Carrying In Bar, Restaurants And Liquor Stores

[bellavite1]

Is there any regulations and if so do they vary between counties?

[newracer]

Just don't drink, no other restrictions.

[TFOGGER]

No restrictions under state law, thus no restrictions on concealed carry with permit statewide. The same rules apply concerning BAC limits as with driving (.5mg/dl) apply to possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

CRS18-12-106 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-106%27%5D)

Definition of "under the influence" CRS 12-22-303 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2712-22-303%27%5D)

[bellavite1]

Let me clarify, I am not planning to drink, but I want to carry, of course unless there is a sign etc.
However I seem to remember that in Lakewood, for example, there was a law, ordinance or whatever prohibiting carrying in any establishment that sells alcohol...

[TFOGGER]

Let me clarify, I am not planning to drink, but I want to carry, of course unless there is a sign etc.
However I seem to remember that in Lakewood, for example, there was a law, ordinance or whatever prohibiting carrying in any establishment that sells alcohol...

Like everything else concerning concealed carry, superceded by CRS 18-12-201 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-201%27%5D)

[newracer]

No restrictions under state law, thus no restrictions on concealed carry with permit statewide. The same rules apply concerning BAC limits as with driving (.5mg/dl) apply to possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

CRS18-12-106 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-106%27%5D)

Definition of "under the influence" CRS 12-22-303 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2712-22-303%27%5D)

"Under the influence" is not defined for CCW. While it is believed to be the same as driving that may not be the case.

[OneGuy67]

No restrictions under state law, thus no restrictions on concealed carry with permit statewide. The same rules apply concerning BAC limits as with driving (.5mg/dl) apply to possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

CRS18-12-106 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-106%27%5D)

Definition of "under the influence" CRS 12-22-303 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2712-22-303%27%5D)

By going to CRS 18-12-106, subsection (1)(d) will give you the CRS 12-22-303, which is the definition for a controlled substance, specifically stating subsection (7), which is:

(7) "Controlled substance" shall have the same meaning as in section 18-18-102 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-18-102&sid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0#JD_18-18-102) (5), C.R.S.

There is no specific definition for "under the influence" in relation to CCW, as NewRacer has pointed out.

[TFOGGER]

By going to CRS 18-12-106, subsection (1)(d) will give you the CRS 12-22-303, which is the definition for a controlled substance, specifically stating subsection (7), which is:

(7) "Controlled substance" shall have the same meaning as in section 18-18-102 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-18-102&sid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0#JD_18-18-102) (5), C.R.S.

There is no specific definition for "under the influence" in relation to CCW, as NewRacer has pointed out.

oops...got in a hurry

I'll update it later, assuming I can find the appropriate statute.

My understanding is that for the purposes of 18-12-106, the courts are applying the same standards as for DUI, but I haven't been able to research the precedents yet. Either way, it's a class 2 misdemeanor to be in possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

Maybe 18-1-804 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-1-804%27%5D) Or 42-4-1301 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2742-4-1301%27%5D)

[DFBrews]

oops...got in a hurry

I'll update it later, assuming I can find the appropriate statute.

My understanding is that for the purposes of 18-12-106, the courts are applying the same standards as for DUI, but I haven't been able to research the precedents yet. Either way, it's a class 2 misdemeanor to be in possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

lets do a Irvingesque what if... you are sitting at home having a few beers watching what ever someone breaks in and you have to resort to deadly force. can/will they still hit you with the misdemeanor?

[Zundfolge]

lets do a Irvingesque what if... you are sitting at home having a few beers watching what ever someone breaks in and you have to resort to deadly force. can/will they still hit you with the misdemeanor?
I'm going to guess ('cause I'm not a lawyer) but I'd bet that self defense is an affirmative defense (specifically one of "necessity" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity)) against the "intoxicated with a firearm" charge.

[TFOGGER]

lets do a Irvingesque what if... you are sitting at home having a few beers watching what ever someone breaks in and you have to resort to deadly force. can/will they still hit you with the misdemeanor?

