BREAKING: Colorado Background Check Bill Passes Out of Senate Committee

(courtesy sfgate.com)

“A proposal to expand [state] background checks on all firearm purchases advanced in the Colorado senate after dozens testified including Mark Kelly, the husband of former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords,” kjc8.com reports. “The Democratic sponsored bill passed on a 3-2 party-line vote in the State Senate, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee. The bill would expand background checks to include private and online firearm sales.” Given the CO Dems control of the State Senate, it’s all down to Governor Hickenlooper. In other words, preventing gun registration in the Rocky Mountain State is perilously close to a lost cause. Opponents of the mag cap bill face the same long odds.

comments

  1. avatar Anmut says:

    To all the gun owners that chose legal weed over the 2nd Amendment last November… I hope it was worth it!

    1. avatar Nate says:

      The fact that it’s either-or is fucking pathetic.

      Also, wasn’t it a voter approved question and not politicians that legalized it? If so, that means what you’re saying doesn’t make sense. In my state, marijuana became medicinal because we voted Yes and not No.

      1. avatar William says:

        Exactly. No citizen voted on the gun ban, unlike legal cannabis.

        Anmut is pre-judiced and mistaken. He has a right to remain misinformed, so leave him alone!

    2. avatar Nate says:

      It shouldn’t be either or, that’s one of the reasons this country has gone insane. Prohibition of drugs = as stupid as prohibition of guns, for the same reasons.

      And didn’t the voters vote it in, and not the politicians?

      1. avatar ColoradoGunOwner says:

        That is correct the people of Colorado voted weed in and now the California transplants are voting out our guns. These guns laws should be voted on and not decided by politicians who don’t care or represent the people anymore.

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          Peace out, man, make love, not war! (Dates me, doesn’t it?)

        2. avatar Keith says:

          Why not put together a pro-2a ballot measure then. Do an end run around the anti-2a legislature. Even if you lose, you’ll bleed MAIG a few million bucks fighting it. And you can put it on the ballot election after election.

        3. avatar anonymous says:

          > you’ll bleed MAIG a few million bucks fighting it.

          Ha ha ha ha!

          Michael Bloomberg is the 10th richest man in America, with a worth of $25 billion.

          The NRA’s budget, with 3 – 5 million members, is $250 million — 1% of Bloomberg’s worth.

          For years, conservatives and libertarians celebrated the ability of the uber-wealthy to buy elections and legislation. “Corporations are people” and “Money is speech” we were told. Anyone who worried about the concentrated power of the 1% — or more accurately the top of the 1% — was derided as a “socialist” or “communist” or some other epithet.

          Well, that hasn’t really worked out for us recently, has it?

          The sad thing is that we were manipulated, used as tools, and acted like “useful idiots”. The left-wing really doesn’t need to take away our guns, because the right-wing has already disarmed most of us in our minds.

        4. avatar Jerry says:

          Well, enjoy the weed anyway.

        5. avatar William says:

          You bet. Good comment.

    3. avatar Nazgul says:

      Not all gun owners that voted for the legalization of marijuana voted for the Gun Prohibitionist politicians.

    4. avatar James says:

      You do not make sense. No one is choosing one civil rights violation over another. This is a mutually exclusive issue.

    5. avatar Anmut says:

      I’m just saying that you have to vote in Dems to legalize weed. And Dems don’t like guns, especially when there is knee jerk policy to get in line with.

      That’s the facts. Is it right, probably not. But did some people vote for recreational pot over guns by electing candidates that fully supported legalization while being mute on the 2nd Amendment – heck yeah. Are they paying for it now, unfortunately yes.

      If the morons in Madison, WI got their way we would be in the same boat.

      1. avatar CJ says:

        Agreed. If liberal Madison had its way we’d all be carrying little red books.

      2. avatar William says:

        “I’m just saying that you have to vote in Dems to legalize weed. And Dems don’t like guns, especially when there is knee jerk policy to get in line with.”

        You’re right! It’s a TRAP, isn’t it? And not by accident, I’m sure. Freedom-loving folks like most of us here are confronted with a Hobson’s Choice.

        We HAVE to get rid of this BS system we now find ourselves under; but we have to accept some blame for it. Back to Constitutional government in the small sense.

        If we can’t change the minds of the hypnotized and dumbed-down, we have little chance of success. That’s the task we’re faced with.

