Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Firearms Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill tightening dealer rules, records and penalties after contested testimony
Summary
Lawmakers heard hours of testimony for and against HB 26‑11‑26, which would expand dealer recordkeeping to all firearms, require training and vetting of anyone with access to inventory, mandate reporting of lost/stolen firearms, and give the Department of Revenue a graduated penalty tool; the committee moved the measure to the Committee of the Whole.
Sponsor introduced HB 26‑11‑26 as a response to field inspections that documented burglaries and gaps in dealer security and recordkeeping. The sponsor said the bill extends acquisition/disposition record requirements from pistols and revolvers to all firearms, clarifies that employees (including independent contractors and volunteers who have access) must be vetted and trained, requires reporting of lost or stolen firearms (the sponsor noted the reporting window was amended from 72 to 48 hours), and authorizes the Department of Revenue to issue fines up to $75,000 for repeat violations as a middle enforcement step.
The committee heard robust, often emotional testimony on both sides. Proponents included survivors of gun violence, domestic‑violence advocates and groups such as Colorado Ceasefire, Violence Free Colorado and the Firearms Dealer Division, which argued the bill closes accountability gaps and improves public safety. Michelle Stone Principato, director of the Firearms Dealer Division, said the bill clarifies record keeping and definitions and provides a graduated enforcement approach to correct problems without immediate permit revocation.
Opponents — including many federally licensed dealers (FFLs), Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and small business owners — argued the bill duplicates federal recordkeeping, would impose onerous costs on small, often home‑based dealers, and could push some dealers out of business. Dealers testified that current ATF forms and recordkeeping satisfy many requirements and that duplicative state forms would increase clerical burdens and risk inconsistent records. Witnesses suggested alternatives such as removing duplication or adjusting rulemaking to avoid one‑size‑fits‑all security standards for small and storefront dealers.
Committee members questioned how the bill would affect rural dealers, the effect on small businesses, and the extent to which rulemaking would address physical‑security differences; the Department of Revenue and the Firearms Dealer Division said security standards would be established in rulemaking to allow operational flexibility. After discussion, a motion carried to move HB 26‑11‑26 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation.
