Colo. Court upholds Denver weapons ban

[Sindawe]

DENVER - A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Monday upheld Denver's ban on assault weapons, despite arguments that state weapons laws should trump city ordinances.

The 3-3 vote, with one justice abstaining, ended a high-profile fight between Colorado's largest city and state officials over two state laws enacted in 2003 that pre-empted local regulation of firearms in favor of uniform state regulation.

The city sued the state, claiming the laws violated its rights to regulate matters of local concern.

Denver District Judge Joseph Meyer III ruled in 2004 that the city had to conform to some parts of the state laws, but he said the city could bar the sale of assault weapons and so-called Saturday night specials despite state laws prohibiting local governments from banning weapons that are otherwise legal under state and federal law.

Both the city and the state appealed Meyer's ruling.

The Supreme Court said that because of its tie vote, the lower court's ruling stands. It gave no legal opinion or analysis of the issues.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060605/ap_on_re_us/denver_weapons_ban_1

 

[Henry Bowman]

Why did one abstain? :banghead:

 

[Thefabulousfink]

Could someone please post the law in question, because if I am reading the article correctly, it is only illegal to sell "Assualt Weapons" in the city limits.

If that is true all it will do is hurt the business of local gunshops, and make people drive out of the city limits to buy a gun.

Way to take a bite out of crime Denver.

 

[scottgun]

It's not the sale of assault weapons. Its the posession of assault weapons and hi cap magazines (over 21 rnd capacity).
And the definition of assault weapons are model specific.

You can not live in Denver and legally keep an AR15 in your house.


Denver (§ 38-130)
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/denver_ordinance.txt

Cite as Revised Municipal Code (RMC), or Denver Code.

Sec. 38-130. Assault weapons.

(a) Legislative intent. The city council hereby finds and
declares that the use of assault weapons poses a threat to the
health, safety and security of all citizens of the City and County
of Denver. Further, the council finds that assault weapons are
capable both of a rapid rate of fire as well as of a capacity to
fire an inordinately large number of rounds without reloading and
are designed primarily for military or antipersonnel use.

The city council finds that law enforcement agencies report
increased use of assault weapons for criminal activities. This has
resulted in a record number of related homicides and injuries to
citizens and law enforcement officers. It is, therefore, the
intent of the city council to place reasonable and necessary
restrictions on the sale and possession of assault weapons while
placing no restrictions on the right of citizens to use weapons
which are primarily-designed and intended for hunting, target
practice and other legitimate sports or recreational activities and
the protection of home, person and property.

(b) Definitions. The following words and phrases, when used
in this section, shall have these meanings respectively ascribed to
them:

(1) Assault weapon. The general characteristics of an
assault weapon may include the following features: A
shorter length than recreational firearms; a folding
stock; a modification of an automatic firearm orig-
inally designed for military use; a greater rate of
fire or firing capacity than reasonably necessary for
legitimate sports, recreational or protection
activities and shall include all firearms with any of
the following characteristics:

a. All semiautomatic action, centerfire rifles with a
detachable magazine with a capacity of twenty-one (21) or
more rounds.
b. All semiautomatic shotguns with a folding stock or a
magazine capacity of more than six (6) rounds or both.
c. All semiautomatic pistols that are modifications of rifles
having the same make, caliber and action design but a
shorter barrel and no rear stock or modifications of
automatic weapons originally designed to accept magazines
with a capacity of twenty-one (21) or more rounds.
d. Any firearm which has been modified to be operable as an
assault weapon as defined herein.
e. Any part or combination of parts designed or intended to
convert a firearm into an assault weapon, including a
detachable magazine with a capacity of twenty-one (21) or
more rounds, or any combination of parts from which an
assault weapon may be readily assembled if those parts are
in the possession or under the control of the same person.
f. Any weapon listed in subsection (h).

 

[Infidel]

Why did one abstain?

She was recently appointed to the court, formerly being Solicitor-General and having argued the State's side (the good side) before the court last December.

If that is true all it will do is hurt the business of local gunshops, and make people drive out of the city limits to buy a gun.

What local gunshops? All of the actual gunshops moved out long ago, leaving only a couple of chain sporting goods stores selling guns within the city and county of Denver.