        We need desperately to develop strategies to overcome this state of affairs. DAMN THE DRONES! FULL SPEED AHEAD! It’s a tough row to hoe, and is going to require younger, more energetic people than myself (just turned 65; two bad knees). I will do everything I can do. You do the same.

        1. avatar jerry says:

          Yeah you bet, good comment

  2. avatar Nazgul says:

    Wow. I feel safer already (with sarcasm).

  3. avatar James1000 says:

    Well, at least Matt in FL can now rest easy knowing Magpul is closer to bailing from CO and potentially selling to LEOS in civilian restricted states.

  4. avatar Nazgul says:

    Either something is wrong with the legislation or my weapon. Given the government can do no wrong, I may need to contact the manufacturer for a possible warranty issue since my weapon has not injured anyone since its fabrication.

    1. avatar Redlyr says:

      Same here… All of mine appear to have malfunctioned. Well, I take that back, my SKS did drop the bolt carrier on my thumb once.

  5. avatar Jamie in ND says:

    I’ve been proven correct yet again. Never, never, never, EVER trust demoRATS to protect your 2A rights…when will people accept reality?!

  6. avatar anonymous says:

    from the linked story:

    Kelly also says it’s easy to avoid background checks by buying guns from private sellers and it’s a loophole that needs to be closed. This is one of seven gun related measures being considered today.

    Except that, according to an internal Department of Justice memo from early January…

    Universal background checks
    Twitter summary: Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration and an easy gun transfer process
    .
    .
    A perfect universal background check system can address the gun shows and might deter many unregulated private sellers. However, this does not address the largest sources (straw purchasers and theft), which would most likely become larger if background checks at gun shows and private sellers were addressed. The secondary market is the primary source of crime guns. Ludwig and Cook (2000) compared states that introduced Brady checks to those states that already had background checks and found no effect of the new background checks. They hypothesized that the background checks simply shifted to the secondary market those offenders who normally purchased in the primary market.
    .
    .
    Require all gun transfers to occur at an FFL

    Some states, such as California, require all transfers of guns to be properly documented (since 1923). This usually requires the involvement of a federally licensed dealer in the transaction. Despite this, straw purchasing continues largely unabated. Wachtel (1998) describes some straw purchasing of crime guns for Los Angeles between 1988 and 1995. There are disincentives to following the law in California ($35 and a waiting period). Such a process can discourage a normally law-abiding citizen to spend the time and money to properly transfer his or her firearm to another. To be effective, requiring all transfers to occur at an FFL needs to be coupled with all the necessary incentives (or at least no disincentives) for unlicensed sellers to follow the law. Sanctions and threats of penalties are insufficient.

    source: Greg Ridgeway. “Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies” National Institute of Justice (U.S. Department of Justice). January 04, 2013.

    I don’t know if anyone brought this up at today’s hearings. I was planning to, but didn’t get a chance to even sign up to speak (it was that crowded).

    I also would have asked the senators, “If you require universal background checks for all gun purchases, will you remove the metal detectors at the entrance of this building.”

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      It would not have matter. The decisoin was already made, these meetings are just make believe that “public was heard”. The democrates have shown over and over again, they do not give a crap what you have to say, what the rule of law is or what makes sense and has actual facts. Their progressive agenda is all that matters. if there are enough good people left come election time, these guys need to be shown the door with haste…..unfortunately, I do not believe that will happen and little by little we continue to loose our rights until we ave nothing left.

      1. avatar Nazgul says:

        Pascal, you are correct.

  7. avatar pat says:

    Ha ha ha. The people of the state of colorado have spoken. You morons voted libtard and found out that elections have consequences. Now, get off this forum if you are STILL going to vote democrat (not learn your lesson) and eat poop again. Those that voted GOP have my sympathies.
    Liberalism is a mental disorder.

    1. avatar Avid Reader says:

      Thank you for your sympathy.

      Even if sanity prevails in the 2014 elections, it will be damned hard to undo the damage done in this session.

      1. avatar Nazgul says:

        Avid Reader, I agree.

      2. avatar pat says:

        Yup. A bad voting decision can reverberate potentially for generations. Maybe the good voting folks (non Donkey dorks) can hope for some of this Orwellian swill to be overturned but I aint no lawyer.
        People should/MUST be punished in ’14 as the libtards are using the states (if they cant get fed traction) to roll back liberty.

