CALL TO ACTION: March on state capitols, 19 Jan!

[hatidua]

Wouldn't it also be more beneficial to our cause and message if we showed we can assemble peacefully while armed?

Theoretically, yes. But all it would take is one tiny mistake in the crowd to do a great deal of harm to the intended cause of the rally.

[Uberjager]

Didn't know this was going to be held at Civic Center Park. I'll probably park in one of the areas Irving posted. What should our meetup spot be? I see quite a few of us will be parking by Auraria. Maybe we could meet by the Starbucks on the SW Corner of Kalamath and Colfax at like 11:30.

[Ronin13]

Didn't know this was going to be held at Civic Center Park. I'll probably park in one of the areas Irving posted. What should our meetup spot be? I see quite a few of us will be parking by Auraria. Maybe we could meet by the Starbucks on the SW Corner of Kalamath and Colfax at like 11:30.

I'd be open for that- finally get to use my Starbucks gift card that I never use (I brew my own coffee- insert Pulp Fiction monologue here)... But doubtful I could walk in all the way with you guys, I'm standing on principal and will be CCing...

[Uberjager]

I'd be open for that- finally get to use my Starbucks gift card that I never use (I brew my own coffee- insert Pulp Fiction monologue here)... But doubtful I could walk in all the way with you guys, I'm standing on principal and will be CCing...

Unless you're packing a Pfeifer Zeliska revolver, you'll be good to go.

[XC700116]

I'm a bit T'd off about the idea as well and have been searching for the statute and this is the only thing I can find. I however can't find a concrete answer if a permit is legal authority or not. But the way I'm reading it right now is that it wouldn't be illegal because of 2.c am I wrong in that?

TITLE 18. CRIMINAL CODE
ARTICLE 12. OFFENSES RELATING TO FIREARMS AND WEAPONS
PART 1. FIREARMS AND WEAPONS - GENERAL
C.R.S. 18-12-105 (2012)
18-12-105. Unlawfully carrying a concealed weapon - unlawful possession of weapons



(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if such person knowingly and unlawfully:

(a) Carries a knife concealed on or about his or her person; or

(b) Carries a firearm concealed on or about his or her person; or

(c) Without legal authority, carries, brings, or has in such person's possession a firearm or any explosive, incendiary, or other dangerous device on the property of or within any building in which the chambers, galleries, or offices of the general assembly, or either house thereof, are located, or in which a legislative hearing or meeting is being or is to be conducted, or in which the official office of any member, officer, or employee of the general assembly is located.

(d) (Deleted by amendment, L. 93, p. 964, § 1, effective July 1, 1993.)

(2) It shall not be an offense if the defendant was:

(a) A person in his or her own dwelling or place of business or on property owned or under his or her control at the time of the act of carrying; or

(b) A person in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance who carries a weapon for lawful protection of such person's or another's person or property while traveling; or

(c) A person who, at the time of carrying a concealed weapon, held a valid written permit to carry a concealed weapon issued pursuant to section 18-12-105.1, as it existed prior to its repeal, or, if the weapon involved was a handgun, held a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214; or

(d) A peace officer, as described in section 16-2.5-101, C.R.S., when carrying a weapon in conformance with the policy of the employing agency as provided in section 16-2.5-101 (2), C.R.S.; or

(e) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2003, p. 1624, § 46, effective August 6, 2003.)

(f) A United States probation officer or a United States pretrial services officer while on duty and serving in the state of Colorado under the authority of rules and regulations promulgated by the judicial conference of the United States.

HISTORY: Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 482, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-12-105.L. 73: p. 683, § 3.L. 77: (2)(c) amended and (2)(d) added, p. 976, § 8, effective July 1.L. 81: (2)(c) amended, p. 1437, § 3, effective June 8.L. 86: (2)(d) amended and (2)(e) added, p. 774, § 2, effective July 1.L. 89: (1)(d) added, p. 911, § 1, effective April 15.L. 93: Entire section amended, p. 964, § 1, effective July 1.L. 94: (2)(e) amended and (2)(f) added, p. 647, § 1, effective July 1.L. 2000: IP(2) amended, p. 1009, § 1, effective August 2.L. 2003: (2)(c) amended, p. 648, § 3, effective May 17; (2)(d) and (2)(e) amended, p. 1624, § 46, effective August 6.

Cross references: For affirmative defenses generally, see § § 18-1-407, 18-1-710, and 18-1-805.

ANNOTATION

Recognition of § 13 of art. II, Colo. Const. Section 13 of art. II, Colo. Const., has limiting language dealing with defense of home, person, and property. These limitations have been recognized by the general assembly in the enactment of this section, which restricts the right to bear arms in certain circumstances, while permitting in other circumstances the carrying of a concealed weapon in defense of home, person, and property, and also when specifically authorized by written permit. People v. Blue, 190 Colo. 95, 544 P.2d 385 (1975).

