Close
Results 1 to 10 of 550

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Grand Master Know It All OneGuy67's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    2,512

    Default

    From the Meyers Decision:

    "The City argues that regulation of assault weapons and Saturday night specials is a purely local issue based on the unique characteristics of Denver described above. Further, the City's ordinance banning assault weapons has been in effect since 1989, while the sale of Saturday night specials has been banned since 1975. The State has never chosen to legislate in this area. The State responds that this area, like all gun control, is an area of mixed state and local concern and that the state statute preempting conflicting City ordinances predominates.

    I hold for the City on this issue. Subsection (a) of the assault weapons ordinance states the City Council's findings as to why assault weapons pose a threat to the health, safety and security of the citizens of Denver and that the increasing use of assault weapons for criminal activities has resulted in a record number of related homicides and injuries to both citizens and law enforcement officers. Like open carry, there is little need for statewide uniformity given the unique characteristics of Denver, and the impact of the ordinances on people living outside of Denver is minimal. The exceptions under the assault weapons ban allow the legitimate transportation of weapons by nonresidents through Denver, and the ban on Saturday night specials only applies to sales by dealers within the City and County of Denver. My evaluation of the totality of the circumstances is that Denver's interest in limiting the impact of assault weapons and Saturday night specials in Denver far outweighs the State's insubstantial interest in uniformity of gun control laws, especially since the State has never chosen to legislate in this arena before.

    For the reasons stated above, I find the State has failed to demonstrate a significant interest in requiring every city and town to allow assault weapons and Saturday night specials. Thus, I conclude that the City has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that C.R.S. §29-11.7-103, insofar as the state relies on it to preempt the ordinances at issue here, is an unconstitutional infringement on the home rule powers of the City and County of Denver as guaranteed by Article XX, § 6 of the Colorado Constitution"

    My reading of this does indicate that a local government entity like a home rule city such as Boulder does have the ability to enact like ordinances similar to Denver's.
    “Every good citizen makes his country's honor his own, and cherishes it not only as precious but as sacred. He is willing to risk his life in its defense and is conscious that he gains protection while he gives it.” Andrew Jackson

    A veteran is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to 'The United States of America ' for an amount of 'up to and including my life.'

    That is Honor, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it.

  2. #2
    Fancy & Customized User Title .455_Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Mountains West of Boulder
    Posts
    2,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OneGuy67 View Post
    From the Meyers Decision:

    "The City argues that regulation of assault weapons and Saturday night specials is a purely local issue based on the unique characteristics of Denver described above. Further, the City's ordinance banning assault weapons has been in effect since 1989, while the sale of Saturday night specials has been banned since 1975. The State has never chosen to legislate in this area. The State responds that this area, like all gun control, is an area of mixed state and local concern and that the state statute preempting conflicting City ordinances predominates.

    I hold for the City on this issue. Subsection (a) of the assault weapons ordinance states the City Council's findings as to why assault weapons pose a threat to the health, safety and security of the citizens of Denver and that the increasing use of assault weapons for criminal activities has resulted in a record number of related homicides and injuries to both citizens and law enforcement officers. Like open carry, there is little need for statewide uniformity given the unique characteristics of Denver, and the impact of the ordinances on people living outside of Denver is minimal. The exceptions under the assault weapons ban allow the legitimate transportation of weapons by nonresidents through Denver, and the ban on Saturday night specials only applies to sales by dealers within the City and County of Denver. My evaluation of the totality of the circumstances is that Denver's interest in limiting the impact of assault weapons and Saturday night specials in Denver far outweighs the State's insubstantial interest in uniformity of gun control laws, especially since the State has never chosen to legislate in this arena before.

    For the reasons stated above, I find the State has failed to demonstrate a significant interest in requiring every city and town to allow assault weapons and Saturday night specials. Thus, I conclude that the City has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that C.R.S. §29-11.7-103, insofar as the state relies on it to preempt the ordinances at issue here, is an unconstitutional infringement on the home rule powers of the City and County of Denver as guaranteed by Article XX, § 6 of the Colorado Constitution"

    My reading of this does indicate that a local government entity like a home rule city such as Boulder does have the ability to enact like ordinances similar to Denver's.
    For whatever reason, its is my understanding (I am not a lawyer) that Boulder does NOT have the same home rule rights as Denver. If so, they would already tried this sort of thing many times in the past. There a bunch of new members on the council, and I am not surprised that the topic has reared up again. If the exceptions allowing the legitimate transportation of the supposedly banned weapons by nonresidents through the municipality, it would a least keep the stupid from impacting those of use who must travel through Boulder, but have no say in its laws.
    Last edited by .455_Hunter; 02-21-2018 at 10:17.

  3. #3
    Nerdy Mod
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .455_Hunter View Post
    For whatever reason, its is my understanding (I am not a lawyer) that Boulder does NOT have the same home rule rights as Denver.
    Same boat - I'm not a laywer. I THINK it had something to do with the fact that the city of Denver existed before Colorado was a state.

    O2
    YOU are the first responder. Police, fire and medical are SECOND responders.
    When seconds count, the police are mere minutes away...
    Gun registration is gun confiscation in slow motion.

    My feedback: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/53226-O2HeN2

  4. #4
    Fancy & Customized User Title .455_Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Mountains West of Boulder
    Posts
    2,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by O2HeN2 View Post
    Same boat - I'm not a laywer. I THINK it had something to do with the fact that the city of Denver existed before Colorado was a state.

    O2
    The funny thing is that so did Boulder, Golden, etc. There is something more to it beside just date of the city, I am just not sure.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •