Since the 10th covers Colorado, and I get lost in all the legal steps, what is the process now to eliminate Colorado's waiting period?
https://www.nraila.org/articles/2025...al-in-nra-case
O2
Printable View
Since the 10th covers Colorado, and I get lost in all the legal steps, what is the process now to eliminate Colorado's waiting period?
https://www.nraila.org/articles/2025...al-in-nra-case
O2
Somedays you eat the bear, other days the bear eats you....
I dont see where this is a bad thing though....
Waiting periods make absolutely no sense. They practically eliminated sales from out of state vendors at gun shows, and discourage making a long trip across the state to make a purchase. If you have a CCW there should be no waiting period.
Agreed, plus some… such as if you’re 18+ and not a convicted felon. Simplest terms for eligibility = correct in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint45
Now there is a circuit split between the 9th and 10th circuit courts, and maybe others.
On A similar note...
https://reason.com/2025/08/18/court-...n-a-month-law/
California's one-gun-a-month law was challenged by a coalition of individuals and groups... A U.S. district judge found the law unconstitutional last year, though the decision was stayed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals pending appeal. A three-judge panel of the same court reversed the stay last August, leaving the law unenforceable. Then, in June of this year, three judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the appeal that the law in fact violates the Second Amendment.
So waiting periods are being ruled unconstitutional as are purchase limits. That bodes well for licensing, I mean mandatory education schemes as well.
*Why do you think they exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint45
*asks in obvious Captain Obvious tone.......
It’s a feature, not a bug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint45
Also in NM we bypass the wait with a CCw but they also want 14 days and no bypass. But still, you passed a background check. An arbitrary wait for a constitutional RIGHT is asinine.
Background checks (government permission to possessQuote:
Originally Posted by Scanker19
a tool that restricts government power) should also be eliminated. Only thing that should prevent purchase or possession of a firearm/weapon is that you are incarcerated. Once released, you are considered rehabilitated and all rights should be restored.
All 50 states have a different procedure for restoring rights. Some refuse to do so or make it impossibly difficult, others automatically restore them after 5 or 10 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric P
Vermont was the only state not to strip ex offenders of rights. The ATF position was: "Well, technically, if those rights were never taken away THEY WEREN'T RESTORED, so we're arresting you for felon in possession of a firearm federally even though you're legal under state law."
This is just a former injunction ruling, but I think it provides well for us. I think it would be able to be cited in the lawsuits against the Colorado law, especially in regards to getting some kind of preliminary injunction relief. Also votes well for a final decision on The whole law.
Washington gun law just had a video about this. I guess the 10th circuit refused to hear it on bunk, which means that this ruling stands. I don’t know if this was just a pulmonary injunction or that it was found that winning periods were unconstitutional as a final ruling? It definitely seems like it would put Colorado’s law into trouble.
Waiting periods are just another assault on our constitution and American freedoms by the new marxist democrats. More virtue signaling for their low morals voters. Can we please have a ruling to find the ban on plastic grocery bags unconstitutional? Most everyone used for them for trash but now end up buying other plastic bags to replace them.
Firearm Purchase Waiting Periods (in CO, 3-day waiting period): A Right delayed is a Right denied.
We all know what this and all of the other anti-2A laws are, "death by 1000 cuts". Even if these restrictions are taken to court (at a tremendous cost to those seeking to remove the infringements), and *if* the plaintiffs win, the State can take months to re-instate the Rights ("It's going to take us time to revise our procedures") - and usually no action is taken until after they lose on appeal (even more time and money involved). You and I challenging these restrictions could very well bankrupt us, even with assistance from national gun rights organizations. But the state never has to worry about where the money to fight these repugnant laws will come from - they just tax thepeasantscitizens more.
The State knows exactly what they're doing and the possibility of losing in the courts - but they get their way for a time. They also know that when cases go before SCOTUS, the decisions are usually quite narrow in nature instead of addressing all potential aspects of state authority on the matter. This just leaves the door open wide for the states to keep pulling these shenanigans over and over.
