Concealed carry guns could be banned from Denver parks, city buildings

[Aim1]

Not sure this will pass legal muster. A sensitive area like a court house is one thing, not sure the rest is.



https://www.denverpost.com/2022/05/...-concealed-gun-carriers-parks-city-buildings/

 

[WisBorn]

I'm surprised that weapons are not already banned from city buildings.
The three different states that I have lived in ban weapons in city, county, state, and federal buildings.

 

[wiscoaster]

Not sure how you enforce something that's concealed.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Stay out of Denver. I do.

 

[jmorris]

Creating a “safe zone” for criminals, why have I never thought of that? Oh, I’m not a fool.

 

[.455_Hunter]

This was the goal of the Triple-D state government's elimination of pre-emption last year- to make it impossible for most urban area citizens to go about their day legally armed. Several communities are actively pushing these restrictions, plus "sensitive areas" like banks, churches and grocery stores. No officials have been able to cite any actual justification based on rates of violent concealed carry malfeasance, it's all virtue signaling. Most of these petty dictators absolutely abhor the concept that "normal people" can legally carry "hidden guns" in public.

 

[Speedo66]

No officials have been able to cite any actual justification based on rates of violent concealed carry malfeasance...

Why let the facts get in the way of a good political moment?

 

[CapnMac]

CO gun laws flat out boggle me (and many others, too, apparently).

 

[PapaG]

You’re going to become Illinois

 

[Old Dog]

Not sure this will pass legal muster.

Of course it will. It's been done in several states, counties and cities.

It's why some Dem state legislators are now aiming to do away with preemption laws in states that have them (such as Washington). For those in states with a preemption law, we need to hold our ground, because it will render the concept of lawful concealed carry moot should preemption be overturned in these states.

Looks as though, since Boulder's already gone, the California of Colorado is almost complete. The entire West Coast is gone, Idaho and Arizona are in the antis cross-hairs as well.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

Looks as though, since Boulder's already gone, the California of Colorado is almost complete. The entire West Coast is gone, Idaho and Arizona are in the antis cross-hairs as well.

I have seen this being referred to as a new form of Lebensraum...

 

[.455_Hunter]

CO gun laws flat out boggle me (and many others, too, apparently).

Colorado was one of the relatively early adaptor of the "shall issue" and local pre-emption carry laws in 2004. This was well ahead of many "red" states, and during the brief period we had a R governor, one R controlled legislative branch, and the other had enough rural D's and R's to override the urban stupid. In reality, 2004 - 2012, Colorado was one of the best environments for gun owners.

By late 2012, that all changed, with the triple-D taking control immediately after the Aurora Theater Shooting. In 2013, we were rewarded with the >15 mag supposed ban and the UBC law, but for many folks (like me), it really didn't have much of an impact.

However, with the King Soopers Shooting in 2021, war was declared on the pre-emption restriction and concealed carry, allowing local government to pass whatever they want as long as its MORE restrictive than state law. In addition, safe storage mandates were also implemented.

Yeah, it sucks. Armed citizens will have to make some choices about their personal carry decisions moving forward.

 

[Plan2Live]

Not sure how you enforce something that's concealed.

In my state, punishment for violating concealed carry laws typically includes suspension or termination of your concealed carry permit. Most permit holders I am friends with would rather obey the law and simply avoid going into locations where they can't legally carry rather than risk losing their carry permit.

 

[wiscoaster]

In my state, punishment for violating concealed carry laws typically includes suspension or termination of your concealed carry permit. Most permit holders I am friends with would rather obey the law and simply avoid going into locations where they can't legally carry rather than risk losing their carry permit.

Yes, of course, except those aren't the people you need to enforce against because they're no threat to public safety in the first place, but a law and a threat of punishment never deterred a criminal intent on committing his crime. My question was with respect to enforcing by prevention, not by threat of punishment. You can't enforce prevention of concealment, because the act of committing the crime cannot be detected, unless you put restricted access with metal detectors everywhere you want to enforce. That would go over real well at parks.

 

[WisBorn]

I have to agree with @Plan2Live. Just moving from SC back to WI. I am firmiliar with both states laws having permits in both (SC no longer valid as they are for residents only).
The risk of conviction breaking the law carrying a firearm into a restricted area is not worth doing it.
I understand that you have a risk/threat if you don't have your protection.

