Ensuring the future of elk, other wildlife, their habitat and our hunting heritage.

Thursday, March 7, 2013

A Call to Action in Colorado

To RMEF members, 

As most you know, there are a number of gun control-related bills making their way through the Colorado Legislature. Among them is Senate Bill 196 which holds all manufacturers, distributors and owners of ANY rifle –excluding bolt-action— they produce, sell or use, liable if that gun is misused to harm another person. If passed, this would prevent the presence of these rifles at RMEF big game banquets and, therefore, could drastically reduce RMEF’s ability to raise funds at banquets to do conservation work in Colorado. 

RMEF urges its individual members, volunteers, and all others concerned with such legislation to contact your state Senator and/or state Representative via email or by telephone (303 866-2316). Go here for complete list of contact info: http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2011A/csl.nsf/directory?openframeset

Senate Bill 196— Assault weapons manufacturer liability
House Bill 1224— Bans magazines with a capacity greater than fifteen rounds
House Bill 1226 – Repeals current law allowing individuals with a concealed carry permit to carry a firearm for self-defense on a college or university campus
House Bill 1228 – Imposes a “gun tax” for a background check when purchasing a firearm
House Bill 1229 – Criminalizes the private transfer of a firearm


  1. I appreciate RMEF bringing this up today, but Please tell us the reason you're opposed to this unconstitutional gun grabbing is NOT to preserve your ability to raise money. Our Second Amendment is not about hunting and raising funds. It's more than that. Please clarify for us. As a Montanan, I and my fellow gun rights advocates who hunt would appreciate knowing where you stand on this most important issue. If it's only about raising money, you will lose a lot more than you will raise.. Thank You

  2. The bottom line is RMEF supports the Second Amendment--that already goes without saying. If passed, this particular bill would not only fly in the face of that but also hinder RMEF's ability to carry out conservation work in Colorado. Funds that are raised by RMEF members remain in that given state. So in other words, it's a lose-lose proposition.

  3. I understand the concern about gun rights, but think a mention of the need for sportsmen to support CO's habitat stamp legislation (SB 175), would be much more in line with the RMEF's mission - to protect elk habitat and hunting. The habitat stamp has protected more than 170,000 acres and provided loads of access to sportsmen.