rapidly so those who don't pay close attention will not know what they are getting hit by. If one party controls all houses then you have the fights between the factions within the party such as the diffferences between the RINO's in the Republican Party and the Liberty movement members. The Dem's have the same problem between the Marxists and the endangered Blue Dog Democrats. When they are all in agreement the result is usually not good for the working Joe Citizen.
Not open for further replies.