Reading the comments about changes in CO makes me think about how states differ in their laws and how to obtain a CCW/CWP permits.
While living in the Blue State of IL I had a permit. I also had a CWP while living in the Red State of SC. Both CWP permits had very similar training requirements and restrictions. The Purple State of Wisconsin is least restrictive.
Now purchasing a firearm SC the most friendly with no waiting period. WI has a waiting period for handguns. IL has waiting periods of both handguns and long guns.

 

[wiscoaster]

... WI has a waiting period for handguns.....

Wha?!?!? No they don't. I live here and I've bought handguns here. No waiting. Maybe you're thinking about the state background checks for handguns, which became notorious for multiple-day delays during the pandemic but are now back to normal. I can choose a handgun, fill out the forms, get background-checked, pay for it, and out the gun store door carrying my new gun within a half hour. If you had to wait on a recent purchase, maybe it was because you got a "delay" from NICS due to your address change.

 

[WisBorn]

Wha?!?!? No they don't. I live here and I've bought handguns here. No waiting. Maybe you're thinking about the state background checks for handguns, which became notorious for multiple-day delays during the pandemic but are now back to normal.

I apologize! Wisconsin repealed its 48 hour waiting period to purchase a handgun in 2015.

 

[wiscoaster]

Sorry, text added by edit while being quoted. I have this bad habit of always wanting to say more. Not necessarily a good habit to have.

 

[WisBorn]

Sorry, text added by edit while being quoted. I have this bad habit of always wanting to say more. Not necessarily a good habit to have.

I should have checked the law before posting myself. I moved from WI to IL in 2015. Then to SC in 2019. Back to WI in March 2022.
I bought my first handgun in WI in 1986 and many many others after.
The 48 hour waiting period was the norm.

I have never had a problem with having to wait for the background check (fingers crossed that doesn't change). The 48 period was a pain considering that you could stop in a gun shop hours from home see a handgun you like then have to decide if you were willing to drive back to pick it up two days later. Im glad that the waiting period changed. I feel for our CA friends that have much longer wait periods.

 

[Plan2Live]

but a law and a threat of punishment never deterred a criminal intent on committing his crime.

Are you suggesting we should repeal all laws that don't prevent people from breaking the law?

 

[wiscoaster]

Are you suggesting we should repeal all laws that don't prevent people from breaking the law?

That's not what I said in the quoted post.
However, for purposes of discussion, my viewpoint is that we shouldn't enact new laws that are burdensome only to the people likely to obey those laws but that don't deter those not likely to obey those laws. All laws are guidelines for acceptable social behavior, with punishment for unacceptable behaviors that pose dangerous to the public. Compliance is always voluntary. Those who choose not to comply should be punished when found out, prosecuted and convicted. Laws that put restrictions on behaviors that pose no danger to the public and that aren't going to be complied with anyway by those who care nothing about compliance are laws that are ineffective and unnecessary, and are usually enacted just to demonstrate to voters that their elected officials are "doing something". I think the Denver law that's the subject of this thread fits that description. And further, wrt to that law, I think it actually makes the public less safe, because there's not going to be a "good guy with a gun" present to stop the bad guy intent on doing harm to the public.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Being a Denver municipal ordnance, the initial penalty for violation is a $50 ticket.

 

[MedWheeler]

.455_Hunter writes:

Colorado was one of the relatively early adaptor of the "shall issue" and local pre-emption carry laws in 2004.

Florida adopted both "shall issue" and state pre-emption in 1987. Admittedly, the pre-emption portion lacked real enforceability until 2011, when the law was amended to allow local politicians or leaders to actually be penalized for violating it. Colorado might have been watching for non-renewal of the Federal AWB before taking action back then.

 

[.455_Hunter]

.455_Hunter writes:



Florida adopted both "shall issue" and state pre-emption in 1987. Admittedly, the pre-emption portion lacked real enforceability until 2011, when the law was amended to allow local politicians or leaders to actually be penalized for violating it. Colorado might have been watching for non-renewal of the Federal AWB before taking action back then.

Yes, we all know about Florida. My basis was a comparison to states like KS, NE, or IA. The CO CCW law was approved before the AWB non-renewal debate was concluded. The make-up of the state government was different at the time, with progressive purists being in the minority. Now a progressive ideologue is the state senate president.