FAQ on Colorado CCW and Firearms Laws Updated 4/4/01 Colorado's concealed weapons permit statute, and the statutes giving sheriffs and police chiefs the power to issue the permits: Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) Sec. 18-12-105.1. Permits for concealed weapons - liability (1) Pursuant to the grant of authority in sections 30-10-523 and 31-4-112.1, C.R.S. the chief of police of a city or of a city and county or the sheriff of a county may issue written permits to carry concealed weapons. A chief of police or sheriff who receives an application for a permit for a concealed weapon from a person who does not reside within the confines of his jurisdiction shall consult the chief of police or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the applicant resides prior to issuing said permit. The chief of police or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the application for a permit for a concealed weapon is made shall notify the chief of police or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the applicant resides of the disposition of said application. Any such permit shall be effective in all areas of the state. (2) A sheriff or chief of police shall make an inquiry, including a fingerprint check, into the background of an applicant for a permit to carry a concealed weapon to determine if the applicant would present a danger to others or to himself or herself if the applicant is granted a permit. The sheriff or chief of police shall not be liable for any damages that may result from granting a permit, if the sheriff or chief of police, prior to granting a permit, requests a criminal history check of the applicant from the Colorado bureau of investigation, including a request to process the applicant's fingerprints. The Colorado bureau of investigation, upon request by a chief of police or sheriff, shall conduct a criminal history check of an applicant, including but not limited to processing of fingerprints, pursuant to this subsection (2). The cost of such check shall be borne by the applicant. Sec. 31-4-112.1. Chief of police - permits for concealed weapons. The chief of police of a city or city and county may issue written permits to carry concealed weapons. Any such permit shall be issued in accordance with section 18-12-105.1, C.R.S. Sec. 30-10-523. Sheriff - permits for concealed weapons. The sheriff of each county may issue written permits to carry concealed weapons. Any such permit shall be issued in accordance with section 18-12-105.1, C.R.S. ------------------------------------------------------- CCW Issuance Colorado's concealed carry permit law is pretty crummy in some ways, and decent in others. It gives local law enforcement complete discretion as to whether to issue a permit or not. The only reason it was passed is because of a lawsuit against the Routt county sheriff and city of Steamboat Springs police chief for refusing to issue a permit. (Douglass v. Kelton, 610 P.2d 1067, 199 Colo. 446 (1980)). One of defenses of the law enforcement chiefs to the suit was that they were not authorized by law to issue a permit, and issuing permits was not inherent to their jobs. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed, and rejected the claim of the person seeking a permit. The legislature responded by enacting laws expressly granting the authority to issue permits to sheriffs and police chiefs. Prior to that change the only reason to believe there was even such a thing as a concealed carry permit in Colorado was that the concealed carry prohibition statute allowed a permit as a defense. The Supreme Court suggested that home-rule cities (most cities in Colorado) could authorize their chief of police to issue them, as Denver had, for example. Denver's CCW ordinance will also honor one issued by a mayor of a city, but that permit will not be valid under state law. The state law allows a sheriff or police chief to issue a permit to literally anyone. Most will issue only to residents of their jurisdiction. Some sheriffs will issue to landowners in their county, or to business owners in their county, even if you live in another county. The Douglas, Jefferson and Arapahoe county sheriffs have indicated in the past that they will only issue to residents of unincorporated areas, taking the position that folks who live in cities should get permits from the chief of police, who has primary law enforcement jurisdiction where they live. However the Jefferson county sheriff has changed since that time (1997), so again it is best to check for the most current information. Other sheriffs may also have this policy. I know of no one willing to issue to anyone regardless of place of residence, however a few police chiefs are apparently willing to issue to non-residents on a case by case basis, as part of cooperative agreements with firearm instructors. While no training or proficiency is required by the law, many sheriffs and police chiefs like