Although this probably shouldn't come as any real surprise, it should be noted that Colorado Democrat candidate for Governor Mike Johnston has released his proposal for increased gun control measures in the state.

https://mikejohnstonforcolorad...olicies/gun-violence

Gun Violence
February 8, 2018

Every time gun violence strikes, there are those who claim there’s nothing we can do to prevent it. That is nonsense. There’s plenty we can do -- we just need to have the courage to do it.

Our hearts collectively stop when we see the news alert: another shooting. The wounds from Columbine, Aurora, and too many other tragic days in our shared history remain raw, and will never fully heal.

Every time gun violence strikes, there are those who claim there’s nothing we can do to prevent it. That is nonsense. There’s plenty we can do — we just need to have the courage to do it.

For too long, elected leaders from both parties have failed to act, either in service to or out of fear of the gun lobby. Powerful interest groups, like the National Rifle Association, block life-saving, commonsense, measures by funneling resources to their cronies in Congress. In turn, these politicians ignore the will of their constituents in favor of the gun lobby’s bottom line. Thankfully, the gun lobby does not represent the vast majority of gun owners in America — or in Colorado.

We must act now. We owe it to brave police officers killed in the line of duty. We owe it to the twelve families who lost a loved one at the Century 16 theater in Aurora. We owe it to the 700 people who died at the hands of a gunman last year and thousands who will die in the years to come if we don’t take action. We owe it to the kids trying to go on without their mom, the teachers with an empty seat in their classrooms, the spouses who now lie alone in bed — the thousands who have a hole in their lives that can never be filled because we have lacked the courage to act. We owe it to all Coloradans.

Responsible gun ownership has been a tradition in my family for generations, and the values associated with that heritage are ones I intend to pass down to my children. I take the responsibility of gun ownership seriously — and so, as a gun owner, it was my duty to stand up for gun safety while representing Coloradans in the State Senate. In the aftermath of the horrific shooting at the Aurora theater, I fought to limit the capacity of magazines and institute stronger background checks. I’m also proud of the work I did to protect women from domestic abusers. The gun lobby fought me the entire way, but my record proves that progress only requires courage. I’m proud of the work we did.

The following plans outlines three steps we must take to prevent gun violence, and one step we must take to ensure that if someone does open fire against our neighbors, we won’t face the same devastation we’ve seen in too many shootings in our state’s shared history:

I Will Keep Guns Away From People Who Are a Danger to Themselves and Others

We have a responsibility to protect the innocent, and keep guns away from people who have shown they intend to do harm. We must keep these deadly weapons away from:

-Those Who Commit Domestic Violence — As part of this effort, I will improve implementation of SB-197, which requires that individuals who are under certain domestic violence protective orders or are convicted of certain domestic crimes may not purchase or possess a firearm. I will ensure judges issue this order and police capture guns. I will also close the loophole that allows for non-married, non-cohabitating domestic abusers to own a gun.

- Those Who Commit Hate Crimes — Those who have demonstrated a willingness to act on hate should not be trusted with guns. In a country that is struggling to heal from hate-fueled massacres at Charleston AME church and the Pulse Nightclub, we must ensure that those who commit hate crimes of any kind are prevented from access weapons that can do mass harm. Currently Coloradans who commit hate crime felonies may not have a gun, but those who commit hate crimes misdemeanors can carry a gun the next day. As Governor, I will impose a ten year prohibition for those convicted of hate crime misdemeanors.

-Individuals at Risk of Harming Themselves or Others — Often, families are the first to recognize that a loved one is in crisis. They can see the signs when someone poses a danger to themselves or others. According to the Brady Center, 42% of individuals who commit mass murders exhibit concerning behavior before their crimes. Gun Violence Restraining Orders, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders, allow police officers and family and household members to petition a court to temporarily separate a person from firearms if there is documented evidence they may hurt themselves or others.

I Will Make Colorado Schools the Safest in the County

Too many parents in Colorado have endured the devastation of losing a child to an act of violence committed at school, a place where we must insist all children can be safe to learn and grow. We can have an honest disagreement about exactly how to balance a commitment to public safety with the right to bear arms. But when it comes to our children and the schools that serve them, we need to get this right.

I will make Colorado the first state in the nation to put into place a comprehensive approach to preventing violence in schools. I will enact the three key research-backed strategies that Sandy Hook Promise, the extraordinary nonprofit founded by the parents of children murdered in that horrific tragedy, have proven can prevent school violence:

-Support all schools to develop threat assessment plans and trainings for gun violence in schools. Many Colorado schools already do this, but it must be universal. Schools would be given additional support to use the best available evidence to keep their students safe.

