By Brian Porter | Rocky Mountain Voice
A debate Tuesday on the proper role of government and at what point constitutional liberty has been infringed, led by Senate Republicans, fell upon deaf ears.
Senate Bill 25-003, what some deem to be the most overreaching gun-control proposal in the country, was passed by a 19-15 vote of the Democrat-dominated Senate and now heads to the Colorado House. If it were to clear the House, the bill would land on Gov. Jared Polis’ desk.
The bill, if it were to be signed into law, would allow for future purchase, sell or transfer of only certain semiauto firearms on a Democrat-submitted list and would create a de-facto gun owner registry through other requirements, such as mandatory hunter’s and firearms education classes prior to purchase.
“We have moved from what I characterize as a ban, and we’ve veered into a conversation of allowing access if you are willing to give up your rights,” said Republican Senate Minority Leader Sen. Paul Lundeen.
At issue in the bill, is whether, in the interest of stemming mass shootings in the state, if Coloradans should sacrifice constitutionally-provided gun ownership rights. The bill is derived from Democrat Sen. Tom Sullivan’s personal experience of his son’s death in the Aurora theatre shooting more than a decade ago.
“I’m not a threat to the Second Amendment,” Sullivan said, a position many in the 179 who testified on the bill and others who have phoned his office might not agree. Some of those phone calls, he says, are not repeatable in polite company.
Lundeen lectured Democrats on the difference between a right and privilege, saying a right — like gun ownership — is God-given while a privilege is granted and regulated by the government.
“The difference is critical,” he said. “The right is not given by government, it is a fundamental right that predates government itself.”
He filtered through a list of firearms not exempted by the Democrats’ list, including common-use hunting rifles by makers such as Browning, Henry, Remington, Ruger, Sig Sauer, Winchester and, of course, Armalite, the namesake for the alleged “assault rifle” gun owners know as the AR platform.
One of those rifles is possibly the most owned hunting rifle in America — the Remington 74, owned by more than 28 million. It is an example of a rifle meeting the bill’s description of banned guns. Chambered in .270, .30-06 and .308, it is a gas-operated semiauto with detachable box magazines.
While the bill allows 40 semiauto firearms to be exempted, “we’ve identified more than 150 [others]…all chambered in calibers legal for taking big game in Colorado,” that are not exempted, Lundeen said.
Douglas County Republican Sen. John Carson, who during second reading of the bill read from the U.S. Constitution, described the bill as “a further erosion of constitutional rights in our state.”
Cheyenne County Republican Sen. Rod Pelton followed, “Now I have to pay to exercise my right?”
Infringing gun control measures are not new to Colorado gun owners. Douglas County Republican Sen. Lisa Frizell noted Democrats have passed 23 such measures.
“Nobody is made safer,” she said. “Shall not be infringed really does mean that, it means shall not be infringed.”
She called the bill a “slippery slope” requiring permission for a “God-given right” enshrined in both the state and U.S. Constitution.
“What’s next?,” she asked. “Are we going to require registration of existing property [firearms] so y’all can come get it?”
Sterling Sen. Byron Pelton noted the oath he swore to enlist into the U.S. Navy, and that led to a renewed conversation toward the Republican-proposed carve out for veterans to be omitted from the ban.
“Somehow, [honorably discharged veterans] are a danger to society,” El Paso County Republican Sen. Larry Liston said. “These are men and women who fought for our freedoms. They are not the problem, to a large degree they are the solution.”
Mesa County Republican Sen. Janice Rich delivered the remarks that were most pleasing to a broad swath of gun owners, some of who almost immediately reached out to the Rocky Mountain Voice.
“Before September 2025, I urge you to support your gunsmith, gun store and stock up on what you can afford,” she said. “I encourage you to map out the closest Second Amendment-friendly state and purchase the guns of your choosing. Let there be a run on guns and magazines.”
The comments angered co-sponsor Denver County Democrat Sen. Julie Gonzales, who said it was an encouragement of breaking the law. Actually, it was not an encouragement of breaking of any law, as Rich said “Before September 2025,” when the law would take effect, and she did not declare what size magazine. It is not illegal to purchase a firearm, ammunition or an ammunition magazine under 15 rounds from an adjoining state to Colorado, only this law could make it so.
“When you look at harm, the causes of harm largely are firearms,” Gonzales claimed. From 2019-23, a firearm was used in about one-third of violent crimes in Colorado, a Colorado Division of Criminal Justice report reads, meaning a firearm was not used in two-thirds of violent crimes.
Sullivan defended the bill as not being “some back room discussion that we excluded the public from,” and said stakeholders were involved for months in advance of filing the bill, although he has failed to ever define those stakeholders on the floor.
While Democrats opposed the amendment to carve out veterans from the ban, Sullivan may have stood alone in providing a reason.
“We don’t want to talk about the 22 [veterans] that take their lives every day in this nation, and the 13 who take their lives with a firearm,” he said.
He also rebuffs conservative claims the law is unconstitutional.
“The Supreme Court has said the Second Amendment is not an absolute right,” he said. “I agree with that.”
Ultimately, gun owners largely might agree with Western Slope Republican Sen. Marc Catlin’s perspective that he can own guns because the constitution says he can.
“I haven’t hunted in years. I wonder sometimes why I should have them, but I think about the right I have to have them,” he said. “I think the part that bothers me the most [with the bill] is having to be put on a list. Americans are not good with being put on a list. The question is what will be done with the list.”