Senator Sullivan’s “just another form” gun law remark goes unchecked by media as sheriffs warn of crippling costs

By Cory Gaines | Commentary, Colorado Accountability Project

Senator Sullivan’s dismissive rhetoric goes unchecked by the liberal media

Let me start with a quote from Post “reporter” Nick Coltrain’s article linked at bottom.

“SB-3 does prohibit the sale of many semiautomatic weapons — unless the purchaser has completed a firearm education course. The bill was heavily amended while it made its way through the legislature and Sullivan now describes it as a ‘permit-to-purchase’ law. People who follow the law haven’t lost access to anything in recent years — and won’t under this law, Sullivan said. But laws need to change as society changes, he said. Sullivan likened the new gun laws to the shift toward widespread adoption of seatbelts in cars a few generations ago. It didn’t happen overnight, but the life-saving devices are now the norm. ‘OK, you’ve got to wait a few days to get (a gun). Or you have to fill out another form. Whatever it is, you still get what you want,’ Sullivan said.”

There is a fair bit going on here that is worth noting. You have Coltrain’s gross oversimplification of what SB25-003 actually requires. There is Senator Sullivan’s blithe and dismissive characterization of what this state has done with regard to gun rights.

But underlying all of this is a dynamic I have seen in the Post and others. No matter what the topic, no matter whether he has personal involvement or not, you will likely see ample space given to Senator Sullivan. This is in contrast to the no or little space given to others with a story equally tragic but not as bullish on gun control (see, for example, the parents of Kendrick Castillo).

Further, you will note (as is the case with the Post’s Coltrain) that Senator Sullivan’s words almost always go unchecked and unchallenged.

I feel for Senator Sullivan. I cannot imagine what it would be like to lose a child.

Losing a child, however, does not make your contentions unassailable. Losing a child grants you sympathy but not omniscience. And if you are going to be in the arena of public policy after such a tragedy, it is perfectly okay to have people disagree and correct falsehoods, when done civilly of course.

Our media seems to have not learned this lesson, to the detriment of all.

https://www.denverpost.com/2025/08/03/colorado-gun-laws-impact-second-amendment/

---

As Sen Sullivan said, it’s just a little longer wait and another form right?

The above is not a direct quote of Sullivan’s, but rather a paraphrasing of something he said which was quoted in a Denver Post article (see the post prior to this one).

Anyone familiar with SB25-003 and/or the flurry of gun control measures passed by Democrats in the last few years knows the (intentional?) ignorance of his words.

While much of the bill’s effects on individuals has been well raked-over, there has been less attention on the bill’s effects on both local governments and the beleaguered Colorado Parks and Wildlife department (which was undoubtedly excited to be tasked with this, given how well their wolf efforts have been received).

Whether or not it was the writer’s intent, the article linked at bottom helps fill in the record by asking some Western Slope sheriffs for their thoughts on implementing SB25-003. He asked CPW too about their role.

I won’t go through what all said (I’d recommend reading the entire article to see what each sheriff interviewed thought), but I will give you a couple quotes from near the top:

“Summit County Sheriff Jaime FitzSimons said SB 3 imposes ‘unfunded mandates that require significant time, personnel and financial resources to implement. These include the expansion of firearms safety programs and outreach efforts that were not previously within the scope — or budget — of many sheriff’s offices, particularly in rural or resource-limited counties like Summit,’ FitzSimons said.”

“Moffat County Sheriff Chip McIntyre described his office as one with ‘a lean staff and a budget focused on core public safety services, including patrol, detention and emergency response. Adding a new statutory obligation, especially one that requires verification processes, applicant communication, and documentation, could divert staff time from these primary functions,’ he said. ‘Without additional support, it may delay other services or strain operational efficiency.’”

And skipping further down for CPW’s thoughts:

“Colorado Parks and Wildlife will be in charge of developing both the course criteria and curriculum, as well as the database. SB 3 does authorize the wildlife agency to use $1.4 million from its Parks and Outdoor Recreation Cash Fund this year to help with initial operational costs. But as Parks and Wildlife Law Enforcement Chief Ty Petersburg put it, ‘To say money was allocated is a bit of a misnomer. We’re essentially borrowing our own money.’ Roughly $1 million from the cash fund is slated to go to developing and maintaining the state database. Petersburg said this will be used by multiple entities, including sheriff’s offices, private safety instructors and gun retailers, who will use it to ensure that would-be gun purchasers are meeting all of the criteria. The remaining $400,000 will be used to hire additional staff, like a program manager, a specialist who can work with independent trainers, and IT and administrative support. Petersburg said that money ‘is not there to help offset the sheriff’s costs, and it would probably have to be a far larger number to offset their expenditures.’”

So who does pay?

All residents pay via the opportunity cost of diverting finite resources. Hard to imagine the kind of logic that says diverting law enforcement resources away from patrols, investigations, outreach so that law-abiding gun owners can take courses and register themselves is a way to make us safer, but there you have it.

Oh, and speaking of who pays, it’s anyone who wants the permit. They will have to pay so that the infrastructure to verify that they can exercise their fundamental rights.

READ THE FULL COMMENTARY AT THE COLORADO ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.