They're not coming for your lawnmower, they just want to limit what you can buy. Colorado's headlong rush into gun control makes for trouble later.
They're not coming to take away your lawnmowers or natural gas-fired appliances, but they are wanting to take away your ability to choose.
The State of Colorado, through both elected policy makers (see the "Maverick Observer" post linked first below for a quick reprisal/rundown) and through unelected bureaucrats (see the CPR article on the Air Quality Control Commission working in league with "stakeholders" like CoPirg a left leaning group) is working to eliminate more and more fossil fuel burning equipment in this state.
Sometimes that work is done through outright bans like that the AQCC is pursuing with lawn equipment, and sometimes that work is done patiently, drop by drop, by spreading out the ballast, then putting the sleepers down, then laying the rails, then building the rail cars, you get the metaphor.
If you join me in finding this objectionable, I have a suggestion. I would encourage you to join me in speaking at an AQCC meeting. The next one is on the July 19 - 21st. The third link below is your ticket to register.
You can also send your written comment to cdphe.aqcc-comments@state.co.us
You do not need to be an expert. You don't need the oratory skills of Daniel Webster.
You just need to be present. You need to let them know that you disagree. You need to let them know that the entirety of the state is not unanimous in supporting their actions.
You need to ask them if this is the proper role of the government. You need to ask if these are decisions that bureaucrats should be making on our behalf while working with liberal interest groups.
https://themaverickobserver.com/gas-appliances-home-warranties-aim-to-ban-gas-powered/
https://www.cpr.org/2023/07/07/denver-gas-lawn-equipment-ban-2025/
https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZAodO6rpz8jGdWGqYb2XfaRMJhT08KDIsN_#/registration
When you're in such a rush to "do something", you risk making policy that steps on itself. That is, you make laws that are ill considered with lots of possible unintended consequences.
You ever watch the Three Stooges? If you don't, I bet you at least know who I'm referring to. I bet, further, that you know the gag in the attached screengrab. The three of them all try to run through the door at the same time and wedge themselves in.
This struck me as an apt metaphor for what you'll read in the CompleteColorado article below.
The two laws referenced here are one that requires that people who make their own firearms from kits (sometimes referred to by the pejorative "ghost guns") get a serial number on their guns to make them legal. The second law expands the liability for people hurting others with firearms to manufactures and etc.
These two laws are (sadly, not as comically in this case as in the case of the Stooges) colliding with each other. No one in the government, nor at the licensed firearm dealer level (the people who the state blithely tells people to seek out to serialize their guns) really has a good handle on the process.
Add that to the fact that putting a serial number on a gun could open the dealer to liability under the other law and you likely will have dealers not really eager to help make your gun legal.
Yep, nothing quite as satisfying as policy that's well thought out, and that is made at a considered pace.
Nothing quite like law that takes into account the effects it will have when implemented.
Oh, wait. That's not what we have here in this state. At least not with regard to gun law.
One last thing: anyone willing to take a bet that this sort of problem will get fixed in the upcoming session vs. just adding more rules?
https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/2023/06/19/new-colorado-laws-create-confusion-conflict-over-making-unserialized-guns-legal/
Related:
I usually stick to state issues, but I saw this and it is related to state efforts (though tangentially--the Federal ban is more about an unelected Executive Branch agency acting on its own authority and outside legislative efforts like that of Colorado).
The ruling below would probably have almost no bearing on the state one since ours is done through a legislative move, presented here for context and completeness, however.
https://thereload.com/federal-court-tosses-biden-ghost-gun-ban/