Colorado lawmakers reintroducing 'red flag' gun bill

Colorado lawmakers reintroducing 'red flag' gun bill
Marianne Goodland, Colorado Politics Feb 14, 2019 Updated Feb 15, 2019

Colorado lawmakers announced Thursday they will try again to pass a "red flag" bill to take guns out of the hands of those deemed mentally unstable.

While the bill has yet to be formally introduced in the House, supporters indicated the 2019 red flag bill will be dramatically different than the version rejected in the Republican-controlled state Senate last May.

As described by lawmakers, this year's "Extreme Risk Protection Order" bill would allow law enforcement officers to remove guns and ammunition from a person deemed a risk to themselves or to others.

Under the measure, once law enforcement removes guns from someone, a judge would be required to hold a hearing within 14 days to determine if the respondent is mentally stable.

In contrast to last year's measure, the respondent would be provided with legal counsel. But if the person is deemed a risk to themselves or others, law enforcement could hold the weapons for up to 364 days, double the number of days in the 2018 bill.

Hopefully they let the public read the whole bill before voting on it. While it sounds like a good idea, the devil will be in the details.

FredHayek wrote: Hopefully they let the public read the whole bill before voting on it. While it sounds like a good idea, the devil will be in the details.

READING the written words, in it's entirety, is always good....comprehension of the content would always seem like a no brainer, BUT that rarely happens it seems jmo

Colorado House passes ‘red flag’ bill
Legislation, which would allow law enforcement to seize weapons, heads to state Senate
By Ryan Maye Handy Herald Staff Writer
Monday, March 4, 2019 5:03 PM

DENVER – Colorado’s controversial “red flag” gun bill, which would give law enforcement the right to seize firearms from gun owners who they believe pose a threat, passed the House on Monday against the objections of gun-rights activists. It now heads to the Senate.

House Bill 1177 has been supported by some Front Range sheriffs and was crafted by a lawmaker whose son died in a mass shooting. The bill would allow family or law enforcement to flag someone as a threat and seek a court order to have that person’s firearms seized. If approved, a hearing would determine whether to extend the weapons seizure for as many as 364 days.

Fourteen states have enacted so-called “red flag” bills, otherwise known as extreme risk protection orders. Colorado’s version empowers family members or law enforcement to petition a judge to place a temporary order on a person who is a threat to his/herself or others. If approved, the order would require that person to surrender all firearms for up to two weeks while the court conducts a hearing to assess grounds for a longer-term seizure.

'Red flag' gun bill passes Colorado Senate by one vote
Marianne Goodland, Colorado Politics Mar 28, 2019 Updated 1 hr ago

Senate President Leroy Garcia was the only Democrat to vote against House Bill 1177, which passed by an 18-17 margin in a chamber where Democrats hold a slim majority. Garcia, D-Pueblo, who signaled earlier in the week that he would vote no, joined every Senate Republican in opposing the bill.

The measure now moves back to the House of Representatives, where Democrats hold a larger majority.

The House previously approved an earlier version of the bill, but needs to vote again on Senate amendments before the bill can advance to Gov. Jared Polis for his signature.

Lots of questions and "what ifs" associated with this bill. Visit "rallyforourrights.com" For extensive coverage.
On that site is a listing of the counties that will be 2nd Amendment sanctuaries; Park County is one.

Hmm, isn't "sanctuary" a form of secession? Refusing to enforce laws forced upon you by a larger, heavy handed government entity - sounds like they may need to bring in Union.. ahem, Federal soldiers....

So... sanctuaries are ok when then protect guns. They are not ok when the protect people. Got it.

Both the Aurora and Denver police unions hate this bill. It would endanger their rank and file members.
Maybe the politicians who signed the bill into law should volunteer as point man to go into that dark house and retrieve all the weapons?

hillfarmer wrote: So... sanctuaries are ok when then protect guns. They are not ok when the protect people. Got it.

My point was that sanctuaries are never ok because of the precedent set by Lincoln in the [un]civil war. That is exactly how we got there. The south refused to enforce and collect tariffs that they considered unfair and rigged to favor northern states.