Public pleads for 12 hours with Colorado House committee to reject bill attorneys called ‘inconsistent, unconstitutional’ and others say ‘infringes’ on 2nd Amendment
By BRIAN PORTER | The Rocky Mountain Voice
Hundreds of Coloradans provided a master’s course to lawmakers on the Founding Fathers, the Federalist Papers and the U.S. Constitution Tuesday in opposition to House Bill 1292, but it was to no avail.
The presentation of the bill, by Democratic Reps. Elisabeth Epps and Tim Hernandez, to the House Judiciary Committee drew pro-gun advocates to call it an “all out war” and “infringement” on gun owners, and to instead call for hardening of targets at schools throughout Colorado.
A bill they say was written by special interests, ignores personal responsibility, could shutdown gun shops throughout the state, and is an unconstitutional overreach of power to restrict common use firearms from law-abiding Coloradans, the House Judiciary Committee was told repeatedly. Throughout the day Coloradans told lawmakers that even small caliber pistols they conceal carry would be made an “assault weapon”.
The bill titled “Prohibit Certain Weapons Used in Mass Shootings,” is not that at all, Republican Rep. Ryan Armagost said, with him and others indicating the bill is an extreme measure to restrict ownership of pistols and long guns from law-abiding citizens by Democrats.
“At least every paragraph, maybe every sentence uses the term ‘assault weapon’. Why don’t we just change the bill title to ‘Assault Weapons ban’?” Armagost asked.
The bill has a broad definition of “assault weapon”, which could make rifled barrel pistols and long guns illegal, along with pistol grip shotguns, and many other firearms. The terms “detachable magazine and threaded barrel,” among other cosmetic descriptions, is overly broad, Republican Rep. Matt Soper said. One Coloradan pointed out that almost every modern firearm has one of the cosmetic features described in the bill.
“This bans almost every single rifle in Colorado,” Armagost said. “What wasn’t banned by the specific list is banned by your definition.”
After about 12 hours of testimony, HB 1292 advanced on a 7-3 party-line vote of support by Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee. The three Democrats on the committee opposed the measure one Coloradan had called “draconian”. The bill will move on to the House floor.
The handgun he open carries for self-defense on a daily basis would have been banned, along with countless others, Taylor Rhodes said Tuesday, testifying in opposition.
“Eighty percent of the firearms sold at Cabela’s would be banned,” the executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners said. “The Glock I carry would be banned – that’s right, a Glock pistol would be banned by this bill.”
For example, firearms instructor Barbara Miller told the committee her Smith & Wesson Shield pistol is on the list of banned guns. She self-identified as a 5-foot woman.
Epps defended the bill: “There is no room in our society for these weapons.”
Hernandez indicated the bill was drafted in consultation with several anti-gun groups, which he named for the committee. It did not have a sponsor in the Senate.
“In the last five years we’ve seen 12 pieces of gun legislation,” Republican Rep. Gabe Evans said. “I’m just curious how this legislation keeps us safe, when the previous 12 have not done anything.”
He continued to question throughout the day the result of the 12 bills and also to question how many weapons had, without human action, been used in a killing.
Some complained the legislation was almost identical to legislation previously introduced in the Colorado Legislature during prior sessions. Passage to the House means the bill advanced an additionally step this time.
Hannah Hill, the legal affairs director for the National Association of Gun Rights, joined Rhodes in threatening litigation if the bill were to be signed into law. Several attorneys testified the bill has several constitutional violations.
“What you are proposing is to trample on the Constitution,” Hill said. “The 2nd Amendment is clear, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Not everyone opposed the measure.
Several students who identified themselves as activists to the House Judiciary Committee, supported the measure as a means to prevent more school shootings, but schools are already a gun-free zone.
“The motive here is to force gun owners and gun shops out of the state,” said Ian Escalante, director of operations for Rocky Mountain Gun Owners. “It has nothing to do with safety.”
The Colorado House, under Democrat control, has trampled on the 2nd Amendment for many years, he said.
“It would be easier to define the guns that are not banned in this bill, rather than those that are,” Escalante said.
