Denver to Ban Bump Fire Stocks

Sen. Feinstein and Blumenthal contemplate a bump fire stock (courtesy denverpost.com)

“The [Denver] City Council next week will begin consideration of an ordinance change that would make it unlawful to sell, carry, store or possess a bump stock device within Denver city limits,” canoncitydailyrecord.com reports. Strangely enough . . .

they don’t actually need the reg: “local law already prohibits the types of semiautomatic rifles that can be modified with a bump stock, as well as limiting the capacity of their magazines.”

Let’s hear from the man responsible, Councilman Rafael Espinoza:

“I’m under no illusion that if somebody is hell-bent on committing a heinous crime, they could both have larger magazines and modify their weapon,” he said, by skirting the law or buying outside the city. “But that said, the only people in the city and county of Denver that should have that kind of firepower are law enforcement and trained officials.” . . .

As proposed, his measure defines bump stocks as “any device for a pistol, rifle or shotgun that increases the rate of fire achievable with such weapon by using energy from the recoil of the weapon to generate a reciprocating action that facilitates repeated activation of the trigger.”

Is that the kind of language we can expect from the ATF in regards to a rules change to add bump fire stocks to items regulated by the National Firearms Act, or ban them completely? Watch this space. Meanwhile . . .

Denver City Council’s proposed penalty for selling, carrying, storing or possessing a bump fire stock is well short of Massachusetts’ life sentence. It’s a fine of no less than $100 and no more than $999, and a jail sentence of no less than 10  days and no more than 180 days. [Click here for the full text.] Your right to keep and bear arms — or inert bits of plastic — be damned.

comments

  1. avatar The Phad Thai nom nom monster says:

    What a Crock!

    1. my brother lives in big D……..drives up to Cheyenne and buys all his high capacity mags there……stupidest law these commies have ever come up with……

  2. avatar strych9 says:

    Who gives a shit?

    Everything is already illegal in Denver anyway.

    1. avatar How_Terrible says:

      Colorado: California 2.0

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Not even close.

        Denver OTOH basically is. Ever since they managed to convince the Colorado Supreme Court that Denver is a special entity, to which the rules of the state don’t apply, gun rights have effectively been dead within city limits.

        1. avatar Ed says:

          I used to dream of moving to Colorado when I was grinding away in sweaty Florida, then the transplanted commiefornians ruined it…another beautiful god damn state RUINED by morons.

    2. avatar Geoff says:

      Except marijuana.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Can’t use it in public. I’m not sure how the public intox laws on pot work though.

        It’s not something I’ve ever had cause to worry about.

  3. avatar Tom says:

    In saying that only law enforcement and trained officials should be allowed to possess “assault weapons”, he might as well say that only government can be trusted, not the citizens.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      He did.

  4. avatar MDH says:

    And so Denver continues its descent into totalitarian blue state insanity.

    Only Jack Boots should have the right to powerful firearms, right? I keep hearing this again and again from lefties.

    Their belief is that the Jack Boots are on their side, are there to do their bidding, and that somehow disarming law abiding gun owners will protect them from the very criminal communities they (the self anointed liberal elite) have spent decades engineering and incubating.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      Then it’s off to a BLM event the next day to protest the out of control, murderous cops.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        The blm is a cure that’s worse than the disease.

  5. avatar Icabod says:

    They should look to Tahoma Park, Maryland. The city is a “nuclear free” zone. One cannot process, launch, or detonate a nuclear device in the city limits. They also found a humane way to deal with their rat population. They would live trap them and release them outside of the city.
    Makes about as much sense as Denver.

    1. avatar How_Terrible says:

      Please for the love of all that is good and decent tell me that you are joking about the rat control solution…

      1. avatar ACP_arms says:

        What Icabod said about live trapping is in line with what a city’s animal control does with problem wildlife.

        1. avatar How_Terrible says:

          I fully understand using catch and release for certain types of wild life. It just makes no sense for rodent control.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          There was that horn player from Hamelin, in Lower Saxony.

