The Truth About 1224 and 1229

Sorry, I delayed the next Preparedness 101 blog to get this one out.  I’ll try to get that one written and posted in the next day or so.

Here is the final text of 1224 and 1229.  Governor Chickenpooper (thanks, Jenna!) has now officially signed both of these, plus a handful of additional unconstitutional bills into law.  But since 1224 and 1229 are the two most likely to affect your life, I’ll try and break them both down more than I did in the very beginning.

I’ll start with my personal favorite, HB 1224.  This is the socialist, unconstitutional, dumbest thing I’ve ever heard, standard large-capacity magazine ban bill.  First, the new definition that I’m sure we will all grow to love (sorry, the sarcasm engine is working overtime today):

  • (2) (a) “LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE MEANS:
    (I) A FIXED OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE, BOX, DRUM, FEED STRIP, OR
    SIMILAR DEVICE CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING, OR THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE
    READILY CONVERTED TO ACCEPT, MORE THAN FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF
    AMMUNITION;
    (II) A FIXED, TUBULAR SHOTGUN MAGAZINE THAT HOLDS MORE
    THAN TWENTY-EIGHT INCHES OF SHOTGUN SHELLS, INCLUDING ANY
    EXTENSION DEVICE THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE MAGAZINE AND HOLDS
    ADDITIONAL SHOTGUN SHELLS; OR
    (III) A NONTUBULAR, DETACHABLE MAGAZINE, BOX, DRUM, FEED
    STRIP, OR SIMILAR DEVICE THAT IS CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING MORE THAN
    EIGHT SHOTGUN SHELLS WHEN COMBINED WITH A FIXED MAGAZINE.

Clearly, the intention was to stop people from murdering millions with a 16-round magazine.  But since I said this is likely to affect you and your life, I’ll skip to the good parts.  Point #1: this appears to apply only to the magazines themselves, not to the actual guns.  I can’t find anything in there that leads me down the “all Glocks will be illegal” path.  Let me know if I’m missing it.

Here’s the next part:

  • (b) “LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE” DOES NOT MEAN:
    (I) A FEEDING DEVICE THAT HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY ALTERED SO
    THAT IT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE MORE THAN FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF
    AMMUNITION;          [Jeff’s note: I have no clue what this means… how does one, specifically, “permanently alter” a magazine without damaging it?]
    (II) AN ATTACHED TUBULAR DEVICE DESIGNED TO ACCEPT, AND
    CAPABLE OF OPERATING ONLY WITH,.22 CALIBER RIMFIRE AMMUNITION; OR       [I have a S&W M&P 15-22, a purpose-built .22LR, but I don’t think it falls under this – it has a detachable magazine, not an “attached tubular device”… I’m screwed]
    (III) A TUBULAR MAGAZINE THAT IS CONTAINED IN A LEVER-ACTION
    FIREARM.

Next:

  • 18-12-302. Large-capacity magazines prohibited – penalties –
    exceptions. (1) (a) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, ON
    AND AFTER JULY 1,2013, A PERSON WHO SELLS, TRANSFERS, OR POSSESSES   [June is going to be HUGE in Colorado!!]
    A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE COMMITS A CLASS 2 MISDEMEANOR.
    (b) ANY PERSON WHO VIOLATES SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION
    AFTER HAVING BEEN CONVICTED OF A PRIOR VIOLATION OF SAID SUBSECTION
    (1) COMMITS A CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR.
    (c) ANY PERSON WHO VIOLATES SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION
    COMMITS A CLASS 6 FELONY IF THE PERSON POSSESSED A LARGE-CAPACITY
    MAGAZINE DURING THE COMMISSION OF A FELONY OR ANY CRIME OF
    VIOLENCE, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 18-1.3-406.
  • So in case you’re like me and now you need to know what “any crime of violence” means, here’s the verbiage from 18-1.3-406:
    • (2) (a) (I) “Crime of violence” means any of the crimes specified in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (a) committed, conspired to be committed, or attempted to be committed by a person during which, or in the immediate flight therefrom, the person:
      (A) Used, or possessed and threatened the use of, a deadly weapon; or
      (B) Caused serious bodily injury or death to any other person except another participant.

