View Full Version : HB 13-1043 is set to PASS tomorrow redefining a firearm as a "DEADLY WEAPON" period
lilpromisedland
03-03-2013, 09:01
Firearms redefined as a "DEADLY WEAPON" by HB 13-1043 is scheduled for Final Passage in the Senate on Monday the 4th.
Under current law, for the purposes of criminal law, a deadly weapon is defined as a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded; a knife; a bludgeon; or any other weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, whether animate or inanimate, that in the manner it is used or intended to be used is capable of producing death or serious bodily injury.
The bill modifies this definition so that a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, QUALIFIES AS A "DEADLY WEAPON" regardless of the manner in which it is used or intended to be used.
http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2013a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/A1381F329604BCFB87257AEE0057E410?Open&file=1043_01.pdf (http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2013a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/A1381F329604BCFB87257AEE0057E410?Open&file=1043_01.pdf)
No more having a firearm for competition, target practicing, or recreation. Why would anyone but a killer want to own a "deadly weapon"? Just one more absurdity to join the others. It's no wonder that SB 196 has the option of "surrendering the assault weapon." We're all going to be painted as criminals if these bills pass.
Just another nail in the coffin for freedom. Way to go Colorado, way to go.
We're all going to be painted as criminals if these bills pass.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
-- Ayn Rand
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
-- Ayn Rand
The only problem is that we don't have a lack of criminals, it's the gov not wanting to go after real criminals, so it makes easier targets out of us.
Nice way to kill the hunting industry.
I just now read that bill, it looks like they scratched out firearms on line 8. Either way, this is absurd and will open room for more abuses to punish legal gun owners who do hunt and practice for competition.
lowspeed_highdrag
03-03-2013, 14:05
I see this as more of a modifier of CRS so LEO's wont face any legal issues in an OIS involving an unloaded firearm.
The only problem is that we don't have a lack of criminals, it's the gov not wanting to go after real criminals, so it makes easier targets out of us.
REAL criminals are too dangerous . . . and they are experts at hiding evidence and lying to the police . . . all their friends will lie too. Law abiding citizens are easy marks . . . they will even admit everything and tell the truth.
I see this as more of a modifier of CRS so LEO's wont face any legal issues in an OIS involving an unloaded firearm.
Already covered in CRS Felony Menacing statute. Felony menacing involves threatening someone with a weapon or with the belief that one has a weapon. Under this statute, the officer can presume that a firearm presented in a threatening manner is indeed a deadly weapon. No need for another statute to state the obvious, which also happens to have some very negative connotations for hunters, competitive shooters, and CCW holders.
We need to mobilize and vote ALL these fools out on 2014. Then our first act should be to repeal ALL these bills and redefine out state constitution so that this can never be done again.
so basically you will always be in possession of a deadly weapon if you carry, hunt, recreation shoot, etc etc.
so basically you will always be in possession of a deadly weapon if you carry, hunt, recreation shoot, etc etc.
yes, and the real question is: what other laws are hidden in the CRS restricting deadly weapons? Is it against the law to bring a deadly weapon into a church? into a business? A bar? Do you need a permit to transport a deadly weapon according to highway laws?
Great-Kazoo
03-04-2013, 10:18
yes, and the real question is: what other laws are hidden in the CRS restricting deadly weapons? Is it against the law to bring a deadly weapon into a church? into a business? A bar? Do you need a permit to transport a deadly weapon according to highway laws?
if you don't know. or are unsure of the CO laws you should have these bookmarked. Especially if you CCW.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDPS-CBIMain/CBON/1251622200175
legality issues are here.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDPS-CBIMain/CBON/1251622199820
yeah my questions implied CC but really are asking how those rules will change. under the old definition you were carrying a firearm, now you are carrying a deadly weapon.
Since the old definition required the intent or appearance of intent to do harm there may be many laws that now apply. Laws that were written to be very restrictive because they applied only to criminals intent on doing harm.
Sorry, not going to comb through the CRS loooking for Deadly Weapon.
Great-Kazoo
03-04-2013, 13:47
yeah my questions implied CC but really are asking how those rules will change. under the old definition you were carrying a firearm, now you are carrying a deadly weapon.
Since the old definition required the intent or appearance of intent to do harm there may be many laws that now apply. Laws that were written to be very restrictive because they applied only to criminals intent on doing harm.
Sorry, not going to comb through the CRS loooking for Deadly Weapon.
If you're not willing to do your homework why should anyone else do it for you? You CCW you should know the laws.
All this is bullshit terminology, for you being demonized as a gun owner. Nothing more than useless words that put people such as yourself who "don't have the time" read in a panic.
If you're not willing to do your homework why should anyone else do it for you? You CCW you should know the laws.
All this is bullshit terminology, for you being demonized as a gun owner. Nothing more than useless words that put people such as yourself who "don't have the time" read in a panic.
I know the existing CC rules, I did my homework (and took the class). I do not know how they will change when the definitions change under this bill. That is what I was getting at. I doubt anyone knows the full effects of this change but I'm fairly sure they are not to our advantage.
