The template for new urban restrictions, including CCW bans.

[.455_Hunter]

Coming soon to your Colorado community...

https://boulderbeat.news/2022/02/12/boulder-gun-control/

Some highlights...

Raising the age limit for purchasing firearms from 18 to 21


This is already the law in Boulder, but the code language needs updated, city officials said.


Nationally, it is illegal for 18-20 year olds to purchase handguns from licensed dealers. They may buy them from private parties.


Instituting a 10-day waiting period for firearm purchases


The 10-day period would begin once a background check is initiated, according to city language. Many exemptions are included: for law enforcement and military but also for transfers between licensed sellers, transport, repair, etc.


Prohibition on open carry


This would ban the carrying of visible firearms in public places, except for in a vehicle, locked case or with a concealed carry permit. As with many other proposals, exemptions for military members and law enforcement are included.


Disallowing concealed carry in "sensitive" areas


Open and concealed carry would be banned in city buildings; public parks; playgrounds; city recreation and/or community centers; protests held on public property; within 500 feet of ballot counting or polling places; at "licensed premises for alcohol sellers" such as bars or liquor stores; hospitals; mental health or substance abuse treatment centers; stadiums or arenas; banks; theaters; day care centers and preschools. This would not apply to firearms in vehicles, a form of concealed carry under some laws. Places of worship could be exempt from the concealed carry ban, if they so choose.

[Essentially everywhere a citizen goes in conducting daily business.]



Banning "ghost" guns

Guns without a serial number would not be allowed in Boulder, with exemptions for antiques or any firearm manufactured before Oct. 22, 1968, when federal authorities began requiring serial numbers on new guns.

[Ah Pook]

Nice that the pic in the article is a Magpul mag.

This just sounds never ending.

[.455_Hunter]

This is rich...


Though not included in Tuesday’s presentation, city council members requested a specific exemption for private security guards.

“In today’s world,” councilman Mark Wallach said, “there are institutions that may want to have a meaningful security presence.”


Hey Mark- Do you think that just maybe such a thought process also includes armed citizens and their families who are in public?

[wctriumph]

Without any preemption law the next couple of years should be downright terrifying …

More gun free zones equals more death of innocent children!!

[ray1970]

Just the continued Californication of the state.

Its been coming for a long time but eventually we?ll catch up with the west coast.

[Gman]

The lefties in CO are running left so fast and so hard they're trying to beat the west coast to the punch in some cases.

[FoxtArt]

Pray for overreach....





....while Scotus is 6 - 3 (F.U. Roberts)

[dan512]

Sigh... I just wonder what problem this is solving. Are there a lot of murders committed using a "ghost gun?" Are a lot of crimes committed by individuals who are concealed carrying in city parks? Couldn't we maybe look at some data first? Like try to solve the actual problem?

[Gman]

How many times do we hear about felons who aren't supposed to be in possession of firearms committing crimes with...firearms? Yeah, a couple more laws will fix those lawless bastidges.

It's not about controlling the crime. It's not about controlling the guns. It's about controlling the people.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

The bars thing is what always gets me. Been legal here since the start of CCW, and what kind of problem has it been. Pre-schools too. WTFudge.

Theaters? If you think I'm going into one of those kill boxes unarmed, you are on crack.

Can't wait for Denver to lower the bar further.... going for ghost guns now.

Agree on SCOTUS- get off your asses and sanctify ARs and 30rounders to start off. Plus the NY case that is pending will go a long ways towards these stupid CCW restrictions.

Eventually, these morons are going to run out of things to ban and then they will have to address the real cause of violence..

[TheGrey]

"Though not included in Tuesday’s presentation, city council members requested a specific exemption for private security guards.

“In today’s world,” councilman Mark Wallach said, “there are institutions that may want to have a meaningful security presence.”

The joke's on them. Private Security Guards aren't licensed. Neither are PIs (anymore) so they're going to either have to research that giant gaping hole in their logic, or it's going to bite them on the butt. I bet they're assuming that guards and the like are licensed and vetted and everything else.

[theGinsue]

"Though not included in Tuesday’s presentation, city council members requested a specific exemption for private security guards.

