Denver Assault Weapons Ban partially repealed

[ether]

I wanted to expand on my posts in this recent thread because I don't think they got the attention they deserved:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=333728

At some point 2 significant subsections of the Denver AWB (c. and h. of Section 38-130) were removed, presumably due to a ruling that they were "unconstitutionally vague". Here is the latest Denver municiple code (as of January 7, 2008):

http://library1.municode.com/default/DocView/10257/1/248/252

Scroll down to Section 38-130 and notice that subsections (c) and (h) are now marked "Reserved". These are significant sections that used to attempt to define an "assault weapon", as evidenced in this old copy of the code:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/denver_ordinance.txt

Can anyone find anything left in the latest code that could possibly restrict the ownership of a typical AR15, for instance, as long as you don't own any magazines over 20 rounds?

According to this organization, these subsections were removed as far back as January 2007 (scroll down to "Assault Weapons"):

http://rmgo.org/faq

Unfortunately, I doubt the city is going to advertise that its ban has been neutered, so you still run the risk of having to prove in court that your AR is legal in the event a LEO that doesn't know any better feels it's necessary to arrest you for having said AR in Denver.

What do you guys think?

 

[jlbraun]

WHAT?!?!

How did this happen and I didn't know about it?

 

[ether]

Crazy huh? I never would've thought twice about checking the latest municiple code if I hadn't stumbled onto the rmgo.org Gun Law FAQ.

 

[ether]

I also forgot to mention significant changes in 38-130(b)(1).

Here's the original language from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/denver_ordinance.txt:

"(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:"


And here's the latest language from http://library1.municode.com/default/DocView/10257/1/248/252:

"(1) Assault weapon shall include all firearms with any of the following characteristics:"



That's a huge difference in and of itself...notice that now 1) a folding stock is only prohibited on shotguns, 2) no mention is made of length (NFA rules obviously still apply), 3) no reference is made to military firearms originally designed to fire automatically, 4) the stupid "rate of fire" comment is ommitted.


...very interesting indeed.

 

[Evocatii]

I am surprised that this happened. I myself live on the western slope yet I would think that I would have heard of the change.

 

[Robert Hairless]

A shorter length than recreational firearms; ... a greater rate of fire or firing capacity than reasonably necessary for legitimate sports, recreational or protection activities ...

Seems to me that the above language in the municipal code is so obviously vague that it is unenforceable and--if an attempt were made to enforce it--that it would be nullified under the Void-for-Vagueness Doctrine arising from interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Somewhere along that way someone might point out that many recreational firearms have a length of just a few inches: I recreated this week with a snubnosed revolver. The language is so vague that it doesn't even specify that the recreational firearms must be long guns.

In the bay next to me this week a competition shooter was practicing and if he were the standard for a greater rate of fire might be impossible to define. The man was fast--and accurate too.

As for firing capacity, I just don't know what that means. It can't mean "magazine capacity" because the term is well known and that law doesn't use it, so it must intend something else.

In a society regulated by laws, the laws must be sufficiently clear and specific so that people who want to be law abiding can comply with them.

 

[DouglasW]

WHAT?!?!

How did this happen and I didn't know about it?

Ditto.

I actually have the (unknowingly) old ordinance bookmarked on my computer, so I can easily reference the (apparently out-dated) law.

If true -- I can't get the "current ordinance" to open up right now -- I'm surprised these changes were not broadcast more widely, either by the MSM or by pro-gun groups/gunshops/ranges in the metro area.

Hmmm...I think I better start saving for an AR before November

 

[ether]

If you can't get the link to the "new code" to open, just go here:

http://www.municode.com/Resources/gateway.asp?pid=10257&sid=6

and then search for "Assault Weapons" and click on the link that starts with "Article IV".

 

[OMGWTFBBQ]

Doesn't CO have state preemption of gun laws?

My own city(Minneapolis) has a registration scheme that's still on the books, but they can't enforce it because because Minnesota state laws preempt it.

 

[NickEllis]

Denver went to the CO Supreme Court to argue for "Home Rule" for their assault ban, and essentially overrode any state preemption for a certain number of laws.

Beyond that.... WHAT!! How did I not hear of these changes? Can we get a CO lawyer in here to explain this?

 

[ether]

Denver City/County (not sure the difference, if there is any) does have "home rule" of law. Don't quote me, but I believe this is because "Denver" was a municipality before "Colorado" was a state. They *do* continue to maintain their own "Assault Weapons Ban"...the law, as a whole, was upheld by the State Supreme Court, which is why it's still on the books. It was ruled that they can still restrict magazines over 20 rounds, shotguns with folding stocks, etc.

 

[schloe]

I was told the same thing buy the guy who run's Scottie's Guns on Colfax recently. His shop is in the city and county of Denver. He sells AR-15s and AKs and every other type of "assault" weapon.

He said according to the current laws they are perfectly legal in Denver unless they have a magazine insterted in them that can hold over 20 rounds.

This is the same interpretation as the RMGO website.