-Support all schools to provide suicide prevention training to teachers, administrators, and students. By identifying the warning signs of a mental health crises before it escalates, and connecting that child to appropriate care, we can prevent our kids from self-harm.

-Establish an anonymous reporting system, with supporting training, that would be 24/7, free and accessible to all schools, parents, teachers, students, and administrators across the state. This is a critical way to make sure everyone in the school ecosystem knows how to identify the warning signs of violence and that this information quickly gets to those who can help prevent harm.


I Will Ban Weapons and Accessories Designed for Assault and Mass Murder

While we may not be able to prevent every single act of gun violence, we can do more to address those weapons that are designed for and capable of increased destruction and harm.

We took a big step in 2013 by limiting magazines to 15 rounds. But too many dangerous weapons still remain. We must make sure our policies improve as quickly as weapons dealers seek to evade them.

In particular, bump stocks must go. The massacre in Las Vegas in 2017 was the worst mass shooting in American history: 58 concert goers were killed and over 500 people were injured. The shooter in Vegas used a bump stock, which made it possible for him to fire long, deadly bursts from a semi-automatic rifle. These gun conversion devices turn semi-automatic rifles into de facto automatic weapons capable of inflicting mass casualties. Right now these devices are completely unregulated. This must change. In fighting for limits on magazine sizes on the Senate floor in 2013, I said that “the task of taking lives and the task of saving lives are fundamentally different endeavors, and they require different tools.” Bump stocks are tools for taking lives. We will outlaw them.

Received this via email today from NRA/ILA, sorry couldn't find a link, just a copy and paste:

Tomorrow, the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee is scheduled to consider House Bill 1015. Please contact committee members and strongly urge them to SUPPORT House Bill 1015.

Sponsored by Representatives Lori Saine and Stephen Humphrey, and Senator Owen Hill, House Bill 1015 seeks to repeal the misguided 2013 law that limited the amount of ammunition a firearm magazine can hold. By removing this restriction, law-abiding Coloradans are not limited in their ability to protect themselves and their loved ones.

Again, please contact members of the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee and strongly urge them to SUPPORT House Bill 1015.

quote:

Originally posted by bigpond73:
Received this via email today from NRA/ILA, sorry couldn't find a link, just a copy and paste:

Tomorrow, the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee is scheduled to consider House Bill 1015. Please contact committee members and strongly urge them to SUPPORT House Bill 1015.

Sponsored by Representatives Lori Saine and Stephen Humphrey, and Senator Owen Hill, House Bill 1015 seeks to repeal the misguided 2013 law that limited the amount of ammunition a firearm magazine can hold. By removing this restriction, law-abiding Coloradans are not limited in their ability to protect themselves and their loved ones.

Again, please contact members of the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee and strongly urge them to SUPPORT House Bill 1015.

After receiving the email I was doing the same thing but couldn't find a link on their website either. They didn't give us much heads-up on this so thanks for posting it up as quickly as you did.

Hickenlooper & Kate Brown (Gov. Oregon) were on MSDNC. Hick was making Assault Weapons noises.

... So much bullshit in this interview.

https://www.msnbc.com/morning-...rs-1168540227742?v=b

Per NRA-ILA alert:
https://act.nraila.org/takeaction.aspx?AlertID=1961

On Monday, March 19, the Senate State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee is scheduled to consider two gun bills. Please contact committee members and strongly urge them to OPPOSE Senate Bill 51 and to SUPPORT Senate Bill 52.

Colorado: Contact Committee Members About Gun Bills

Senate Bill 51, sponsored by Senator Michael Merrifield, would make it a crime to knowingly possess a “multi-burst trigger activator” that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm. The broad and overreaching provisions in this legislation could potentially criminalize firearm modifications such as competition triggers, and ergonomic changes that are commonly done by law-abiding gun owners to make their firearms more suitable for self-defense, competition, hunting, or even overcoming disability.

Senate Bill 52, sponsored by Senator Owen Hill, and Representatives Lori Saine and Stephen Humphrey, seeks to repeal the misguided 2013 law that limited the amount of ammunition a firearm magazine can hold. By removing this restriction, law-abiding Coloradans are not limited in their ability to protect themselves and their loved ones.

Received this today by email from the NRA-ILA:

On Wednesday, April 25, the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee is scheduled to consider Senate Bill 52.  Please contact committee members and strongly urge them to SUPPORT Senate Bill 52.

Senate Bill 52, sponsored by Senator Owen Hill, and Representatives Lori Saine and Stephen Humphrey, seeks to repeal the misguided 2013 law that limited the amount of ammunition a firearm magazine can hold.  By removing this restriction, law-abiding Coloradans are not limited in their ability to protect themselves and their loved ones.