Here’s the first scary thing I picked out.  If you’ve taken our Law of the Gun & Legal Aftermath of a Defensive Shooting class, you know that “brandishing” is not a crime in Colorado… but “menacing” IS.  There’s an element of intent with menacing, and it appears now that if you are caught menacing with a 16-round magazine, that’s a Class 6 Felony, on top of the menacing charge.  Don’t do it – you’ll lose your guns forever if you do.

So now that I’ve scared you to death, here’s the good news!!  (yes, sorry, more sarcasm)

  • (2) (a) A PERSON MAY POSSESS A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE IF HE
    OR SHE:
    (I) OWNS THE LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE
    OF THIS SECTION; AND
    (II) MAINTAINS CONTINUOUS POSSESSION OF THE LARGE-CAPACITY
    MAGAZINE.

Woo hoo!!  So now all we have to do is prove that we a) owned it prior to July 1st, 2013 and b) were in continuous possession of it.  No sweat!  [damn sarcasm]  But wait, there’s more:

  • (b) IF A PERSON WHO IS ALLEGED TO HAVE VIOLATED SUBSECTION (1)
    OF THIS SECTION ASSERTS THAT HE OR SHE IS PERMITTED TO LEGALLY
    POSSESS A LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (a) OF
    THIS SUBSECTION (2), THE PROSECUTION HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO
    REFUTE THE ASSERTION.

Actually, no sarcasm this time, this is the best part of the bill, er, law.  At least when I say that I owned it legally prior to July 1st, they have to prove that I didn’t.  I’ll take that.

The next part of the bill is all the people who are exempted… but not to worry, it’s pretty much the government… and you don’t qualify.  So feel free to skip right over that part.

The last big part of the bill is some rambling socialist llama poop about manufacturing these things (sorry, Magpul, it was nice knowing you) and how manufacturers have to mark them with the date… blah blah blah.  I’m sure that’ll be cheap.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention my favorite part [sorry, back to the sarcasm again].  The law actually concludes with this gem:

  • SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds,
    determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate
    preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.

You can’t make this stuff up.  Seriously, you can’t.  Health?!?!  Public peace?!?!  Safety???  What, are they worried about big, heavy 30-round PMAGs falling off a building and smashing people in the heads?  How on EARTH does this help my health?  Or anyone’s health?  Are people grinding these things up and putting them in milkshakes now?

1224 was obviously written by this guy:

Architect of new safety legislation in Colorado

Ok, so here’s what we know:

  • If you have a 16+ round magazine prior to July 1st, you’re grandfathered
  • BUT, you can’t let anyone else touch it after July 1st or both of you have committed a Class 2 misdemeanor and the magazine itself is now illegal.  If you’re worried about any of your magazines getting you in trouble down the road, call me at 303-608-1911 and I’ll come pick it up.  Seriously, that’s my number.  I’ll store the magazine for you.  You can’t get it back after July 1st, but I’ll consider it yours when I use it.  I’ll even write your name on it.
  • I now highly recommend that your carry gun holds 15 rounds or less.  For some of us, that’s not a problem.  For others of us who like to carry 16-round 40 S&W magazines for a Springfield XD(M) 3.8 Compact… well, you’re screwed.
  • If you have ANY magazines capable of holding 16 rounds or more, DO NOT LET ANYONE ELSE TOUCH THEM.  Period.  I don’t care if it’s your spouse, your son or daughter, or if you’re giving these to your family in your will.  They can’t touch them…
  • … unless you have a gun trust and the other person is specifically named in the trust.  Just sayin’.  And if you’re interested in such a crazy thing, I have just the person for you: Adam Weitzel.  Just tell him I sent you.
  • New Carry On Colorado policy: if you take an AR-15 class with us, you have to bring your own magazines.  You can’t use mine.  Sorry.
  • Now, to the point that has been getting a lot of swirl lately about magazines that are “readily converted” – I’m sure that will have to get defined in court at some point, but if you haven’t seen this yet, it’s worth the time (it’s 1 minute):

Interestingly, Peter Boyles of KHOW fame (local talk radio station – he’s their morning host and a very pro-gun guy) is organizing a July 2nd magazine day or somesuch.  His vision is to get hundreds or thousands of people together in a public place like the front steps of the capitol, each carrying a magazine capable of holding 16+ rounds, then everyone just hands the magazine to the person next to him/her.  Brilliant idea, and I must say, it’s growing on me.  What a brilliant way to make the point that handing a magazine to another person doesn’t make you any more of a criminal, it doesn’t suddenly decrease public health or safety, and the law is totally unenforceable… unless they start hauling off everyone there, which kinda throws a kink into the plan.  But keep an eye out for that one.

