Colorado SB 25-003 gun ban defunds CPW

[bayoublaster7527]

Apparently the bill got even worse before it passed the House, further defunding parks and wildlife to make up for any potential shortfalls in licensing fees. This above and beyond the initial startup cost of $1.2 million. Becoming very clear the majority of Dems in the Colorado General Assembly don’t care about parks and wildlife. They only care about levying restrictions on legal gun owners and keeping those Everytown for Mike Bloomberg checks rolling in.

 

[elkduds]

Apparently the bill got even worse before it passed the House, further defunding parks and wildlife to make up for any potential shortfalls in licensing fees. This above and beyond the initial startup cost of $1.2 million. Becoming very clear the majority of Dems in the Colorado General Assembly don’t care about parks and wildlife. They only care about levying restrictions on legal gun owners and keeping those Everytown for Mike Bloomberg checks rolling in.

Exactly what changed to make it 'even worse?'

 

[elkduds]

Apparently the bill got even worse before it passed the House, further defunding parks and wildlife to make up for any potential shortfalls in licensing fees. This above and beyond the initial startup cost of $1.2 million. Becoming very clear the majority of Dems in the Colorado General Assembly don’t care about parks and wildlife. They only care about levying restrictions on legal gun owners and keeping those Everytown for Mike Bloomberg checks rolling in.

Here is the relevant text from the bill. Reads like CPW gets reimbursed for everything it has to do per the bill. The reimbursements include fees from permit applicants and direct payment from CO general fund. Am I missing something?

