Colorado House Bill 1224: Magazine Ban Worse Than Advertised

Posted by on Mar 13 2013 | guns, PPC, Second Amendment

By now you’ve heard about the magazine ban that’s on its way to the Governor’s desk. But there is something about this bill, HB 13-1224, that you probably don’t know: It bans MOST normal magazines found in normal guns! Watch the video below as I demonstrate how Colorado’s magazine ban is way worse than advertised with my very normal Glock 19 handgun.

5 comments for now

5 Responses to “Colorado House Bill 1224: Magazine Ban Worse Than Advertised”

  1. Kevin

    The “universal background check” law is even worse. I travel weekly for work leaving my firearms, and evil standard magazines, at home with my wife (who also owns firearms). So now I have several equally stupid choices.
    1. Nothing, and as of wednesday each week we are criminals. I’ve illegal transfered ownership to my wife firearms for longer than 72 hours with out a background check.
    2. Bi-Weekly background checks and transfers back and forth.
    3. Check my collection of 40 plus rifles and pistols in checked bagage to take with me every sunday or monday. And pay the pees.
    4. Sell my collection, mostly without magazines, losing thousands of dollars.

    Guess what I pick option 1, just ignore the idiots and accept the consequences. Now, why do I follow any other laws, or pay taxes?
    That is the only question left to figure out. I work hard at being a lawful gun owner, I should put just as much effor tinto my new criminal pursuits.

    13 Mar 2013 at 9:31 pm

  2. Also, & I’m sure Mr. Kopel is hip to this unless he’s all juiced out atm, the bill exempts carriers that transport magazines made “within Colorado.

    That means the fed ex or UPS guy who has 17 round mags to deliver to the Denver PD would be violating the law if those mags originate out of state.

    A trucker with a few boxes of 15 round, yet readily convertible, mags coming from Kansas on his way to Cheyyene? A lawbreaker even if he doesn’t stop.

    A civilian carrier delivering a shipment of 30 round mags to Ft Carson? A vile & disgusting criminal if those mags originated from someplace not “within Colorado”.

    In fact, someone flying a cargo plane over Colorado with mags from someplace not “within Colorado” is a misdemeanant even if he/she doesn’t land.

    I’m thinking that a lawyer who slept through no more than half of law school should be able to convince even a 10th circuit judge to strike this thing down on July 2nd by 2p.m. MDT. Wouldn’t even have to get into the 2nd amendment – the interstate commerce clause would do just fine. & this part of the law can’t be separated from the rest, so the whole thing would sink.

    Plus there’s no transfer exceptions. So if someone’s wife used his 16 (or 12) shot firearm to justifiably repel a home intruder, she’d be a criminal herself. Ya couldn’t even hand over an SKS with a fixed 20 round magazine to a gunsmith for repair. That’s if Hickenlooper signs it into law.

    In a shameless bit of self promotion, I hash out some of the issues with this bill over at my place, but y’all get the idea.

    Mr. Caldera, if ya can, since you might be able to reach ol’ Hick, could ya tell him this bill not only has 2nd amendment issues, and Section 2 Article 13 issues, but kinda runs roughshod all over that interstate commerce bit? That might convince him that a veto is a terrible thing to waste…

    14 Mar 2013 at 10:46 am

  3. JayeRandom

    Excellent presentation and style. You should do more videos!

    15 Mar 2013 at 10:44 pm

  4. Bob

    Jon,
    I know there has been a lot of focus on HB1224, the magazine ban, but it seems to me too little attention is being paid to HB1229. This bill seems to me to be much more dangerous, the magazine ban being unenforceable, while the universal background checks creates a defacto registry. Reading the bill, it states that the FFL which conducts the transfer background check must retain records in the same manner as when conducting a retail sale.

    Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:

    (b)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.

    (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.
    (b)
    A LICENSED GUN DEALER WHO OBTAINS A BACKGROUND CHECK ON A PROSPECTIVE TRANSFEREE SHALL RECORD THE TRANSFER, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 12-26-102, C.R.S.,AND RETAIN THE RECORDS, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 12-26-103, C.R.S., IN THE SAME MANNER AS WHEN CONDUCTING A SALE, RENTAL, OR EXCHANGE AT RETAIL. THE LICENSED GUN DEALER SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS, INCLUDING U.S.C. SEC. 922, AS IF HE OR SHE WERE TRANSFERRING THE FIREARM FROM HIS OR HER INVENTORY TO THE PROSPECTIVE TRANSFEREE.

    It sounds as if a 4473 will have to be filled out providing full traceability of firearms bought new after this law takes effect and defacto registration.

    I also interpret this bill as not allowing someone other than the owner to use the firearm for target shooting except at a commercial range.

    THE TRANSFER IS A TEMPORARY TRANSFER OF POSSESSION WITHOUT TRANSFER OF 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;
    (II) AT A TARGET FIREARM SHOOTING COMPETITION UNDER THE AUSPICES OF, OR APPROVED BY,A STATE AGENCY OR A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.

    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.

    There is no provision for me loaning a gun to Smitty, a non-relative, if we wanted to go target shooting at someplace, say for instance, the Pawnee Grasslands or the woods somewhere.

    Hmmm…, lose all of your guns for two years…

    They’re trying to pawn this bill off as something sounding so innocuous as a simple background check for private sales, but in reality is much worse.

    16 Mar 2013 at 3:43 pm

  5. [...] Jon Caldara: Colorado House Bill 1224: Magazine Ban Worse Than Advertised [...]

    20 Mar 2013 at 10:07 am

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Clicky Web Analytics