to see evidence of training before issuing a permit. There is no statutory requirement you be a state resident to get a permit, out of state residents are theoretically eligible, if a sheriff or chief can be found willing to issue the permit. Any permit issued according to the state law (by a police chief or sheriff) is good statewide, with no jurisdictional exceptions. Out of state permits are not recognized in Colorado. Holders of permits may carry on school grounds, by state law. Whether a Colorado permit makes the holder exempt from the newly enacted (9/30/96) federal Gun Free School Zones Act (18 U.S.C. sec. 922(q)) is questionable. Colorado permits currently have no standards for issuance, which the federal law says they have to have, in order to exempt the holder from the federal law. In Colorado, the issuing officer must do a background check, and must "consult" the chief or sheriff where an applicant lives, if they do not live in the jurisdiction of the issuing officer. They must also notify that other sheriff or chief of the disposition of the permit request. But they can issue to anyone; they need not pay any attention to the results of the background check. There are no persons who are ineligible by law for a Colorado CCW permit, not minors, not felons, not fugitives, not illegal aliens, not drug users, not anyone. Most agencies have their own rules, beyond the statute. Denver has its own ordinance, (RMC sec. 38-116.5) requiring a non-refundable $100 application fee, yearly renewal ($35), a range test, and giving the chief of police complete discretion in issuing or renewing a permit. In 1993 Denver was sued over its arbitrary permit policy of refusing to issue to ordinary persons. The trial court threw the suit out, but the Court of Appeals reversed that decision, sending it back for further proceedings. Miller v. Collier, 878 P.2d 141 (Colo. App. 1994). As part of the settlement of the suit, after the Court of Appeals decision, the Denver chief of police has begun the process of formulating regulations on when permits will be issued, and also changing the Denver ordinance. A set of draft regulations was issued, for public comment, in August, 1996. As of 8/99 nothing further has happened, to my knowledge, and the Denver Rocky Mountain News reported on Nov. 19, 2000 that Denver has issued only 2 permits to persons who were not ex-law enforcement judges or government employees, suggesting nothing has really changed. The draft Denver regulations are on this web page. Permit validity On the other hand, once you manage to get a Colorado permit, unlike the "shall issue" permit of many states, Colorado's permit is basically unrestricted as to what knife or firearm you can carry and where you can carry. A few places are off limits by law (the state capitol building) others by local or court rule (jails and prisons, many courthouses and civic buildings). However, carry in taverns, saloons, bars, other places which sell or serve alcohol, schools, churches, casinos, and pretty much all other places is lawful. Private property owners can theoretically prohibit concealed carry at their establishments, and have you removed, and or charged with trespassing if you ignore their rule, however, I do not see such signs, nor have I heard of any such cases. In any event, if you carried onto private property in violation of such a rule by a property owner you would not be in violation of state law on carry, as state law does not prohibit carry by a CCW holder on private property at which the owner has prohibited carry. Permit details Until February, 1995 the situation almost everywhere in Colorado was that permits were only available to cronies and political contributors of sheriffs. In February, 1995, the newly elected sheriff for El Paso county (where Colorado Springs is located), John Anderson, announced a policy of issuing CCW permits to residents of that county, (or residents of other counties with a business in El Paso county), without any subjective criteria. He required applicants be 25 or older, complete an application and pass a background check, pay $85 for the permit, ($20 for an annual renewal), and provide proof of training in the use of a handgun. Sheriff Anderson has since moved on, but his successor in office is continuing his CCW policy - however the fees and requirements may have changed. As always it is best to check with the sheriff to see what he requires. Although there has been no significant state law change since 1995, despite attempts, a lot of sheriffs have changed their own policy about the circumstances under which they will issue a permit. This is due in large part to a decision by the Sheriff's association in 1995 to have their members stop abusing their power to issue permits. Not all sheriffs have gone along, but some formerly fairly anti-gun sheriffs, are now issuing permits. Some sheriffs were also voted out of office in favor of folks who weren't going