.15 (4) (a) THE DIVISION MAY ADOPT PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES16 NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS SECTION.17 (b) THE DIVISION SHALL ESTABLISH COURSE REQUIREMENTS FOR18 A BASIC FIREARMS SAFETY COURSE AND AN EXTENDED FIREARMS SAFETY19 COURSE THAT INCLUDE INSTRUCTION ON THE SUBJECTS REQUIRED IN20 SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(a)(IV). THE REQUIREMENTS MUST NOT REQUIRE21 MORE THAN FOUR HOURS OF INSTRUCTION FOR A BASIC FIREARMS SAFETY22 COURSE OR TWELVE HOURS OF INSTRUCTION FOR AN EXTENDED FIREARMS23 SAFETY COURSE.24 (c) THE DIVISION SHALL CREATE AN APPLICATION FORM FOR A25 PERSON TO APPLY FOR A FIREARMS SAFETY COURSE ELIGIBILITY CARD26 PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116.THE APPLICATION FORMMUSTREQUIRE27 THE INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED ON AN APPLICATION-17- 0031 PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(b). THE DIVISION SHALL MAKE THE2 APPLICATION FORM AVAILABLE AT NO COST ON ITS WEBSITE.3 (5) (a) THE COMMISSION SHALL ESTABLISH A FIREARMS TRAINING4 AND SAFETY COURSE RECORD FEE FOR A PERSON TO BE INCLUDED IN THE5 SYSTEM.THE FEE MUST REFLECT ACTUAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS TO6 IMPLEMENT THIS SECTION. THE COMMISSION MAY ADJUST THE FEE, BUT7 SHALL NOT ADJUST THE FEE MORE THAN ONE TIME EACH YEAR. THE8 DIVISION SHALL TRANSMIT THE FEE MONEY REMITTED TO THE DIVISION BY9 A SHERIFF PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(b) TO THE STATE10 TREASURER, WHO SHALL DEPOSIT THE FEE MONEY IN THE FIREARMS11 TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND. 12 (b) (I) THE FIREARMS TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND13 IS CREATED IN THE STATE TREASURY. THE FUND CONSISTS OF MONEY14 CREDITED TO THE FUND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (5)(a) OF THIS SECTION15 AND ANY OTHER MONEY THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY MAY APPROPRIATE16 OR TRANSFER TO THE FUND. THE STATE TREASURER SHALL CREDIT ALL17 INTEREST AND INCOME DERIVED FROM THE DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT OF18 MONEY IN THE FIREARMS TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND TO19 THE FUND. MONEY IN THE FUND IS CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATED TO THE20 DIVISION FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION.21 (II) THE MONEY CREDITED TO THE FIREARMS TRAINING AND22 SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(b) AND23 ANY INCOME AND INTEREST DERIVED FROM THE DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT24 OF THE MONEY IS EXEMPT FROM ANY RESTRICTION ON SPENDING,25 REVENUE, OR APPROPRIATIONS, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE26 RESTRICTIONS OF SECTION 20 OF ARTICLEXOF THE STATE CONSTITUTION.27 (c) (I) BEFOREDECEMBER31, 2029,IN ORDERTO IMPLEMENT THIS-18- 0031 SECTION, THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION MAY REPORT TO THE STATE2 TREASURER AN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO TRANSFER TO THE FIREARMS3 TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND FROM THE PARKS AND4 OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND.WITHIN THREE DAYS AFTER RECEIVING5 A REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR, THE STATE TREASURER SHALL TRANSFER6 THE AMOUNT OFMONEY DESCRIBED IN THE REPORT.THE DIRECTOR OFTHE7 DIVISION MAY MAKE MULTIPLE REPORTS TO THE TREASURER PURSUANT TO8 THIS SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I).9 (II) (A) IN ORDER TO RESTORE TO THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR10 RECREATION CASH FUND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY TRANSFERRED FROM THE11 FUND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I) OF THIS SECTION, WITH12 INTEREST, THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION MAY REPORT TO THE STATE13 TREASURER AN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO TRANSFER FROM THE FIREARMS14 TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND TO THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR15 RECREATION CASH FUND.WITHIN THREE DAYS AFTER RECEIVING A REPORT16 FROM THE DIRECTOR, THE STATE TREASURER SHALL TRANSFER THE17 AMOUNT OF MONEY DESCRIBED IN THE REPORT. THE DIRECTOR OF THE18 DIVISION MAY MAKE MULTIPLE REPORTS TO THE TREASURER PURSUANT TO19 THIS SUBSECTION (5)(c)(II)(A).20 (B) THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE TRANSFERS TO THE PARKS AND21 OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION22 (5)(c)(II) MUST NOTBE GREATERTHAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT TRANSFERRED23 FROM THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND PURSUANT TO24 SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I) OF THIS SECTION.25 (C) BY JUNE 30, 2030, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE TRANSFERS TO26 THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND REPORTED BY THE27 DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION TO THE STATE TREASURER PURSUANT TO THIS-19- 0031 SUBSECTION (5)(c)(II) MUST BE EQUAL TO THE TOTAL AMOUNT2 TRANSFERRED FROM THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND3 PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I) OF THIS SECTION, PLUS FAIR MARKET4 INTEREST, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Here is the relevant text from the bill. Reads like CPW gets reimbursed for everything it has to do per the bill. The reimbursements include fees from permit applicants and direct payment from CO general fund. Am I missing something?

