Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
Colorado has quietly carved out a niche in the gun-control world, and it’s not a good one. While Virginia grabs headlines for pushing AR bans, Colorado lawmakers are refining something far more insidious: aggressive expansion of red-flag laws that weaponize schools and healthcare systems against lawful gun owners.
That’s the warning sounded this week by William Kirk of Washington Gun Law, who broke down the implications of Colorado Senate Bill 4. And why it should concern gun owners far beyond the Centennial State.
At its core, SB4 dramatically expands who can petition a court for an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO). Colorado already lowered the bar last year by allowing more “community members” to seek red-flag orders. This bill blows that door wide open.
Under SB4, entire institutions (not just individuals) could petition to have your firearms seized. That includes K-12 schools, colleges, hospitals, behavioral health facilities, and substance-abuse treatment centers. If you or your child had contact with one of these institutions within the past six months, that entity could potentially initiate a red-flag action.
And here’s the catch: it doesn’t have to be the specific professional who treated you. The facility itself can act as the petitioner.
SEE ALSO: Armasight Pro Series: A Thermal Overhaul — SHOT Show 2026
Kirk points out the obvious problem. Red-flag laws already operate on extremely low evidentiary thresholds. Rather than raising penalties for criminal misuse, states like Colorado are expanding the pool of people who can label someone “dangerous” and trigger firearm confiscation. Often, before the gun owner ever gets a hearing.
Even more troubling is the chilling effect this creates. If seeking mental-health counseling or substance-abuse treatment carries the risk of being disarmed, people may simply stop seeking help. That undermines public safety while eroding trust between patients, families, and professionals.
Colorado’s approach also relies heavily on vague definitions, such as “co-responders” in community response teams, non-law-enforcement personnel who interact with individuals during behavioral health calls. That ambiguity isn’t accidental. It’s how red-flag usage scales quickly without openly violating constitutional limits.
As Kirk warns, this isn’t just a Colorado problem. States like New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, and Virginia are watching closely. If SB4 becomes law, it won’t be the exception.
When lawmakers can’t disarm the public directly, they outsource the job. Colorado Senate Bill 4 shows exactly how that’s done.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
colorado . LOL !!
Several articles have mentioned that the far leftists democrats in Colorado weren’t getting enough people on ERPO. Only a few dozen each year. So they expanded it.
Remember that neighbor of yours who throws crazy beer parties and you complained? Well, he’ll call in anonymous and report you for having guns
Nothing in the Bill to increase suicide. phone.lines or more mental hospitals.
Just the democrats plan to disarm as many gun owners as possible. Using whatever means they can.
Another thing is, say for instance, the far leftist democrats ban all semi auto rifles, how soon do you think it will be before they go after lever action rifles, bolt action rifles and pump action rifles?
I’ve heard hunters say ” oh, they will never ban bolt action rifles”, want to bet? Right after the Kennedy assassination in 1963, they were politicians who wanted to ban all bolt action rifles- and that was 63 years ago!
Several gun sites have mentioned that the gun banning groups will next push is to BAN all magazines over 5 rounds- and require all magazines to have a serial number- and in order to purchase one you would have to fill out forms, get fingerprinted, get a background check- then have to wait 5 days before you could take home the magazine.
With the ever-increasing stakes, before someone answers any questions with a “health care” worker, the provider should be required Mirandize the patient. All institutions that can initiate a red flag law should be required by law to disclose this fact in writing, on a semi-annual basis, to all people potentially impacted by these threatening circumstances. The Stazi like tactics should cut both ways and NOT be free from legal redress.
How they can take someone’s word at face value over this is beyond me. If you went to the police and told them your next-door neighbor was a drug dealer or a child molester… They would have to investigate. But with guns they can just come in and take them?
Vote wisely!
Redflag laws should NOT be anonymous; the caller (reporter) data should be locked up, sure, but unsealable by judicial order in the case of malicious fraud. Same for swatting.
This could easily be swatting. Colorado, even on the more conservative West Slope, is an uneasy mix of solid American firearm owners who live next door to rainbow flag toting Leftists. These people would turn in their neighbor for guns because they simply don’t like that the gun owner drives a diesel pickup.