    2. avatar Nate says:

      Way to keep that divisive left-right paradigm going, you’re just as bad as the liberals you hate.

      1. avatar pat says:

        All liberals are not anti-gun. ALL anti-gunners vote democrat/libtard. It IS a liberal/democrat problem.
        DEAL with it, learn, and move on by NOT voting democrat AGAIN.

        1. avatar Bruce says:

          Funny. I thought Mit was a republican but since he voted for the AWB he must have been a democrat. It was a funny election, two democrats were running.

        2. avatar Nate says:

          Uh, I’m not voting Democrat or Republican, even if the Republican is pro-2a he’s likely to be an idiot on most everything else.

          Vote 3rd party, not for either of those groups of statists.

        3. avatar pat says:

          Bruce, If you think Mitt would have pushed AWB like Barry Obummer in…..2013!!!…..your on CRACK, as they aint the same (and thats why morons like you cost us the election).
          Nate, grow up. Elections have consequences.
          Mitt was not my first choice either. You throw support early on for your favorite candidate in the primaries and whatnot. But, in the general election (of a two party system) you dont throw your vote away because at this stage it is better to change the party from within in a better political landscape (unless you like ‘kid Kenyan’) than voting for Mickey Mouse or Hitler.

        4. avatar Ralph says:

          Bruce, Mitt never voted for an AWB. The state legislature voted in the AWB in 1998, before he was Governor. Mitt was never in the legislature.

      2. avatar WLCE says:

        nate youre exactly right.

        1. avatar pat says:

          WLCE, My statement above is simply unassailable.
          You support your favorite EARLY ON, then vote to change from within during the general election by choosing one of the ONLY TWO CHOICES logically available (because elections have consequences).
          There is too much on the line to have a girlish hissy fit because your FAVORITE horse (nor mine) wasnt chosen for the final so now your gonna vote for Donald Duck (and thereby screw Colorado…and maybe the whole US….gun wise).

    3. avatar William says:

      You’re wrong. The normal people of Colorado are not at fault. I lived in Taos County, NM, for a few years – about 60 miles from the CO border, and these voters are “come-theres” from both coasts, of liberal persuasion: California, Pacific Northwest, the Northeast states such as New York and so on. They altered the demographic, especially in places like Denver and Boulder, Colorado Springs.

      “Come-heres” are not inherently bad for a state. But if they bring anti-gun opinions into a state, and eventually there’s enough of them, we can see the result.

      This process of education isn’t going to be easy, not by a long shot.

  8. avatar Gyufygy says:

    Did George Zimmerman get a badge and move to CO when nobody was looking? Right side of the above picture, above Kelly’s left shoulder.

  9. avatar S.CROCK says:

    So are private party sales in Co now illegal? Is that 15rd mag cap actually in effect now?

    1. avatar anonymous says:

      No, this was just a committee vote.

      It has to go to the full senate for a vote, and whatever bills pass that go to the governor.

  10. avatar DDay says:

    Mark Kelly can FOAD. That little midget doesn’t know a fricken thing about guns.

    1. avatar anonymous says:

      > That little midget doesn’t know a fricken thing about guns.

      On what do you base that on?

      http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/kellyme.html

      Mark E. Kelly (CAPTAIN, USN)
      NASA Astronaut

      PERSONAL DATA: Mark Edward Kelly is the son of Richard and Patricia Kelly, two retired police officers. He was born in Orange, New Jersey, on February 21, 1964, and raised in West Orange, New Jersey. Kelly is married to U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Kelly’s identical twin brother, Scott J. Kelly, is also an astronaut and served as commander of International Space Station (ISS) Expedition 26. The Kelly brothers are the only siblings who have both traveled in space.

      EDUCATION: Kelly graduated from Mountain High School in 1982. He received a B.S. degree in marine engineering and nautical science from the United States Merchant Marine Academy, graduating with highest honors in 1986. In 1994, he received an M.S. degree in aeronautical engineering from the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School.

      AWARDS: Defense Superior Service Medal (with one bronze oak leaf cluster); Distinguished Flying Cross; Air Medal (with valor device and three bronze service stars); Navy Commendation Medal (with valor device and one bronze service star); Navy Achievement Medal; Southwest Asia Service Medal (with one bronze service star); Navy Expeditionary Medal; National Defense Service Medal (with one bronze service star); Navy Unit Commendation (with one bronze service star); Sea Service Deployment Ribbon (with one bronze service star); Overseas Service Ribbon; Kuwait Liberation Medal (Saudi Arabia); Kuwait Liberation Medal (Kuwait); NASA Exceptional Service Medal; NASA Space Flight Medal (with three bronze service stars).