.15 (4) (a) THE DIVISION MAY ADOPT PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES16 NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS SECTION.17 (b) THE DIVISION SHALL ESTABLISH COURSE REQUIREMENTS FOR18 A BASIC FIREARMS SAFETY COURSE AND AN EXTENDED FIREARMS SAFETY19 COURSE THAT INCLUDE INSTRUCTION ON THE SUBJECTS REQUIRED IN20 SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(a)(IV). THE REQUIREMENTS MUST NOT REQUIRE21 MORE THAN FOUR HOURS OF INSTRUCTION FOR A BASIC FIREARMS SAFETY22 COURSE OR TWELVE HOURS OF INSTRUCTION FOR AN EXTENDED FIREARMS23 SAFETY COURSE.24 (c) THE DIVISION SHALL CREATE AN APPLICATION FORM FOR A25 PERSON TO APPLY FOR A FIREARMS SAFETY COURSE ELIGIBILITY CARD26 PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116.THE APPLICATION FORMMUSTREQUIRE27 THE INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED ON AN APPLICATION-17- 0031 PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(b). THE DIVISION SHALL MAKE THE2 APPLICATION FORM AVAILABLE AT NO COST ON ITS WEBSITE.3 (5) (a) THE COMMISSION SHALL ESTABLISH A FIREARMS TRAINING4 AND SAFETY COURSE RECORD FEE FOR A PERSON TO BE INCLUDED IN THE5 SYSTEM.THE FEE MUST REFLECT ACTUAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS TO6 IMPLEMENT THIS SECTION. THE COMMISSION MAY ADJUST THE FEE, BUT7 SHALL NOT ADJUST THE FEE MORE THAN ONE TIME EACH YEAR. THE8 DIVISION SHALL TRANSMIT THE FEE MONEY REMITTED TO THE DIVISION BY9 A SHERIFF PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(b) TO THE STATE10 TREASURER, WHO SHALL DEPOSIT THE FEE MONEY IN THE FIREARMS11 TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND. 12 (b) (I) THE FIREARMS TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND13 IS CREATED IN THE STATE TREASURY. THE FUND CONSISTS OF MONEY14 CREDITED TO THE FUND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (5)(a) OF THIS SECTION15 AND ANY OTHER MONEY THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY MAY APPROPRIATE16 OR TRANSFER TO THE FUND. THE STATE TREASURER SHALL CREDIT ALL17 INTEREST AND INCOME DERIVED FROM THE DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT OF18 MONEY IN THE FIREARMS TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND TO19 THE FUND. MONEY IN THE FUND IS CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATED TO THE20 DIVISION FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION.21 (II) THE MONEY CREDITED TO THE FIREARMS TRAINING AND22 SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-12-116 (5)(b) AND23 ANY INCOME AND INTEREST DERIVED FROM THE DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT24 OF THE MONEY IS EXEMPT FROM ANY RESTRICTION ON SPENDING,25 REVENUE, OR APPROPRIATIONS, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE26 RESTRICTIONS OF SECTION 20 OF ARTICLEXOF THE STATE CONSTITUTION.27 (c) (I) BEFOREDECEMBER31, 2029,IN ORDERTO IMPLEMENT THIS-18- 0031 SECTION, THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION MAY REPORT TO THE STATE2 TREASURER AN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO TRANSFER TO THE FIREARMS3 TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND FROM THE PARKS AND4 OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND.WITHIN THREE DAYS AFTER RECEIVING5 A REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR, THE STATE TREASURER SHALL TRANSFER6 THE AMOUNT OFMONEY DESCRIBED IN THE REPORT.THE DIRECTOR OFTHE7 DIVISION MAY MAKE MULTIPLE REPORTS TO THE TREASURER PURSUANT TO8 THIS SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I).9 (II) (A) IN ORDER TO RESTORE TO THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR10 RECREATION CASH FUND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY TRANSFERRED FROM THE11 FUND PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I) OF THIS SECTION, WITH12 INTEREST, THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION MAY REPORT TO THE STATE13 TREASURER AN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO TRANSFER FROM THE FIREARMS14 TRAINING AND SAFETY COURSE CASH FUND TO THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR15 RECREATION CASH FUND.WITHIN THREE DAYS AFTER RECEIVING A REPORT16 FROM THE DIRECTOR, THE STATE TREASURER SHALL TRANSFER THE17 AMOUNT OF MONEY DESCRIBED IN THE REPORT. THE DIRECTOR OF THE18 DIVISION MAY MAKE MULTIPLE REPORTS TO THE TREASURER PURSUANT TO19 THIS SUBSECTION (5)(c)(II)(A).20 (B) THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE TRANSFERS TO THE PARKS AND21 OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION22 (5)(c)(II) MUST NOTBE GREATERTHAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT TRANSFERRED23 FROM THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND PURSUANT TO24 SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I) OF THIS SECTION.25 (C) BY JUNE 30, 2030, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE TRANSFERS TO26 THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND REPORTED BY THE27 DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION TO THE STATE TREASURER PURSUANT TO THIS-19- 0031 SUBSECTION (5)(c)(II) MUST BE EQUAL TO THE TOTAL AMOUNT2 TRANSFERRED FROM THE PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION CASH FUND3 PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (5)(c)(I) OF THIS SECTION, PLUS FAIR MARKET4 INTEREST, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR

