(The Center Square) - Colorado’s gun control law that went into effect last week is receiving widespread pushback from many notable organizations in the state, including two county sheriffs’ offices.
And the National Rifle Association joined a lawsuit against the governor for enacting the bill, which requires purchasers of semiautomatic firearms and rapid-fire devices to get training and be certified for using the guns.
The Colorado legislature, officially called the General Assembly, last year passed the gun control bill, which took effect on Aug. 1, 2026. Senate Bill 25-003, titled "Semiautomatic Firearms and Rapid-Fire Devices," was sponsored by Sen. Tim Sullivan, D-Centennial, who said the legislation was intended to prevent mass shootings.
Following its enactment at the beginning of the month, the law quickly received statewide and national pushback.
Pro-gun rights groups such as the Second Amendment Foundation and Colorado’s Rocky Mountain Gun Owners strongly opposed the bill on constitutional grounds. Relatedly, DCF Guns, Colorado’s largest gun store and range company, pledged $400,000 to fight the bill in court and reduce rates for its firearm safety class, which the new law requires for certain gun purchasers.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife was in charge of preparing county sheriffs’ offices with the resources necessary to implement the law. This included ensuring the permitting systems were working before or by Aug. 1 so that there would not be delay once the law took effect.
Many county sheriffs’ offices, however, pushed back on the law’s implementation, either issuing a statement of disagreement while still participating in its enforcement, or disagreeing and refusing enforcement altogether.
The latter is what the Montezuma County Sheriff’s Office did just four days before the the law went into effect.
Sheriff Steven Nowlin issued a statement announcing his office “will not be participating in the management and issuance of the training certificate required through the mandated Colorado Parks and Wildlife program for any person to purchase or transfer a specified restrictive semiautomatic rifle, shotgun or handgun identified by the Colorado Department of Revenue as provided by Senate Bill 25-003 effective August 1, 2026.”
Nowlin talked to The Center Square during an interview and noted laws are generally enacted to promote public safety and security. However, he did not feel that SB25-003 adequately does this, even if that were the intention.
Nowlin also wrote in his online statement that he “swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the state of Colorado, and perform the duties of the Office of Sheriff in Colorado by protecting those rights for all citizens in Montezuma County.”
The Custer County Sheriff’s Office issued a similar statement on Aug. 11, posting a picture of Colorado’s Constitution, Article II, Section 13: the right to bear arms. Though he did agree to oblige with the bill’s implementation, Sheriff Lloyd Smith wrote in the post that he “did not take an oath to help the state erode those rights one requirement, one fee, and one bureaucratic hurdle at a time.”
Smith was also asked by the state’s NRA chapter, the Colorado State Shooting Association, to support a federal civil rights lawsuit against the bill and signed a declaration under penalty of perjury “describing the negative effect this law will have on our community ...”
Smith told The Center Square that he agreed to support the lawsuit and sign the declaration. He added he was “eagerly awaiting the federal court decision,” but noted litigation can take years.
Colorado’s NRA chapter files suit
In September of last year, the Colorado State Shooting Association filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for Colorado against Gov. Jared Polis, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and Michael Allen, the district attorney for the Fourth Judicial District. Polis and Weiser, who's running for governor against Republican candidate Victor Marx, are Democrats. Allen is a Republican.
The suit challenges the constitutionality of SB 25-003 and seeks permanent immediate injunctive relief enjoining the defendants from enforcing the new law.
Lawrence Pacheco from Weiser’s office told The Center Square it has “no comment, and we’ll make our arguments in our filings and in court.”
Ally Sullivan, the deputy press secretary at Polis’ office, told The Center Square the office is not commenting on active litigation.
Among the lawsuit's plaintiffs is Israel Del Toro, a Colorado resident and Air Force veteran who served in Afghanistan. During his service abroad, he was severely wounded by an explosive device that hit his vehicle while traveling. He was given a 15% chance to live.
But by 2010, Del Toro had recovered to the point that he felt he could serve his country again. He successfully convinced the U.S. Department of Defense to do something it had never done previously. The department allowed Del Torro, a fully-disabled veteran, to re-enlist. Del Toro served nine more years in the Air Force before retiring in 2019.
Because of Del Toro’s physical restrictions caused by his injuries sustained in Afghanistan, he relies on common firearm accessories like force-reset triggers. However, under SB25-003, this type of accessory, as well as others like it, are classified as “dangerous weapons” and present a class five felony if the user is caught with possession.
Colorado Ceasefire, a 26-year old statewide grassroots gun violence prevention organization, lobbied extensively for SB25-003 in the Colorado Senate.
The organization also notably lobbied for SB 26-004, which expanded the scope of Extreme Risk Protection Orders – another bill that was heavily criticized by gun rights advocates.
Colorado Ceasefire declined to talk to The Center Square about concerns that restrictions on rapid-fire devices could have unintended consequences for gun owners with physical disabilities.
Commented