to be jerks about it. While there has been turnover in a lot of these sheriff's offices, this is the most recent survey I have. According to a survey done by the Denver Post, and published in the 3/24/96 issue, the following county sheriffs do not require a showing of need to issue a permit: Adams, Baca, Chaffee, Cheyenne, Clear Creek, Crowley, Custer, Delta, Dolores, Douglas, Elbert, El Paso, Fremont, Garfield, Gilpin, Grand, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Kit Carson, La Plata, Las Animas, Moffat, Montezuma, Park, Phillips, Pueblo, Rio Blanco, San Miguel, Sedgwick, Summit, Teller, Washington and Weld. The following counties' sheriffs require some showing of need; it will vary from not a big deal (practical or written tests, or personal references are common), to really belonging in the category below of counties that only issue to cronies: Alamosa, Arapahoe, Archuleta, Bent, Boulder, Conejos, Costilla, Huerfano, Jackson, Jefferson, Kiowa, Lake, Larimer, Mesa, Montrose, Pitkin, Rio Grande, Saguache, San Juan, and Yuma. As of the time of the survey, the following counties only issued to cronies, and political contributors - but be sure and check with the sheriff now in office, I expect some of these policies have changed, as the sheriffs of some of these counties have changed since 1996: Denver, Eagle, Lincoln, Logan, Mineral, Morgan, Otero, Ouray, Prowers and Routt. The general rule seems to be that personal information about holders of permits is a public record. On May 26, 2000 Governor Owens, bowing to the news media, vetoed HB 00-1114, which would have shielded this information from public disclosure. The bill was spurred by a Ft. Collins newspaper, editorially opposed to gun ownership, printing the names and home addresses of permit holders in Larimer county. If you do receive a Colorado permit, expect that gun hating news media might publicize your name and home address. While I don't see much news value in who got a permit in a 'shall issue' type jurisdiction like Larimer county, it would be interesting to know who was special enough to get the lone permits from the cities of Northglenn, or Lakewood, for example. My guess is that their political connections were more important than whatever "need" those places claim is required to get a permit. On November 19, 2000 the Denver Rocky Mountain News published an article on a survey they did of every sheriff and certain police chiefs (those of cities with more than 5,000 persons) to see how many permits each had issued, and whether they would release personal information on permit holders under Colorado open records laws. The paper didn't print information on permit holders which it was able to obtain; apparently the point was not to publicize permit holder's personal information, but to see how government officials were treating requests for what the paper considered public information. Most sheriffs and police chiefs refused to release information on permit holders, and a few refused to even release the number of permits they had issued. Below is the information on the number of permits issued by the places surveyed. Permits issued to persons who were ex-law enforcement, quasi-law enforcement like code/zoning enforcement, and judges (some judges are considered "peace officers" under Colorado law, and do not need a permit to carry a concealed weapon) were excluded, when the occupation of the permit holder could be identified. This information tends to give an idea of how liberal the jurisdiction is - if a county with a large population (like Arapahoe, for example) has issued few permits (which it has, only 27), then they are likely being pretty restrictive. On the other hand, if a county with a low population (like Baca) has issued a lot of permits, they may well be issuing to persons who reside outside their jurisdiction, as well as being liberal with county residents. Counties Adams, 334 Alamosa, 27 Arapahoe, 27 Archuleta, unk Baca, 117 Bent, 0 Boulder, 351 Chaffee, 46 Cheyenne, about 20 Clear Creek, 20-25 Conejos, 54 Costilla, unk Crowley, 2 Custer, 215 Delta, 80 Dolores, 26 Douglas, 274 Eagle, 9 Elbert, 29 El Paso, 4,045 Fremont, 377 Garfield, 17 Gilpin, 17 Grand, 124 Gunnison, unk Hinsdale, 9 Huerfano, unk Jackson, 11 Jefferson, 190 Kiowa, unk Kit Carson, 26 Lake, unk La Plata, 223 Las Animas, 18 Larimer, 699 Lincoln, unk Logan, 34 Mesa, 426 Mineral, 25 Moffat, 120 Montezuma, unk Montrose, 200 Morgan, 27 Otero, 0 Ouray, 2 Park, 96 Phillips, 10 Pitkin, 3 Prowers, unk Pueblo, 520 Rio Blanco, approx. 