In the most recent fiscal note, it explains that $1.4 million will be transferred the first year from the Outdoor Recreation Cash Fund to the Firearm Licensing Fund and estimated $500,000 in the following years to cover the operating costs in excess of the collected fees. They don’t have to “reimburse” the CPW Outdoor Recreation Cash Fund until 2030. That estimate is based on the false premise that CPW can manage all this with just 3 FTE. Gonna take way more than that, with Hunter Ed booking out 120 days currently in some areas. The point is to create a process so lengthy that no one uses it. Keep in mind these same folks told us wolf reintroduction would cost $500k and it’s closer $5 million. All this is in an environment where the state has a $1.3 billion budget deficit. The goal is to regulate and restrict gun ownership out of existence, by first creating a lengthy, cumbersome process that discourages ownership of the most popular, best selling rifles. And if you think SB 25-003 is the end of gun control bills and restrictions in Colorado, then you have been completely duped. Majority of Colorado General Assembly Dems are all in on the take from Everytown for Mike Bloomberg. They have to propose new anti-gun bills every session to keep that money and support flowing.

 

[elkduds]

We live in a nation of states. Mine has had it with mass shootings and seeks to legally limit the means for same. Mine also supported law, order and the Constitution in Nov. 2024. Ironic to hear pro 2A arguments based on Constitutionality from supporters of the aspiring King of 'Merica. More legal restrictions on military firepower in civilian hands suits me fine. I read 2A in the order it was deliberately written by the founders. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," I'm not here to change minds, mine is made up. Well regulated.

 

[Cogreeny]

We live in a nation of states. Mine has had it with mass shootings and seeks to legally limit the means for same. Mine also supported law, order and the Constitution in Nov. 2024. Ironic to hear pro 2A arguments based on Constitutionality from supporters of the aspiring King of 'Merica. More legal restrictions on military firepower in civilian hands suits me fine. I read 2A in the order it was deliberately written by the founders. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," I'm not here to change minds, mine is made up. Well regulated.

 

[elkduds]

View attachment 365739

People who reasonably disagree with you are gay? Find a better insult: https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/top-10-rare-and-amusing-insults-vol-1

 

[Forkyfinder]

We live in a nation of states. Mine has had it with mass shootings and seeks to legally limit the means for same. Mine also supported law, order and the Constitution in Nov. 2024. Ironic to hear pro 2A arguments based on Constitutionality from supporters of the aspiring King of 'Merica. More legal restrictions on military firepower in civilian hands suits me fine. I read 2A in the order it was deliberately written by the founders. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," I'm not here to change minds, mine is made up. Well regulated.

Heres the proper context of "well regulated" that you are missing. It means the inverse of what you think.

 

[Cogreeny]

People who reasonably disagree with you are gay? Find a better insult: https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/top-10-rare-and-amusing-insults-vol-1

 

[elkduds]

View attachment 365740

Heres the proper context of "well regulated" that you are missing. It means the inverse of what you think.

Second Amendment's Purpose: The Second Amendment's purpose was to ensure that the citizenry was capable of forming and maintaining a militia, not to guarantee an individual right to own firearms."

That is exactly my point, thank you.

 

[Cogreeny]

Second Amendment's Purpose: The Second Amendment's purpose was to ensure that the citizenry was capable of forming and maintaining a militia, not to guarantee an individual right to own firearms."

That is exactly my point, thank you.

You can rest easy at night knowing we’ll still be buying and building better than military grade weaponry and hunting with it in the same places you’re hunting. Good times.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Second Amendment's Purpose: The Second Amendment's purpose was to ensure that the citizenry was capable of forming and maintaining a militia, not to guarantee an individual right to own firearms."