The words "about the person" means sufficiently close to the person to be readily accessible for immediate use. People in Interest of R.J.A., 38 Colo. App. 346, 556 P.2d 491 (1976).

"Concealed" means placed out of sight so as not to be discernible or apparent by ordinary observation. People ex rel. O.R., 220 P.3d 949 (Colo. App. 2008).

The scope of subsection (2)(b) is clarified in § 18-12-105.6, which indicates the general assembly's intent that local ordinances on carrying weapons in private vehicles be preempted only insofar as they conflict with the provisions of § 18-12-105.6. Trinen v. City & County of Denver, 53 P.3d 754 (Colo. App. 2002).

The local ordinance concerning carrying a weapon in a private vehicle is not preempted since it can be harmonized with subsection (2)(b). Trinen v. City & County of Denver, 53 P.3d 754 (Colo. App. 2002).

Pistol tucked under edge of car seat. Where uncontested evidence established that pistol was tucked under the edge of a car seat on which petitioner was sitting, where it was within his easy reach, these circumstances constitute carrying a "firearm concealed on or about his person". People in Interest of R.J.A., 38 Colo. App. 346, 556 P.2d 491 (1976).

Question of whether weapon is concealed is question of fact for the jury which should not be summarily determined by the trial judge at the time that he rules on the defendant's motion to suppress. People v. Vincent, 628 P.2d 107 (Colo. 1981).

Former subsection (2)(c) did not confer power to issue permits for carrying concealed weapons to police chiefs and sheriffs. Douglass v. Kelton, 199 Colo. 446, 610 P.2d 1067 (1980).

Person receiving permit to carry concealed weapon cannot be convicted. Once a person receives a permit to carry a concealed weapon in a county or city, he may not be convicted under subsection (2)(c). Douglass v. Kelton, 199 Colo. 446, 610 P.2d 1067 (1980).

Statute as basis for jurisdiction. See People v. Pickett, 194 Colo. 178, 571 P.2d 1078 (1977).

Defendant could not be convicted of carrying a concealed weapon without the prosecution proving that defendant intended to use this short-bladed knife as a weapon. While the characteristics of an instrument may be an important factor in determining the intended purpose of an instrument, the language of the concealed weapons statute and established precedent establishes that a knife's design does not, by itself, prove that the person carrying it intended to use it as a weapon. A.P.E. v. People, 20 P.3d 1179 (Colo. 2001).

Applied in People v. Velasquez, 641 P.2d 943 (Colo. 1982); People v. Deschamp, 662 P.2d 171 (Colo. 1983).

Either way I'll probably still go and not carry just to avoid the BS, but I'm not liking the idea in the least bit. It just doesn't seem right to me, but I'm not about to push my luck on it since I'm not a lawyer either. At this point I'm more curious to know for sure than anything.

[Aloha_Shooter]

If you're CCing, just how would John Q. Public know you're carrying? Or more to the point, just how would they know you aren't exercising your right as you see it? The stickling point on not wanting to attend if you can't carry just .. doesn't make sense since they wouldn't know you aren't carrying. I'm not excited about being in Denver at all but this rally is important and it's equally important there not be a single picture or incident for the antis to misuse.

[asmo]

I am going - and I am carrying (concealed).

If DPD or CSP decides they want to do something about it I'll leave - or video tape the encounter and deal with it later.

[Gman]

I don't get it. We're going to exercise our 1st Amendment rights, but we're going to be intimidated out of our 2nd Amendment rights? My CCW is not "in public".

I'm going to the park, not the capitol grounds.

[Snowman]

don't forget to leave your porn, drugs, pitbulls, 44oz drinks, and mistresses (and cigars) and hi-cal BK Whoppers at home too. no drinking from the toilets and stay out of the trash cans. LOL!

[Jefe's AR]

I'm not too pleased with the lack of 'transparency' as well. But...

Listen, he organized it but it's not his so to speak. This is a National protest. If you want to CCW be careful as you approach. If it seems like not such a good idea then back off and put your ccw in your locked car, if you're comfortable with that, or just support form a distance. If you're comfortable leaving your CCW at home then do so. What do you do when you go out and get drunk with your friends? Leave it at home I hope. What's important is we are seen in LARGE numbers. Large numbers scare politicians. It shows unity. Let's argue about it after the protest. Sometimes it's ok to set your ideals aside while working towards a common goal that we all agree about. LARGE numbers without and 'incident' would be the best scenario we can hope for. If you feel it may be dangerous then leave the kids and wife at home. We're men. We can face danger. Together. It's what we do. :P