 

[scottgun]

model specific

(h) Specific prohibited assault weapons. It is unlawful to carry,
store or otherwise possess within the City and County of Denver any of the
following weapons which are hereby declared to be assault weapons except
as provided in and subject to all the provisions of this section:

(1) All of the following specified rifles:

a. Norinco, Mitchell and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs
(all models).
b. Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil.
c. Beretta AR-70 (SC-70).
d. CETME G3.
e. Colt AR-15 and CAR-15.
f. Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max 1 and Max 2.
g. Fabrique Nationale (FN/FAL, FN/LAR and FNC. [sic]
h. FAMAS MAS223.
i. Heckler & Koch HK-91, H-93 [sic], HK-94 and PSG-1.
j. MAC 10 and MAC 11.
k. SKS with detachable magazine.
l. SIG AMT, SIG 500 Series and SIG PE57.
m. Springfield Armory BM59 and SAR-48.
n. Sterling MK-6 and SAR.
o. Steyr AUG.
p. Valmet M62, M71S and M78.
q. Armalite AR-180 Carbine.
r. Bushmaster Assault Rifle (armgun).
s. Calico M-900 Assault Carbine.
t. Mandall THE TAC-1 Carbine.
u. Plainfield Machine Company Carbine.
v. PJK M-68 Carbine.
w. Weaver Arm Nighthawk.

(2) All of the following specified pistols:

a. Action Arms UZI.
b. Encom MP-9 and MP-45.
c. MAC 10 and MAC 11.
d. INTRATEC TEC-9.
e. Mitchell Arms Spectre Auto.
f. Sterling MK-7.
g. Calico M-900.

(3) All of the following specified shotguns:

a. Franchi SPAS 12 and LAW 12.
b. Gilbert Equipment Company Striker 12.
c. Encom CM-55.

 

[One of Many]

Since the denver ordinance is model specific, it seems that they have left a large loophole for AR type rifles; those made by DPMS for example, since they are neither Colt or Bushmaster, should be legal.

If Denver prosecutes an owner of a DPMS Panther model rifle, and it works back up to the State Supreme Court, then this law should be overturned.

Another possibility is for the State to totally eliminate Home-Rule Cities. This may require a State Constitutional Amendment.

Another possibility is for the state to declare Home-Rule Cities inelligible for any state funding, because they are independent entites and state laws do not apply inside their limits. They do not receive any services from state agencies (Police, Highway, etc.) without paying for services rendered; the flip side of this is that the residents of those cities do not pay state income taxes. The state could make all roads into or out of the Home-Rule Cities into Toll roads, to cover the cost of maintaing them, and create a transportation tax for Hazarous materials (gasoline, etc.) entering or leaving those cities.

Also, since those cities would not be a part of the state, they would not be allowed to vote in state elections, or federal elections as part of the state; they would have to qualify independently of the state to vote in federal elections (like the District of Columbia). That would greatly reduce their political impact in national politics.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

Can't have a pitbull, can't have an "assault rifle" can't have standard capacity mags... I would imagine .50 cal. is next.
Sounds like Denver should be part of Kali, not Colorado.

 

[Leanwolf]

DOUBLETAPDREW - " Sounds like Denver should be part of Kali, not Colorado."



Denver IS part of California!!!

L.W.

 

[BozemanMT]

I don't even know what to say about this.
got the old red cloud of blood going.
just unbelievable
We aren't a nation of laws, we are a nation of lawyers.
Guess Denver has no need to see my money.
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[scottgun]

One of Many - I don't think the model list is inclusive, but rather "including but not limited to", so your DPMS would qualify under the general definition of an assualt rifle. INAL so that just my interpretation. If you read the entire statute, it is very restrictive. And since denver doesn't recognize anyone but itself, I wouldn't want to be the one to put up money on a test case.

Your other suggestions are good for removing home rule status, but Denver won't give up trying to become San Fran.

 

[engineer151515]

I find it interesting that it is

"the intent of the city council to .........while
placing no restrictions on the right of citizens to use weapons
which are primarily-designed and intended for ......the protection of home, person and property"

will disallow weapons "designed primarily for military or antipersonnel use".


So - make sure you protect yourself while using weapons not designed for antipersonnel use.



Or.....

"Okay, let me see if I got this straight. In order to be grounded I've got to be crazy, and I must be crazy to keep flying missions. But, if I ask to be grounded that means I'm not crazy anymore, and I have to keep flying."
Catch-22

 

[Jim March]

Ohhhh man.

So when is the Denver carry ban ordinance coming up before this set of jokers?

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Since the denver ordinance is model specific, it seems that they have left a large loophole for AR type rifles; those made by DPMS for example, since they are neither Colt or Bushmaster, should be legal.

With magazines holding 20 or fewer rounds, correct. Same would be true for Olympic and several other brands -- as well as "roll your own" models.

The stinker is the clause about not being able to possess the parts to assemble an "assault" configuration. If you had an allowable brand of AR-15 and had even ONE 30-round magazine in your possession at the same time you possess the rifle, you'd be in violation.

But the law doesn't mention pairs of 20-rounders held together by jungle clips ...

 

[MrTuffPaws]

Sounds like Denver should be part of Kali, not Colorado.