Again, please contact members of the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee and strongly urge them to SUPPORT Senate Bill 52.

https://www.nraila.org/article...l-in-house-committee

I was just about to post the update but I see you beat me to the draw again...thanks Mike!

The end of the legislative session is approaching so lets ramp up those emails and phone calls to the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee members and urge their support for SB 52.

I just learned that there is a proposal to ban assault weapons, Bump Stocks, and magazines over 10 rnd. capacities in Boulder. The broad-sweeping assault weapons definition would ban the sale and possession of many hunting and defensive guns...and would leave the definition open to the interpretation of the city council.

There was a Pro-2A protest rally held in opposition to this ban proposal.

I'd like to see gun owners and Pro-2A supporters hold more of these protest rallies. It's time to take a page out of the Left's playbook and let them see that we are serious in our support for our rights.

I particularly liked the little girl's sign in one of the article's pictures of the protest. "Without guns who will protect our unicorns?"


Pro-gun demonstrators rally in downtown Boulder against assault weapons ban

Activists blast city's proposed action as 'knee jerk' response to mass shootings

By John Bear
Staff Writer

POSTED: 04/21/2018 04:32:01 PM MDT UPDATED: A DAY AGO

How does the proposed law define 'assault weapons'? As City Attorney Tom Carr has drafted it,

"assault weapons" are defined as:

• All semiautomatic rifles that have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and that have any of the following characteristics: a pistol grip or thumbhole stock; a folding or telescoping stock; or any protruding grip or other device to allow the weapon to be stabilized with the non-trigger hand.

• All semi-automatic center-fire pistols that have any of the following characteristics: the capacity to accept a magazine other than in the pistol grip or any device to allow the weapon to be stabilized with the non-trigger hand.

• Any firearm that has been modified to be operable as an assault weapon as defined by the city, plus any part or combination or parts designed to convert a firearm into an assault weapon.

Pro-gun demonstrators — many of them carrying versions of weapons that would become illegal in Boulder under a proposed ban on assault-style weapons — lined Broadway in downtown Boulder on Saturday afternoon to voice their displeasure.

"This demonstration is because of the extremes that the Boulder City Council is going to," organizer Jason Boros said. "If they weren't, I wouldn't be out here."

The city council has already passed a first reading of an ordinance that will prohibit the sale and possession of numerous kinds of semi-automatic rifles and handguns that have been categorized as "assault weapons."

Many of the demonstrators carried AR-15-style rifles, a weapon that is popular among gun enthusiasts but has, however, gained notoriety in recent years because of its association with numerous mass shootings in the United States, including the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., in February.

The incident prompted the City Council to consider the measure, which has been championed by Councilwoman Jill Adler Grano who has called it a "no-brainer."

Numerous demonstrators were seen carrying holstered handguns and rifles slung over their shoulders and across their backs. Boulder municipal code dictates that weapons carried outside of a persons's residence, business or vehicle must be kept in a case that is recognizable as a gun case by a "reasonable person."

Boulder police Sgt. Alastair McNiven said that there was some "education" provided to demonstrators by police regarding the code, but no one was ticketed for an open carry violation.

"With the limited resources available, we monitored the event in order to prevent a breach of the peace," he said.

Brandon — a Longmont resident who, like a number of the activists, declined to give his last name — and his wife were both armed with AR-15s. They brought their two young children, he said, to show that "average families" own weapons that would be banned under the Boulder ordinance.

"We aren't criminals," he said. "I don't think we should be turned into criminals."

Organizers discouraged partisan politics at the event and asked attendees to leave items such as Confederate battle flags and Donald Trump signs at home. Aside from the occasional "Make America Great Again" cap, demonstrators appeared to abide by the suggestion. But American and Gadsden flags were numerous along with National Rifle Association regalia.

Protesters carried placards bearing messages like "Gun Free Zones are Sitting Duck Zones," "My Assault Rifle Self Identifies as a Personal Defense Weapon" and "Without Guns Who Will Protect the Unicorns."

Ty Lawson said he is a Boulder native, and he came to the demonstration because the City Council's proposed ordinance is a "knee jerk" reaction to mass shootings which he said are statistically "almost zero" when compared to gun violence overall.

"I don't feel my Second Amendment rights should be infringed upon because of it," he said. "That's why I'm protesting it."

Lawson said that he collects guns, and he thinks the ordinance is "ridiculous."

"I'm concerned about the City Council going a little too far," he said. "We are supposed to be inclusive. (Adler Grano) wants to marginalize me and I haven't done anything."