“In today’s world,” councilman Mark Wallach said, “there are institutions that may want to have a meaningful security presence.”

The joke's on them. Private Security Guards aren't licensed. Neither are PIs (anymore) so they're going to either have to research that giant gaping hole in their logic, or it's going to bite them on the butt. I bet they're assuming that guards and the like are licensed and vetted and everything else.

Agreed. But then, our politicians have never really taken the time to validate their logic when they come up with a feel good measure.

What has bothered me, since originally reading the comment by councilman Mark Wallach is that there is another group that may want to "have a meaningful security presence" - the average citizen.

Politicians around the country are wringing their hands trying to figure out how to get rampant crime under control, yet their policies have created the perfect storm for widespread out-of-control crime.
- The Supreme Court says that law enforcement has no responsibility to provide safety to the individual, just society as a whole.
- Laws are put in place which do nothing to control crime, yet remove the ability of the individual to protect themselves.
- Politicians at the local and state levels significantly reduce the presence of law enforcement.
- More policies are put in place to seriously tie the hands of remaining law enforcement to address real crime.
- Growing liberal activism from District Attorney's and judges all but eliminates penalties and prosecution of criminals, leaving them on the streets to commit more crimes.
- Yet, these politicians still think the problem is the lawful gun owner who just wants to protect themselves that's the real problem so they institute more laws to disarm the citizens.

Seriously flawed logic here that's emboldening criminals to step up their game while putting the citizens at greater risk.

Golly, who could have seen any of this coming; right?!

[Gman]

It is a fundamental problem that continually goes unaddressed:

Do criminals obey laws? By definition, they do not. Why is the politicians answer to crime to make more laws?

The politicians are either not smarter than a 5th grader, or they know the impact of what they are doing to the law abiding.

In every criminal case I've seen where a gun was used, laws were already broken. Many of the offenders have criminal histories. Laws aren't the problem. Enforcement and keeping these people from harming a peaceful society is the problem.

[JohnnyDrama]

It is a fundamental problem that continually goes unaddressed:

Do criminals obey laws? By definition, they do not. Why is the politicians answer to crime to make more laws?

The politicians are either not smarter than a 5th grader, or they know the impact of what they are doing to the law abiding.

In every criminal case I've seen where a gun was used, laws were already broken. Many of the offenders have criminal histories. Laws aren't the problem. Enforcement and keeping these people from harming a peaceful society is the problem.

Is this rhetorical?

Politicians don't obey the laws either.

Enforcement will not only keep criminals from harming people, enforcement will also keep politicians from harming people. Neither group likes accountability.

[Planner]

The bars thing is what always gets me. Been legal here since the start of CCW, and what kind of problem has it been. Pre-schools too. WTFudge.

Theaters? If you think I'm going into one of those kill boxes unarmed, you are on crack.
..

I agree, however, the problem this creates comes in a defensive use. Even if justified, they?ll charge you because you were carrying in a prohibited space. Litigious DAs are looking for any reason to charge cops and law abiding citizens these days while simultaneously letting the goons go off light or not even charging.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Martinjmpr]

"Though not included in Tuesday?s presentation, city council members requested a specific exemption for private security guards.

?In today?s world,? councilman Mark Wallach said, ?there are institutions that may want to have a meaningful security presence.?

The joke's on them. Private Security Guards aren't licensed.

Not by state but AFAIK many cities/counties do have licensing requirements for private security guards. I worked security a lot when I was in school and I know that Denver, for example, has a fairly extensive licensing program that divides security guards into armed/unarmed and has training and background check requirements. At least they did when I was working there and I can't imagine those requirements have gotten more lax. Besides Denver I know Greenwood Village used to require a license and I thought Boulder did too but I'm not sure as I never worked there.

I know when I was working security there were some firms that required everyone to get a Denver merchant guard license even if they weren't going to be working in Denver, that way they would have a uniform standard of licensure across the board.


Pray for overreach....



The "overreach" thing only works if the regulation or rule places a burden on ordinary, average folks who don't really care too much about gun issues. For example, if they started requiring that every person who owned a gun notify their local LE agency so their home could be inspected for "safe storage", that would impact a lot of people who own guns but who don't follow gun-type political issues and the outroar would be enormous.