    2. avatar Echo5Bravo says:

      Boulder CO is also a nuclear weapons free city.

    3. avatar Geoff PR says:

      [Rats]

      “They would live trap them and release them outside of the city.”

      I’d be fine with that, provided the release altitude was over 2000 feet AGL.

      Over bare rock.

      Serge should bid on that contract, it’ll be good practice for his true love in life, commie vermin disposal…

      *snicker*

    4. avatar Diksum says:

      Takoma Park is a suburb of DC. That’s where the rats go. Surprise surprise!

    5. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Takoma Park…..

      But yes it is practically a hippie commune right on the DC line inside the most liberal county in Maryland. What did you expect?

  6. avatar Geoff PR says:

    By that logic, all trucks in the city limits should be banned, since someone *could* use one to mow down pedestrians.

    Or am I missing something on this?

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Denver hates guns (and their owners) and consistently passes nonsensical restrictions that you won’t find anywhere else in the state, including in Boulder.

      Denver won a case years back that effectively says that they can ignore state gun laws because Denver is… special. Since then they’ve had a series of laws that don’t make much sense. This is why this in only in Denver. Boulder doesn’t have a court case making them “special”. (They are pretty special though, in the short-bus sense of the word.)

      For example. An AR or AK is not a banned “assault weapon” in Denver until you insert a magazine over 20 rounds (that might be down to 15 rounds these days) into it. Then it magically becomes an assault weapon and is banned. So banned in fact that if you walk into a gun store with a mag inserted they’re required to call the police.

      So, in Denver, everyone from BPS to Cabela’s to your LGS will ask you, should you bring in a rifle case, not to open it. They’ll then question you about the contents before letting you open it. See, if they don’t actually see the mag inserted into the gun it’s all good. They’ll tell you flat out that if it’s got a mag over the limit to go out to the parking lot and remove it and they’ll tell you that if they see a “high capacity” mag IN the gun then they MUST call the police. Of course if that same mag is lying NEXT to the gun, well no problem.

      On top of that it’s legal to have a loaded handgun (not a rifle) in your car everywhere in Colorado as long as you’re engaged in lawful travel. Not so in Denver. No CCW and it’s off to jail with you if you’re caught.

      The rest of the state has open carry. Your gun becomes uncovered in Denver and it’s OC which is illegal.

      The list goes on. Their knife laws are stupid too. But, Denver is it’s own little fiefdom and does as it pleases.

      This is why Glendale, completely surrounded by Denver, has consistently elected a Libertarian mayor who’s modus operandi has been to lower taxes, cut regulations, leave people the hell alone and run a titty-bar/gin joint.

  7. avatar Jon in CO says:

    Oh my fellow countrymen,

    Please stop thinking CO is CA, or even close to it. Denver, and Boulder may be close, but the rest of this state is as red as it gets. We still buy 30 rd mags in the state, we still don’t comply with UBC’s. There’s no signage for carry that has force of law, we have campus carry, automatic knives, and permit less open carry. We are still more free than the bastion of guns which is TX.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Automatic knives can be questionable unless you’re active duty military or LEO.

      I haven’t seen the local laws enforced much but there are places I wouldn’t carry an auto knife on a dare. Denver and Aurora being the places that immediately come to mind.

    2. avatar Slick says:

      So, basically, it is California. California is a Red state besides LA and San Francisco…

      1. avatar Michi says:

        Not even close. These laws are Denver and the city of Denver only. Unlike California where the laws extend to the whole state. Buying an AR with a full cap mag even in Boulder is trivial. Getting a CCW or open carrying in the same — trivial. Denver is the only city where you have to watch out because of their weird ass special dispensation.

