Moving to Colorado with magazines >15 rds that I have owned since prior to 2013

[Trunk Monkey]

My point with that hyperbolic statement is that what was once true for Colorado - everyone ignoring the mag ban- may not hold true in the near future.

Which is why I only carry magazines that are in clear compliance with the law. 15 rounds or less and I have receipts for every magazine I've bought since 2013.

FWIW Colorado isn't a solid blue state. Denver and the surrounding cities are blue and the rest of the state is pretty red.

 

[LysanderSpooner]

Treating you differently based on your previous residency would likely violate both the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Art. IV, section 2, clause 1 and the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause. See, e.g., Zobel v. Williams, 457 U.S. 55 (1982); Saenz v. Roe, 536 U.S. 489 (1999).

 

[Trunk Monkey]

FWIW Colorado isn't a solid blue state. Denver and the surrounding cities are blue and the rest of the state is pretty red.

FWIW I have amended my assessment. Colorado is Mucho HARD Blue. WIth matching gun laws to follow I'm sure

 

[P89DCSS]

I see gun stores in Colorado selling 20 and 30 round ar15 mags. In clear sight on retail sales racks for anyone to see. The Colorado mag round limit isn't enforced at all from what I see.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

The Colorado mag round limit isn't enforced at all from what I see.

Until it is

Over the six years the ban has been in place, just 11 people, all men in their 20s and 30s, have been convicted and sentenced for violating the magazine ban. Lawyers in Colorado's 18th Judicial District have prosecuted about a dozen of these cases.Jul 17, 2019

https://www.kunc.org/2019-07-17/six...ados-large-capacity-magazine-ban#:~:text=Over the six years the,a dozen of these cases.


If you're breaking the law you're putting your future in the hands of the next cop run into.

 

[RavenTai]

FWIW I have amended my assessment. Colorado is Mucho HARD Blue. WIth matching gun laws to follow I'm sure

Sad, Colorado is a beautiful state, but I guess the land in California is beautiful also, its the Californians that are the problem.

 

[P89DCSS]

Until it is



https://www.kunc.org/2019-07-17/six...ados-large-capacity-magazine-ban#:~:text=Over the six years the,a dozen of these cases.


If you're breaking the law you're putting your future in the hands of the next cop run into.

Don't make any incorrect assumptions about my behavior. I was just making a factual statement and drawing a very simple and obvious conclusion. I am not a lawyer. It does seem very strange that this law is not being enforced with a few exceptions. I suspect the magazine charges you cite were thrown in on cases where the prosecutors were overcharging to force a plea.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

I suspect the magazine charges you cite were thrown in on cases where the prosecutors were overcharging to force a plea.

That's entirely possible but they were still thrown in.

I wasn't implying that you were breaking the law. I don't even know if you live in Colorado.

That doesn't change the truth of what I said. If you break the law you are putting your future in the hands of the next cop you run into.

 

[Dudedog]

Californians that are the problem

Not all of us....

 

[Spats McGee]

Do you think I will get any straight answers contacting local prosecutors or attorney generals office?

I think you'll get a straight answer, and that answer will be: "I can't give you legal advice." Prosecutors and attorneys general represent the State. Period. If you want your own legal advice, you need to go hire your own lawyer.

 

[Miami_JBT]

https://www.kunc.org/2019-07-17/six...d-under-colorados-large-capacity-magazine-ban

As a previous poster said, the law is selectively enforced against people doing felonious things already. Many sheriffs were against it too.

Don't think it will always stay that way. Many Sheriffs in NY were against the SAFE Act too.... they still bent knee and enforced it anyways as the years rolled by. Sheriffs retired, were voted out of office, or simple went with the general political mood and changed their mind and started to enforce it.

I've read the law since I like CO and I have been thinking of moving there. The issue with the law is it isn't clear if the magazine had to be owned by you prior to the enactment and living in CO. I've legally owned magazines since before Clinton was President, it just happened to be that it was all done here in FL.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Do you think I will get any straight answers contacting local prosecutors or attorney generals office?

LOL... no.

 

[.455_Hunter]

LOL... no.

Yeah. LOL. Real funny.