But the things they're talking about will only affect a very small group of people and so most citizens (especially in the People's Republic of Boulder) will just shrug their shoulders.

Think about it: Prohibitions on purchasing firearms by those aged 18 - 20? How many 18 - 20 year olds are buying firearms? I mean, I did, but I was in the minority back in the early 80's when I was doing it. And nothing will prevent those aged 18-20 from simply going to a different city/county to purchase guns so I don't see that as having enough impact to really bother anyone in Boulder.

Prohibitions on open carry? Who open carries in Boulder now?

Concealed carry restrictions? That's not going to rile anybody except the die-hard concealed carriers, who are a tiny minority of the population - not enough to get ordinary citizens involved.

Ghost guns? Purely symbolic and stupid anyway. 99.9% of voters don't know what a "ghost gun" is and likely don't care.

Now, the one law that WOULD likely result in some activity would be the 10 day waiting period for firearms purchases.

But I don't think it will mobilize voters to "vote the bums out." What it likely WILL do is drive gun stores out of Boulder county (which is likely exactly what the intention is.)

[Great-Kazoo]

Concealed carry restrictions? That's not going to rile anybody except the die-hard concealed carriers, who are a tiny minority of the population - not enough to get ordinary citizens involved.

Ghost guns? Purely symbolic and stupid anyway. 99.9% of voters don't know what a "ghost gun" is and likely don't care.

Now, the one law that WOULD likely result in some activity would be the 10 day waiting period for firearms purchases.

But I don't think it will mobilize voters to "vote the bums out." What it likely WILL do is drive gun stores out of Boulder county (which is likely exactly what the intention is.)


Not one of those things would mobilize the average gun owner in CO, to get involved. When the BGC at gun shows was on the ballot. You'd be surprised how many gun owners "thought" it was a good thing. Because they "didn't go to gun shows", among other things, , it wasn't something they actually cared about.

[DDT951]

Eventually, these morons are going to run out of things to ban and then they will have to address the real cause of violence..

Crime stats are what they are. Go look at ?gun violence? data from the FBI. Most of the ?gun violence? can more adequately be explained as ?demographic violence?. There is a very strong correlation and causation between the murder rate and socio-economic groups the murderers belong to.

We just are not honest about solving the issue. Instead labeling ?gun violence? takes the responsibility away from the humans that cause the problems. And by humans that cause problems I am putting every progressive in that category. They count on a permanent underclass for votes. How many Boulderites that want to ?help? are moving an ?underprivileged? family in with them? Most houses in Boulder could easily hold double the amount of people.

Yes. I believe blood is on the hands of Democrats and Progressives for the socia-economic conditions where they have trained a large portion of the population to be dependent upon the government.

[Martinjmpr]

If you think about it, the "perfect law" is one that makes a politician LOOK like he's doing something but doesn't actually do anything to rile up the opposition. The magazine ban is a perfect example of this.

The politicians can say "look what I did! I banned evil magazines!

But it didn't ban, remove or prohibit one single thing. So gun owners were like [Dunno] why should I care?

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

If you think about it, the "perfect law" is one that makes a politician LOOK like he's doing something but doesn't actually do anything to rile up the opposition. The magazine ban is a perfect example of this.

The politicians can say "look what I did! I banned evil magazines!

But it didn't ban, remove or prohibit one single thing. So gun owners were like [Dunno] why should I care?

And even more, doesn’t take govt money to implement. All the gun laws are bans, which cost nothing to implement.

The craziest thing is that all of these gun laws for large part are moot now because of the catch and release nature of the new bail laws.

[.455_Hunter]

The craziest thing is that all of these gun laws for large part are moot now because of the catch and release nature of the new bail laws.

Catch and release is only for the established criminal class. They will find a way to ensure gun owners with no other criminal record will be required to post high bails.

[doodguybro]

Tough on crime by eliminating bail for perps, but banning regular people from defending themselves is some of the most backwards commie stuff ever.

[Gman]

Tough on crime by eliminating bail for perps, but banning regular people from defending themselves is some of the most backwards commie stuff ever.

Which follows the commie game plan. Can't have a stable self-reliant society. They must destabilize society.