Article Contributed on: 3/2/2007 9:16:05 AM
The so-called "make my day better" bill, or HB 1011, did not have a good day in the Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee on Monday.
In the House, the bill squeaked by with a vote of 34 to 30 and expanded upon the original law which allowed the use of force against an intruder by a homeowner if that homeowner felt his or her life was at risk. HB 1011 was introduced by Rep. Cory Gardner, R - Yuma and carried by Sen. Ted Harvey, R - Highlands Ranch, in the Senate.
"This law simply says that a business owner has the right, if he feels his life is in danger, to self protection and it extends the make my day law from the home to the place of business," said Harvey while speaking before the committee.
The summery of 1101 states that it "creates a presumption that an occupant who uses deadly physical force against an intruder has a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury to himself or herself or another person." It goes on to say that businesses and vehicles would be included under the law, although vehicles were stricken from the legislation.
Early on in the hearing a clear partisan split could be seen in the committee. Taking a clear stance against the bill were the Democrats: The Committee Chair, Peter Groff, Denver; Sue Windels, Arvada; and Chris Romer, Denver. And supporting the bill were Republican Senators Dave Shultheis and Ron May, both of Colorado Springs.
Groff voiced his concerns about simple misunderstandings turning violent.
"My concern is that there will be group of kids that come into the business where the owner thinks they are a threat. If a group of kids from East High School come into a 7-Eleven (convenience store) after a basketball game, and the owner does not understand the dress or culture than he might feel threatened enough to pullout a gun."
Harvey responded that such cases would be up to the District Attorney to decide and that it was better to "err on the side of the victim."
Aurora Police Chief Daniel Oates spoke on behalf of the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police testified against the bill.
"Everyone in this room, at some point in their lives has been in a business setting when an argument has occurred," said Oates. "An argument can break out between a business owner, proprietor or representative and someone who is a customer. Those kinds of disputes occur everyday in our society and we are opposed to empowering a stressed clerk or a business owner to rely on this statute to justify the use of deadly force."
Douglass County Sheriff David Weaver of the Colorado Sheriff's Association said that while many of the same criticisms of the original law were being rehashed, the answers to those questions were also the same.
"Some have asked the question, 'is your television set worth someone's life?' But you know what the intruder made that choice," said Weaver. "Am I willing to bet my life on someone's intent? Are you here for my life or my diamonds? The same thing applies to a business. Are you here for a (candy bar) or my cash drawer? If it's the (candy bar) I'll sell it to you. If it's the cash drawer, enter at your own risk."
After Sen. May moved to take the bill to the floor. Sens. Groff, Romer, and Windels voiced their concerns. Groff did not was not convinced that the judgment of business owners was sufficient, while Romer had concerns over what constituted an illegal entry. Windels said she was not sure the language of the bill limited the use of force to owners or employees of businesses.
"If one gang member felt threatened by another threatened then could they kill the other person if they were both in a business?" she asked.
Shultheis made highlighted some of the dangers he believes are an incentive to allowing people to protect themselves.
I look at overall society and I wonder how many of us want our wives and daughters to work in a (convenience) store in a neighbor hood with high crime.
We have lost a lot of civility in this society, and we have a lot of belligerence going on with young people without fathers who are challenging authority. We should allow people to protect themselves.
In the end, however, a simple majority signed the bills fate. The democrats voted to postpone indefinitely HB 1011, effectively defeating it.