So, class… are we good with 1224 now?  If you’re keeping score, 1224 is now 18-12-301 thru 303.  Find it in the Colorado Revised Statutes nearest you.

Let’s move on 1229.  Here’s where it starts:

  • 18-12-112. Private firearms transfers – background check
    required – penalty – definitions. (1) (a) ON AND AFTER JULY 1, 2013,
    EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (6) OF THIS SECTION, BEFORE ANY
    PERSON WHO IS NOT A LICENSED GUN DEALER, AS DEFINED IN SECTION
    12-26.1-106(6),C.R.S., TRANSFERS OR ATTEMPTS TO TRANSFER POSSESSION
    OF A FIREARM TO A TRANSFEREE, HE OR SHE SHALL:
    (I) REQUIRE THAT A BACKGROUND CHECK, IN ACCORDANCE WITH
    SECTION 24-33.5-424, C.R.S., BE CONDUCTED OF THE PROSPECTIVE
    TRANSFEREE; AND
    (II) OBTAIN APPROVAL OF A TRANSFER FROM THE BUREAU AFTER A
    BACKGROUND CHECK HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY A LICENSED GUN DEALER, IN
    ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 24-33.5-424,C.R.S.

So our socialists have decided that they need to weasel themselves into a transaction between my neighbor and me.  Got it.

Since 1229 is significantly longer than 1224, I’ll skip ahead a little bit.  We get to this:

  • (2) (a) A PROSPECTIVE FIREARM TRANSFEROR WHO IS NOT A
    LICENSED GUN DEALER SHALL ARRANGE FOR A LICENSED GUN DEALER TO
    OBTAIN THE BACKGROUND CHECK REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION.

So if you desire to buy or sell a gun now, you have to go through your local FFL dealer.  Carry On Colorado is not, and never will be, a gun dealer.  Zero interest.  But we have several friends who are in that business, and they all hate these bills right alongside the rest of us.  But honestly, this new provision, which is now state law, isn’t a bad deal for them.  So far.  But the first takeaway: in order to buy or sell a gun privately, between you and your neighbor, you have to go through your favorite FFL dealer.

But the FFL dealer (Federal Firearms License, by the way – the Fed’s way of knowing you’re “authorized” to sell a gun via mountains of red tape) has to then run the check, provide both the buyer and the seller the results of the background check, but since we’re now requiring everyone go through a licensed dealer, we don’t want to encourage price gouging, so they threw this little tidbit in there:

  • (d) A LICENSED GUN DEALER MAY CHARGE A FEE FOR SERVICES
    RENDERED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, WHICH FEE SHALL NOT EXCEED TEN
    DOLLARS.

Translation: regardless of how much the actual background check actually costs, the FFL dealer can not charge more than $10.  That sounds great on paper, until you look at this from the perspective of a gun store.

I’ll start: let’s say that the state of Colorado (or the NICS or whatever) decides to charge $50 per background check.  Right off the bat, all gun purchases the “traditional” way, directly through your gun store, suddenly get more expensive.  By the way, I should point out that the state of Colorado can now tax that transaction however they see fit (see 1228, also signed into law this week).

Ok, so back to private sales.  I have no idea how many private gun sales take place in Colorado every year – no one does.  They’re private.  Duh.  But let’s say there are 500,000 a year.  Now assume for a minute that you own a gun store and now you have 10,000 additional background checks that you now have to provide (on guns that you aren’t selling), and you’re losing $40 per transaction (Colorado charges you $50, you can only charge the seller $10).  That’s a $400,000 loss right off the top.  How good is your business model now?

Already, some gun stores are saying that they are now refusing to do ANY background checks for private sales: read this.