About 200 demonstrators were grouped along Broadway in between Canyon Boulevard and Arapahoe Avenue by 2 p.m. Drivers appeared to honk in support although an occasional carload of people would throw up middle fingers as they passed. One man unhappy with the demonstrators yelled out "stop killing kids" repeatedly as he walked by, but there appeared to be little in the way of counter-demonstrators on Saturday.

Vique DeJuliannie, of Loveland, said she came to the demonstration because she is a widow with two children and can't count on anyone else to protect her and her family. She is against the proposed ban.

"They're ain't nobody but me who is going to save me except myself," DeJuliannie said. "I'm not some right wing nut job, either. ... I just believe in my right to protect myself with whatever weapon I choose."

John Bear: 303-473-1355, bearj@dailycamera.com or twitter.com/johnbearwithme

Here is the FB page for the group that set up that and several other local rallies. Good folks. (The Unicorn girl is the page owner's daughter)

https://www.facebook.com/rallyforourrights/

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
Here is the FB page for the group that set up that and several other local rallies. Good folks. (The Unicorn girl is the page owner's daughter)

https://www.facebook.com/rallyforourrights/

Thanks for posting that link! I spent a couple hours reviewing the protest pics and the group's FB page. Interesting to see such a diverse group come together to defend the 2A. I'm not a protester by nature, but I'm going to look into attending a rally at some point.

They are holding another rally on May 5th in Fort Collins. These aren't protests as much as they are a good natured show of force and patriotism. Anyone who can come should really try.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
They are holding another rally on May 5th in Fort Collins. These aren't protests as much as they are a good natured show of force and patriotism. Anyone who can come should really try.

I noticed that next scheduled rally. I might be able to make this event and will if able. It would be great to get some SIGForum members to attend. If anyone is going post here and maybe we can organize an SF presence at the rally.

According to the Rally for Our Rights FB page the next rally is scheduled:

Fort Collins
Saturday, May 5 at 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM MDT
Intersection of College Ave and Mulberry St

Details
It's not over...it has only just begun!!

Join with your fellow Second Amendment supporters at “Rally For Our Rights - Fort Collins” – a demonstration in support of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms!

Saturday May 5th – 1 to 3pm – intersection of Mulberry St and College Ave, Fort Collins, CO.

This will be a non-permitted event exercising our First Amendment right to protest on public sidewalks. There will be no speakers or set agenda. We will be lining the streets around the intersection of Mulberry and College carrying signs, banners, and flags supporting our right to keep and bear arms.

Please do bring:
- Enthusiasm
- Signs, lots of signs! Focus on the Second Amendment and that many gun control laws turn law abiding citizens into criminals.
- American, historical, and patriotic flags
- Banners and signs supporting gun rights and the 2nd Amendment.

Please do not bring:
- Confederate, Anarchy, Trump, or other political propaganda flags
- Off topic signs or banners, or anything advocating or attacking a particular political party or ideology beyond the Second Amendment

This is a single focus/issue event with participants from various political parties and with differing ideological beliefs. Please be respectful and courteous to your fellow Second Amendment supporters.

This is not an open carry protest, but you can open carry if you'd like. Yes, it is still legal to open carry in Fort Collins! Firearms must be holstered or slung and should be secured; and if concealed, properly permitted.

We will meet near the GoodTimes and the old Safeway off Mulberry and College. Find the flags, and you'll find us!

We'll be collecting donations for the Fort Collins Crossroads SafeHouse: Domestic Violence Shelter & Support Center! Please bring full size shampoo, conditioner, lotion, soap, kids wash, and etc toiletries. They also need blankets and pillows. All items MUST be new. You can also bring cash and we'll deliver it all to them after the rally!

Feel free to share this invitation with your friends and other interested parties. It’s time to fight back and make our voices heard. We hope to see you there!

I had heard about this bill a few weeks ago and had planned on posting info on it but, after doing an internet search, couldn't find any current references (articles, legislation) to it. Although I can't prove this I suspect that this bill has been "hidden" from public view until now.

Apparently the Colorado legislature has, once again, waited to ram through some important last minute legislation before the current legislative session ends...and House Bill 1436 DEPUTY ZACKARI PARRISH III VIOLENCE PREVENTION ACT, dubbed the "Red Flag" Bill or Extreme Risk Protection Order is one of the bills being rushed through.

I'm in the process of reading through the bill now, having only skimmed it. I am not categorically opposed to this type of legislation, BUT I need to see some key protections for gun owners in it before I will support it.

The fact that the bill is being rammed through at the last minute without much public awareness or debate about it greatly concerns me. If the merits of a bill are readily apparent then let the bill be introduced early in the session, rather than at the last minute which doesn't allow for much public debate and also allows for last minute changes to the bill without public input.