Since you called me out on it, there are 55 quick hits for Deadly Weapons in the searchable CRS. I'm sure there are more with a better search. Here is a nice one:
18-9-106. Disorderly conduct
(1) A person commits disorderly conduct if he or she intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
(a) Makes a coarse and obviously offensive utterance, gesture, or display in a public place and the utterance, gesture, or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace; or
(b) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2000, p. 708, § 39, effective July 1, 2000.)
(c) Makes unreasonable noise in a public place or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy; or
(d) Fights with another in a public place except in an amateur or professional contest of athletic skill; or
(e) Not being a peace officer, discharges a firearm in a public place except when engaged in lawful target practice or hunting; or
(f) Not being a peace officer, displays a deadly weapon, displays any article used or fashioned in a manner to cause a person to reasonably believe that the article is a deadly weapon, or represents verbally or otherwise that he or she is armed with a deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm.
so will (f) be interpreted to destroy open carry laws? Going to open carry an AR through walmart any more?
I know the existing CC rules, I did my homework (and took the class). I do not know how they will change when the definitions change under this bill. That is what I was getting at. I doubt anyone knows the full effects of this change but I'm fairly sure they are not to our advantage.
Since you called me out on it, there are 55 quick hits for Deadly Weapons in the searchable CRS. I'm sure there are more with a better search. Here is a nice one:
18-9-106. Disorderly conduct
(1) A person commits disorderly conduct if he or she intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
(a) Makes a coarse and obviously offensive utterance, gesture, or display in a public place and the utterance, gesture, or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace; or
(b) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2000, p. 708, § 39, effective July 1, 2000.)
(c) Makes unreasonable noise in a public place or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy; or
(d) Fights with another in a public place except in an amateur or professional contest of athletic skill; or
(e) Not being a peace officer, discharges a firearm in a public place except when engaged in lawful target practice or hunting; or
(f) Not being a peace officer, displays a deadly weapon, displays any article used or fashioned in a manner to cause a person to reasonably believe that the article is a deadly weapon, or represents verbally or otherwise that he or she is armed with a deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm.
so will (f) be interpreted to destroy open carry laws? Going to open carry an AR through walmart any more?
I see what you are getting at. However your example is not relevant. Changing the "status" of a firearm does not change this statute. As long as you are not displaying it "in a manner calculated to alarm," you are good to go.
Who open carries an AR through Walmart?
I see what you are getting at. However your example is not relevant. Changing the "status" of a firearm does not change this statute. As long as you are not displaying it "in a manner calculated to alarm," you are good to go. Who open carries an AR through Walmart?It was a JC Penneys.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55649700-78/yorgason-carry-store-gun.html.csp
It was a JC Penneys.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55649700-78/yorgason-carry-store-gun.html.csp
That case was a combination of exercising the first and second amendments. Valid but absolutely intended to cause alarm. illegal act now.
and in general cases, based on other threads here, open carry is uncommon enough in urban areas that one can expect alarm. certainly enough cause the for the cop responding to the MWAG call to write you a ticket. Then you get to argue about your motives with the Judge.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
-- Ayn Rand
And this is why they hate Ayn Rand so much...
That case was a combination of exercising the first and second amendments. Valid but absolutely intended to cause alarm. illegal act now.
and in general cases, based on other threads here, open carry is uncommon enough in urban areas that one can expect alarm. certainly enough cause the for the cop responding to the MWAG call to write you a ticket. Then you get to argue about your motives with the Judge.
Where are you getting this information?
Since when is shopping while carrying a gun "intended to cause alarm?" If in fact, he did something intended to cause alarm, it would have been illegal then as well as now.
Please site a case where a cop wrote a ticket for open carry.
This sounds like it comes from the "Guns is scary" crowd.
Where are you getting this information?
Since when is shopping while carrying a gun "intended to cause alarm?" If in fact, he did something intended to cause alarm, it would have been illegal then as well as now.
Please site a case where a cop wrote a ticket for open carry.
This sounds like it comes from the "Guns is scary" crowd.
Read the disorderly conduct code cited above. The law has changed, a firearm is now a deadly weapon regardless of intent or use and falls under section (f). That is what the whole discussion was about, how did other laws change with one little change to a definition.
Where are you getting this information?
Since when is shopping while carrying a gun "intended to cause alarm?"
That is how open carry is defined and prosecuted in cities with strict gun control laws. Even if you have a valid CCW permit and your handgun is accidentally exposed and someone is frightened enough to call 911. In NYC, this law even applies to common legal to carry pucketknives. If a NYPD undercover Transit cop sees a knife's pocketclip, that person is immediately arrested and taken to jail, zero tolerance, guaranteed conviction.
osok-308
03-20-2013, 15:24
Thank you colorado democrats for officially making me ashamed of my state.
That is how open carry is defined and prosecuted in cities with strict gun control laws. Even if you have a valid CCW permit and your handgun is accidentally exposed and someone is frightened enough to call 911. In NYC, this law even applies to common legal to carry pucketknives. If a NYPD undercover Transit cop sees a knife's pocketclip, that person is immediately arrested and taken to jail, zero tolerance, guaranteed conviction.
Without citations, your post is nothing more than hearsay.
Please link an article where someone was prosecuted for open carry; in a city where it is legal to open carry.
We have enough pressing issues without adding mythical convictions for open carry.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.