New Colorado gun law triggers response in Pitkin County, Basalt

One of Colorado’s new laws introduces sweeping restrictions on the manufacture, sale, and ownership of certain semiautomatic firearms and devices designed to increase firing speed. It represents one of the most significant overhauls to firearm regulation in state history.

Colorado Senate Bill 25-003, signed into law in early April, takes effect Aug. 1, 2026.

Under the new law, the commercial manufacture, sale, transfer, distribution, or purchase of “specified semiautomatic firearms” is prohibited. 

This category includes both semiautomatic rifles and shotguns equipped with detachable magazines, as well as gas-operated semiautomatic handguns that accept detachable magazines. The legislation exempts .22 caliber rimfire firearms with tubular magazines, bolt- and lever-action rifles, and other firearms deemed to pose a lower public safety risk.

Beyond commercial restrictions, the bill also introduces a new permitting process for individuals seeking to acquire one of the specified firearms. 

Applicants must complete a state-approved firearm safety course and pass a background check conducted by the local sheriff. Sheriffs are authorized to deny permits if they determine the applicant poses a danger, and denied applicants have the right to appeal in court.

Jon Kelly, chairman of the Pitkin County Republicans, said the law goes too far. 

“It’s insane,” he said. “Essentially, what this law does is, it bans anything other than a non-magazine firearm. It bans all semiautomatic rifles and handguns, except for a .22 that you can load into the underside of the gun. It puts this extremely onerous requirement on owners to do these training sessions, that have to get renewed every five years, which picks up with every new gun that you have.”

Jonathan Melnick, owner of Basalt Firearms, questioned the motivations behind the bill’s drafting and criticized what he perceived as an emotional response by its primary sponsor, Sen. Tom Sullivan, D-Centennial, whose son was killed in the 2012 Aurora theater shooting. 

“I have the utmost respect for the gentleman who lost his son, so when it comes to bereavement and what he was going through, I suspect that his mind was so overwhelmed with the loss of his child that he thought this was the answer,” Melnick said. “It surprises me that your overall population does not recognize that. I am talking liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican — what difference does it make when it comes to recognizing that?”

He added that legislative approaches like SB 003 miss the mark on addressing the real causes of violence. He pointed to a recent incident in Vancouver where a driver plowed into pedestrians.

“Would banning SUVs stop incidents like this?” he asked.

State Rep. Elizabeth Velasco, D-Glenwood Springs, who represents House District 57, voiced strong support for the bill while reaffirming her commitment to Colorado’s tradition of responsible firearm ownership. 

“I believe in responsible gun ownership as part of our heritage, economy, and constitutional rights,” she said. “I support responsible use of firearms, and this bill would not prohibit possession of any currently owned firearms.”

The bill is not retroactive, meaning individuals who legally owned specified firearms before Aug. 1, 2026, can retain them without applying for a permit. Future sales or transfers of those firearms, however, are largely prohibited, except under narrow exceptions such as inheritance.

Velasco emphasized that the legislation reflects values already embedded in many rural communities. 

“I know that hunting is extremely important to our district, even our youth get access to safety training in their 4-H programs,” she said. “This bill requires training for users of specific firearms to complete a hunter education course certified by the Division of Parks and Wildlife.”

She further framed the legislation as part of a broader public safety initiative. 

“Colorado also has a tragic history of gun violence and mass shootings. As such, I also support legislation that includes addressing root causes such as education, housing, and healthcare,” she said. “Coloradans deserve to be safe in our communities, at home, at school, at places of worship, at grocery stores, and everywhere we go.” 

Velasco added that she looks forward to supporting additional efforts to reduce gun violence across the state.

Despite support from many Democratic lawmakers and gun safety advocates, the bill has drawn sharp criticism from rural constituents and Second Amendment defenders, who argue that the measure unfairly targets responsible gun owners and will face serious constitutional scrutiny.

Kelly also argued the bill is unconstitutional and in direct conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which affirmed an individual’s right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense.

Legal challenges are expected as advocacy groups prepare to contest the measure in court.