That is exactly my point, thank you.

Interesting - it cant keep the story straight.

 

[COEngineer]

Since this is a hunting forum, I would like to suggest that we focus on the effects on CPW (and therefore on our wildlife, habitat, and hunting privileges) and not re-hash the 2A arguments ad nauseum.

As I understand it, they are going to steal from the Parks Cash fund (originally they were after the Wildlife cash fund, which is hunting license dollars, but they switched to Parks to avoid PR rules) and they *can/should* repay the Parks fund over time, but as anyone who knows how well politician's keep their promises, I think it is reasonable to fear that the Parks fund will not be repayed or at least not fully or timely.

The bigger question is, what the hell does CPW have to do with semi-auto gun training??? Even if you agree with making it harder to obtain a certain gun type, why would you put the onus on the Parks and Wildlife department? The obvious answer is because this bill was not well thought out and because the Parks have funds (the new Keep Colorado Wild Pass which is default added to your car registration fees has been a boon for the Parks Cash fund). Back to the original point, this should not affect the Wildlife side of CPW, but I don't understand their staffing/funding well enough to say that it won't.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

We live in a nation of states. Mine has had it with mass shootings and seeks to legally limit the means for same. Mine also supported law, order and the Constitution in Nov. 2024. Ironic to hear pro 2A arguments based on Constitutionality from supporters of the aspiring King of 'Merica. More legal restrictions on military firepower in civilian hands suits me fine. I read 2A in the order it was deliberately written by the founders. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," I'm not here to change minds, mine is made up. Well regulated.

I’m confused, you ascribe to the fact that we citizens make up the militia but you don’t believe we should be able to own military grade firearms? Which is it? I just don’t believe law-abiding citizens should have to buy back their rights from the government. If you think the controlling majority in the Colorado General Assembly really cares about public safety, then you are sorely mistaken. Why do they continually disregard and show open contempt for the primary public safety officers in this state (literally every county Sheriff)? I attended many of the committee hearings to testify and the open disgust with which gun owners were treated by the committee Dems was very troubling. So CO Dems are the party of law and order, huh? Are you familiar with Denver? Why don’t they support law enforcement?

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Second Amendment's Purpose: The Second Amendment's purpose was to ensure that the citizenry was capable of forming and maintaining a militia, not to guarantee an individual right to own firearms."

That is exactly my point, thank you.

Actually Supreme Court ruling hold that the Second Amendment does in fact guarantee an individual right to own firearms. Who do you think makes up a militia? It is INDIVIDUAL citizens. In fact FOID laws have been recently found to be more unconstitutional than simple assault weapons bans.

Illinois circuit judge finds FOID cards for firearms in home unconstitutional

This ruling applies to those with guns in their homes.

www.14news.com

so back to OP, this bill has gotten worse through the amendment process. And from a hunting/wildlife perspective, I think it is a terrible decision to place this burden of carrying out a very controversial gun control mandate on Colorado Parks and Wildlife. But back to my original point, majority of Co Dems couldn’t care less.

 

[elkduds]

Actually Supreme Court ruling hold that the Second Amendment does in fact guarantee an individual right to own firearms. Who do you think makes up a militia? It is INDIVIDUAL citizens. In fact FOID laws have been recently found to be more unconstitutional than simple assault weapons bans.

Illinois circuit judge finds FOID cards for firearms in home unconstitutional

This ruling applies to those with guns in their homes.

www.14news.com

so back to OP, this bill has gotten worse through the amendment process. And from a hunting/wildlife perspective, I think it is a terrible decision to place this burden of carrying out a very controversial gun control mandate on Colorado Parks and Wildlife. But back to my original point, majority of Co Dems couldn’t care less.

Asking again, how is it worse? It originally made the weapons it now permits completely illegal.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Asking again, how is it worse? It originally made the weapons it now permits completely illegal.