But let’s get back to the new law:

  • (3) (a) A PROSPECTIVE FIREARM TRANSFEREE UNDER THIS SECTION
    SHALL NOT ACCEPT POSSESSION OF THE FIREARM UNLESS THE PROSPECTIVE
    FIREARM TRANSFEROR HAS OBTAINED APPROVAL OF THE TRANSFER FROM
    THE BUREAU AFTER A BACKGROUND CHECK HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY A
    LICENSED GUN DEALER, AS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH (b) OF SUBSECTION (1)
    OF THIS SECTION.

Got it – this is for real, even if you’ve been half-asleep until now.  I can’t sell a gun to my neighbor without a background check.

  • (4) IF THE BUREAU APPROVES A TRANSFER OF A FIREARM PURSUANT
    TO THIS SECTION, THE APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR THIRTY CALENDAR
    DAYS, DURING WHICH TIME THE TRANSFEROR AND TRANSFEREE MAY
    COMPLETE THE TRANSFER.

Ok, now our elected socialists are just having fun with this.  How long can they make a bill these days?

  • (5) A PERSON WHO TRANSFERS A FIREARM IN VIOLATION OF THE
    PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION MAY BE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE FOR
    ANY CIVIL DAMAGES PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY THE TRANSFEREE’S
    SUBSEQUENT USE OF THE FIREARM.

Pay attention to that one above.  They just kinda snuck that one right in there, didn’t they?  So instead of the expected “violating this statute is a class 3 misdemeanor” thing, now when you violate this, you can get sued for any damages the new owner causes with that gun.  Good luck to ya!

Ok, so this law sucks.  Got it.  But there are exceptions, right?  Oh, yes.  Here’s the first exception that jumped out at me:

  • (b) A TRANSFER THAT IS A BONA FIDE GIFT OR LOAN BETWEEN
    IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS, WHICH ARE LIMITED TO SPOUSES, PARENTS,
    CHILDREN, SIBLINGS, GRANDPARENTS, GRANDCHILDREN, NIECES, NEPHEWS,
    FIRST COUSINS, AUNTS, AND UNCLES;

Nice!  Ok, so I can give a gun to my son when he gets old enough and I don’t have to have a criminal background check on him.  Excellent!

  • (c) A TRANSFER THAT OCCURS BY OPERATION OF LAW OR BECAUSE
    OF THE DEATH OF A PERSON FOR WHOM THE PROSPECTIVE TRANSFEROR IS AN
    EXECUTOR OR ADMINISTRATOR OF AN ESTATE OR A TRUSTEE OF A TRUST
    CREATED IN A WILL;

Don’t you just HATE that the government treats us like we’re 4 years old?  Did they really have to spell this out?  Apparently so.  But here’s where it starts to get really good:

  • (d) A TRANSFER THAT IS TEMPORARY AND OCCURS WHILE IN THE
    HOME OF THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE IF:      [Jeff note: in the home is key for this part “d”]
    (I) THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE IS NOT PROHIBITED FROM
    POSSESSING FIREARMS; AND
    (II) THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE REASONABLY BELIEVES THAT
    POSSESSION OF THE FIREARM IS NECESSARY TO PREVENT IMMINENT DEATH
    OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE;
    (e) A TEMPORARY TRANSFER OF POSSESSION WITHOUT TRANSFER OF  [I guess this is now outside the home in “e”]
    OWNERSHIP OR A TITLE TO OWNERSHIP, WHICH TRANSFER TAKES PLACE:
    (I) AT A SHOOTING RANGE LOCATED IN OR ON PREMISES OWNED OR
    OCCUPIED BY A DULY INCORPORATED ORGANIZATION ORGANIZED FOR
    CONSERVATION PURPOSES OR TO FOSTER PROFICIENCY IN FIREARMS; [don’t take anyone shooting in national park/forest land]
    (II) AT A TARGET FIREARM SHOOTING COMPETITION UNDER THE
    AUSPICES OF, OR APPROVED BY, A STATE AGENCY OR A NONPROFIT
    ORGANIZATION; OR
  • (III) WHILE HUNTING, FISHING, TARGET SHOOTING, OR TRAPPING IF:
    (A) THE HUNTING, FISHING, TARGET SHOOTING, OR TRAPPING IS
    LEGAL IN ALL PLACES WHERE THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE POSSESSES THE
    FIREARM; AND
    (B) THE UNLICENSED TRANSFEREE HOLDS ANY LICENSE OR PERMIT
    THAT IS REQUIRED FOR SUCH HUNTING, FISHING, TARGET SHOOTING, OR
    TRAPPING;    [ok, this part seems to contradict paragraph (I) above – can I take someone shooting in national park/forest land or not??]
  • (f) A TRANSFER OF A FIREARM THAT IS MADE TO FACILITATE THE
    REPAIR OR MAINTENANCE OF THE FIREARM; EXCEPT THAT THIS PARAGRAPH
    (f) DOES NOT APPLY UNLESS ALL PARTIES WHO POSSESS THE FIREARM AS A
    RESULT OF THE TRANSFER MAY LEGALLY POSSESS A FIREARM;   [I can take my gun to a gunsmith, nice – but again, the fact that we have to spell that out does NOT make me happy]
  • (g) ANY TEMPORARY TRANSFER THAT OCCURS WHILE IN THE
    CONTINUOUS PRESENCE OF THE OWNER OF THE FIREARM;  [I love it when the law is written specifically so that activist judges get to decide what it really means]
  • (h) A TEMPORARY TRANSFER FOR NOT MORE THAN SEVENTY-TWO
    HOURS. A PERSON WHO TRANSFERS A FIREARM PURSUANT TO THIS
    PARAGRAPH (h) MAY BE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES
    PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY THE TRANSFEREE’S SUBSEQUENT UNLAWFUL USE
    OF THE FIREARM; OR   [I’m sorry, but why couldn’t the socialists have said this in 1224???]