I read one DA's support for the bill, however he urged that it include a sunset provision so that any deficiencies in the bill could be addressed in the next legislative session. I completely agree with this approach...I won't support any form of the bill that doesn't include a sunset provision.

Both the RMGA and NRA-ILA are opposed to this bill:

Colorado: Urge Your Lawmakers to Oppose Gun Control Legislation!

Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee voted 7 to 4 to pass House Bill 1436, legislation that intends to create so-called “Extreme Risk Protection Orders.” It is very important that you contact your state Representative and urge them to OPPOSE House Bill 1436 when it comes up for a vote.

House Bill 1436 is the "red flag" bill and would allow family, roommates or household members, and law enforcement to have an individual’s guns taken away without a hearing and little to no due process. The bill allows the confiscation of firearms through ex parte hearings where a person isn't given notice and a hearing.

Here is the actual HB 1436 wording:

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites...ls/2018a_1436_01.pdf


Colorado 'Red flag' gun bill passes committee, Republican sponsor chastised, lauded


Colorado 'Red flag' gun bill passes committee, Republican sponsor chastised, lauded

May 1, 2018 Updated: May 1, 2018 at 8:38 pm

A bill that would let law enforcement or family members seek a court order to remove firearms from at-risk individuals, known as a "red flag" law, won approval in its first House committee hearing Tuesday.

Under House Bill 1436, law enforcement or family members could get a temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order. The Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee voted 7-4 for the bill, which now heads to the full House for debate.

Whoever seeks the protection order would have to show a preponderance of evidence that the person in question poses a risk to himself or others through use of a firearm.

The at-risk person would have to be notified on the day of or the day after the initial hearing. Once the order is granted, law enforcement can confiscate any weapons and ammunition from the person.

The judge who grants the protection order would have to hold a second hearing within seven days to determine whether to extend the order or return the firearms. At that second hearing, under a stronger standard of "clear and convincing evidence," the order could be extended up to 182 days.

If the "at-risk" person asks that the order be terminated, the burden of proof falls on the person who sought the order.

Tuesday's hearing had an unusual twist.

House Minority Leader Patrick Neville, R-Castle Rock, a long-time ally of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, put himself on the House Judiciary Committee in place of Assistant Minority Leader Cole Wist, R-Centennial, one of the bill's main sponsors.

Wist was reprimanded in a late Monday night caucus meeting over his sponsorship of the bill. A motion to strip him of his leadership position never went to a vote.

But House Republicans told Colorado Politics the caucus discussed the bill and worked out its differences.

Had Wist stayed on the committee Tuesday, the 7-4 party-line vote could have been a bipartisan 8-3 decision.

Gov. John Hickenlooper put in his 2 cents on the bill, which is named after slain Douglas County Deputy Zackari Parrish III.

Parrish died in a New Year's Eve ambush by a man identified as mentally ill.

Douglas County Sheriff Tony Spurlock told the Judiciary Committee that officials knew of the shooter's mental illness for months and had been trying to find a way to deter him from causing harm.

Many other law enforcement officials, district attorneys, mental health professionals and gun control advocates also spoke in favor of the bill.

Dan May, district attorney for El Paso and Teller counties, told the committee he supports the bill but would like amendments to also allow removal of firearm parts that could readily convert firearms into automatic weapons, and to set the second hearing within 72 hours instead of a week.

And because the bill is being rushed through the Legislature in its closing days, May said, a one-year sunset provision should be attached so any problems could be addressed in a year.

The committee also heard from people whose family members and other loved ones died of suicide by gun or other gun violence, and from family members who fear for their mentally ill loved ones.

George Braucher, the district attorney for Arapahoe and Douglas counties, said he still is committed to the Second Amendment but supports the bill because of a "giant gaping hole" in the law that enables incidents such as Parrish's slaying.

Randy Chase reminded lawmakers that two senators were recalled and a third resigned in 2013 after the Democratic majority in the Statehouse passed gun-control laws in the wake of the 2012 Aurora theater mass shootings.

"If I had a hat to take off, I would take it off" to Wist for his bravery in sponsoring the bill, Chase said.

But the bill is opposed by Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and the Firearms Coalition of Colorado, which is affiliated with the National Rifle Association.

If it is too difficult to incarcerate dangerous people under the criminal or mental health laws, that's where the Legislature should focus, said James Bardwell, an attorney for RMGO.

"Depriving dangerous people of firearms does not address the problem this bill is supposed to address," he said.

The bill "is about the person, not the gun," May told the committee. "We should be more concerned about the person who walks down a street" shooting people, such as happened in Colorado Springs on Halloween night 2015.

Police killed the mentally ill gunman, but only after he killed three innocent passersby - one of the reasons May cited for supporting the bill.

