Colorado Lawmaker Forced to Cover Second Amendment Sticker Amidst Heated Gun Control Debate

A Republican lawmaker in Colorado found himself at the center of a minor controversy after being instructed by his Democratic colleagues to conceal a sticker supporting the Second Amendment on his laptop while present in the state House chamber. The incident occurred against the backdrop of a contentious debate surrounding a sweeping gun control bill that has ignited partisan tensions and raised questions about the interpretation of constitutional rights.

State Representative Ken DeGraaf, a Republican representing a district in Colorado, publicly addressed the situation during remarks on the House floor. Visibly demonstrating the mandated cover-up, he pointed to a piece of paper obscuring a sticker affixed to his laptop. The sticker, according to DeGraaf, prominently displayed the phrase "shall not be infringed," followed by the abbreviation "2-A," a clear reference to the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

DeGraaf expressed his surprise and dismay at the request, suggesting that the sticker was deemed offensive, particularly in the context of the ongoing debate surrounding the gun control legislation. "I had to cover up this," DeGraaf stated, emphasizing the perceived sensitivity surrounding his support for the Second Amendment. "They couldn’t stand my sticker… It said ‘shall not be infringed’ and signed ‘2-A’ and that was considered offensive, which I understand would be offensive to this bill."

The incident occurred as Colorado lawmakers are actively engaged in debating Senate Bill 25-003, a controversial piece of legislation aimed at restricting the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms that utilize detachable magazines, notably including the AR-15 platform. This type of firearm has been at the center of numerous mass shootings across the nation, making it a focal point in the ongoing debate about gun control measures.

Proponents of the bill, primarily Democratic lawmakers, argue that such restrictions are crucial for enhancing public safety and preventing gun violence. State Representative Meg Froelich, a Democratic sponsor of the bill, defended the legislation, stating, "Preventing gun violence is one of the most effective ways that we can make our communities safer and save lives. Semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines are uniquely lethal and dangerous." Froelich emphasized that the bill aims to establish "a commonsense solution" by ensuring that individuals receive proper training and meet the necessary requirements under state and federal firearm laws before acquiring "the most lethal weapons on the market."

Colorado has a history of enacting gun control measures, including background checks, waiting periods, and restrictions on high-capacity magazines, all aimed at reducing gun violence. Senate Bill 25-003 represents a further step in this direction, seeking to tighten regulations on specific types of firearms.

However, the legislation has faced strong opposition from Republicans, who argue that it infringes upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens and that it could potentially be deemed unconstitutional. DeGraaf, in his remarks, accused his Democratic colleagues of being offended by the Constitution itself, citing the sticker incident as evidence of this perceived aversion.

As DeGraaf addressed the covering of his sticker, he was informed that the request was based on existing rules prohibiting such displays in the "well" of the chamber. This designated area is situated between the chamber’s front desk and the first row of member seats.

DeGraaf responded with a touch of sarcasm, stating, "So OK, no displays of the Constitution in the well, got it." His comment highlights the underlying tension and disagreement regarding the interpretation and application of constitutional principles in the context of gun control legislation.

The bill has already passed the state Senate and has undergone a second reading in the House. Observers anticipate that the legislation will soon be ready for a final vote in the House, potentially paving the way for its enactment into law.

The debate surrounding Senate Bill 25-003 reflects a larger national conversation about gun control, pitting those who advocate for stricter regulations to reduce gun violence against those who defend the rights of gun owners under the Second Amendment. The incident involving DeGraaf’s sticker serves as a microcosm of this larger conflict, illustrating the sensitivities and ideological divides that permeate the debate.

The debate in Colorado is happening as other states also consider stricter gun control legislation. New Mexico lawmakers have warned a sweeping gun control bill primed for passage shows Democrats are dead-set on disarming us. Some states like Florida, are even considering repealing existing gun control measures like red flag laws.

The outcome of the vote on Senate Bill 25-003 in Colorado will likely have significant implications for gun laws in the state and could potentially serve as a model for other states grappling with the issue of gun control. The controversy surrounding DeGraaf’s sticker underscores the challenges involved in finding common ground and achieving consensus on such a divisive and emotionally charged issue.