    3. avatar BLoving says:

      “the bastion of guns which is TX”?
      Thanx. I think… but no. Texas is no bastion of guns. Governor Abbott and Lt.Gov.Patrick tried to get the votes together to free our people and become a Constitutional Carry state, but they couldn’t get enough of the legislature to stop hating free citizens. The best they could manage was lowering the Poll Tax on our civil rights from $140 to $40 for a four-year civil rights permission card.
      We’re working on it…

      1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

        With Joe Straus gone , things may be different now.

    4. avatar Michi says:

      Wish more people would realize this (but they won’t). I’ve had out of state dealers tell me that Colorado has an “assault weapons ban”; when in reality they’re confused because Denver does.

      Little has changed here ; I’ve seen local sherriffs at the LGS chatting with people about the weather while they buy 30 round mags. I guess if they don’t live here they don’t get what a non-issue it is.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        If NYC can render New York an anti-gun state, why cannot Denver render Colorado an anti-gun state? NYC accounts for 43% of NY state population (8.5mil/19.7mil). Denver accounts for 52% of Colorado population (2.9mil – metro area/5.5mil).

        Denver makes up a larger percentage of the state population than NYC does of NY state. Seems to me declaring Colorado “blue” and “anti-gun” is fair short-hand for the situation.

        1. avatar Avid Reader says:

          Not yet, but if we let it happen, it could. So far we have a widely-ignored ban on magazines over 15 rounds, and an almost equally widely-ignored requirement for universal background checks.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          I do understand “the resistance”, but…..

          The votes are in Denver, meaning the laws are written to accommodate. Denver is apparently turning full leftist, and anti-gun, meaning the representatives and senators will line up accordingly. Meaning the electoral votes will go left. Meaning, as in Californication and New York, the “red” leaning voters will be subjugated. Holding onto guns does not turn the political wheel. It is obvious Calif, Colorado, New York completely ignore the rural population. Hope you guys can one day turn Denver around, but sometimes you have to cut your losses and consolidate your power with other populations in more secure territory. Outposts are there to serve as early warning, not strategic assets to be defended at all costs.

        3. avatar Mike says:

          Actually the City & County of Denver population is under 700k (est 693k 2016). You correctly state the population of the metro area which includes:Aurora, Lakewood, Littleton, Englewood, Arvada, Westminster, Thornton, Centennial, etc.

          So going with the population of the City of Denver at 700k, it is 12% of the state (25% population of the Denver area). These Denver laws only apply to the City and County of Denver not the entire metro area.

    5. avatar GS650G says:

      While it may be true red voters have more area it seems the blue areas have more votes and call the shots. Just like .CA, MD, even PA.
      How does it feel to be Lorded over by a geographically small area? And that’s the plan they use. Stuff ballot boxes with votes to get representation and the governor’s house and you can bend the rest of the state over.

  8. avatar Sam I Am says:

    You gotta respect Mr. Espinoza. He is a gun control advocate who publicly admitted a bump stock ban would accomplish nothing. That takes courage.

  9. avatar Erik says:

    Yay! We did something!

    What a joke…

  10. avatar GS650G says:

    I cant wait to read Feinsteins obituary

  11. avatar Joe R. says:

    Bump Stocks to ban Denver.

    Ban that CO, just like the global-warmingists said. Or was that CO2?

    Doesn’t matter, ban em all.

  12. avatar Ing says:

    “I’m under no illusions that this will do anything helpful. But damn it, we have to fuck the proles over somehow!”

    Progressives explained in one sentence.

  13. avatar Jimmy says:

    makes no sence you can have an smoke pot, but you cant have bump stocks

  14. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Well hell, empty and close the jails and prisons. Crime has now ended, the sheeple are safe. What a joke!

  15. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    I wish Denver would just ban violent crime, then their citizens would be safe.

  16. avatar Anymouse says:

    Since I can bump fire a factory stock rifle as fast as a bump stock equipped one, the rate of fire isn’t increased and the law doesn’t apply to anything. The bump stock takes less practice and strength and is more stable.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      I think your finger would qualify as an accessory increasing the rate of fire if used in a “bump fire’ episode. What we saw of the law isn’t clear on that point.

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