Probably, if they thought that alcohol played a role in your decision to use deadly force. You might be able to beat it regardless based on the MMD law, but I could see the attorney's fees being pretty inflated...

I could be wrong(happens often enough), but most of the firearms possession laws have exceptions for your home or business. Dunno about that one, though. LEOs?

[TFOGGER]

I'm going to guess ('cause I'm not a lawyer) but I'd bet that self defense is an affirmative defense against the "intoxicated with a firearm" charge.

My concern would be that the presence of alcohol(enough to be legally impaired or intoxicated) in your system might jeopardize your claim of self defense.

[DFBrews]

My concern would be that the presence of alcohol(enough to be legally impaired or intoxicated) in your system might jeopardize your claim of self defense.

My thoughts too.

It just backs up the fact if you use your weapon your life is going to drastically change

[Zundfolge]

My concern would be that the presence of alcohol(enough to be legally impaired or intoxicated) in your system might jeopardize your claim of self defense.
With current castle doctrine it would have to be a real shaky self defense claim to begin with (like you shot your own kid sneaking in the house or something).

Someone forcibly entered your premiss and it becomes a pretty clear castle doctrine/self defense case.

But yeah, it would still complicate things a bit, and I certainly wouldn't want to be the test case.

[OneGuy67]

oops...got in a hurry

I'll update it later, assuming I can find the appropriate statute.

My understanding is that for the purposes of 18-12-106, the courts are applying the same standards as for DUI, but I haven't been able to research the precedents yet. Either way, it's a class 2 misdemeanor to be in possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

Maybe 18-1-804 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-1-804%27%5D) Or 42-4-1301 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2742-4-1301%27%5D)

I haven't been able to find any specific court cases in which the trial court has applied a .05 BAC or greater to the charge. In many of the cases that I've been able to scan, there hasn't been a formal intoxication test like the Intoxilyzer used if it wasn't a driving offense that started the police contact. Most have been witness observations.

18-1-804 (4) does give a decent statement for intoxication:

(4) "Intoxication", as used in this section means a disturbance of mental or physical capacities resulting from the introduction of any substance into the body.

42-4-1301 (which is the DUI/DWAI statute) only gives a case law review one particular case that is driving related, which could be brought forward as an argument by a prosecutor:

A trial court's instruction on the meaning of "intoxication" is not erroneous where it states that one drink of an intoxicating liquor might produce such a mental and physical condition as to render the defendant "under the influence" of alcohol within the meaning of the statute. Lanford v. People, 159 Colo. 36, 409 P.2d 829 (1966).


Probably, if they thought that alcohol played a role in your decision to use deadly force. You might be able to beat it regardless based on the MMD law, but I could see the attorney's fees being pretty inflated...

I could be wrong(happens often enough), but most of the firearms possession laws have exceptions for your home or business. Dunno about that one, though. LEOs?

That is a good question. I do not know what a trial court would do specifically with this. I do know that intoxication has been used as part of the defense in that the defendant wasn't able to make a conscious or informed decision of their actions, be that in a sexual assault or homicide incident.


My concern would be that the presence of alcohol(enough to be legally impaired or intoxicated) in your system might jeopardize your claim of self defense.

Possibly, depending upon the argument.


With current castle doctrine it would have to be a real shaky self defense claim to begin with (like you shot your own kid sneaking in the house or something).

Someone forcibly entered your premiss and it becomes a pretty clear castle doctrine/self defense case.

But yeah, it would still complicate things a bit, and I certainly wouldn't want to be the test case.

Here is the "Make My Day" statute, just to clarify. I wasn't able to find any case law that spoke to the shooter being intoxicated and its effect on prosecution.

18-1-704.5. Use of deadly physical force against an intruder. (http://www.michie.com/colorado_print/lpExt.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame-chapter.htm&l=query&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-1-704.5%27%5D)

(1) The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704 (http://www.michie.com/colorado_print/lpExt.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame-chapter.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-1-704&sid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0#JD_18-1-704), any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.
(3) Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of such force.
(4) Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from any civil liability for injuries or death resulting from the use of such force.