Broomfield – Latest to Pass Anti-Gun Legislation in Colorado

On Tuesday, January 10th, the Broomfield City Council passed a number of anti-gun ordinances following a public hearing. Each goes into effect immediately. I drive through Broomfield several times a week. I live about a stone’s throw from the city boundaries and a few times a month I host a Concealed Carry class within the city.

The most concerning proposals have been deferred to a hearing in June. I will discuss them below as well.

Here is a list of the proposals that did pass and are now law in Broomfield Colorado:

  • Ord. 2188 bans the sale and POSSESSION of “rapid-fire trigger activators” whatever that means. The text of the law is pretty vague, so there are certainly some things that would be obviously included like a bump stock, but frankly, there are potentially other things that could fall into the definition… like my trigger finger 🙂
  • Ord. 2190 restricts home-built firearms. Basically,Basically, anything without a serial number. No more building or possessing these firearms in Broomfield.
  • Ord. 2191 requires firearm dealers in Broomfield (of which I think there are about 20) to post anti-gun propaganda about the red flag orders.
  • Ord. 2193 prohibits open carry in public places. This is similar to the city/county of Denver in this regard.
  • Ord 2194 prohibits the concealed carry of firearms in City/County of Broomfield-owned and operated places where signs are posted indicating as much, and security personnel and metal detectors are present. This is frankly a pointless law as the state law already achieves this but hey politicians need to do stuff right?
  • Ord 2195 & 2200 update various definitions and provisions in other parts of the code to be consistent with the other new ordinances.

So what does this mean for people in my neck of the woods? Practically for most people, it means very little. For those who really like building their own guns or like to open carry, you should be on guard that those things aren’t ok in Broomfield anymore.

To be clear, I think every one of those ordinances is a violation of our constitutional rights, but frankly, the 2 biggies I was most concerned about have been deferred.

Ord. 2189 prohibits adults ages 18-20 from exercising their second amendment rights. The same people we send off to war wouldn’t be allowed to buy guns in Broomfield.

Ord. 2192 would impose a 10-day waiting period on gun purchases and require that buyers present proof of training or experience prior to purchase. Man, am I glad this hasn’t passed.

Those last two will come up again in June but frankly if either passes they will be immediately challenged in court and based on recent district court decisions around the country and last year’s supreme court decision I don’t think either could pass constitutional scrutiny. We’ll see what the recent Oregon training requirement does when it is challenged in court in the upcoming months as well. In fact, it could be the Oregon legal challenges that caused the city of Broomfield some pause with Ord. 2192.


  1. Clark Kent on February 1, 2023 at 10:10 am

    As we have learned here in Washington state, ‘legal challenges’ mean ZERO to the anti-gunners. They will go full speed ahead with enacting unconstitutional firearm laws regardless of what SCOTUS has to say about the matter. Even if an unconstitutional law is challenged in court, the government uses YOUR TAX DOLLARS to defend said law.

  2. Luke Nordvick on February 2, 2023 at 6:16 am

    Good article. Ordinance 2191 particularly rubs me the wrong way. Forcing a business owner/property owner to put up signs that say things they most likely disagree with is a disgrace.

    • Dennis on February 9, 2023 at 12:03 am

      Ordinance 2191 violates the 1st Amendment.

  3. Thomas Flemming on February 9, 2023 at 8:45 am

    Nobody ever said that the Broomfield council is the shiniest apples in the bushel basket. I’m so glad I don’t live in a state that lets stupidity run rampant. Praise the Lord for God, guns and family!

Leave a Comment