Earlier this month, Governor Jared Polis signed Senate Bill 3 into law — Colorado’s most sweeping gun control measure in recent history. It will require Coloradans to pass a background check and complete a training course before buying many semiautomatic firearms, while also banning rapid-fire trigger devices like bump stocks.

This piece comes at a time of reckoning once again. Just days ago, two people were killed and several more injured in a shooting at Florida State University — another act of violence in a long, tragic list. In that context, SB-3 feels especially timely. Supporters call it a step toward safety; opponents, an overreach. To me, it does seem like a compromise — one that may not satisfy anyone completely but genuinely attempts to balance rights with responsibility. The bill isn’t a blanket ban. It exempts common handguns and shotguns and allows continued possession of existing weapons. It aims for regulation, not confiscation — and for that reason, I hope it stands up to court challenges. Years ago, a conservative family member in Kansas — a dyed-in-the-wool MAGA Trumper — told me he thought gun buyers should pass a safety course. I was genuinely surprised. This was the same person who thought it perfectly normal to keep a loaded shotgun in the kitchen while kids ran around. But his reasoning was simple: If you’re going to own something so powerful, you should at least know how to use it safely.

So, in my view, requiring training and background checks isn’t radical. It’s a reasonable middle ground that acknowledges the deadly seriousness of firearms. It’s a meaningful improvement — but we also need to be realistic: Most mass shooters pass background checks. Some even train extensively beforehand. SB-3 may reduce risk in some cases, but it won’t, on its own, address the deeper roots of violence.

That’s why this law should be seen as a beginning, not an endpoint. Gun policy without people policy is incomplete. If we want to prevent tragedies, we must also invest in mental health care, conflict resolution programs, and community resilience. Regulation can help limit harm, but only care and connection reduce the desperation that leads someone to use a weapon to cause harm in the first place.

So, I also hope lawmakers keep going, because while SB-3 is a meaningful step, real safety demands more than just laws. It requires the political will to fund red flag laws, enforce safe storage rules, and invest in programs that prevent violence before it begins. That’s the work still ahead — and it’s work worth doing.

Hernán Villanueva, chvillanuevap@gmail.com

This hardly seems controversial. Except that everything with guns is controversial. First, outlawing the purchase of devices that would turn a “regular” assault rifle into a machine gun is just logical. Without an expensive and hard-to-get permit, it’s illegal to purchase a new machine gun. Who could be against this law? Only people who want to bypass the laws that make it difficult to own machine guns.

Second, before you buy an assault rifle, you need to pass a background check and get training. We need training to get a driver’s license. Both make sense, as both can be lethal weapons, and it’s reasonable to require training before taking control of these objects. There is a significant difference, though. Only one of these is guaranteed by the Constitution.

My buddy is pro assault rifle. He believes the Second Amendment guarantees citizens the right to own what the militia uses. Back at the birth of our country, that was a muzzle-loaded musket. Today, it is an assault rifle. Requiring a background check and training might not be constitutional, depending upon how the courts interpret the Second Amendment.

No one’s Second Amendment right is being taken away. My buddy is probably okay with both restrictions, and he still gets to keep his assault rifle. My position on gun laws is like my position on abortion: Let’s settle on a reasonable compromise upon which 75% (or more) of our citizens can agree. Unfortunately, the extremes on both sides generally control the narrative and the proposed laws. Except here. Hurray for Polis and Colorado.

With these laws, Colorado has taken the high ground of moderation on guns. But Colorado still wallows in the depths of the extreme on abortion. Almost indistinguishable from murder, partial-birth abortion is still legal in Colorado. We had our chance to go mainstream in the last election, and we didn’t. Bummer.

This legislation vaults Colorado to the top of the heap for restrictive gun laws, but I doubt they will be very effective. Even if they don’t curb gun violence, I completely understand and agree with the desire to “do something.” These laws are just common sense. But anyone who really wants an AR-15 will just drive to Wyoming. Until we have national legislation, these laws just make us feel better. And who doesn’t want to feel better? I do.

Bill Wright, bill@wwwright.com

Long before psychedelia took hold of my musical imagination in the 1960s, Gene Autry’s “Back in the Saddle Again” was the number one song on my personal hit parade. As a second grader, I would strap on my faux ivory handled colts, slip in a role of repeating caps and shoot at my friends as we walked to school. I’d sing to myself in a whisper the lyric I had committed to memory, “Riding the range once more, totin’ my old 44, where you sleep out in the night, and the only law is right, Back in the Saddle Again.” I was immersed in gun culture, Toy Guns. In my growing up, the gun and the West were synonymous. I came out West, but the romanticized image of the gun as a peacemaker I left far behind.

Last week, Gov. Jared Polis helped to create the West I want to live in. Senate Bill 3 will, as the governor assured, “make Colorado safer.” Common sense is Back in the Saddle Again. Shotguns, rifles and most handguns are exempt; gas-powered semi-automatic firearms are not. Every Republican in the State House (34) voted against the measure, crying that such a restriction frays our Constitutional rights. Isn’t that rich. Republicans stand by and watch as our Constitutional rights are daily gunned down, but cry foul if reasonable tweaks to the Second Amendment are enacted.

We in Colorado know that a semi-automatic weapon (and those modified to fire like one) is the engine of mass murder. We learned this lesson in schools, at a movie theater in Aurora and at a grocery store in Boulder. We don’t need any more lessons. We need ever-expanding safety measures that keep gun violence away from our community.

Tim Sullivan, the bill’s sponsor, whose son was murdered in the Aurora Theater shooting, consistently notes that gun violence is a public health concern. In opposition to that concern, Huey Laugesen, with the Colorado State Shooting Association, claims that “this is going to put firearm ownership out of reach for a lot of people,” noting that obtaining a permit and background checks are expensive and is an erosion on the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

He has recently started a petition to request that Attorney General Pam Bondi investigate the State of Colorado for its infringement on the Second Amendment. The bill doesn’t restrict gun ownership, it just means you can’t have an AR-15 assault rifle.

This issue reveals the political polarization that blisters our nation. When it comes to gun control, we cannot endure unlimited rights with limited responsibilities. Rights and responsibilities must align. Passing Senate Bill 3 does just that. Thank you, Governor Polis.

Jim Vacca, jamespvacca1@gmail.com