      EXPERIENCE: In December 1987, Kelly became a naval aviator and received initial training on the A-6E Intruder attack aircraft. He was then assigned to VA-115 (Attack Squadron 115) in Atsugi, Japan, and made two deployments to the Persian Gulf on the aircraft carrier USS Midway, flying 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm. After receiving his master’s degree, he attended the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School from June 1993 to June 1994. He has logged more than 5,000 hours in more than 50 different aircraft and has over 375 carrier landings.

      At this time, Kelly remains on active duty. He is on loan to NASA and holds the rank of Captain in the U.S. Navy.

      On Tuesday, June 21, 2011, Kelly announced his retirement from the U.S. Navy, and NASA, effective October 1, 2011.

      1. avatar DrVino says:

        “a naval aviator”

      2. avatar Nazgul says:

        There you go again Anonymous, worshiping those with impressive credentials that are a threat to your civil liberties.

      3. avatar Miserylovescompany says:

        Anonymous, there is nothing, but NOTHING, in his service record, that indicates he knows a damn thing about firearms. Aircraft yes, small arms no. FLAME DELETED

        1. avatar Shenandoah says:

          Says right there in the first paragraph that he’s from New Jersey. And the son of two police officers. That’s about all I need to hear to know he knows nothing about guns. Not to mention there’s a huge, huge difference between learning to shoot and field strip an M-16 during your service time and “knowing” anything about guns. That’s akin to saying taking driver’s ed makes someone a car guy.

        2. avatar anonymous says:

          > Now go shut your trap and disappear,
          > please and thank you.

          I spent yesterday in line at the Colorado state capitol waiting for a turn to speak that never came because the lines were so long.

          I was going to go down to the Colorado state capitol today to talk to as many of the state senators as I can in a last-ditch effort to stop the insanity.

          RESPONSE TO FLAME DELETED

  11. avatar Buell301 says:

    Need to strengthen state constitutions if possible, to prevent future rights grabs. I fear all states being overrun with idiots who ruin their state only to infest another and ruin it. This will happen in Virginia soon enough and is already happening in Colorado. My fellow Marylanders are fleeing the BS they voted for only to bring their voting habits to fine states such as VA, WVA, PA and Delaware.
    Future proof the constitutions. Or we could peaceably split the country again which I wouldn’t mind. I’d take West Virginia any day of the week.

  12. avatar DrVino says:

    Isn’t MarkKelley an Astronaut? From Arizona?….

    Him testifying on gun regulation is like me being an expert on death because my daughter died…

    1. avatar Chuck in IL says:

      That’s exactly why he is there. To stir up emotion and create sympathy. You would think a naval aviator would have the presence of mind to know when he is being used as a prop.

      1. avatar Mr aNINNYmouse says:

        …except that he is allowing that intentionally.

  13. avatar CZJay says:

    You got to have the right to own and carry arms in your state Constitution. Everyone should get that in there if it isn’t there already. Otherwise, you will be fighting all the way the supreme court of the US.

  14. avatar ensitu says:

    The law is designed to create a schsim,to force gun owners to choose betwen bowing down, sublicating themselves to the new Emperor or being hunted men. outlaws in the eyes of their children and society. those that c hose to fight will die slow ugly deaths, their children will die along side them.
    Any Questions?

  15. avatar Silver says:

    Do not comply, CO subjects. Slaves comply. Free men realize the difference between what’s right and what’s lawful.

    Keep doing what you’re doing and wear your tag as outlaw proudly, the way the founding fathers did.

  16. avatar benny says:

    and if we look to our left, we see Magpul, a firearms company that provides 500+ jobs to our state and plenty of revenue.

    aaaaaaaand its gone.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      It’s still there as far as I know. I’ll believe that it’s moving when it moves.

  17. avatar Kyle says:

    Are universal background checks really THAT bad? I am against any universal registration, but how would universal background checks lead to that? I mean we have pretty much universal background checks already for when you purchase a gun from a gun dealer, it’s just purchases between private owners of firearms that have yet to also require a background check. I know myself I’d want to know if the person I was selling a gun to was a criminal or not.

