(CO) Concealed-Handgun Permits Expected To Double With Proposal

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Concealed-Handgun Permits Expected To Double With Proposal

POSTED: 6:48 a.m. MST March 12, 2003
UPDATED: 8:21 a.m. MST March 12, 2003

DENVER -- The number of concealed-handgun permits in Colorado would more than double to about 36,500 under a measure headed for debate by the full House.

The House Appropriations Committee approved Senate Bill 24 on Tuesday.

The legislation would require county authorities to issue concealed-handgun permits to people who pass a criminal-background check, demonstrate competence with a weapon and meet other criteria.

Current law gives magistrates, police chiefs, sheriffs and other local authorities the discretion to issue or deny permits to anyone.

Statewide, roughly 15,000 concealed-handgun permits have been issued to Colorado residents. Under the measure, an additional 21,500 are expected to be issued, according to Colorado Bureau of Investigation statistics.

The 36,500 permits would amount to less than 1 percent of Colorado's total population of 4.3 million people, said CBI agent Susan Kitchen.

The proposal prohibits concealed guns in public schools and continues bans on guns in federal buildings and in secure public buildings such as the Denver City and County Building and the state Capitol.

While authorities in Colorado Springs, Fort Collins and most other big cities have issued concealed-gun permits liberally over the years, Denver authorities have rarely issued them.

Meanwhile, a push to change the law that closed the so-called gun show loophole stalled for a second time on Tuesday. House Bill 1119 would remove a requirement of licensed gun dealers to obtain a background check if any part of a firearm transaction occurs at a gun show.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/2034867/detail.html

Colorado Springs has been liberally issuing permits?
 
I need a play card. Isn't this what was already floating around in the CO lege? :confused:
 
Shall-issue is great, but I'm still not too hot about not being able to carry in schools. My current permit allows me to do so. I guess that means I'll either move to a better state before I have kids, or homeschool.

-z
 
Colorado Springs has been liberally issuing permits?
Click to expand...

El Paso county sheriffs have issued over 5,000 concealed hand gun permits over the years, of which over 4,200 are currently active. Recently elected Sheriff Terry Maketa has lowered the eligibility age from 25 to 21. Of the handful of El Paso county permits that have been revoked, not a single one was revoked for violating the terms and conditions of the permit.
 
Both bills passed out of the house today, and now go to the Gov., who will sign them. Then the fun starts.
1)Denver will sue over the infringement of their sovreignty (they think they're an independent country). Denver will lose.
2) The local sherriffs will interpret the law to suit themselves, and several will be sued. and:
3) It will work out differently than was expected or intended.
 
Both bills passed out of the house today, and now go to the Gov.
Click to expand...
Do you mean that both SB24 and SB63 have passed through the house?

Having read SB24 there are several things I really dislike about it. Your fingerprints get sent to the Feds, there's a rather vague statement that says permits can be denied if they feel you shouldn't have one, even if you pass the background check (does this mean that someone can be denied for having a Marilyn Manson t-shirt, or dredlocks, or somesuch nonesense? and the fees imposed are exorbitant- $100 to get the permit, $30 for the fingerprinting, and then the cost of a safety course.

Is there a chance that SB63 will pass, or that SB24 can have the more offensive bits taken out before it's made into law?
 
The amendment prevents the creation of a state-wide datebase of issued permits, as I understand it.

SB 24 still stinks. And I predict a DECREASE in the number of issued permits, not the other way around. Higher fees plus the added cost of a training class (figure $50 or more for that) are going to discourage a lot of people from getting them who otherwise would have.

If anyone is still laboring under the idea that Owens and Chlouber are on our side, please stop. They aren't.

The restriction on carrying in schools is only going to work on people who weren't a threat in the first place: those of us who obey the law as a matter of daily life.

This whole thing could have been easily solved by simply changing "may" to "shall" in the current statute. This bill (SB 24) is nothing more than a bone tossed to the NRA (the training requirement, which will be a windfall to its instructors) to keep their support in the future and a middle-of-the-road approach handed down by a governor looking to get into the national mix in a few years who doesn't want to get labeled as right-wing where guns are concerned.
 
My friendly local pistol shop charges $125 for an NRA pistol course that satisfies the requirements of SB24. I had also heard that the DOW hunter safety classes would qualify since they are givin by a law-enforcement branch of the government. Don't know what that costs, as I'm old enough not to have to take it.
Cost of a permit will vary _a lot_. Safe bet is that Boulder and Denver will charge the max, and drag their feet on the hunter safety bit. That's $255 worst case, for a five year permit.

SB 63 is probably dead for the year.

We need to write thank-you letters to all the legislators who voted for these bills, regardless of what you might think of them, and get ready to improve them next year. Delete the federal fingerprints, and the redundant CBI check, for example.

We've won a battle, but not the war, by any stretch. You can bet the antis will be wanting to add more no-carry zones, and more hurdles as soon as they can get the ink dry on the bills. They remind me of T. Pratchetts description of vampires: "Not dead enough."


MMM: Please read sig line _twice_>:neener:
 
Billl,

I agree. Let's also see if we can get rid of those new "no carry" zones (e.g. schools).