What this thread demonstrates is that there needs to be an established and direct method for citizens to engage government officials concerning legality of a given action or topic.

This smoke and mirrors notion about "working for the state" and not the citizenry is ridiculous, and the "hire a lawyer" just to get a simple question answered is asinine.

A citizen can contact the local Building Department about code requirements for a new furnace without having to hire a contractor.

Why it is supposedly different with legal actions?

 

[Miami_JBT]

Yeah. LOL. Real funny.

What this thread demonstrates is that there needs to be an established and direct method for citizens to engage government officials concerning legality of a given action or topic.

This smoke and mirrors notion about "working for the state" and not the citizenry is ridiculous, and the "hire a lawyer" just to get a simple question answered is asinine.

A citizen can contact the local Building Department about code requirements for a new furnace without having to hire a contractor.

Why it is supposedly different with legal actions?

Because the local DA doesn't interpret how laws are enforced. For that, you need to get it in writing from the State's Attorney General and that depends on their own legal interpretation and since they are political offices, that can change depending on who's in power and what party they associate with.

Additionally, since laws are vague on purpose and case law has been established that executive regulatory agencies can interpret the law and determine how they are to be enforced due to the Chevron Deference Doctrine and the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, getting a straight answer from anyone is like farting in the wind.

In my LE career, I've received four different legal opinions on the same question from three different Attorney Generals due to who held the office and what direction the political winds were blowing.

 

[Spats McGee]

Yeah. LOL. Real funny.

What this thread demonstrates is that there needs to be an established and direct method for citizens to engage government officials concerning legality of a given action or topic.

This smoke and mirrors notion about "working for the state" and not the citizenry is ridiculous, and the "hire a lawyer" just to get a simple question answered is asinine.

A citizen can contact the local Building Department about code requirements for a new furnace without having to hire a contractor.

Why it is supposedly different with legal actions?

You may not like the situation, but that doesn't change what it is. A State (or another government agency) can be thought of like a corporation. It's simply an entity that has legal work that it needs done, so it hires lawyers to do it. Those lawyers work for the State. In my State (and I think in most if not all states), the AG is an elected official who then hires all of the deputy AGs. The prosecutors are the same way. The county prosecutor is elected, but hires all of the deputy prosecuting attorneys. The prosecutors handle the trial-level criminal work, and the AG's office handles the appeals. (At least that's the way it works here.)

One major difference between code officers and prosecutors, though is that the Code officer probably won't be in charge of prosecuting you for violating the building code. (Though that same officer may be the one who cites you after that non-conforming furnace is installed.) You're free to contact whatever gov't officials you want. Not all of them will be free to talk to you, though.

 

[Frank Ettin]

....A citizen can contact the local Building Department about code requirements for a new furnace without having to hire a contractor....

Various regulatory agencies have varying responsibilities for administering certain statutes, and for adopting and administering certain regulations to assist in administering those statutes. Building departments are generally such agencies, and they administer various building codes by issuing permits for construction only to projects which have demonstrated compliance. Such agencies can often provide information to the public to help members of the public comply with technical, administrate, or procedural requirements.

Some administrative agencies have formal procedures for requesting certain types of advice. For example, the IRS has procedures for requesting a Private Letter Ruling. Someone interested in that sort of formal guidance will often find that the help of a qualified lawyer can be very useful.

But one must remember that in providing such assistance, an agency is representing the the state, not the individual. So an agency response will be based on agency policy and its interpretations of the statutes and regulations it administers -- even if those policies or interpretations might be subject to challenge.

But your lawyer will be responsible for representing your interests. And communications with your lawyer will be private.

 

[.455_Hunter]

The two previous responses exactly highlight why direct citizen engagement of government for legal clarification should be a standard practice.

The OP has a simple question and should be able to receive a binding answer within a very reasonable timeframe from the LE or DA. It's not hard.

Getting a response on the legality of a matter should not be the sole domain of the legal cabal.

 

[Miami_JBT]

The two previous responses exactly highlight why direct citizen engagement of government for legal clarification should be a standard practice.

The OP has a simple question and should be able to receive a binding answer within a very reasonable timeframe from the LE or DA. It's not hard.

Getting a response on the legality of a matter should not be the sole domain of the legal cabal.