Skipping ahead a little here…

  • (b) UNLESS A TRANSFEROR OF A FIREARM HAS ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE
    TO THE CONTRARY, THE TRANSFEROR MAY RELY UPON THE STATEMENT OF
    AN OWNER, MANAGER, OR EMPLOYEE OF A BUSINESS THAT REPAIRS OR
    MAINTAINS FIREARMS THAT NO OWNER, MANAGER, OR EMPLOYEE OF THE
    BUSINESS IS PROHIBITED FROM POSSESSING A FIREARM.
  • (9) (a) A PERSON WHO VIOLATES A PROVISION OF THIS SECTION
    COMMITS A CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR AND SHALL BE PUNISHED IN
    ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 18-1.3-501. THE PERSON SHALL ALSO BE
    PROHIBITED FROM POSSESSING A FIREARM FOR TWO YEARS, BEGINNING ON
    THE DATE OF HIS OR HER CONVICTION.  [seriously?]

Skipping a lot, then the familiar ending:

  • SECTION 13. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds,
    PAGE 18-HOUSE BILL 13-1229determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate
    preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.

Ok, whew.  So what do we know?  Well for starters, we know that 2014 can’t get here soon enough.  We also know that we may or may not be able to take people shooting on national park/forest land.  But when you come shooting with Carry On Colorado, we may be ok.  Just bring your own magazines.

Whew!  Now… what did I miss?

Advertisements

6 comments on “The Truth About 1224 and 1229

  1. Ron says:

    Ok, so let me get this straight…..My Winchester Model 1873 lever action in 44/40 caliber and was manufactured in 1889 and holds 17 rounds, I will no longer be able to let my sons or a friend shoot it? Or any of the replica Winchesters out there used for cowboy action shooting? Jeeeeeesuuus!!!

    As for magazines for ARs, I think I’d pick up 2 or 3 15 round magazines for range use and safely store my 30 roung mags safely away somewhere. That way the mags won’t inadvertantly get in the wrong hands.

  2. Ron – it does say that a large-capacity magazine is not “(III) A TUBULAR MAGAZINE THAT IS CONTAINED IN A LEVER-ACTION FIREARM.” Is that you? Maybe you have an exemption for that thing (let’s hope).

  3. Ron says:

    Actually I did re-read that. It looks like the tubular magazine like my lever action does not fall under this although it does hold 17 rounds. Thanks for putting all this info out there. A lot to wade through.

  4. […] First, here’s my rant on 1224 and 1229:  https://jeffcarryoncolorado.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/the-truth-about-1224-and-1229/ […]

  5. […] “continuous possession” means (and if you have no idea what I’m talking about, read this), after a lot of pressure from the Independence Institute and others, the Governor’s office […]

  6. […] been talking for a long time about how idiotic, insane, ridiculous, and unenforceable some of the new gun laws are.  Most of […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s