30 Rio Grande, unk Routt, 56 Saguache, unk San Juan, 0 San Miguel, 58 Sedgwick, 19 Summit, 85 Teller, 132 Washington, 23 Weld, 332 Yuma, 11 Cities (a number of these cities undoubtedly send persons interested in a permit to the county sheriff, who will issue a permit, the city may not necessarily be being arbitrary and restrictive in not issuing any permits). Alamosa, 1 Arvada, 4 Aspen, 0 Aurora, 1 Boulder, 0 Brighton, 2 Broomfield, 0 Brush, 0 Canon City, 0 Castle Rock, 0 Cherry Hills Village, 0 Colorado Springs, 0 Commerce City, 2 Cortez, 0 Craig, 0 Delta, unk Denver, 2 Durango, 0 Englewood, 0 Federal Heights, 0 Fort Collins, 0 Fort Lupton, 3 Fort Morgan, 1 Fountain, 0 Glenwood Springs, 0 Grand Junction, 0 Greenwood Village, 10 Greeley, 0 Gunnison, 0 Lafayette, 0 La Junta, 2 Lakewood, 1 Littleton, 0 Lone Tree, 0 Longmont, 0 Louisville, 0 Loveland, 0 Montrose, 0 Northglenn, 1 Parker, 0 Pueblo, 0 Rifle, 0 Salida, 0 Sheridan, 0 Steamboat Springs, 0 Sterling, 0 Superior, 0 Thornton, 0 Trinidad, 2 Westminster, 0 Wheat Ridge, 3 Windsor, 0 Woodland Park, 0 While getting a permit can be hard, and getting one from the city of Denver is impossible, Colorado expressly allows one to carry a concealed weapon (firearm or knife) under the following circumstances (see C.R.S. sec. 18-12-105): 1) in his own dwelling or place of business, or on property under his control at the time of the act of carrying; or 2) in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance for lawful protection of his or another's person or property while traveling; or 3) when one is a permit holder; 4) when one is a peace officer; or 5) when one is a federal probation officer, or pre-trial services officer, within the scope of his duties. While Colorado law used to refer to these as affirmative defenses, effective August, 2000, they are now exceptions. This is an important change, because now instead of these being something for you to prove at your trial, they are things which the prosecutor must (or should be required to, anyway, we will have to see what the courts do with this change) prove are NOT true, right from the beginning. If he cannot, he does not have a basis for proceeding with criminal charges. Before, the prosecutor could proceed to trial even if he knew or had a reason to think you had a permit, or were carrying in your car within the statute, because that was for you to prove. Now, with these being exceptions, not defenses, they are for him to disprove, same as he has to prove you possessed a firearm or knife concealed. If he cannot, there is no case. Given that there is no statewide database of holders of concealed carry permits, and given that any chief or sheriff can issue to anyone, I expect a prosecutor will now have to ask each person who can issue a permit if they have issued a permit to the defendant in order to proceed with a case for unlawful carrying of a concealed weapon. Otherwise they cannot prove one element of the crime, that the person with the weapon did not have a permit. In addition, an important change was made to Colorado law in the 2000 legislative session, greatly limiting the scope of Denver's draconian firearms laws, which are discussed below, and which are not changed by this, just greatly limited in their application. Effective at the beginning of August, 2000, a new section, C.R.S. section 18-12-105.6 takes effect. It provides that "the carrying of weapons in private automobiles or other private means of conveyance for lawful protection of a person's or another's person or property while traveling into or through a municipal, county, or city and county jurisdiction, regardless of the number of times the person stops in a jurisdiction, is a matter of statewide concern and is not an offense." The new law also preempts any local regulations which are more restrictive than state law in this one regard. This has the effect of limiting the application of Denver's absurd ordinance on carry of firearms in your car to persons who both reside there, and also don't leave the city on their trip - those whose trip does not take them into or through a different city or county than the one they started in. Given how hard it will be for Denver prosecutors to show anything about a persons trip (if that person keeps their mouth shut when dealing with Denver police, as they certainly should), I expect that this will dramatically decrease their harassment of persons (including Denver residents) who have guns in their cars for protection while traveling through that particular garden spot. The change in law also clarifies what "traveling" is, a term which has not been defined, and which has not been the subject of an appeals court decision. In other states with similar laws (Missouri and Texas in particular) the courts had excepted regular commutes, and short trips by local residents, claiming that was not "traveling." Colorado law is now clearly different, it includes any trip which passes through more than one city or county, within the traveler exception, an easy standard to meet when traveling in the Denver area. Note also that the new law applies equally to unconcealed as well as concealed carry, within your car, for your protection. Carrying a rifle or shotgun with a round in the chamber in a motorized vehicle is illegal under Colorado hunting law; this does not apply to handguns. See