"We need to take a step forward that is constitutional, that is appropriate, has a lot of safeguards beyond anything else we've seen in this country," May said, "and we need to protect people under certain circumstances and hold people accountable for their use of guns. That's the issue."

The hearing wrapped up with a round of kudos to Wist from committee Democrats for his courage in sponsoring a bill that has drawn the ire of his caucus.

"This is what leadership looks like," said Rep. Joe Salazar, D-Westminster.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Modern Day Savage,

I was hoping to make the Ft. Collins Rally for our Rights event...but unless I can pull a rabbit out of a hat it's not likely to happen.

If any members go to the rally I hope you will post how it went...maybe even a few pics.

I like what these rally supporters are doing and wanted to give them a little virtual pat on the back and thank them for their efforts!

Note: the current CO legislative session ends May 9, so be prepared for this bill to be rushed through in the next day or two and to take action. The House completed its third reading of the bill on May 4 and it has been sent to the Senate for immediate action.

The current (as of this date) version of HB18-1436 is 30 pages and I finally carved out the time to read it.

I also caught a radio interview with 18th Judicial District AG George Brauchler (candidate for state AG), who came out in favor of the Red Flag bill. During the interview he stated that he read the first draft of the bill @ 3 weeks ago, and that it has been substantially improved since that first draft.

I am not a lawyer and may be wrong about certain bill provisions, but I do have some concerns about the bill in its current form.

Just a few of the concerns I have based on my reading:

- Although this is true even now, should the bill be passed into law firearms owners will need to be particularly careful with what they say, as even exaggerations, hyperbole, or heat-of-the-moment and insincere remarks may be used in evidence by a petioner for ERPO.

- Although there is some general wording instructing that LEA adopt firearms storage and return policies there is no wording that specifies that the firearms be returned in the same condition that they were confiscated in. There is wording that instructs that, once an TERPO/ ERPO has expired or is terminated that it be filed promptly, however I would like to see language that specified that firearms be returned to the owner within a specified period. 72 hrs, 5 business days, etc...

- section 8h specifies that a credible threat or unlawful or Reckless use of a firearm by the respondent may be subject to an TERPO/ ERPO. While many gun owners would criticize those who fail to follow basic gun safety practices, I am concerned that in a scenario where a gun owner had a ND or otherwise acted unsafely but without intention to harm, that didn't result in any injury to others that that in itself may be a basis for the petition being granted.

- Section 16 k Corroborated evidence of the use of controlled substances or alcohol AND Section 18 i evidence of recent acquisition of a firearm or ammunition by the respondent. Again, while many gun owners would object to the use of controlled substances or alcohol and the handling of firearms, I am concerned that this provision may be abused in the granting of a TERPO/ ERPO petition. Those who legally use marijuana, and even those who get drunk at a bachelor or Super Bowl Party have reason to be concerned.

I have a few other concerns about the bill wording as well...including the fact that there is no sunset provision included in the current House bill to address any deficiencies.

In all fairness to the bill, there are some protections for gun owners that I am pleased to see. However one of my main concerns is that the legislature kept this bill under wraps and is only now trying to ram it through at the last minute before the public is fully aware of the bill and has had only limited time to debate it. If the bill has merit then let the legislature introduce it in its final form early enough in a legislative session for the public to review it.

Keep in mind that the NRA-ILA and the RMGO both oppose this bill. If need be, they can table it and address it in the next session.

Please take some time to contact your elected Senate reps and urge them to oppose this bill!

HB18-1436 was read on Monday May 7 in the Senate Committee on State, Veterans, & Military Affairs and its status is Postpone Indefinitely. Effectively dead this go-around.

I held off posting an update on this as there was talk that Governor Hickenlooper was going to use his executive power to call a Special Legislative Session specifically to force the legislature to address this "Red Flag" bill, however he recently came out with a statement that basically said that given the way the bill dead-ended he didn't think it would do any good to call for the Special Session.

So, this legislative session is done. There will still be some interim committee work done throughout the year and it wouldn't surprise me if the Red Flag bill was at least discussed and possibly additional changes suggested.

Job well done everybody! We lost ground in Denver on their so-called Assault Weapons ban enhancement and Bump Stock ban, and also in Boulder which passed their ban on so-called Assault Weapons ban and Bump Stock ban (although apparently there is further debate to enhance the ban to prevent anyone under the age of 21 from buying a rifle). My understanding is that the Boulder ban hasn't gone into effect yet.

But, overall, we held our ground...sometimes that is a victory in of itself. I believe that this Red Flag bill couldn't have been defeated without your participation in contacting your elected reps. Thanks all!