From reading the bill, it sounds like those of us with old permits can still carry on school grounds until our pre-SB24 permits expire. After that, we have to disarm in schools. Is that correct?

-z
 
Yes, the hunter safety course will satisfy the training requirement. But I still have a hard time imagining the need to charge someone $100 for the privelege of being able to defend their own life. Seems to me that the fee ought to be enough to cover the county's admin cost for the background check, and no more.

The whole thing with the K-12 schools is ridiculous, because we've been able to do that for years and there hasn't been one single incident of a permitted carrier causing a disturbance on school grounds. That's nothing more than pandering and political positioning by Owens (who has higher aspirations), and it comes at the expense of our safety.

Then there's the whole fingerprinting issue. A law-abiding citizen who wants to be prepared to defend his life has to be printed like a common criminal? Doesn't the fact that a person is bothering to apply for a permit rather than just carrying outside the law indicate that he or she is NOT a threat to anyone who does not present a threat to him or her first? I didn't serve my country for a dozen years to be told that I need to get fingerprinted like a thug.

Why has common sense fled the CCW debate?
 
Quick critique:


First off (& no disrespect to Drizzit for just posting an article)

"While authorities in Colorado Springs, Fort Collins and most other big cities have issued concealed-gun permits liberally over the years, Denver authorities have rarely issued them. "

Ummittigated BS. "Cities" haven't issued in CO for several years, but you can't expect a mere "investigative reporter" to glean facts. Sheriffs isssue, not Chiefs of Police (cities).

Zak,

CRS 18-12-105.5 has allowed anyone with a permit to carry in any school since its inception. Heard about any licensed-folk running amok & causing havok? Thought not. This whole deal was a non-issue & merely a sop to the "possible" to get this latest tripe passed. Sorry, but I cannot condone "fixing" something that never required it.

Ah! Re-reading, I took completely 180. Let my first take as a record of reading for compreshension, OK? ;) Appologizies again, Zak.

Justin,

I'd bet that 63 is as dead as George Washington - & not be revived - ever. Just toom "rtadical" for a state that already allowed everything, per statute, that 24 excludes.

Bob L,

Got yer back, buddy.

Billl,

We haven't won the battle, & likley lost the war.

What we did give up are too many aspects of CCW ALREADY ALLOWABLE ON THE FRICKIN' BOOKS! All 24 will do is allow the Denverites to get CCW & give the NRA state-affiliates a mutally-engorged backslapping-fest for finally "winning."

They just screwed the rest of the state.

Congrats. :barf:

Never, EVER, write a thank you letter to a rep who actually took a stand & uphold his (her) oath of office.

Too easily we toss these dogs a bone for doing what they already promised to do. I cannot be more emphatic here!

Beata them up unmercifully when they don't, but they already promised to do so, right?

& Zak again.

I haven't read he latest & greatest, but can bet that as soon as this goes into effect, your school cary while be gone with the signing. Usually everything included in any bill goes into effect - no exceptions & I cannot for the life of me expect that they would pass a "no school carry" while still allowing anything along the lines of grandfathering it.

Will have to dust it up, but our NRA-state-folk just screwed up big time in the name of "progress."

BTW, far as I'm aware, y'all who get permits (& those of us who already had 'em) "get" to be talen off the "criminal database" in '07.

Yup, if you get one (finally - pant, pant), you're automatically entered into the CO criminal database right along side rapist, known child-hosers, & other felonious folk ....

Might want to get your permit & then go spend the extra scoots for a different license tag # (change it to "save to prarrie dogs" or sumpin) so you're not auto-tagged as a "danger."

Be forewarned & congrats - you asked for it.



:barf:
 
labgrade,

My opinion that we can still carry in schools with our OLD permits, until they expire or we get new ones, is based on this language in the new SB24:

"It shall not be an offense if.... the person at the time of carrying a concealed weapon held a valid written permit to carry a concealed weapon issued pursuant to section 18-12-105.1, as said section existed prior to its repeal; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214 (3)"
Click to expand...
Here is a link to SB24:
http://www.leg.state.co.us/2003a/in...974917C87256C6B005D4177?Open&file=024_rer.pdf

The text I quoted is on pages 27-28.

-z
 
labgrade,

I would guess they'd add that provision so that the terms of the old licenses don't change, e.g. so if you live under a rock and have a permit, your "rules" don't change out from under you. I think this makes the old permits a little more valuable than the new ones, at least until they expire (2006, I think, for me?).

In the other thread, I posted something about SB25. Does it mean open-carry will be now more acceptible than it has been?

-z
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
(CO)Concealed-gun bill clears House panel
Replies
3
Views
424
Zak Smith
Zak Smith
E
  • Locked
(CO) Put common sense in concealed-carry law
Replies
4
Views
707
Bob Locke
B
D
  • Locked
"The Colorado Freedom to Carry Act," bill introduced
Replies
8
Views
3K
Desertdog
D
E
  • Locked
Applications for concealed-weapon permits up 87% in El Paso County
Replies
20
Views
2K
Standing Wolf
S
C
  • Locked
Colorado: "Reluctant officials must accept gun-permit forms"
Replies
24
Views
1K
TarpleyG
T
Back
Top