Colorado Lawmaker Ordered to Cover ‘Shall Not Be Infringed – 2A’ Sticker, Sparks Free Speech Debate
Denver, CO – Colorado State Rep. Ken DeGraaf (R) was ordered to cover up a Second Amendment sticker on his laptop during a House session on Friday after it was deemed “offensive” by Democratic colleagues. The sticker, which read “Shall not be infringed – 2A”, became a flashpoint during the debate over SB25-003, a controversial gun control bill that would ban certain semiautomatic firearms and impose stricter firearm ownership regulations.
Rep. DeGraaf, a staunch defender of gun rights, was vocal in his opposition to the bill and called out the hypocrisy of those who found the words of the U.S. Constitution offensive.
“I had to cover up this, they couldn’t stand my sticker,” DeGraaf said while speaking on the House floor.
“It said ‘shall not be infringed’ and signed ‘2A,’ and that was considered offensive, which I understand would be offensive to this bill.”
The Gun Control Bill That Sparked the Controversy
The bill in question, SB25-003, proposes some of the strictest gun control measures in Colorado’s history, including: ✅ Banning the manufacture, sale, transfer, or distribution of specified semiautomatic firearms
✅ Classifying rapid-fire devices as ‘dangerous weapons’
✅ Implementing a Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) system
✅ Requiring firearms safety course verification for gun buyers
✅ Mandating federal firearms licensees to check a buyer’s eligibility for semiautomatic firearms
The legislation is being fiercely opposed by gun rights groups, conservatives, and constitutional advocates who argue that it infringes on Second Amendment rights.
Censorship of the U.S. Constitution?
During the debate, Rep. DeGraaf was asked to cover up the pro-Second Amendment sticker on his laptop, prompting outrage among conservatives.
The National Association for Gun Rights posted a clip of the moment, highlighting the absurdity of the situation:
“To give you an idea of what we are facing on the ground here in Colorado: A representative was forced to cover a sticker on his laptop that read ‘Shall not be infringed – 2A’ because it was deemed ‘offensive.’”
🔗 View Tweet
Rep. DeGraaf responded sarcastically, pointing out the inconsistency in banning a constitutional phrase in the legislative chamber:
“So OK, no displays of the Constitution in the well, got it,” DeGraaf fired back.
Fox News reports that the official reason for the demand was that displays of any kind are prohibited in the chamber’s “well”, an area near the front desk where members deliver speeches. However, critics argue that the action sets a dangerous precedent for suppressing conservative voices and constitutional advocacy.
Free Speech or Political Censorship?
The incident has ignited a debate over free speech, with conservatives arguing that Democrats are increasingly hostile toward constitutional principles.
🔥 Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) weighed in, blasting Colorado Democrats for censoring a pro-Second Amendment message.
“They are literally banning displays of the Constitution in the Colorado House! This is absolute insanity. The Founding Fathers would be ashamed.”
🔗 View Tweet
Conservative commentator Matt Walsh echoed the sentiment:
“If a simple phrase from the Constitution offends you, maybe you shouldn’t be making laws.”
Meanwhile, gun control activists defended the decision, claiming that the sticker was a political statement that violated chamber rules. However, critics noted that Democrats have been allowed to wear symbols or display signs related to other political causes.
What’s Next for SB25-003?
Colorado’s gun control bill is expected to pass through the Democratic-majority legislature, though it faces strong legal challenges from gun rights groups. The Supreme Court’s recent decisions in favor of Second Amendment rights could ultimately block parts of the bill if it is signed into law.
Meanwhile, Rep. DeGraaf has vowed to continue fighting against unconstitutional restrictions, making it clear that he won’t be silenced by those who find the Constitution “offensive.”
🚨 What do you think? Should lawmakers be allowed to display constitutional amendments in the legislative chamber?