There have been a few Federal District decisions (and is currently awaiting SCOTUS decision) ruling against magazine capacity restrictions, yet since July, 2013 CO has maintained a 15-round capacity limit which prevents you and I from purchasing certain magazines, and in some cases, some firearms.
SCOTUS needs to set a hard, firm and clear definition for what "infringement" means pertaining to firearms, possession, magazines, other accessories, and ammunition and States need to be forced to comply immediately with those decisions. Instead, SCOTUS continues to pick one cherry off of the tree at a time.
The Constitution doesn’t protect grocery bags.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hummer
The bans are regulatory policy, not a rights issue. US courts have repeatedly upheld plastic bag bans, citing they are within the authority of the government's legitimate interest.
The Washington Gun Law video
https://youtu.be/fcQsaVs3VuU?si=PCZEjZZBcX99P9rm
So, is it as ‘simple’ as filing a court case? Or are there enough differences ??? Between their and our law?
If we can identify a firearm law knowledgeable attorney willing to take on the case here in CO, I'd be willing to be the plaintiff. (Probably going to need to financial support to pay legal costs to make it happen too).Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
Then all products should be banned from using plastic packaging……but just in the states that ban bags.
When does that happen next?
Man I?d love to the plantiff in a case against polis and the state.Quote:
Originally Posted by theGinsue
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
10th Circuit covers Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Kansas, Oklahoma and Utah.
Firearm transfer Waiting Periods in these states are dead with this ruling.
If the Appeals Court denied NM’s petition SCOTUS is certain to deny it as well.
It’s dead Jim
https://youtu.be/-50XyalVKrg
I hope NM appeals to the USSC. End this nonsense already.Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
Can ya feel that Colorado Democrats?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJGDuiLw8BY
So what does this mean for us here in Colorado? Has it been challenged yet or are the folks that do that just sitting on the sidelines? If the waiting period is struck down in one state of the 10th Circuit does it apply to others or does it need to be challenged in each state? I'm not an attorney nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn last night, just wondering from better informed minds than mine, thanks.
That's why I asked. I had initially thought this was for a preliminary injunction, but I think this was a final case on the merits. As to an appeal to SCOTUS, does NM have a limited time frame to do it? Even if they do, and say that its gets cert, but just sits there for a year waiting for a potential hearing date- this is still the law of the land in the 10th.
Would you file this in state or in federal court?
I assume that there is already a case that someone has filed in the past, and you could just do a notice to the judge?
And back to the SCOTUS issue, would a CO judge put it on hold to see if SCOTUS takes it- but it is the law of the land in the 10th?
It seems like a no-brainer for someone like RMGO to file a lawsuit and claim a win. Have them be useful for once.
Why RMGO? The group that filed this case and won is Colorado based (Mountain States Legal Foundation) and has done more for gun rights in this state over the last decade than RMGO has.Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
I don't care who does it, I didn't know who was the representation on the NM case. I'm just surprised there hasn't been more about this. Even with Weiser complaining about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by def90
I mentioned RMGO since they seem like they'd relish the fact that they could get a win for little or no cost.
Stopping by the LGS tomorrow to see what they say.
I have not dug into it yet to see when mandate would issue, etc., but my best recommendation for people is be patient.
Most states in a district will resolve issues independently once something is truly final. E.g. a case is likely entirely unnecessary. Don't expect it resolved on day 1, but give it a minute.
It's easy to be a plaintiff in an action, which can be as little as 4 hours of work. On the other hand, it takes thousands of hours for the legal team behind the Plaintiff, and federal district actions can run 2 years before initial orders, up to a decade with all appeals.
It's MUCH preferable for a state to bring its own shit in alignment with recent rulings.
Patience.
I'm wondering when it's found to be unconstitutional, if the state has to refund the monies collected. If so, save those receipts!
O2
Unfortunately this corrupt state will continue to do everything it can to deny/delay our constitutional rights. I keep saying that if my grandkids weren’t here I’d be gone.
It would be the only thing they ever won....Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
What money? This is the waiting period only, right? What was the cash money direct impact?Quote:
Originally Posted by O2HeN2
Sorry, wishful thinking coupled with being distracted. You're correct. Hopefully a tax on a right will be taken up soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
O2