CCW Classes & Firearms Training In Metro Denver & All Of Colorado
Tag: gun
Dive into a wide range of topics related to guns, including firearm reviews, training techniques, maintenance tips, legal updates, and responsible gun ownership. Our articles are designed to inform, educate, and support everyone from first-time buyers to experienced shooters.
Short answer: No — unless you fall into a narrow exception, Colorado now requires you to be 21 years old to purchase ammunition.
Colorado’s New Ammunition Age Law
Historically, federal law split the rules:
Handgun ammo – must be 21+ to buy from a dealer.
Rifle/shotgun ammo – could be bought at 18+.
Colorado used to follow this model, but that changed with House Bill 25-1133, which took effect in 2025. Now, all ammunition sales require the buyer to be 21 years old — whether it’s for a handgun, rifle, or shotgun.
Exceptions for 18- to 20-Year-Olds
The law provides a few narrow carve-outs:
Active-duty military or honorably discharged veterans
Hunter education certificate holders
Born on or before January 28, 2007 (grandfather clause that expires in 2028)
On-site range use — you can buy ammo for immediate use at a shooting range
If you don’t meet one of these criteria, you can’t legally purchase ammunition in Colorado until you turn 21.
Legal Challenges & Court Rulings
Pro-gun organizations, including Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, quickly challenged the law. So far, both the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and Chief U.S. District Judge Philip Brimmer have allowed it to remain in effect, ruling that the age restriction does not violate the Second Amendment. Many in the firearms community disagree, arguing that this is another unnecessary law targeting law-abiding young adults rather than criminals.
Why This Law Matters to Gun Owners
For decades, an 18-year-old in Colorado could buy rifle or shotgun ammo for hunting, sport shooting, or defense. Now, unless you fall under an exception, you’re out of luck until 21. Critics argue this treats legal adults like second-class citizens, while doing nothing to address actual criminal misuse of firearms.
Relevant Colorado Statute
Colorado Revised Statutes, HB25-1133 (2025) – Establishes the 21-and-over ammunition purchase requirement, exceptions, and penalties for violations.
When someone uses deadly force in self-defense, the legal aftermath can be just as intense as the incident itself. One step that often confuses people is the grand jury process—especially when a person isn’t immediately charged after a shooting.
If you’ve heard that someone “wasn’t indicted” or that their case “went before a grand jury,” it’s important to understand what that actually means—and how it can shape the outcome of a self-defense case.
What Is a Grand Jury?
A grand jury is a group of citizens who are called to review evidence and decide whether there’s probable cause to believe a crime was committed. They do not decide guilt or innocence. Their job is simply to determine whether a person should be formally charged with a crime—a process known as indictment.
Unlike a regular (trial) jury, a grand jury:
Is larger (usually 12 to 23 members, depending on the state)
Does not include a judge or defense attorney
Hears only the prosecutor’s side
Operates in complete secrecy
Often meets over a longer period and may consider multiple cases
In most states, the defendant doesn’t know the proceeding is even happening until after a decision is made.
Indictment vs. Charge vs. Conviction: What’s the Difference?
These three terms often get confused, especially in news coverage:
Indictment: A formal accusation issued by a grand jury stating that there is probable cause to believe someone committed a crime.
Charge: A formal accusation brought by a prosecutor, either through a grand jury indictment or direct filing with the court.
Conviction: A finding of guilt at trial or via a plea agreement, determined beyond a reasonable doubt.
So just because someone is indicted doesn’t mean they’re guilty—it only means the case will proceed to court. And if a grand jury does not indict, the case often ends right there.
Do All States Use Grand Juries?
No, not all states use grand juries the same way. Here’s how it generally breaks down:
Common Grand Jury States: States like Ohio, Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana frequently use grand juries to review felony cases.
Mixed or Optional Use: States like Colorado, California, and Florida allow prosecutors to choose between a grand jury or a preliminary hearing (a public hearing before a judge who decides if charges can proceed).
Rare or Limited Use: In states like Washington, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, grand juries are rarely used except for special investigations or public corruption cases.
⚖️ In Colorado, California & Florida, prosecutors typically use preliminary hearings, but grand juries may be used in complex or politically sensitive cases.
Understanding how your state handles this process can help you better prepare for what could happen after a self-defense incident.
Why Would a Prosecutor Use a Grand Jury?
There are several reasons why a District Attorney (DA) might choose to present a case to a grand jury instead of filing charges directly:
To Gain Public Trust In emotionally charged or controversial cases—especially those involving self-defense or use of force—prosecutors may prefer that a group of everyday citizens decide whether charges should be filed.
To Avoid Political Backlash A grand jury gives the appearance of neutrality. If a decision is unpopular, the DA can say, “The grand jury made that call.”
For Legal Cover in Tough Cases When the law isn’t clear-cut or the facts are murky, a DA may rely on the grand jury to sort it out and provide backing for their decision.
