Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce Magazine Laws

Status
Not open for further replies.
They do not have to enforce the laws for them to be effective. Nobody will ship a mag to ban states and retail there stores will not stock them.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad that they are some of the few that actually uphold their oaths to protect the Constitution. And one of them is going to be running for state senate in 2014. You CO folks should take a good look at him and see if he's worth supporting.
 
Unfortunately, these sheriffs represent sparsely populated rural areas. This reflects the gun debate at large: the antigunners are concentrated in large urban centers. What's bad for our side is that that's where the bulk of the voters are. You see this in state after state -- Maryland, for example, would be pro-gun if it were not for Baltimore and the D.C. suburbs. And Virginia is rapidly becoming that way too.
 
I don't know so that's why I am asking, but....

Can a county override a state's law like the one on mag capacity or the evil black guns?
Can a county in CO, CA, CT, NYS, etc pass a law that does not recognize a state or federal law? In this example, can a CO county say there is no maximum for a magazine capacity and it's legal in that county? I realize outside of that county it changes but... ?
 
Can a county in CO, CA, CT, NYS, etc pass a law that does not recognize a state or federal law? In this example, can a CO county say there is no maximum for a magazine capacity and it's legal in that county? I realize outside of that county it changes but... ?
Click to expand...

No they generally cannot. However they can not notice violations and so enforcement generally ceases in the county.
However there is still multiple levels of law enforcement. So the Sheriff may typically advise not to enforce it, some deputies occasionally enforce it anyways, and some city cops within that county almost always enforce it.
And a state trooper/highway patrol may typically enforce it.
So it may depend what road you are on within that county.

In some areas the jurisdiction of multiple will overlap, so it could depend entirely on who just happens to answer a call.
 
Let's face it, the federal government refuses to enforce laws daily. I fail to see why some local sheriff's similar refusals is even a blip on the radar. :(
 
While it's nice that he may not pursue people to enforce an unjust law, it is an erosion --albeit slight-- of our system of laws. When police don't enforce the law, people begin to lose respect for it (the same is the case when the law is stupid, putting the system of law in a Catch 22 when it comes to arbitrary laws like this). Prosecutorial/enforcement discretion is not a solution nor a substitute for bad law. Hopefully this situation is short in duration while the stupid law is quickly repealed/struck down, so the damage to the system of law is minimal, as well as the injustice to citizens.

Unfortunately, these sheriffs represent sparsely populated rural areas. This reflects the gun debate at large: the antigunners are concentrated in large urban centers. What's bad for our side is that that's where the bulk of the voters are. You see this in state after state -- Maryland, for example, would be pro-gun if it were not for Baltimore and the D.C. suburbs. And Virginia is rapidly becoming that way too.
Click to expand...
That's funny, seeing as these big cities have a demonstrably greater need for the average citizen to go armed than rural areas :confused:. If only we could impart this fact upon the people so frequently brutalized and burglarized in the inner city.

Someone should do a poll of a big city (any big city) showing geographically where "you wish that you, and you alone could legally carry a handgun" lights up the brightest. Or, in the spirit of the Brady-style leading question poll; "do you wish that you were capable of neutralizing any violent attacker?"

TCB
 
Pot is not a topic for THR.

Also, it is not that they are refusing to enforce the laws, it is more that the laws are completely unenforceable. These are not like speed limit laws where there is clear cut limits. Nope, there is no way to prove if a mag was brought into the state after the ban date or not. None. So why should I waste my time trying to get you to tell me you brought it in when there are much more important thing to be doing.

The refusal to enforce is a grandstand to draw attention to how absolutely stupid these laws are and how absolutely unenforceable they are.
 
The refusal to enforce is a grandstand to draw attention to how absolutely stupid these laws are and how absolutely unenforceable they are.
Click to expand...

The grandstanding is a big part of it, they are elected after all. This can be enforced though. It would be very invasive and disruptive but it could be. Think inspecting at public firing ranges or competitions. There are also the individuals still listing mags on Armslist, easy to find and prosecute.
Many, possibly even most, mags do have a manufacture date stamped on them. Possession of an old one cannot be disproven but new magazines could be enforced if someone wanted to. Time will be required before bothering to enforce possession, need a larger pool of post ban mags. This law will likely get it's first conviction when someone commits a violent crime with a mag date stamped after July.

Meanwhile we enforce it ourselves, mags are unavailable at retail or through mail order.
 
I went thru my stack of magazines, no dates on them.

That is the issue - unless the law specifically calls out that a date or marking be placed on them, they can't be construed as being illegal.

So, the law was improperly written to simply outlaw by design - the capacity to hold more than a specific number. That goes to an unConstitutional "deprivation of property" - we can't use something, and we get no compensation for our loss.

There's also the Constitutional issue that the powers of the Police are derived directly from the powers of the people - what they can do to protect themselves in defense of their lives and property is the source. The Police then are further hampered by the duty to protect our rights during acts of enforcement - because they are subordinate to the people.

The Sheriffs get it. They live with being an elected official, and they know they have to share much of the same interpretation that the public does - or get fired.

The State authorities, however, and some municipalities, have built up an immunity to being held responsible. It's based on the idea that all others in their same capacity are in the same situation, so no one challenges the status quo out of their own selfishness. It takes an outsider with authority to force change. They don't hold elected positions, and they aren't sufficiently held to respond to those who are.

What we have allowed is the creation of a standing army on our very neighborhood soil, and all the warnings and precautions our founding fathers wrote to us are now illuminated for us to understand.

Gun confiscations and the BATF mass copying FFL records while the Federal Court holds that the NSA is out of bounds scooping up emails makes this an interesting situation.
 
Anyone unafraid to side-step state law is willing to have a buddy ship them anything that's 'reasonable' to own. Take that as you will. :)
 
So, are the cops going house to house with a search warrant looking for illegal mags? After all, the state handgun registry is probable cause that you are breaking the law.....chris3
 
It is really sad what has happened to CO in recent years. This is certainly a welcome sight and a step in the right direction. I hope to gun control guys lose BIG in the next election.
 
Nobody will tell me what magazines I can own!!! I will continue to buy outdoor life good housekeeping etc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top