It didn’t take long for gun control extremists in the Colorado State Legislature to gut the Second Amendment this year – 111 days to be exact. Three more gun control bills are now headed to Governor Jared Polis’ desk for final signature. This is on top of two other gun control bills he’s already signed this legislative session, which went into full swing Feb 16, 2021 and is expected to end no later than June 12, 2021.
Here’s what is heading to the governor
SB21-256 Local Regulation Of Firearms
• Repeals Colorado’s 2003 Firearm Preemption Law and replaces it with language that allows localities and municipalities to create their own firearm laws as long as they are MORE restrictive than state law.
• This bill would allow for any county or municipality to ban the possession, sale, or transfer of a firearm, ammunition or firearm accessory within their jurisdiction; and would allow any county, municipality, special district, or college campus to ban concealed carry. For reference there are 217 municipalities, 64 counties, 2,800 special districts, and 62 college campuses.
• Bill goes into effect upon Governor’s signature. With the passage of this bill, the Second Amendment fight will now move from the State Capitol in Denver to your backyard.
Contact Governor Jared Polis and ask he veto this very dangerous bill: [email protected] / (303) 866-2885
HB21-1298 Expand Firearm Background Check Requirements
• Adds 11 misdemeanors to the list of background check disqualifiers, prohibiting purchase and possession for 5 years from date of conviction. This bill does work retroactively so anyone who has been convicted of one of these 11 misdemeanors in the past five years will now be prohibited persons.
• Removes the option for FFLs to transfer a firearm to new owner if background check is formally delayed for more than 3 days.
• Extends the time agencies have to review a background check denial from 30 days to 60 days, and allows for indefinite denial without disposition in certain instances.
• Bill goes into effect upon Governor’s signature.
Contact Governor Jared Polis and ask he veto this bill: [email protected] / (303) 866-2885
HB21-1299 Office Of Gun Violence Prevention
• Creates a new entity within Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDHPE) called the Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
• This office will be asked to “…increase the awareness of, and educate the general public about, state and federal laws and existing resources relating to gun-violence prevention.” That includes how to safely store guns, how to report a lost or stolen weapon, how to access mental health care and how to utilize Colorado’s Red Flag Law. They will also be tasked with so-called “evidence based” data collection.
• The office will be responsible for distributing grants to non-profit agencies and groups who will work within communities to implement “evidence based” gun safety action based on their “evidence based” data collection.
• Democrats rejected amendments that would have prevented these grants from going to groups who involve themselves in electoral politics, such as Moms Demand Action, because taxpayers should not be funding their push to elect so-called “Gun Sense Candidates”.
• The office will also track and publish what local firearm laws are in place across the state, as they assumed SB21-256 would pass when writing this bill. They are requesting $3 million dollars for fiscal year 2021-2022.
Contact Governor Jared Polis and ask he veto this bill: [email protected] / (303) 866-2885
Here’s what’s already been signed
HB21-1106 Mandatory Safe Storage of Firearms
• Requires firearms be “safely stored” in homes where children or prohibited persons could gain access.
• Exceptions are if the firearm is being carried on body or within such close proximity it is readily available as if it was being carried on body.
• Acceptable safe storage techniques include trigger locks, gun safes, bio-metric triggers, or a container that appears locked (yes, it really says that).
• Failure to comply is a Class 2 misdemeanor.
• Law takes effect July 1, 2021.
SB21-078 Mandatory Reporting of Lost and Stolen Guns
• Requires a person who discovers a firearm lost or stolen to report it to law enforcement within 5 days.
• Failure to comply is a $25 civil infraction.
• Bill was amended to give immunity to anyone who violated the safe storage law and had their firearm lost or stolen.
• Law goes into effect 90 days after adjournment of 2021 Colorado General Assembly (sometime in September 2021).
What can you do now? Become a watchdog in your own community. Pay attention to your county commissioners, city/town council, local colleges and universities, and so on. Alert us if anything comes on your radar. If you’re interested in organizing within college campuses, please also reach out. That fight is going to be immediate.