The Grand Jury and Self-Defense
Self-defense cases often walk a legal tightrope. Even if the shooter appears justified under the law, prosecutors must still evaluate whether:
The use of deadly force was reasonable
The person had a legal right to be there
The force was used to stop an imminent threat
In states with Stand Your Ground or Castle Doctrine laws, prosecutors may find it difficult to meet the standard for criminal charges—especially when the evidence is ambiguous or leans toward justification.
Rather than unilaterally deciding, they may present the case to a grand jury to let the public weigh in.
Example: The James Rayl Shooting
A good example of a grand jury in action is the 2022 shooting of James Rayl in Ohio.
Rayl attempted to force his way into the home of his ex-girlfriend. After ignoring verbal warnings, he kicked the door multiple times until it opened slightly. Inside the home, Mitchell Duckro, the ex-girlfriend’s father, fired three shots through the door, killing Rayl.
The case sparked national debate:
Was the use of force justified under Ohio’s Castle Doctrine?
Did Rayl pose an immediate threat if he hadn’t fully entered the home?
Rather than decide alone, the local prosecutor presented the case to a Shelby County grand jury.
After reviewing the evidence—security footage, the 911 call, witness statements, and Ohio law—the grand jury voted 7 to 1 not to indict Mitchell Duckro.
Because the standard for indictment is simply probable cause, the vote suggests the grand jury strongly believed Duckro’s actions were legally justified, or at least didn’t rise to the level of criminal wrongdoing.
Grand Jury Declines to Indict — But Civil Court Follows
Although Duckro faced no criminal charges, the legal battle didn’t end there.
In 2023, the family of James Rayl filed a civil lawsuit against Mitchell Duckro and his wife, alleging wrongful death. Unlike a criminal case, where guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, a civil case only requires a preponderance of the evidence—meaning it’s more likely than not that the defendant is liable.
In July 2025, a confidential settlement was reached in the civil case. All claims were dismissed by agreement, with no admission of wrongdoing by Duckro. The settlement amount was undisclosed, but it likely helped the Duckros avoid a drawn-out court battle and potential financial devastation.
The case is essentially closed from a criminal standpoint.
The state can’t retry the case without new evidence or extraordinary circumstances.
However, even if a person is not indicted criminally, they may still face civil lawsuits, including wrongful death or negligence claims.
Final Thoughts: Grand Juries and Self-Defense Law
If you carry a firearm or plan to defend your home under a Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground law, it’s important to understand the full legal picture. A grand jury is not a trial—but it is often the first major legal hurdle you’ll face after using force.
Whether or not charges are filed may come down to a group of citizens in a room you never see, based on evidence presented by a prosecutor who may or may not be sympathetic to your actions.
The Rayl case shows how grand juries function, but also how criminal and civil liability are two very different things. Even if you are never charged, you may still need to defend your actions in court—at great financial and emotional cost.
Takeaways
A grand jury decides whether to file charges, not whether you’re guilty.
Not all states require grand juries—many use preliminary hearings instead.
Only the prosecution presents evidence, and the process is secret.
The James Rayl case ended with no criminal charges but did result in a civil settlement.
Self-defense insurance could help protect you from the financial aftermath, even when you’re legally justified.
On the morning of July 31, 2022, James Rayl, a 22-year-old Ohio man, was fatally shot by Mitchell Duckro after attempting to force entry into the Duckro family home. Captured on a Ring doorbell camera, the incident sparked national attention and intense debate over the use of deadly force under Ohio’s Castle Doctrine.
While no criminal charges were filed, the case didn’t end there. In 2023, Rayl’s family pursued civil action, and in July 2025, a confidential civil settlement was reached. The legal, financial, and emotional consequences offer a powerful case study in modern self-defense law—and what happens when you’re left to face a lawsuit after pulling the trigger.
🏠 What Happened: The Shooting of James Rayl
Rayl, who had previously dated Mitchell Duckro’s daughter, Allyson Duckro, appeared unannounced at the family’s front door. After ringing the doorbell and waiting briefly, he began kicking the door in.
Inside, Mitchell Duckro warned him repeatedly. When the door began to give way, he fired three shots through the wooden door, striking Rayl in the shoulder and chest. Rayl stumbled away and collapsed on the front porch. He was later pronounced dead at the scene.
Duckro was never charged. A Shelby County grand jury declined to indict him, citing Ohio’s Castle Doctrine, which gives homeowners broad authority to use deadly force against intruders. Here is a link to see the Ring footage.
🧑⚖️ The Civil Lawsuit: Conatser v. Duckro
Despite the lack of criminal charges, Rayl’s mother, Nancy Conatser, filed a wrongful death lawsuit in July 2023. The civil complaint named Mitchell, Allyson, and Stacey Duckro as defendants and alleged:
That Duckro used excessive force
That Allyson may have misled or emotionally manipulated James, causing him to show up
That the shooting was unreasonable, especially since the door hadn’t fully opened
The case became a national talking point about the difference between criminal immunity and civil liability in self-defense cases.