There was a mass migration from CA to Denver a few years back. I have to say sorry about that, but you should have put up fences.

 

[thesneakyrussian]

There was a mass migration from CA to Denver a few years back. I have to say sorry about that, but you should have put up fences.

it's still going on even worse then ever with the current real estate prices. i hope they won't trash CO like they are trashing CA.

(Low Road language removed by Art)

 

[The-Fly]

the only good thing about this whole mess is demographics.

Put simply, what most people think of as "denver" is really a big metro area mainly dominated by towns such as Thorton, Aurora, Arvada, Denver, etc. This ruling only applies to the ACTUAL city of denver, and not the burbs surronding denver, where the vast majority of the population lives. Denver itself is about 500,000 people, so those folks are screwed. For the most part, Denver itself is fairly run down and poor (think Detroit) so not many gun owners with banned weapons are affected.

That said, Denver's law is B.S., and I'll do my best to not spend money there.

 

[thesneakyrussian]

The-Fly, it's not about how many people are affected, it's about the the fact that they are affected at all. This issue should not exist or talked about to start with, just as any kind of "gun control" BS.

 

[Dbl0Kevin]

The good thing though as only a city ordinance there really isn't much teeth to the rule. I don't know about Colorado but here in NJ the most they can do for a town ordnance is give you a fine, and it doesn't even go on your record.

 

[Fletchette]

I posted this in another thread but I think it bears repeating:

However, in the last 19 years Colorado has made some mistakes. Immediately after Columbine, locals caved in to the media pressure and enacted Amendment 22 which requires a background check for gun sales between private citizens if any portion of the sale occurs at a ”gun show”. A “gun show” is further defined to be three or more people. Not only is this blatantly unconstitutional because it violates the Second Amendment, it also violates the First Amendment; Freedom of Assembly. The idea of a few friends, in the privacy of their own home, to exchange a firearm requiring the permission of Big Brother is starkly reminiscent of Stalin. Since Amendment 22 is an Amendment, not a law, I suspect we will never be able to repeal it.

The underlying problem with Colorado is the importation of millions of newcomers, mostly from California, into Denver. These people are used to such laws and actually want a Socialist State. As Denver grows the state as a whole becomes bluer and bluer. The results are depressing. The last election serves as an illustration.

For the first time in decades, the Democrats have taken control of the State government. I fear the next election will be worse, turning Denver into a Rocky Mountain Chicago.

After a decade of liberal attacks, Colorado recently repealed TABOR for five years. Without spending/taxing/borrowing limits, the state will soon be bankrupt. Taxes will skyrocket.

The city of Denver ignored a local referendum on the ballot that was passed legalizing marijuana within the city saying, “city police will still arrest marijuana possession because it violates state law”. With the same breath, the city refuses to abide by state concealed carry laws and enforces more restrictive city laws that are specifically prohibited in the state law. Denver cites an obscure legal term of “home rule” to do this. This picking and choosing of which laws to enforce, and which parts of the Constitution to read, and which elections to follow, is highly un-democratic. It is the first steps to dictatorship.

 

[scottgun]

(j) Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation, who is convicted
of violating any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine
of not less than one hundred ($100.00) or more than nine hundred
ninety-nine dollars ($999.00) and a term of incarceration of not less
than ten (10) days nor more than one hundred eighty (180) days.

 

[Hyunchback]

I really have to get to the next CSSA meeting and find out what Tony Fabian has planned for this.

And I really have to check out where my second house is. If it's really Denver then I hope the law is done away with before my wife can get us moving there.

Right now we are so far east we aren't even Aurora. The other one is somewhere near the Denver/Aurora line. Hard to tell the players without a score card sort of area thanks to cherry picking properties for taxes.

Can a homeowner secede from a city?

As it is my FN/FAL clone only has 20 round magazines. The Butler Creek 25 rounders for my 10/22s are exempt. It's rimfire, not centerfire.

 

[The-Fly]

thesneakyrussian - i agree, its a stupid law and a piss poor ruling by the judges, and one we should fight tooth and nail.

My analysis was based simply on demographics: in reality, this decision can be avoided by simply living in the burbs of Denver, which most gun owners would want to do anyways due to the crime and other problems that the city of Denver has.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Sounds like Denver should be part of Kali, not Colorado.

Denver wants to be the San Francisco of the Rocky Mountains.

 

[Zundfolge]

So if "assault weapons" are illegal to possess in Denver does that include common carriers?

I live in Colorado Springs, but the vast majority of UPS and FedEx shipments come here via Denver ... so if its illegal for even UPS to possess an AR-15 does that mean that if I order one from Bushmaster or another manufacturer or dealer will they refuse to ship it to my local FFL (much like they refuse to ship to California)?