C.R.S. section 33-6-125. Note that Colorado law does not make any distinctions based on the loaded or unloaded nature of a gun, as to carry. Concealed carry of an unloaded firearm is the same as loaded, in terms of its legality or illegality under the law. Note also that the gun need not be on your person to be concealed. It may be hidden within reach, for example under the seat in a car. The issue of concealment is a fact issue for a jury; but there is no trick here. Hidden from view, and still accessible is a good working definition. Unconcealed (open) carry is not regulated by Colorado state law. Some home-rule cities prohibit or regulate open carry. Denver has a municipal ordinance which provides for a permit for unconcealed carry, however I am not aware of anyone applying for one; issuance is discretionary in the same way a concealed carry permit is. In terms of cities around Denver, Golden, Arvada and Wheat Ridge apparently do not purport to regulate open carry. Littleton does. As a matter of practice, it is not done in any of the ski towns or urban areas of Colorado. Open carry is seen from time to time in rural parts of Colorado, and is much less likely to raise any eyebrows during hunting season. OTHER FIREARMS ISSUES As of August 1, 1999, there is once again a state run instant check system for firearm sales, so the federal Brady check is done through the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI), for free. The program, first reinstated by order of Gov. Owens without any legal authority, was also passed by the legislature in the 2000 session, authorizing CBI to act as the so called "Point of Contact" for the FBI. A Colorado CCW permit does not satisfy the Brady law requirements that state law limit permits only to persons who may lawfully possess a firearm under state and federal law, so it does not work to except its holder from the Brady check. On March 31, 2001, Amendment 22 will take effect. Amendment 22 is a law enacted by the voters of Colorado in November, 2000. It purports to require background checks on certain sales by unlicensed sellers at gun shows. However, the scheme for implementing the checks (having a Federally licensed gun dealer perform the check on behalf of an unlicensed seller, as if he was performing one on his own customer) is prohibtied by Federal law, as the proponents of the initiative were aware before it was voted on. The effect is to prohibit such sales by unlicensed sellers altogether, because they can only be conducted in accordance with the law, which is impossible. The goal of requiring background checks on sales at gun shows could have been accomplished in a legal manner, however the initiative proponents chose an illegal manner. Whether the legislature decides to try and correct the scheme, and whether there is any backlash against the initiative proponents for their deception (a group called SAFE Colorado) remains to be seen. Colorado law prohibits anyone who is intoxicated from having possession of a firearm. Having a CCW permit is not a defense. If you are going to drive drunk leave the pistol at home. You will get zinged twice if they find a gun in the car after you get caught driving while intoxicated. As to other gun laws; Colorado has no state wide bans on any particular firearm or firearm magazine. No permit is needed to own any gun, except that NFA guns must be in compliance with federal law in order to be legal under state law. No permit is needed to transport any gun, except as noted above with regard to concealed carry, and except as to Denver. There are no state laws regarding any requirement to lock up guns, or otherwise secure them against access by minors, but a few cities have various ordinances along those lines (Denver and Boulder come to mind). All NFA weapons (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, destructive devices, and Any Other Weapons) except some destructive devices (molotov cocktails) are legal if federally registered (the federal "permit" is an affirmative defense to a charge of possessing an "illegal weapon" under state law). Getting the law enforcement certification for an NFA weapon transfer around Denver is hard - Denver will not cooperate, but some suburban cities have signed in the recent past. Best to try and see. Elsewhere in the state it is (generally speaking) easier. A Few Additional Notes on Denver Denver considers itself to be a state within Colorado, and has pretty comprehensive firearms regulation. Visitors to Colorado should be aware that Denver International Airport is located within the city limits, and that Denver law enforcement policy is very hostile to private firearms ownership. Be warned, and consider flying into Colorado by way of another airport. In 1997 Denver enacted an interim public nuisance ordinance, which provides for the civil forfeiture of items used to commit violations of Denver ordinances. It was passed to get at a few things - houses from