⚖️ Civil vs. Criminal: Two Very Different Outcomes
It’s important to understand that criminal court and civil court operate under different standards:
In criminal court, prosecutors must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt”
In civil court, the standard is “preponderance of the evidence”—meaning more likely than not
This means a person can be legally justified in a shooting and still be found liable in civil court. The Rayl case is a textbook example of how legal justification does not guarantee financial protection.
✅ Confidential Settlement Reached in July 2025
In July 2025, a confidential civil settlement was reached through an Agreement to Dismiss All claims (ADA). While the terms remain undisclosed, family members of James Rayl, including his sister Jess Colbert, confirmed the resolution in the Facebook group Justice for James Rayl. In a video post, Colbert stated that the family had reached a settlement with the Duckros and believed justice had been served through civil court.
This avoided a public jury trial and formally closed the civil case.
💵 How Much Did the Duckro Settlement Likely Cost?
While the exact amount is confidential, we can estimate the likely financial impact by analyzing similar wrongful death cases and legal costs.
Cost Component
Estimated Range
Settlement Amount
$100,000 – $1.5 million
Legal Fees
$50,000 – $150,000
Confidentiality Premium
$100,000 – $300,000
🟰 Total Likely Cost
$250,000 – $2 million+
⚖️ Shooting Through Doors: A Legal Grey Area
One of the more controversial elements of this case is that Duckro fired through a closed door.
Even in Castle Doctrine states, this kind of action can raise questions:
Was the door truly about to give way?
Did the homeowner have visual confirmation of the threat?
Could he have waited another second to assess intent?
In civil court, plaintiffs often argue that firing without seeing the person directly is reckless, especially if the door never fully opened. These arguments are emotionally charged and can sway jurors—even when the law is technically on the shooter’s side.
💬 Public Opinion: Deeply Divided
The James Rayl shooting generated intense and polarized reactions online and in the media:
Some saw Duckro as a law-abiding father who protected his daughter from a potential violent intruder.
Others viewed him as a man who panicked and executed an unarmed young man through a wooden door without giving him a chance to leave.
Even among gun owners and self-defense advocates, opinions varied dramatically. That division underscores how complex and emotionally loaded these cases can be—even when the law is clear.
🌐 Social Media and the Fight for Justice
Much of the public pressure to pursue justice came from social media—particularly the Facebook group Justice for James Rayl.
Founded by friends and family members, the group shared updates, organized public awareness campaigns, and highlighted perceived flaws in the investigation. It also served as a central hub for supporters nationwide who wanted to see the case reopened or pursued civilly.
Without this grassroots effort, it’s possible the civil case might have never happened—or gained the momentum it did.
🗣 Author’s Perspective
As a firearms instructor and use-of-force expert, here’s my honest opinion:
I believe the Duckros were in the right. Rayl had no business trying to kick in the front door. Once someone begins to force entry into your home, all bets are off—you have the legal and moral right to protect your family.
That said, I also believe James Rayl made a tragic, dumb, and youthful mistake. He didn’t deserve to die, but unfortunately, this was a situation where his actions triggered a fatal response. It’s heartbreaking.
We’ll never know what his true intent was, but Duckro couldn’t afford to wait to find out. For all he knew, Rayl could’ve been armed. He could’ve killed the family, raped Allyson, or set the home on fire. These things happen. Watch the news.
When it comes to home defense, you don’t get to hit rewind. I believe Mitchell Duckro acted lawfully, and responsibly, under unimaginable stress. It was a justified but devastating situation.
🛡 Could Self-Defense Insurance Have Saved the Duckros Financially?
It’s unknown whether Mitchell Duckro had self-defense insurance. But if he didn’t, the financial damage from this case could have been catastrophic:
Equity in the home
Retirement funds
Garnished wages
Bankruptcy
That’s why self-defense insurance exists.
✅ A Plus for Self-Defense Insurance
With a proper self-defense policy, Duckro’s legal fees and even a seven-figure settlement could have been entirely covered. These policies typically include:
Civil and criminal attorney coverage
Judgment & settlement payouts
Bail bond assistance
Firearm replacement
Expert witness costs
🔎 Compare Self-Defense Insurance Providers
We strongly recommend every CCW holder or lawful gun owner consider coverage from:
Hire Mark Schneider as your expert witness for self-defense, shooting, or use-of-force cases—civil or criminal. Certified firearms instructor with real-world training and courtroom experience.
📣 Final Thoughts
The James Rayl case reminds us that even a legally justified shooting doesn’t end at the muzzle flash. The financial, emotional, and legal aftermath can change your life forever.
Whether you’re defending your home, your life, or your loved ones—be trained, be informed, and be protected.
