Colorado’s Democratic-controlled House on Sunday passed a bill that would ban the sale and transfer of semiautomatic firearms, a major step for the legislation after roughly the same bill was swiftly killed by Democrats last year.

The bill, which passed on a 35-27 vote, is now on its way to the Democratic-led state Senate. If it passes there, it could bring Colorado in line with 10 other states — including California, New York and Illinois — that have prohibitions on semiautomatic guns.

But even in a state plagued by some of the nation’s worst mass shootings, such legislation faces headwinds.

Colorado’s political history is purple, shifting blue only recently. The bill’s chances of success in the state Senate are lower than they were in the House, where Democrats have a 46-19 majority and a bigger far-left flank. Gov. Jared Polis, also a Democrat, has indicated his wariness over such a ban.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    8 months ago

    Unless you just have a sensible court that don’t claim to be “Originalists” while at the same time ignoring the fact that the arms the founders were think of were not ones that didn’t exist at the time.

    • MorrisonMotel6@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Email and Twitter didn’t exist at the time either, but they are still protected under the First and Fourth Amendments. Cell phones with unlock codes didn’t exist, but they’re still covered under the Fourth Amendment That’s a spurious argument that holds zero merit.

      The Second Amendment might not be something you like, but modern firearms are ABSOLUTELY covered. The second amendment must be altered or removed from the Constitution to come even close to what you’re asking. And that process was explained to you up the thread a little

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        8 months ago

        And yet “originalist” judges say that we need to consider what the founders meant. Except, apparently, when it comes to one half of one amendment.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Well, then you need to spend 50 years dedicated to changing the makeup of the Court the way the Republicans did with Roe… see you in 2074! Well, not me PERSONALLY, but you get the idea. ;)