Everyone take 5, hit the showers and grab a hot meal and some well deserved R&R! If you haven't already, please consider voicing your opposition to the proposed national Bump Stock ban by the ATF during the Public Comments period, which expires just a little over a month from now. Also, please stay vigilant for any local anti-2A laws that might crop up.

Keep in mind that the Rally for our Rights group still has another rally scheduled and it sure would be nice to show them some support if you can.

Thanks again everybody!

MDS,
Thanks for your updates. Particularly, the assessment of the "Red Flag" bill. Glad we dodged a bullet on this one.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
But, overall, we held our ground...sometimes that is a victory in of itself.

Unfortunate, but true.
Thanks as always for keeping us up on all this.

Good News...Bad News.

The information in this update is @ 6 weeks old so I'll start by apologizing for not getting it out in a more timely manner. Before posting this I wanted to first review a podcast for info and quite honestly I've been dealing with some recent health issues that have really impacted my mobility.

The Good News-

Regarding the recent Boulder so-called Assault Weapons Ban:

Boulder resident and president of the Independence Institute Jon Caldara, a 2A supporter, has enlisted the help of the Mountain States Legal Foundation in filing a suit against the City of Boulder and what they believe to be a unconstitutional law.

Boulder Residents Seek to Avoid Crosshairs of Unconstitutional Ordinance

Boulder Residents Seek to Avoid Crosshairs of Unconstitutional Ordinance

Jun 12, 2018 | by William Perry Pendley

Law-abiding citizens request preliminary injunction against city’s
assault on right to self defense

DENVER, CO. Continuing to fight back against Boulder’s assault on the rights of law-abiding citizens, Mountain States Legal Foundation today asked the court to halt enforcement of Boulder’s unconstitutional firearm and magazine ban until its federal lawsuit is resolved. Mountain States Legal Foundation, on behalf of its clients, seeks to prevent the City of Boulder from enforcing its unconstitutional ban on some of the most popular firearms and magazines in the country, protecting innocent Boulder residents from excessive fines and even jail time. Plaintiffs Jon Caldara, the Boulder Rifle Club, Bison Tactical, and Tyler Faye demonstrate the effect this unconstitutional ordinance will have on Boulder residents and small businesses.

“This case isn’t just about firearms. This case is about losing your rights with the stroke of a pen,” said Cody J. Wisniewski, litigation counsel with Mountain States Legal Foundation, the law firm representing the plaintiffs. “Boulder cannot be allowed to violate the rights of its residents—for any amount of time.”

In addition to the unconstitutional ban, the ordinance indefensibly raises the minimum age for firearm possession to twenty-one, a slap in the face for one of the plaintiffs in the case, twenty-year-old Tyler Faye, a member of the University of Colorado Shooting Team, and millions of young American veterans who have served their country in time of war.

“We must have a preliminary injunction to stop this unconstitutional ordinance dead in its tracks,” said William Perry Pendley, president of Mountain States Legal Foundation. “Otherwise, well-intentioned, law-abiding citizens will try to comply by going to the police stations with their lawfully-owned, but newly-banned firearms and unnecessarily expose themselves to grave legal consequences.”

On May 15, 2018, the Boulder City Council passed Ordinance 8245, amending the Boulder Revised Code to ban many rifles, shotguns, pistols, and standard-capacity magazines, as well as raising the minimum age for firearm possession to twenty-one, within Boulder city limits. Disturbingly, the ordinance was passed by a unanimous vote, with little debate, and despite an overwhelming number of public comments, telephone calls, and emails expressing concerns with and opposition to the ordinance. Mountain States Legal Foundation filed the lawsuit on May 16, 2018, in the federal district court in Denver, Colorado.

Mountain States Legal Foundation, founded in 1977, is a nonprofit, public-interest legal foundation dedicated to individual liberty, the right to own and use property, limited and ethical government, and the free enterprise system. In 2012, Mountain States Legal Foundation, on behalf of its clients, prevailed in the Colorado Supreme Court in Regents of the University of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. The Court’s unanimous decision in that case confirmed the right of concealed carry permit holders to possess concealed firearms on the public university’s campus.

For more information:
Caldara v. City of Boulder

I'm glad to see a legal challenge to the Boulder Ban...and I greatly appreciate Caldara for taking on this challenge, especially given that he has essentially put himself in the cross-hairs of Boulder's new law once it goes into effect at the end of the year as he is a known 2A supporter who has publicly stated that he owns guns that are banned under the new law and that he will not comply with the ban. He, has effectively made himself a test-case, along with his fellow plaintiffs.

