Editor’s Note: Sen. Chris Holbert, R-Parker, is contributing a column to this week’s print edition. The Colorado Statesman is publishing the column in serial form online this week.

It has been disappointing to see and hear the division that has occurred among pro-Second Amendment advocates over hypothetically changing the current “mag ban” limit from 15 to 30 rounds per magazine. Yes, such a change would resolve access and use restrictions for almost all firearms users. However, leading into the April 13 “gun bills” hearing of the House Committee on State, Veterans & Military Affairs, there wasn’t actually a bill that could have been amended to accommodate such a change.

In the days leading into the committee hearing, well-intentioned grassroots advocates expressed support of an “effort,” a “compromise,” a “deal” that didn’t actually exist. I don’t mean for that to sound critical, simply that it happened. The reason that SB 15-175 could not be amended is that the title of that bill was narrowly crafted to cover only repeal of current statute, not amending (changing) statute that would remain. Such restrictions exist under our Single Subject Clause, Article V, Section 21 of the Colorado Constitution. Unlike Congress in Washington, D.C., where “pork barrel” (combining unrelated issues) legislation is common, legislation before the Colorado General Assembly must fit under the title of a given bill.

– Sen. Chris Holbert is a Republican representing northern and western Douglas County.