House Democrats on Friday advanced a proposal to ban a long list of “assault” weapons in Colorado following a debate that lasted several hours.

The measure still needs the full vote of the House, which could happen Sunday. Its fate in the Senate remains uncertain.    

Sponsored by Reps. Tim Hernandez and Elisabeth Epps, House Bill 1292 would prohibit 13 types of “assault” weapons, along with adding a definition of “assault weapons” into state law.

Supporters argued that the so-called “assault weapons” have no place in society, and that Colorado cannot wait for Congress to enact a federal ban. Critics countered that the bill would ban most guns in Colorado — and it is, therefore, unconstitutional. 

Gov. Jared Polis has said there are limits to what states can do on the issue and that he prefers a federal response. He noted that a ban in Colorado would just force people to go across the state line into Wyoming to purchase those weapons. Wyoming does not require background checks when buying from a private dealer.

If the bill won passage through the Senate and is signed by the governor, which is unlikely, a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality is all but a certainty. 

The proposal is a serious attack on the Second Amendment, said Rep. Matt Soper, R-Delta, who described the measure as a “takings.” 

He pointed out the House Judiciary Committee amended the bill to remove a $250,000 civil fine for transferring an assault weapon, taking the penalty down to a low-level criminal petty offense. He claimed that change indicated the original fine was not serious to begin with. 

Soper also argued that the low-level petty offense brings in other constitutional concerns, such as the Fourth Amendment. It would put a burden on law enforcement and require police to investigate low-level petty offenses, which he called a waste of time. 

Hernandez indicated the penalty change was done at the behest of the governor’s office.

The Democrat also argued that the bill “is essential for the safety of our communities.” He noted that Friday was the first time in Colorado history that the state House had considered such a legislation.

“For my entire life, we have been living with mass shooting … active shooter drills … waiting to die in schools because adults would not be bold enough on guns,” the 27-year-old legislator said. 

House lawmakers adopted several amendments during the debate, notably that gun dealers who sell or purchase the weapons listed in the bill could be subject to financial penalties and reporting to the Department of Revenue for further action.

The only successful change — at least for a brief time — from Republicans came from Rep. Ron Weinberg of Loveland, who offered an amendment to set up a task force to look at the underlying causes behind mass shootings.

“This amendment puts the horse back in front of the cart,” Weinberg said, adding it is appropriate to look into the weapons used, mental and psychological elements, underlying causes, violent video games and movies, whether someone has taken hunter safety courses — or even staying up late.

“Before we take a wholesale ban on assault weapons, there are question left unanswered,” he said.

In advocating for its passage, Rep. Rick Taggart, R-Grand Junction, said the amendment tries to get to the bottom of behavioral issues, which, he maintained, is the cause in 99% of shootings.

Rep. Javier Mabrey, D-Denver, who urged a “no” vote, said things, such as violent video games and movies, happen in other countries that don’t have mass shootings.  

The House approved the Weinberg amendment on a standing vote, in which  the votes are not recorded.

But when the House got to its final action of the day — a parliamentary process to confirm the work done on the bill — Mabrey said there is already an office of gun violence prevention that, he insisted, already conducts the work sought by Weinberg’s amendment.

The House then voted to strip the amendment off. 

When police officers in Uvalde, Texas learned the shooter had an AR-15, they refused to confront the gunman, Mabrey said. The Democrat claimed the officers had no choice but to wait for better coverage, although some of the officers had the same weapon, to make a point that the police were unwilling to confront a weapon “designed to kill.”

Little can be done to help someone shot with an assault weapon, he added. 

“We deserve the freedom from fear of gun violence,” he said. “We cannot abandon the responsibility to the people of Colorado to take action while we wait for the court … The desire to own these specific kinds of weapons does not outweigh the freedom of children to feel safe to go to school.” 

The debate included a request from Rep. Ryan Armagost, R-Berthoud, to read the bill at length. That request triggered a new rule that says a lawmaker who makes that request cannot leave the House floor during the reading except for brief periods of no more than five minutes. The reading did not take long, given the bill’s 16 pages.

Toward the end of the roughly six-hour debate, Rep. Brandi Bradley, R-Roxborough Park, said she didn’t become a gun owner because she lived in a safe state — she now has multiple guns because Colorado is not a safe state.

Guns prevent 2.5 million crimes per year, she said, and 60% of convicted felons have said they would avoid committing crimes when they know the victim has a gun, she said. 

On July 1, up to 90% of guns would be banned in Colorado under HB 1292, Bradley said, adding it would go after people who want to protect their rights.

The animating thinking behind the bill, she said, is to “ban all the guns after July 1 — because of a small percentage of mass shootings.” 

HB 1292 is now up for a final vote of the House before heading to the Senate.