cuchulainn
May 22, 2003, 08:19 AM
from the Bolder Daily Camera
http://www.bouldernews.com/bdc/editorials/article/0,1713,BDC_2489_1979489,00.htmlLosing combination
Now we have more gun permits, fewer gun laws
May 22, 2003
At a time when more Coloradans are seeking permission to carry concealed weapons, their local governments have almost no authority to regulate the possession and use of guns. That absurd and potentially lethal combination is a direct result of the 2003 legislative session, which produced two major changes in state firearms law.
One measure overhauled the system for issuing concealed-weapons permits. Under the old system, county sheriffs were free to decide who received a permit and who didn't. The results were varied, to put it mildly. Some law-enforcement officials issued permits by the thousands; at the other extreme, Denver issued almost none. The new law establishes a single set of standards for the entire state. It requires the sheriff to issue a permit to anyone 21 or over who passes a criminal background check and an approved firearms-training course.
After the new concealed-weapons law took effect over the weekend, some expected a long line of applicants this week in the Denver-Boulder area. What they've seen so far is brisk traffic but no stampede. On Monday, 23 people sought permits in Denver and 65 showed up in Jefferson County. In Boulder County, which normally receives about six applications a month, 21 people applied over the first two days.
It's hard to tell whether these modest numbers point to an emerging trend or merely a brief surge in applications. In either case, it should go without saying that cities have the authority to regulate where these weapons are carried — and to enact other restrictions on the possession, sale and use of guns.
Right now they don't. While rewriting the concealed-weapons law, the Legislature also stripped local governments of the power to regulate guns, by prohibiting them from enacting almost any ordinance more stringent than state law.
Gun-rights advocates described this law as a necessary response to the state's "confusing patchwork" of firearms laws. That argument was at least plausible in the case of concealed-weapons standards, which really were confusing — particularly when sheriffs in rural areas defeated the purpose of the old system by issuing permits to residents of Denver. But the same argument is cynical when applied generally to local firearms laws. Of course they're different in Sterling and Boulder, for the simple and obvious reason that Sterling and Boulder are different kinds of communities. What's confusing about that?
Unless the courts intervene, common-sense local ordinances are off the books. Denver can't outlaw assault-type weapons or stop people from openly carrying guns on a mall. Boulder can't go beyond state law in restricting the access of minors to guns. Broomfield can't require gun-carrying security guards to obtain a permit. The state can prohibit concealed weapons from legislative chambers — but a local government wouldn't be able to ban them from a City Council meeting.
The good news is that cities are gearing up to challenge the law in court as an attack on their home-rule authority. Denver is planning to file suit, and Boulder is prepared to join it. Here's hoping they prevail. A victory in court would send a resounding message to state lawmakers foolish enough to believe that they served the cause of public safety by putting more guns on the street and fewer laws on the books.
http://www.bouldernews.com/bdc/editorials/article/0,1713,BDC_2489_1979489,00.htmlLosing combination
Now we have more gun permits, fewer gun laws
May 22, 2003
At a time when more Coloradans are seeking permission to carry concealed weapons, their local governments have almost no authority to regulate the possession and use of guns. That absurd and potentially lethal combination is a direct result of the 2003 legislative session, which produced two major changes in state firearms law.
One measure overhauled the system for issuing concealed-weapons permits. Under the old system, county sheriffs were free to decide who received a permit and who didn't. The results were varied, to put it mildly. Some law-enforcement officials issued permits by the thousands; at the other extreme, Denver issued almost none. The new law establishes a single set of standards for the entire state. It requires the sheriff to issue a permit to anyone 21 or over who passes a criminal background check and an approved firearms-training course.
After the new concealed-weapons law took effect over the weekend, some expected a long line of applicants this week in the Denver-Boulder area. What they've seen so far is brisk traffic but no stampede. On Monday, 23 people sought permits in Denver and 65 showed up in Jefferson County. In Boulder County, which normally receives about six applications a month, 21 people applied over the first two days.
It's hard to tell whether these modest numbers point to an emerging trend or merely a brief surge in applications. In either case, it should go without saying that cities have the authority to regulate where these weapons are carried — and to enact other restrictions on the possession, sale and use of guns.
Right now they don't. While rewriting the concealed-weapons law, the Legislature also stripped local governments of the power to regulate guns, by prohibiting them from enacting almost any ordinance more stringent than state law.
Gun-rights advocates described this law as a necessary response to the state's "confusing patchwork" of firearms laws. That argument was at least plausible in the case of concealed-weapons standards, which really were confusing — particularly when sheriffs in rural areas defeated the purpose of the old system by issuing permits to residents of Denver. But the same argument is cynical when applied generally to local firearms laws. Of course they're different in Sterling and Boulder, for the simple and obvious reason that Sterling and Boulder are different kinds of communities. What's confusing about that?
Unless the courts intervene, common-sense local ordinances are off the books. Denver can't outlaw assault-type weapons or stop people from openly carrying guns on a mall. Boulder can't go beyond state law in restricting the access of minors to guns. Broomfield can't require gun-carrying security guards to obtain a permit. The state can prohibit concealed weapons from legislative chambers — but a local government wouldn't be able to ban them from a City Council meeting.
The good news is that cities are gearing up to challenge the law in court as an attack on their home-rule authority. Denver is planning to file suit, and Boulder is prepared to join it. Here's hoping they prevail. A victory in court would send a resounding message to state lawmakers foolish enough to believe that they served the cause of public safety by putting more guns on the street and fewer laws on the books.