BAD BILLS NEWSLETTER
ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT’S HAPPENING IN OUR
WE ALL NEED TO BE AWARE. THERE ARE SOME
CRAZY BILLS; BILLS THAT WILL CHANGE OUR
LIVES IN WAYS WE WON’T LIKE!
THIS WEEK, WE ARE HIGHLIGHTING THREE
IMPORTANT BILLS. THESE BILLS WILL BE A
DETRIMENT FOR OUR STATE AND FOR US ALL!
Existing state law prohibits local governments from adopting
ordinances that restrict firearm sales and possession beyond the
restrictions imposed by state law.
This bill would empower local governments to adopt restrictions on
firearm sales and possession that are more restrictive than state law. In
other words, it would unleash local city councils and boards of
commissioners, many of which are less respectful of the Second
Amendment than their constituents, to restrict the rights of their
constituents with regard to firearm ownership and possession.
The bill also would enable certain locally-imposed restrictions on
concealed carry permits.
Questions:This bill obviously invites local governments to impose tighter
restrictions on firearm purchases and possession. There are over 270
incorporated municipalities and 64 counties in Colorado. If each of
those 334 jurisdictions could enact its own gun control laws, how many
lawsuits do you think would result?
How much public money do you think would be spent defending those
Do you expect that many of those new local laws would be
overreaching and violate the Second Amendment?
When the overreaching laws were found unconstitutional by various
courts, could the result be an expansion of rights to buy and possess
firearms, a result counter-productive to the aims of this bill to restrict
Have the sponsors of this bill thought through the effects it would have
if it became law?
Current law requires certain law enforcement agencies to perform the
background checks necessary before a firearm purchaser can receive
his purchase. If the agency does not complete its check within a
specified and rather short period of time, the purchaser is entitled to
receive his purchase. This can lead to firearms being delivered to
individuals who would not receive them if the background checks were
completed timely.The bill would extend the periods allowed to the agencies to complete
the background checks. This effectively extends the period a purchaser
might have to wait to receive the firearm he has purchased. In
addition, the bill would suspend indefinitely the waiting period in
certain situations where the agency encounters special difficulties
completing the check. One such situation is where the purchaser has
been charged with a crime but the crime has not been adjudicated.
Thus, citizens could be denied their constitutional right to purchase a
firearm whenever a law enforcement agency brings an unfounded
criminal charge. This would enable law enforcement to target
disfavored citizens with unfounded charges to deprive them of their
second amendment rights.
Do law enforcement agencies fail to complete background checks
frequently enough to justify permitting them to delay or deny delivery
to law abiding citizens of their lawfully purchased firearms?
How could we be sure law enforcement would not use new powers like
those in this bill to punish citizens whom they simply do not like? For
example, citizens holding political views of which law enforcement
Is it constitutional to deny a citizen the right to purchase a firearm
simply because he has been charged with a crime but not yet tried?
This bill would create a new department of state government, the
Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Of course, the new department couldn’t actually prevent any gun violence. Its function would be to
engage in a public relations campaign in favor of gun controls, financed
at public expense.
At a time of strained state budgets, when many parts of the state can’t
maintain full time, in-person schooling for our younger citizens, is it a
wise use of public money to fund a P.R. campaign against guns?
Can this new department reasonably be expected to have a material
impact, given the huge sums already spent nationwide for decades
attempting to eliminate gun violence to little effect?
If a publicly funded department should be created to address second
amendment issues, shouldn’t its more appropriate purpose be to
educate the public about its rights to keep and bear arms? After all,
that’s what the supreme law of the land provides.
WHY ARE ALL THESE CRAZY BILLS HAPPENING?
WELL, OUR LEGISLATURE IS CONTROLLED BY ONE
PARTY. WE NEED A
LEGISLATURE BALANCED BETWEEN DEMOCRATS
AND REPUBLICANS, SO EACH PARTY CAN HAVE
VOTES TO BLOCK THE BAD BILLS. RIGHT NOW,
THIS ISN’T HAPPENING. TAKE A MINUTE-TALK TO YOUR FRIENDS. TALK TO
YOUR NEIGHBORS. STAY INFORMED ABOUT
WHAT’S HAPPENING IN THE LEGISLATURE.
WHAT WE NEED IS FOR EVERYONE TO GET
INVOLVED! WE NEED YOUR VOICE, WE NEED YOUR
INVOLVEMENT TO SAVE OUR STATE.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO STAY
For more legistlative information visit:
To download our periodic newsletters and other
information visit: www.coloassembly.org