RMGO threatens to sue State of Colorado, others term it unconstitutional
By BRIAN PORTER | The Rocky Mountain Voice
The punishment Democrats will assess on Coloradans wishing to pursue their Constitutional right of gun ownership will be either the costs of an insurance policy or fines beginning at $500 for a first offense of not having firearm liability insurance, if House Bill 1270 passes.
The bill was heard Wednesday in the Senate’s State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee.
“We need to make sure Coloradans have adequate insurance to carry firearms,” said Denver Democrat Chris Hansen, the sponsor of the bill in the Senate.
As with other gun-restricting laws presented this session by Democrats in the House and Senate, this one had substantially more opposition to the bill than support, but was passed ahead anyway in a 3-2 party-line committee vote. And, as with other gun legislation this session, it appears led by anti-gun advocates.
“This would establish Colorado as the first state in the country to require all gun owners to have insurance,” said Allison Shih, who supported the bill on behalf of Every Town for Gun Safety.
“Registrations lead to confiscations,” said Alicia Garcia, a firearms instructor.
Ian Escalante, director of operations for Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, opposed the measure. He noted the undefined term of substantial risk, which would allow insurance companies to deny policies. The bill then would require petitioning a court for an exemption.
“Now you have to get approval from court for your God-given right,” Escalante said.
Julie Ort of Highlands Ranch supported the measure, indicating she found it to add responsibility for gun owners. Mark Harris, a firearm owner and civil attorney, termed it good policy.
“This would bring uniformity to the personal responsibility of all firearm owners,” he said. “It protects all Coloradans, all taxpayers.”
But it may be unconstitutional in several ways. First, the bill requires a class of people to purchase something others are not required to purchase. Second, as pointed out by Escalante, it could lead to 4th Amendment issues of unlawful search and seizure. Another pointed to a 5th Amendment violation by Hansen’s bill.
Escalante was asked if the bill would substantially restrict the right to gun ownership.
“If you tie this with all the other bills that may be passed this session and string them all together, it is going to drastically disincentivize anyone from owning and carrying a firearm,” he responded. “No state has ever implemented anything like this before. The issue is the insurance company can deny a policy based simply on you own firearms.”
Following his testimony, a representative from the American Federation of Teachers indicated her support of the bill on behalf of students. When challenged on whether she would support teaching children they are “created by a caring and loving God that cares for them”, she responded “no”. On follow-up she was asked if she would support teaching the Declaration of Independence, responding that she teaches first-graders.
A line of those in opposition followed, with Rally for our Rights representative Leslie Hollywood addressing the committee, among others.
“I have great concerns about this bill,” she said. “This is a classist bill. It discriminates against the poor.”
Several shared the opinion. Another resident of Colorado questioned whether an insurer could deny coverage based on their opposition to firearms. In earlier testimony, firearms owners had been compared to those who own trampolines or swimming pools.
“Owning a swimming pool or trampoline is not protected under the Constitution, driving is not either,” Lucas said. “That’s not a right, its a privilege.”
Another state resident in opposition called it another “feel good piece of legislation, solving nothing”.
El Paso Republican Sen. Larry Liston seemed to agree.
“We all want safe storage, safe use and responsible ownership,” he said, adding the bill “goes after” the responsible gun owner.
He also questioned whether it may be a step toward a gun registry.
“Do you own a .22? Do you have an AR-15? Do you own one gun or 10?,” he asked. “Insurance companies are going to ask for the make, model and serial number. That detailed information will be in the wrong hands, eventually.”
Perhaps siding with Hollywood, Republican Sen. Mark Baisley questioned the forced purchase of insurance aspect of the bill.
“This is closer to a poll tax,” he said. “A poll tax was a fee placed on those wanting to exercise their right to vote. It was taxing what was their constitutional right. I think there’s a similarity.”
The bill now advances to the floor of the Colorado Senate, where there is a Democrat majority.