The Bad News-

In a May 18th radio interview Jon Caldara mentioned that this Boulder ban on so-called assault weapons is the tip of the ice berg. Apparently the cities of Longmont, Lafayette, Louisville, Superior, and Ft. Collins are all considering similar bans. He believes this is the next coordinated attack by gun grabbers who have shifted their tactics from trying to get gun control measures implemented at the federal level, then the state level, and now attempting it at the city level.

Given the money Bloomberg's anti-2A groups have already donated to anti-2A Democrat candidate's in this election cycle, Jon Caldara noted that the City of Boulder reportedly has a $2M budget deficit and that he believes the reason they were willing to pass the ban at this time, knowing the risk of a lawsuit opposing it, is that Bloomberg money will be used to offset the city's legal defense costs...and he believes this will be true for any other city who decides to enact similar bans.

The Boulder ban is not just a Boulder issue, but could well prove to be a test case for other cities around the state...and in other states as well.

Please stay vigilant and if you hear of any other similar proposed bans please update us here.

Although I was aware of this lawsuit I only just learned that the complaint is partially based on the allegation that the killer was a Colorado resident and that, although 30 round magazines are legal to sell, own, and possess in Texas that it would be illegal for a Texas FFL/ retailer to sell the gun or the magazines to a Colorado resident.

Although this case is happening in a Texas civil court, the potential ramifications to both Colorado gun owners and FFL/ retailers in other states should a jury be swayed to allow this argument to become precedent are obvious.

Although there is little doubt that there was negligence in the failure to report the killer's domestic violence conviction or Bad Conduct military discharge, and possible negligence on the part of Academy Sports, both this lawsuit and the reporting of it smack of the common plaintiff strategy of "going after the deepest pockets" and "throwing spaghetti against the wall"...including the article photo of one of the plaintiffs grimacing in pain as her wound is checked at home in front of the camera.

Also, there are a few inaccuracies in the article and it is lacking in details such as how the killer's state residence was established. However I couldn't find another recent article to link to.

(note: The article link requires either a subscription or disabling ad blockers, and since I didn't want to do either I copied it by hand from my phone to my computer before posting. Please excuse any misspellings or grammatical errors if I didn't copy the article accurately)

https://www.dallasnews.com/new...e-sue-academy-sports


Academy Sporting Goods Chain Sued by Couple Wounded in Sutherland Springs Church Shooting

Lauren McGaughy, Texas Goverment Reporter

Austin- A Texas couple who survived the Sutherland Springs church massacre last year have sued the sporting goods store that sold the gunman the firearm used in the shooting.

On Friday, Rosanne Solis and Joaquin Ramirez sued Academy Sports + Outdoors for selling Devin Patrick Kelley a Ruger AR-556 with 30 round capacity magazines. While this model is legal in Texas, Kelley was a resident of Colorado, where it's illegal to sell, possess, or manufacture magazines with capacities over 15 rounds.

"A Texas gun dealer [Academy] cannot sell a firearm and deliver that firearm to a citizen of another State if that sale would not be legal in the purchaser's State of residence", the lawsuit reads. "The Ruger should have never been placed in Kelley's hands."

The couple, who were both shot, accuse Academy of gross negligence and seek damages of more than $1 million each for physical and mental anguish, disfigurement, and medical expenses. The suit was filed in Bexar County District Court.

On Nov. 5 Kelley killed 26, including a pregnant woman, who had gathered at the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs for Sunday services. In the days after the shooting, Solis and Ramirez said Kelley appeared to target babies and young children during his rampage at the church, and at one point yelled, "Everybody is going to [expletive] die!"

In this 2017 file photo, Joaquin Ramirez checks the gunshot wound on Rosanne Solis' left arm at their home in Sutherland Springs. (Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman)

Kelley, who killed himself as he was fleeing police, was an Air Force veteran who was convicted of domestic abuse and discharged for bad conduct years before the shooting. The Air Force should have reported his criminal history to the FBI's background check system, which would have kept him from purchasing a firearm. Multiple other Sutherland Springs families are suing the federal government for failing to do so, and one other family, who lost three members, filed a lawsuit last year against Academy Sports + Outdoors alleging similar violations.

Emily Taylor, a gun law expert in San Antonio, said she believes Solis and Ramirez have a case. Federal law prohibits licensed gun dealers from selling to residents of other states unless the buyer meets them in person and the sale "fully" complies "with the legal conditions of sale in both such States."

"I think Academy screwed up," Taylor said, adding this case is also extremely rare. "In fact, in practice I have never seen anything like this come up."

But Colorado gun law expert and federally licensed dealer Robert Wareham disagreed.

"It'd be pretty onerous if we told every federal firearms licensee in the nation that they were responsible to know the gun laws of every other state", Wareham said. "I don't think the address he puts down would be definitive, but that's up to a judge to make that call."