Skip to main content

Colorado Legislation and Arms Limitations

The Columbine High School shooting that took place in 1999 claimed the lives of 15 people and wounded 28. Since then the topic of gun control has sparked debates supporting both sides of the argument and from state to state the laws of carrying differs. As of now, a very brief summary of Colorado state law concerning personal arm restrictions are:
"Colorado law also allows a person to possess a handgun in a dwelling, place of business, or automobile. However, when you carry the weapon into your home, business, hotel room, etc. it must be in plain view" (colorado.gov). And according to the National Rifle Association for Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), in Colorado, there is no Permit to Purchase required for a rifle, shotgun or handgun. There is no required Registration of Firearms for rifles, shotguns or handguns. There is no Licensing of Owner for rifles, shotguns or handguns, and there is no permit to carry rifles or shotguns, however, a permit to carry is required for handguns (NRA-ILA).

One of the most recent bills passed on this topic, that was discussed today in class, is HB19-1177, the Extreme Risk Protection Order bill. This bill was in the Engrossed stage, between the second and third readings, and it had originated in the House. The upshot of the bill is that if a family/household member, or law enforcement officer, felt that an individual is potentially a risk to themselves or others by "having a firearm in his or her custody or control or by possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm" (leg.colorado.gov), that concerned citizen could petition for the prohibition of that individual possessing a firearm for 364 days. This bill was signed into law on April 12, 2019.  

In Colorado, each bill and law goes through extensive phases. A few of these phases include; Drafting the bill and introducing it to either the House or the Senate, being referred to a committee to write out the logistics, then sending the bills to the opposite chamber of origin to go through various phases of readings. These phases of readings are; Revised, Engrossed, Rerevised, and Reengrossed. Within these stages of readings, the bills can be amended and adhered, however, once the bill returns to its origin and the two chambers cannot agree on the versions of the bill, it dies (Legislative Legal Services). 
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/How%20a%20bill%20becomes%20law.pdf

This is not an uncommon occurrence because as Professor Hitt has stated, Colorado is the second most politically polarized state in the United States. 

Along with readings, the bills must be voted on by the Committee of the Whole, also known as the COW. Along with being voted on and amended in order to be finally sent to the Governor's office and signed into law, both chambers must produce the exact same bill in order to reach this final step. One difference between the Colorado State Legislative process and the United States Legislative process is that the President has a final say in the passing of a law but if the Governor doesn't vote yes or no on a bill after 10 days, it automatically becomes a law (colorado.gov).

Bills also have to pass through many different committees in both the House and Senate before being completed and ready to sign.  The ERPO bill went through nearly 14 changes and amendments before being signed by both the president of the House and Senate and sent to the Governor.  The General Assembly acknowledges House Judiciary and House Appropriations committees as well as the Senate Appropriations and State, Senate, & Military Affairs as the notable committees that helped this bill pass.  

After cases such as the Aurora Theater Shooting, there was the biggest spike in firearm purchases in the past 18 years of the data. As seen in the first figure, after this bill passed into law, in July of 2019 Colorado saw one of the lowest numbers of firearms purchases since 2014. This could have been a result of the April bill passing, but as a state, we will only begin to see possible change when the law goes into effect on January 1, 2020. 





Work Cited
“Colorado Gun Laws.” 2014. Colorado State Patrol - CSPhttps://www.colorado.gov/pacific/csp/colorado-gun-laws (December 5, 2019).
“Extreme Risk Protection Orders | Colorado General Assembly.” http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb19-1177 (December 5, 2019).
How a Bill Becomes a Law in Coloradohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLOeY1h1TFo (December 5, 2019).
Markus, Ben. “What The Numbers Tell Us About Guns In Colorado.” Colorado Public Radiohttps://www.cpr.org/2018/03/26/what-the-numbers-tell-us-about-guns-in-colorado/ (December 5, 2019).
NRA-ILA. “NRA-ILA | Colorado Gun Laws.” NRA-ILAhttps://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws/colorado/ (December 5, 2019).

Comments

  1. I really liked your post! It was very detailed about the process of making laws and explained very well what the laws currently are on gun ownership in Colorado. I thought it was very smart on how you incorporated the material discussed in class and it made it easier to follow.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I appreciate that you included an analysis of the legislative process and tied it back to gun control. This illustrates how the process is already very complex and can become even more complex when there is a very controversial issue that the bill is addressing. I also liked that you incorporated background on the issue. Colorado does have a history with gun violence that is important to consider when talking about gun control. Great post!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Millie,

    I enjoyed your blog. Obviously, gun control is a very hot topic with politics and will more than likely continue to be that way for some time. Like those comments above me, I also like how you included an analysis of the legislative process, but I also would have liked to hear a bit more information on the issue itself. I discussed this bill in another one of my classes the other day and something I would have liked to see in your article would have been the arguments on both sides of the spectrum. One of the people in my discussion group of that class argued that this would be taking away the rights of the individual who would be getting their firearm taken away while others argued where the compromise is and questioned how far the government should go to try to save lives, even if that means potentially taking away some rights? This is a very interesting topic that could be talked about for hours, but overall I think you did a pretty good job.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good job on your blog. I think you did a nice job being specific and tying in an analysis of the Legislative process. I liked how you discussed where Colorado was years ago and where Colorado is now with gun control.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Immigration Visas and Polarization

Megan King  The story I decided to investigate in National News is , “ Federal Judges Block Trump Policy Targeting Legal Immigrants on Public Benefits ” by Claire Hansen demonstrates how difficult the policymaking procedure can be. In regard to the separations of powers, this ideology does give each branch equal representation, which in this case was to block a new policy. In this situation, three judges filed lawsuits because the new policy the Government was going to implement that visas could be denied if they think that immigrants who are going to use public benefits. It is known as the “public charge” policy which is basically, “any individual who is deemed likely to accept a benefit is considered a public charger” which was just another attempt from the Trump Administration desiring to stop immigration (Hansen). There has already been policies in place that set up circumstances that Immigration Courts and the Government have set up to deny immigration residence just in...

Proposition DD: Let the Bets Flow

On November 5 th , 2019, one of the two measures placed on the ballot in Colorado was Proposition DD, giving the electorate a referendum on the legality of sports betting within the state; it also would impose a tax upon the net revenue of those establishments accepting such bets, the majority of which would provide funding for the Colorado Water Plan and the remainder of which would be used to regulate sports betting and provide services for gambling addiction. Since 1992, gambling on the outcome of most sporting events had been outlawed nationally under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, or PASPA, though with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association , this Act was deemed unconstitutional, and state legislatures became free to legislate regarding sports betting and its legality. Proposition DD was put to a public ballot under the provisions of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution, a ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’ ...

The Proponents of Proposition DD

Proposition DD and its proponents One of the most significant and noteworthy results of the recent elections in Colorado was the passing of Proposition DD. A legislative proposition is a proposal placed on the ballot by the state legislature itself. The legislature in Denver referred the measure with House Bill 1327 during the spring season, with easy bipartisan support. [1] The proposition however did not receive such widespread support from the public, only narrowly passing, and being too close to call on election night. This is illustrated below. [2] The passage of Proposition DD legalised gambling on sports events, beginning in six months’ time; making Colorado the nineteenth state to legalise sports betting. Colorado’s seventeen casino operators will be eligible to apply for licenses for both physical and online sportsbooks, with the Colorado Division of Gaming being tasked to regulate the market. [3] ‘Yes on Proposition DD’ raised about $2.83 million for ca...