Sure, I understand at face value how from a purely ownership perspective the bill is "less worse" in its current form than the original bill. It was originally a semi-automatic firearms ban and through amendments it shifted to a permit-to-purchase/FOID law.

However, I would propose that from a parks/wildlife, fiscal budget, and constitutionality perspective the bill is worse. Objective evaluation of "worse" depends on how you are viewing it. As previously stated it steals $1.3 million from the Outdoor Recreation Fund and $500k in following years to fund Firearms Licensing. Why should the burden be placed on Parks and Outdoor Recreation users? It also takes away CPW personnel resources from their primary role in perpetuating parks, wildlife, and outdoor recreation, while embroiling them in a very contentious gun control mandate. The 3 FTE estimate for implementation is WAY off. Doesn't make sense when you are running against a $1.3 billion dollar budget deficit. While many assault weapons bans have held up in court currently, the Illinois FOID law was recently found unconstitutional in circuit court. It will be subject to more litigation but that is where is stands. That would open SB 25-003 to almost certain court challenges.

 

[elkduds]

Justabirdwatcher - just curious old man, how many covid boosters are flowing through your veins right now cause government told you to

Post reported. Welcome to, and so long from, HT.

 

[Alpine01]

Since this is a hunting forum, I would like to suggest that we focus on the effects on CPW (and therefore on our wildlife, habitat, and hunting privileges) and not re-hash the 2A arguments ad nauseum.

As I understand it, they are going to steal from the Parks Cash fund (originally they were after the Wildlife cash fund, which is hunting license dollars, but they switched to Parks to avoid PR rules) and they *can/should* repay the Parks fund over time, but as anyone who knows how well politician's keep their promises, I think it is reasonable to fear that the Parks fund will not be repayed or at least not fully or timely.

The bigger question is, what the hell does CPW have to do with semi-auto gun training??? Even if you agree with making it harder to obtain a certain gun type, why would you put the onus on the Parks and Wildlife department? The obvious answer is because this bill was not well thought out and because the Parks have funds (the new Keep Colorado Wild Pass which is default added to your car registration fees has been a boon for the Parks Cash fund). Back to the original point, this should not affect the Wildlife side of CPW, but I don't understand their staffing/funding well enough to say that it won't.

By going through CPW, they can partially avoid TABOR (tax-payer bill of rights) constraints/limits as any "fees" paid to CPW are exempt. As noted before, CO is $1.2+ billion in the hole so the House/Senate Finance committees are forcing bill sponsors to find revenue neutral (or better yet, revenue positive) ways of funding their lib causes. You have to read the original bill introduced intot he Senate to understand their real goal - outright ban of all semiauto weapons. It is now effectively a pay-to-play bill where sheriffs can charge a yet to be defined (and variable based on county and time) fee to gain the privilege of taking a safety course and then pay a second cost to take the course at which point CPW certifies you are adequately trained. Many folks have noted this is just another Jim-Crow law. "Duds seems to be "ok" with having to pay to exercise his Constitutional rights. Hoping SCOTUS ultimately overturns this.

 

[elkduds]

By going through CPW, they can partially avoid TABOR (tax-payer bill of rights) constraints/limits as any "fees" paid to CPW are exempt. As noted before, CO is $1.2+ billion in the hole so the House/Senate Finance committees are forcing bill sponsors to find revenue neutral (or better yet, revenue positive) ways of funding their lib causes. You have to read the original bill introduced intot he Senate to understand their real goal - outright ban of all semiauto weapons. It is now effectively a pay-to-play bill where sheriffs can charge a yet to be defined (and variable based on county and time) fee to gain the privilege of taking a safety course and then pay a second cost to take the course at which point CPW certifies you are adequately trained. Many folks have noted this is just another Jim-Crow law. "Duds seems to be "ok" with having to pay to exercise his Constitutional rights. Hoping SCOTUS ultimately overturns this.

You were doing okay until you mentioned me and got it wrong. I've been encouraged not to return to 2A in this thread, but putting words in others' mouths is a certain way to be . . .