President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) J. Sonnenberg (R) Lauren Boebert (R) Ted Harvey

15% 10%↓ 10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Doug Bruce

(R) Bob Gardner




CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Scott James

(R) Gabe Evans




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 16, 2023 01:31 PM UTC

Racist Gun Group Demands Republicans Dance Harder

  • by: Colorado Pols

Earlier this week the House of Representatives concluded “Second Reading” debate on HB23-1165, legislation that would expand local control by allowing Colorado counties to decide whether it is necessary to prohibit the discharge of firearms in a particular area within the county.

As Marianne Goodland explained for the publication formerly known as the Colorado Statesman:

Rep. Judy Amabile, D-Boulder, who sponsored House Bill 1165, described it as a response to what’s happening in Boulder, Gilpin and Clear Creek counties, which, she said, is increasingly getting complaints from residents that neighbors are discharging firearms in a manner they claim is unsafe or create a nuisance.

“People move to rural communities for peace and quiet,” she said, adding they aren’t getting it.

Part of the problem is these rural areas are becoming more populated and running into conflicts over firearm discharges, Amabile said.

The legislation would not prohibit a homeowner from defending themselves against threats from either people or animals. It also would keep some restrictions on local control but prohibiting counties from disallowing discharge of a firearm in a designated area by a peace officer, in an indoor shooting gallery located in a private residence, or at a shooting range.

Today HB23-1165 had its “Third Reading” on the House Floor, which is the final process before a vote is taken and the legislation moves on to the State Senate. But the Republican micro-minority threw a fit and demanded that the bill be either laid over or returned to “Second Reading,” where unlimited debate is allowed and Republicans could make a half-assed attempt at filibustering the legislation.

Why would Republicans insist on pressing rewind on a bill that they just debated on Tuesday? Because when the militant gun rights group Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) tells Republicans to dance…they f***ing dance.


After RMGO made it known how sad they were, House Republicans fell all over themselves in supplication to the same group that made national headlines earlier this month after refusing to apologize when a staff member testified at the State Capitol that we shouldn’t count Black kids in statistics about gun deaths among younger Americans.


Republican Rep. Ryan Armagost

Naturally, House Republicans rolled out some patently ridiculous arguments about why the House should work backward on a bill that they already discussed a few days ago. Republican Rep. Ryan Armagost (Larimer County-ish), who looks remarkably similar to the cartoon owl from the old movie “The Sword in the Stone,” decided to follow a similar script to the one that fellow Republican Rep. Scott “There is No” Bottoms used earlier this week in his defense of gas stoves.

Click here to watch Armagost’s remarks yourself, or read along below:

RYAN ARMAGOST: To restrict that on a county level, which can be just as partisan as this room is…is shameful. For us to be able to push that power over a community that can be just as equally divided, and take that power away from those residents is not okay…

I am in support of laying this over, simply because of the double-speak…and the words that we all hear every day. I know I hear it every day, every time I’m in committee – diversity, equity, and inclusion. That is not a one-way street. That is something we need to honor for every one of our constituents. 

Lifestyles, every walk of life, the diversity that is out there. We have to appreciate all of those people that we are not as familiar with as we have been in our own walk of life and our own path that we’ve taken, or that we’ve been given. We have to appreciate that for all of our constituents. Again, not just for the ones that mark your letter on their ballot – every constituent within your district. You have to honor them. That is what we came up here and swore to do. Every one of us. I was in the room with you. So, please honor that. [Pols emphasis]

Please honor your constituents, and please, lay this over so that we can bring those voices to the table, have a little bit wider perspective, open up our horizons just a little bit – just to focus on all of our constituents. This doesn’t need to be a partisan, party-line thing. It’s something that we can bring back to the table with more discussion and simply honor everyone that we represent.

Armagost accused Democrats of “double-speak” by not respecting the “diversity” of people who want to be able to shoot their guns in any direction at any time, regardless of where those bullets may end up and without concern over whether their shooting fetish might be loud and annoying to neighbors. To put this in another context, Armagost is whining about “diversity” in a speech on the House Floor that is in DIRECT RESPONSE to demands by a gun rights group that thinks Black people should not be included in statistics about firearm deaths.

Effective messaging? Nope. Disgusting and inappropriate? You bet!

Republicans such as Bottoms and Armagost have demonstrated that they don’t give a lick about “diversity” and “equity” any more than they actually care about the idea of “local control.” It’s all just hyperbolic nonsense in service of right-wing extremism — in this case on behalf of an organization in RMGO that Republicans SHOULD have disavowed a long time ago (or at least after RMGO’s racist arguments earlier this month). Of course, Republicans also SHOULD have disavowed Donald Trump and the MAGA movement a long time ago; doing so might have prevented the “Circle of Strife” that is rotting the Colorado GOP from within.


4 thoughts on “Racist Gun Group Demands Republicans Dance Harder

  1. The details of the bill itself, not that that matters really, don't seem that extreme. The major change seems to be the possibility that a board of commissioners could restrict shooting on private property, but only in areas with sufficient dwelling density.

    Someone with more time than me could post a super-gigantic list of things you already can't do on private property, many of which wouldn't even need a board of commissioners to pass a resolution. They'd involve issues like noise, safety, or environmental hazards. Basically, you couldn't purchase the Grateful Dead's old Wall of Sound and turn it up to 11 at midnight if your neighbors don't like the music. You can't install a meth lab. No rooster fighting. 

    Nobody really knows what the Founding Fathers would think about anything, unless there's a quote from Federalist or something, but my guess is they'd tell opponents to this bill to just find an official shooting range somewhere.


  2. Counties have authority to restrict all kinds of things on private property: fireworks, animal abuse and neglect, open fires . . . Why should discharge of firearms be treated any differently?

    The bill strikes me as a reflection of common sense.

  3. This is an important bill for me.  I live in a forested community and it sounds like a reenactment of Vietnam on the weekends most of the year.  I would like to see a restriction on the discharge of firearms in a subdivision and the surrounding forests.  Gilpin County has gone with Clear Creek to build a shooting range off of I-70 around the Trail Ridge road area.  Give the shooters someplace fun to go to and keep the weirdos with their camo outfits and loaded firearms out of the forests.

    1. I know personally a few people who are in situations like yours, GG. They're not necessarily anti-gunners, but the unexpected noise of gunfire is not that pleasant plus it might be a little concerning. What are they actually shooting at, and why?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

46 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!