Donate here or
click the donate button below:
* Contributions are not tax deductible
In light of the recent ruling (6/3/21 ) by Federal judge Roger Benitez overturning a California firearms ban on assault weapons where he ruled it violates the Constitutional right to bear arms, his words, referring to the Second Amendment, I have a suggestion. In my thesis regarding the Second Amendment I think it will prove his ruling right to bear arms” has everything to do with a “militia” and nothing to do with a “person” or individual, which the following will suggest..
Justice Amy Coney Barrett Second Amendment dilemma
In some 225 years neither law professors, academic scholars, teachers, students, lawyers or congressional legislators after much debate have not been able to satisfactorily explain or demonstrate the Framers intended purpose of Second Amendment of the Constitution. I had taken up that challenge allowing Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s dilemma to understand the true intent of the Second Amendment.
I will relate further by demonstration, the intent of the Framers, my understanding using the associated wording to explain. The Second Amendment states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Militia, a body of citizens organized for military service.
If, as some may argue, the Second Amendment’s “militia” meaning is that every person has a right to keep and bear arms, the only way to describe ones right as a private individual is not as a “militia” but as a “person.” (The individual personality of a human being: self)
The 4th Amendment reminds us, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons….”
The Article of Confederation lists eleven (11) references to“person/s.” The Constitution lists “person” or “persons” 49 times to explicitly describe, clarify and mandate a constitutional legal standing as to a “person” his or her constitutional duty and rights, what he or she can do or not do.
It’s not enough to just say “person/s” is mentioned in the United States Constitution 49 times, but to see it for yourself (forgo listing), and the realization was for the concern envisioned by the Framers that every person be secure in these rights explicitly spelled out, referenced and understood how these rights were to be applied to that “person.”
Whereas, in the Second Amendment any reference to “person” is not to be found. Was there a reason? Which leaves the obvious question, why did the Framers use the noun “person/s” as liberally as they did throughout the Constitution 49 times and not apply this understanding to explicitly convey the same legal standard in defining an individual “persons” right to bear arms as a person?
Justice Amy Coney Barrett dissent in Barr v Kanter (2019) Second Amendment argument acquiesced to 42 references to “person/s, of which 13 characterize either a gun or firearm. Her Second Amendment, “textualism” approach having zero reference to “person/s. Justice Barrett’s view only recognizes “person/s” in Barr, as well in her many other 7th circuit rulings. It is her refusal to acknowledge, recognize or connect the U.S. Constitution benchmark legislative interpretive precept language of “person/s,” mandated in our Constitution 49 times, to the Second Amendment.
Leaving Supreme Court Justice Barrett’s judgment in question.
In the entire U.S. Constitution “militia” is mentioned 5 times. In these references there is no mention of “person” or “persons.” One reference to “people” in the Second Amendment. People, meaning not a person but persons in describing militia.
Now comes the word “shall” mentioned in the Constitution 100 times. SHALL; ought to, must ..
And interestingly, the word “shall” appears in the Second Amendment. “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and shall not be infringed.”
“[S]hall not be infringed.” Adding another word “infringed” to clarify any misunderstanding as to the intent of the Second Amendment. Infringe. To encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another;
The condition “Infringe” has put a stop as to any counter thoughts regarding the Second Amendment, as you shall not infringe or encroach on beliefs other to what is evident as to the subject “Militia.”
Finally, clarifying “..the right of the people to keep and bear arms…
People. Human beings making up a group or assembly or linked by a common interest.
In closing, I am not against guns, everybody has them. I’m against using the Second Amendment illogically as a crutch. If it makes those feel better so be it. Just what it deserves, use it with a wink.
William Heino Sr.
The founders believed everyone should be in the militia and everyone in the militia to be armed. Maddison and Hamilton both talked about it in the federalist papers.