In Colorado, failed gun background checks – usually viewed as a safety filter to stop illegal purchases – could soon be used in a very different way. According to a new report by CPR News reporter Allison Sherry, some experts and lawmakers now believe these denials could be used to help screen people applying for jobs in sensitive fields like healthcare, law enforcement, or national security.
The logic? If someone is flagged during a gun purchase background check for having a criminal record, mental illness, or an unresolved immigration status, perhaps they shouldn’t be working in high-trust areas either. But this shift from gun safety to employment screening is setting off alarms among Second Amendment advocates.
Langley Outdoors Academy Calls It “Mission Creep”
Braden Langley, host of the popular YouTube channel Langley Outdoors Academy, warned viewers in a recent video that the government is using gun denials as a backdoor way to track and punish citizens. “If you get pinched on any type of denial,” he said, “you’re not going to be able to get a job in a sensitive area.”
Langley calls this “mission creep” – when a system designed for one purpose slowly becomes something else entirely. “This is why we fight the gun controllers so hard,” he said. “They want your denial on a background check to follow you for life.”
What Happens When You’re Denied a Gun Purchase
According to Sherry’s report for CPR News, when someone fails a background check in Colorado, it sets off a cascade of notifications. Local police, immigration authorities, and sometimes prosecutors are alerted via a tool called “Instacheck.” This system provides half a page of information including the person’s name, the reason for the denial, and the date of the attempted purchase.
Yet despite these alerts, most denials are ignored. No one is charged, no one is investigated, and no one is followed up with – even if they tried to buy a gun while having a felony conviction or active warrant.
Soliman Case Sparks Debate
The system’s failure to act had real-world consequences in the case of Mohamed Soliman. As Sherry reported, Soliman, who was in the U.S. without legal status, tried to buy a firearm in Colorado Springs in November 2024. His application was denied. Then, in December, he tried to get a concealed carry permit and was denied again. Both events were flagged. Authorities were informed. But no one acted.
Six months later, Soliman allegedly carried out a firebombing attack at a demonstration in Boulder, killing one person and injuring others. He later told police he taught himself to make the bombs after failing to obtain firearms.
A Missed Opportunity or a Warning Sign?
Democratic State Senator Tom Sullivan, who has been a leading voice for stricter gun laws in Colorado, said that if authorities had followed up on the background check denial – perhaps even with a simple fine or warning – Soliman might have been deterred.
“Maybe he would have been like, ‘Oh my goodness, someone saw me,’” Sullivan said. “And then they would rethink what they’re doing.”
Braden Langley scoffed at this suggestion, calling it “insane.” In his view, a $500 fine wouldn’t stop someone already plotting violence. “This guy literally firebombed people,” Langley said. “You think he’d stop because he owed a fine?”
Can a Denial Hurt Your Job Prospects?
Beyond fines and arrests, there’s another concern growing fast: the use of gun background check denials in job screening. As Sherry reported, some believe that failed attempts to purchase a gun should be included in someone’s criminal profile, especially when applying for security-clearance jobs.
Critics like Langley say this opens the door to dangerous overreach. “What’s to stop them from saying, ‘You can’t work in a hospital because you failed a gun background check for a paperwork error’?” he asked.
Law Enforcement Isn’t Always on Board
Many local agencies say they lack the time and resources to follow up on background check denials. Teller County Sheriff Jason Mikesell told lawmakers, “It’s not a crime to try and buy a gun. It’s a crime to purchase one if you’re a convicted felon.” Mikesell believes the system is already working – because it blocked the purchase.
Sherry’s report says law enforcement often treats these denials as a low priority, unless they come with a clear criminal trigger like an outstanding warrant.
Prosecutors Want More, But Get Less
District attorneys like Jefferson County’s Alexis King are frustrated. She told CPR News that she only received two background check denial cases from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the past year. One wasn’t strong enough to prosecute. The other is still pending.
“If this tip is supposed to lead to accountability, then why are we getting so little from CBI?” King asked. “We should be building cases, not letting red flags pile up in inboxes.”
Langley Warns of Slippery Slope
Langley worries this kind of data mining could become a trap. He envisions a scenario where future laws ban certain types of guns – say, AR-15s – and anyone who tries to buy one gets flagged, fined, or even disqualified from certain jobs. “It’s not about safety,” he said. “It’s about control.”
He added, “If you can’t pass a background check because of some new rule, they’ll use that as an excuse to block your employment. That’s how this works.”
CBI Gets More Funding, But Progress Is Slow
In response to the criticism, Colorado lawmakers approved $1.4 million in 2024 to help the CBI hire more staff and investigate denials. But according to Sherry’s article, only 30 arrests were made out of more than 4,200 denials last year – less than one percent.
CBI spokesman Rob Low acknowledged the slow rollout, saying the new gun unit is “still refining and improving” its workflow. He added, “We try to work collaboratively with our law enforcement partners and are always willing to accept their feedback.”
Data That Could Help – or Be Abused
Boulder District Attorney Michael Dougherty told CPR News that gun denials have helped investigators in some serious cases. In one incident, a failed background check led to a deeper investigation that eventually stopped a dangerous suspect. But he also warned the system isn’t perfect.
“These aren’t necessarily crimes, but they are red flags,” Dougherty said. “And red flags are only helpful if someone takes the time to look into them.”
A Dangerous New Frontier
Using gun background check data to block employment is a dangerous step. While it may seem logical to deny sensitive jobs to people with a violent history, that’s already covered under existing job screening. What’s happening now is different – using your attempt to legally buy a gun as evidence against you, even if no crime occurred.
There’s no doubt the system failed to stop Soliman. But letting that failure justify new ways to punish people based on gun data sets a chilling precedent. You shouldn’t lose your job, or your future, because a government database got something wrong, or because you made a legal mistake trying to exercise a constitutional right.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.