Evans also discussed the President Bill Clinton-era ban on Armalite Rifles, what has been called “assault rifles”, and other military style, semi-automatic rifles. He recalled more mass shootings following the ban, than before.
Craig Williams, who operates a gun shop in Colorado, put a new spin on an old cliché.
“Bad guys with guns do not fear lawmakers, they fear good guys with guns,” he said. “We do not sell firearms because we want people to commit crimes; we want people to be able to protect themselves.”
The veteran also took on extreme terms some activists testifying were allowed to use, such as terming some of the guns the bill could ban as “Weapons of War.”
“We used M-16s, M-4s on a similar platform [in the military], but we’re talking semi-auto versus fully auto platforms,” Williams said.
A semi-auto rifle fires one ammunition round per trigger pull, and that’s the AR platform.
Another veteran in later testimony indicated it is important to consider ordinances and not guns win wars abroad.
A selection of school teachers and a school board trustee, all of which supported the ban, testified early during the hearing. They were joined later by Grant Cramer, a student at Denver East High School.
“I’ve experienced the trauma of gun violence first hand, and do so everyday when I walk through school,” he said.
One member of the committee asked Cramer if he and other students had been influenced by any special interest groups to testify. One Democrat indicated their presence was a determining factor to her allowing the bill to proceed.
Denver District Attorney Beth McCann also spoke in support of the bill.
“An assault weapon will create more damage in a shorter period of time than a knife or a truck,” she said.
Countered Steve Davis in later testimony: “Assault weapon is a made up term by the anti-gunners.”
Later in testimony, a Denver resident spoke in opposition.
“I don’t trust you guys at all,” said Mitchell Miller of Denver. “You’re not making anybody happy. We feel powerless because you want to take and take and take. I don’t wanna live here anymore. I’m moving to Arizona.”
Melissa Fennell was the second firearms instructor to speak to the committee.
“Where do these laws end? When will it be enough?” she asked. “Banning so-called assault weapons would only take firearms away from my home, not off the streets.”
Another opponent of the law was Aaron Casey, a designer and manufacturer of long guns built on the AR platform, and other firearms. He indicated the majority of his customers are hunters, followed by those purchasing for self-defense.
Rhodes turned in a petition with 175,000 signatures in opposition to the ban, including 30,000 members of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners. He also took on one element of the bill no one else had yet mentioned – exceptions for law enforcement, military and others in government. One member of the committee indicated the exceptions totaled nine groups.
“Trust the government, not the people,” he said. “Let me be clear, before the ink is dry we will file a lawsuit.”
One speaker later in the hearing thanked the panel for allowing him to use his 1st Amendment right to testify while his 2nd Amendment right was being taken. Another called the bill “tyranny”.
A resident of Boulder shortly later followed his testimony by saying “the problem is the gun”.
Another person who testified asked for legislation to harden Colorado as a target, explaining no mass shooting ever occurred at a police station.
Cody Harm addressed those in the hearing who have been affected by shootings.
“These school shootings are absolutely tragic,” he said. “These laws that are being enacted are in violation of the constitution. We all have this right.”
Richard Sanchez told the committee he was a registered Democrat who opposed the bill.
“I think this bill will punish law-abiding citizens and will just result in peeling back our Constitutional rights,” he said.
Nina Brewer told the committee she is a 5-foot-4 attorney in Denver and a firearm is her only security.
“This is a horrible bill that is being put forward. I’m acutely aware of the dangers in downtown Denver, and the dangers have gotten worse,” she said. “This will ban guns women carry to defend themselves every day. This is a tyrannical attempt to take away my rights.”
Ryan Beck told the committee there is a “basic human right of self-defense” and another witness called upon people not to comply with the law in an act of nullification.
A resident who testified 10 hours, 28 minutes into the hearing told members of the committee the whole day was a waste of taxpayer dollars. The meeting lasted until the wee hours of Wednesday morning.
“We must ban assault weapons in Colorado,” Hernandez said. “Seventy percent of Coloradans understand this.”
Except that as much as 70% of those testifying opposed the bill. The final six hours of testimony was nearly exclusively opposed to the bill, one witness pointed out.
“I certainly hope this doesn’t make it to the governor’s desk,” Soper said.