    Where am I going wrong on this?

    1. avatar James1000 says:

      On the surface it sounds like a good idea. In my view, enforcement would be the inherent issue considering there are appx 300 million firearms in circulation today. Example, a gun I sold back in 2006 shows up at a crime scene. LEO comes knocking. My explanation is it was sold before universal background checks were implemented. There maybe a “go forward strategy” with UVBs, but seemingly this just another method of making our lives more difficult.

    2. avatar Buell301 says:

      It doesn’t seem like a bad idea. But here in Maryland our 7 day check period has turned into at least a month if not longer for checks. They could do universal background checks, and then make them long, slow and expensive, just to stick it to gun owners.

    3. avatar anonymous says:

      > Are universal background checks really THAT bad?

      Some of us don’t like being told what we can do in the privacy of our homes with our friends.

      My friends and I sell and trade guns back-and-forth regularly, and this will be a huge incovenience, as we will have to spend several hours driving to-and-from an FFL dealer every time we conduct a transaction.

      And that’s what the purpose of most gun-owner control is: to simply hassle gun owners so much that they don’t bother any more.

    4. avatar anonymous says:

      > Are universal background checks really THAT bad?

      It’s also an example of Donkeyrat hypocrisy.

      If a woman wanting to get an abortion was required to seek government approval, we would here about a “war against women”.

      And the 2012 Donkeyrat platform ( on p. 18 of PDF ) states that

      Voting Rights. We believe the right to vote and to have your vote counted is an essential American freedom, and we oppose laws that place unnecessary restrictions on those seeking to exercise that freedom. Democrats have a proud history of standing up for the right to vote. During the Obama administration, the Justice Department has initiated careful, thorough, and independent reviews of proposed voting changes, and it has prevented states from implementing voter identification laws that would be harmful to minority voters. Democrats know that voter identification laws can disproportionately burden young voters, people of color, low-income families, people with disabilities, and the elderly, and we refuse to allow the use of political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens.

      Having to merely show a state-issued photo I.D. once very two or four years is an intolerable violation of an American’s 15th and 24th Amendment rights.

      Yet they insult our intelligence very time they expect us to believe that background checks, waiting periods, fees, etc. are not “political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens” from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights? Not to mention that gun-owner control laws will “isproportionately burden young voters, people of color, low-income families, people with disabilities, and the elderly”.

      And, as mentioned a few days ago, while the Donkeyrats are making illegal aliens into lawful citizens so they can vote, they are working to make law-abiding American gun owners into criminals so we can’t.

    5. avatar RipVW32 says:

      How is UVB going to work, without universal registration? It is coming, just you wait… it will happen the same way taxes, I mean ‘fees’ get enacted here… God, I HATE people who think that they know what is good for me, better than I do myself…

      1. avatar anonymous says:

        > How is UVB going to work,
        > without universal registration?

        According to the U.S. Department of Justice, it won’t.

        http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

        It was something I was going to try to talk to the state senators about today, but some people on this board feel that it would be better if I just my trap and disappear (see above). So I’m going to stay home instead and watch the world burn.

  18. avatar Mr. Carpenter says:

    Looks like “Ronnie Barret” has another state to throw the finger to. Hes running out of states..and quick. He’ll have to move his company to mexico/china like the rest of the US has done. See a cycle? Anyone?

  19. avatar Lars says:

    What a POS state CO is. Legalize drugs and limit and ban guns and gun accessories. Amazing.

  20. avatar Azimuth says:

    What a shame. Colorado used to be a great place, laid back, nobody bothering anyone else, or telling people what to do. The sort of life that liberals would lay claim to as if it was their own creation. But liberals aren’t as laid back as they claim, are they? No, they’re proving themselves to be monumentally uptight, intolerant busy-bodies.
    This is the tyranny of tiny minds.

  21. avatar Wally1 says:

    Colorado liberals will get exactly what they want, high crime, drug use, crimes against children. A liberal utopia with hard working people paying the bill while the state sinks deeper. Just like California, Colorado won’t wake up until it is bankrupt due to liberal programs that don’t increase safety or benefit citizens. I hope Magpul pulls up and moves, there are a lot of other states who will want their business with reduced tax and regulation incentives. Colorado is like the Titanic, be smart, take the first lifeboat.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email