Theory and Reality are tso different things. The only source for an official answer should be the Colorado State Attorney General's Office since they are the final arbiter for interpretation before the courts legislate from the bench. It is the AG's Office that give guidance on how laws are to be interpreted and enforced.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Theory and Reality are tso different things. The only source for an official answer should be the Colorado State Attorney General's Office since they are the final arbiter for interpretation before the courts legislate from the bench. It is the AG's Office that give guidance on how laws are to be interpreted and enforced.

Considering the law in question is a state law, then yes, I agree the AG's office should be able to answer the OPs question.

Should is the operative word.

I am sorry, but this has bugged me since I was a teenager. Citizens are expected to know and follow laws, but getting official assistance to do so is a pre-ordained quagmire.

I guess I am just lucky that local LE and DA have answered my limited questions in the past.

 

[Frank Ettin]

....Should is the operative word.

I am sorry, but this has bugged me since I was a teenager. Citizens are expected to know and follow laws, but getting official assistance to do so is a pre-ordained quagmire....

Well, you might think that things should be a certain way. Others, however, might have a variety of different ideas about how things should be. At the end of the day how things are will be decided through a variety of political, legislative, and judicial processes.

The bottom line is that things are not necessarily going to be the way some people think they ought to be. Since that's bugged you since you were a teenager, you've obviously known that for some time.

The world is as it is, not necessarily as we'd like it to be. How well each of us will get along in the world will at least in part be determined by how well each can develop the knowledge, understanding, and skills to (1) recognize and understand reality; and (2) deal with it and make good decisions.

 

[Frank Ettin]

....The only source for an official answer should be the Colorado State Attorney General's Office since they are the final arbiter for interpretation before the courts legislate from the bench. It is the AG's Office that give guidance on how laws are to be interpreted and enforced.

That is not true.

An Attorney General is the government's lawyer. He provides legal services to the government, as his client, just as I provide legal services to my private clients. An AG's legal opinions are just legal opinions. There are often influential, and may be given great weight; but they are not binding on a court.

In real life in the real world, the the legal system decides, through judicial process, disputes, disagreements, controversies, or legal questions. Law, including constitutions, statutes, regulations, and decisions of courts of appeal, is a tool used by courts to decide the the issues brought to court for resolution. While the parties may argue what the law is that is applicable to the case, it's up to the court, in the exercise of its judicial function to decide what law actually does apply and how it applies to the facts to decide the outcome. As the Supreme Court ruled back in 1803 (Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 2 L. Ed. 60, 1 Cranch 137 (1803), 1 Cranch at 177), "...It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is....."

 

[.455_Hunter]

I am well aware that my opinion of the situation is just that- the opinion of a professional person outside of the legal cabal.

However, broad shall issue rights for CCW were also just an opinion before they became legal reality.

Maybe somethings need to change.

 

[Miami_JBT]

That is not true.

An Attorney General is the government's lawyer. He provides legal services to the government, as his client, just as I provide legal services to my private clients. An AG's legal opinions are just legal opinions. There are often influential, and may be given great weight; but they are not binding on a court.

In real life in the real world, the the legal system decides, through judicial process, disputes, disagreements, controversies, or legal questions. Law, including constitutions, statutes, regulations, and decisions of courts of appeal, is a tool used by courts to decide the the issues brought to court for resolution. While the parties may argue what the law is that is applicable to the case, it's up to the court, in the exercise of its judicial function to decide what law actually does apply and how it applies to the facts to decide the outcome. As the Supreme Court ruled back in 1803 (Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 2 L. Ed. 60, 1 Cranch 137 (1803), 1 Cranch at 177), "...It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is....."

Through the Administrative Procedures Act and the Chevron Deference, the AG wields considerable legal authority in interpreting laws and their enforcement. A fine example is Massachusetts's Attorney General, Maura Healey and how she completely reinterpreted the MA AWB. Her legal authority due to her office completely changed the entire long gun market in MA. All because she simply looked over the law and said XYZ instead of ABC.

The Courts make final determination, but the AG decides if you're going to be charged in the first place.

 

[dh1633pm]

But to get and maintain a clearance, you need to state that you are obeying the law.