admin
Colorado saw a last‑minute buying frenzy in July as residents rushed to beat a new Democrat-backed “assault weapons” law that added permit-style vetting and mandatory training for many semiautomatic rifles. The state’s background‑check system lit up — and the reasons are plain: new fees, longer classes, more red tape, and a deadline that forced people to act fast.
Record surge in July background checks
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation processed 59,452 background‑check requests in July — up from 20,172 the prior July, roughly a 195 percent jump. That spike is the clearest sign Coloradans reacted to the new law by trying to complete purchases of AR‑15s and other semiautomatic rifles before the August 1 effective date. Remember: these are background‑check initiations, not a precise count of completed sales, but they are a very loud signal of demand and public response to gun control.
What the new law requires
The new system forces would‑be buyers to get a Firearms Safety Course Eligibility Card after sheriff review, pay fees, pass a name‑based check, and complete an in‑person safety course — either a Basic 4‑hour or an Extended 12‑hour track. Colorado Parks and Wildlife is running the program and charges a $52 administrative fee on top of whatever sheriffs and private instructors tack on. In other words, what Democrats sold as “safety” comes with a price tag and a pile of paperwork.
Agencies scrambled to handle the rush
CBI Director Armando Saldate said staff “had to work night and day” to process the July surge and meet the state’s 72‑hour processing goal. Colorado Parks and Wildlife and county sheriffs also scrambled to verify instructors and run courses. That’s ugly government efficiency: passing a law, then hurriedly throwing people and overtime at the problem it created. The end result is predictable — higher costs, longer waits, and more friction for lawful citizens.
Why this matters: rights, costs and lawsuits
Critics and plaintiffs suing over the law call the new requirements “cumbersome and expensive,” arguing they impose burdens that chill Second Amendment rights. Litigation is ongoing, and for good reason: you don’t fix violence by making honest citizens pay hundreds of dollars and jump bureaucratic hoops. The July background‑check surge should be a wake‑up call to anyone who thinks stricter rules don’t have real consequences for law‑abiding gun owners — and to those who cheer them on from a podium far from the fallout.