which drug and gang crimes were being committed, houses with firearms which are prohibited in Denver, like so-called assault weapons, and vehicles in which firearms were carried in violation of the Denver ordinance on carry. So if you carry a firearm in your vehicle in compliance with state law, but in violation of the more restrictive Denver ordinance, the vehicle can and likely will be seized, pending a decision by a judge on whether it can be forfeited. As was the case for many years, firearms used to violate Denver ordinances (or state law) may be forfeited as well. On July 13, 1998, the Denver city council voted to make the forfeiture ordinance permanent. Denver's ordinance on carrying weapons, Revised Municipal Code section 38-117, prohibits carrying a weapon, including a firearm, concealed or unconcealed, excepting only law enforcement officers while in the performance of their duties. There is a second section, 38-118, which sets up various affirmative defenses to a charge under 38-117. An affirmative defense is not an exception to a law, it means that once you are charged with a violation of the law, you may prove one of the listed defenses if you wish, at trial. However, the state need not prove the defense doesn't exist in the first place, as they would if it were an exception, and not an affirmative defense. It is an important distinction, because the crime is complete under the Denver ordinance when the weapon is carried, and you may be charged at that point. Then, after your gun and vehicle have been seized as public nuisances, for violating the ordinance, you can go to court and prove at a trial that you had the weapon, "[f]or use in the course of a bona fide hunting trip for wild game, or for transportation in the legitimate sporting use of such weapons, including shooting matches or other target shooting, or trap or skeet shooting; all such weapons being so used shall be unloaded when carried or transported to or from such hunting trip or place of sporting use;" (R.M.C. section 38-118(b)(3)). You could also prove that you had a concealed carry permit, or fell into a few other defenses listed in section 38-118 (see discussion of the car defense below). As a matter of practice, Denver city prosecutors usually apply for an order to destroy all firearms they seize immediately, before hearing or notice to the owner (ex parte), claiming the weapon is an immediate danger to the citizens of Denver, even in the custody of the police department. If you do not immediately go to court to prevent that from happening, even if you win you will not get your firearm returned; you will likely get a cash equivalent for the firearm destroyed by the city. While the limited defenses provided for by the ordinance would appear to conflict with state law, as well as cases construing the state constitution, there has been no successful challenge to the Denver carry ordinance on that basis. Denver's ordinance also purports to limit the state law defense for carrying a concealed weapon in one's car to person's "where there is a direct and immediate threat thereto, while traveling away from the area of their residence or place of business" in their ordinance prohibiting carry. (RMC sec. 38-118). In 1994 a Denver county court judge ruled this more restrictive defense void as in conflict with state law. The defendant was acquitted in a prosecution under the state law, and the city took an appeal of that decision for precedential purposes, to district court (People v. Allen, 94-CV-4013, decided on 2/10/96). The district court judge, Hon. Robert Hyatt, ruled that the two affirmative defenses did not conflict, under the standards set out by the Colorado Supreme Court, and thus the defense was and is much more limited in Denver than the rest of the state (or any other city that elects to limit it). As the defendant in the case was already acquitted there was no appeal of this decision, and in fact only the city presented an appeal brief to the district court. Nonetheless, it is binding on the Denver County Court. The interplay of the Denver ordinance and the newly enacted revision to state law on car carry have not yet been tested in court. Whether Denver decides to bow to the authority of the State of Colorado remains to be seen. A few other Denver notes: any gun purchase from a dealer located within Denver will have a report of that sale sent to the Manager of Public Safety in Denver, regardless of where the purchaser lives. Denver considers this record to be gun and gun owner registration, and makes it available to its police officers, and to other law enforcement agencies. Denver has also enacted a ban on semi-automatic "assault weapons" and on magazines holding over 20 rounds of ammunition; the text of the ordinance is on this web page. Denver also restricts the retail sale, (but not possession), of guns defined as "Saturday Night Specials." The City of Vail also restricts "assault weapons."