House Bill 21-1106
EFFECTS OF THE BILL:
Requires all firearms to be locked away when not in use.
Makes it a crime to disobey the bill.
WHY IS THIS BILL BAD FOR COLORADO?
The reason stated for this bill is to reduce injuries or deaths when youths and others gain unauthorized access to firearms. If that is a rampant problem, why haven’t the proponents produced facts supporting the claim?
It appears it’s a crime under this bill only if the firearm wasn’t locked away, and if possession of the firearm by another person was unauthorized. (That’s because the bill describes the duty to store the firearm as being to prevent unauthorized possession.)
But many family members, including minors, are provided authorized access to the firearms owned by other family members (e.g., a parent allowing a minor to use the firearm for hunting or target practice). If an accident occurs in such situations, wouldn’t the bill cause prosecutors to claim (counter to the facts) that the possession was unauthorized just so they could get a conviction in a situation that isn’t an actual crime?
Wouldn’t this bill encourage prosecutorial misconduct?
Many people keep firearms for personal protection. The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged that requiring firearms to be inaccessible creates a hazard for the citizen attempting to protect himself or his family. If an emergency occurs in the home requiring a firearm for defense (e.g., home invasion, robbery), will honest citizens be harmed or killed because they won’t have ready access to their protective firearms?
Wouldn’t it be better to expand the availability of firearm safety education? Might that not save more lives than this invasion of privacy?
The law already creates liability for a person who is negligent in storing his firearm, resulting in harm or death to another. Is this additional measure necessary? If this restriction becomes law, will it encourage the adoption of more restrictions on firearm ownership?
View this Bad Bill here.