• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Boulder CO banning "assault weapons" NEW update post 89 people are saying FO

NickJ said:
Colorado does have pre-emption. Denver found a way around it, based on the fact that Denver predates Colorado becoming a state. It’s been tried and tested in court, to no avail. Boulder is following their lead.
Click to expand...

Doesn't almost every metropolitan area in existence predate the forming of the state they're in? That's sort of how they justify the population TO become a state...
 
NickJ said:
Colorado does have pre-emption. Denver found a way around it, based on the fact that Denver predates Colorado becoming a state. It’s been tried and tested in court, to no avail. Boulder is following their lead.
Click to expand...

Looks like they invalidated some of the law but let other parts stand due to the reasoning mentioned below. Looks like Boulder could still easily be challenged in the courts based on the fact that Denver's violent crime rate is 2-1/2 times that of Boulder's and Boulder's crime rates, violent and property, are below state averages.

From an article on the Giffords Law Center site:
"In so holding, the court noted the unique characteristics that differentiate Denver from other parts of the state, such as high population density and a high crime rate, finding that these characteristics outweigh the need for statewide uniformity in these areas."
 
dingbat said:
Looks like they invalidated some of the law but let other parts stand due to the reasoning mentioned below. Looks like Boulder could still easily be challenged in the courts based on the fact that Denver's violent crime rate is 2-1/2 times that of Boulder's and Boulder's crime rates, violent and property, are below state averages.

From an article on the Giffords Law Center site:
"In so holding, the court noted the unique characteristics that differentiate Denver from other parts of the state, such as high population density and a high crime rate, finding that these characteristics outweigh the need for statewide uniformity in these areas."
Click to expand...
Most people will just quietly keep their semiauto rifles and not register them. One of my co-workers has a brother who deals in antiques part time. He has been to the North Shore homes of many elderly widows whose WW II veteran husbands have hidden rifles and handguns they brought back from the European and Pacific battlegrounds. He has a LTC and acquired a few from these women who are not licenced and have had these unlicensed weapons in their homes for decades. They just kept their mouths shut and no one was the wiser. He left the Owen that he found in the attic. Knew better than to touch it.
 
308rifleman said:
Most people will just quietly keep their semiauto rifles and not register them. One of my co-workers has a brother who deals in antiques part time. He has been to the North Shore homes of many elderly widows whose WW II veteran husbands have hidden rifles and handguns they brought back from the European and Pacific battlegrounds. He has a LTC and acquired a few from these women who are not licenced and have had these unlicensed weapons in their homes for decades. They just kept their mouths shut and no one was the wiser. He left the Owen that he found in the attic. Knew better than to touch it.
Click to expand...

Well....You're not wrong, but what has that got to do with preemption in Colorodo and the precedent Denver set running their ban up through the courts and the bearing that precedent might have on a ban in Boulder?
Oh, and your co-worker's brother is a pussy for not touching that Owen.
 
dingbat said:
Looks like they invalidated some of the law but let other parts stand due to the reasoning mentioned below. Looks like Boulder could still easily be challenged in the courts based on the fact that Denver's violent crime rate is 2-1/2 times that of Boulder's and Boulder's crime rates, violent and property, are below state averages.

From an article on the Giffords Law Center site:
"In so holding, the court noted the unique characteristics that differentiate Denver from other parts of the state, such as high population density and a high crime rate, finding that these characteristics outweigh the need for statewide uniformity in these areas."
Click to expand...

sssssowait... the court can invalidate an act of the legislature because they failed specifically to include, "...and Denver, too!" ??!? Is such a requirement of legislative language some peculiarity of the Colorado Constitution, or is the court making this up out of thin air? (Suspect I know the answer already.)
 
Mesatchornug said:
Time to be pedantic.

The term "assault rifle" dates (in my reading) to the STG44, so at least WWII. It quickly became a technical term of art that defines a firearm by its tactical use. My understanding is that it's better described as a select-fire, shoulderable arm chambered in an intermediate cartridge.

"Assault weapon" started as an advertising phrase in the 80s, and was quickly co-opted in the 90s by antis who created an entirely asinine law that was enacted in 1994 - almost a generation ago.

It's fine to argue words and meaning; if you're going to, do us all a favor and be right about it. I feel your pain, but please take a breath before saying these things.
Click to expand...
1994 was the start of my hatred for demcocrats
 
SpaceCritter said:
sssssowait... the court can invalidate an act of the legislature because they failed specifically to include, "...and Denver, too!" ??!? Is such a requirement of legislative language some peculiarity of the Colorado Constitution, or is the court making this up out of thin air? (Suspect I know the answer already.)
Click to expand...

But, but...Denver um special. M-kay?[laugh]
 
SpaceCritter said:
Logically, in fact, one would have to conclude not part of Colorado, if state law somehow magically doesn't apply there.
Click to expand...

My favorite part of their logic is, ok, you guys in Denver haven't got your shit together enough to keep people from breaking the laws we already have so, sure, you can pas some more, extra-special laws that are otherwise illegal.

W.T.F?-over-
 
dingbat said:
Well....You're not wrong, but what has that got to do with preemption in Colorodo and the precedent Denver set running their ban up through the courts and the bearing that precedent might have on a ban in Boulder?
Oh, and your co-worker's brother is a pussy for not touching that Owen.
Click to expand...

He SAID the co-worker's brother didn't touch it. Doesn't mean he didn't touch it [laugh]
 
mikeyp said:
Well, looks like they're off to a good start :rolleyes:

City of Boulder Can't Even Get 100 Gun Owners to 'Certify' Their Newly Outlawed 'Assault Weapons' - The Truth About Guns
Click to expand...


According to Boulder police Sgt. Dave Spraggs, “certification is not a registry” (uh huh) and the police department isn’t keeping any records besides a handwritten count (again, uh huh).
Click to expand...

With only 21 days left to go before the certification period closes, a total of 86 certificates have been issued (there are just over 100,000 residents in the college town). Two of those certifications were for the same firearm shared by a husband and wife (for some reason), that means only 85 guns have been certified so far.
Click to expand...

But...you said...??

[bs2]
 
The only problem with non-compliance with all of these schemes is...you are still denied the use of your property. In the case of Boulder, someone could sneak it out of the city to a range to use, but what do you do in the case of a whole state banning something? Same with bumpstocks. No one turns them in, but how do you ever get to use it then?
 
Qwikdraw45 said:
The only problem with non-compliance with all of these schemes is...you are still denied the use of your property. In the case of Boulder, someone could sneak it out of the city to a range to use, but what do you do in the case of a whole state banning something? Same with bumpstocks. No one turns them in, but how do you ever get to use it then?
Click to expand...

Of course, the other issue (intended of course by the antis) as it relates to all banned, gun-related things is the long-term effect of new gun owners/shooters not being introduced to them and thus not having an interest in them. This marginalizes gun-related things to all but those who keep them hidden.

Our side must reject outright the premise - lie - that is being put forth by their side. There is no "gun" crime or "gun" violence. There is only crime and violence.

Antigun argument: "Gun violence claims the lives of x# people every year"
Our immediate counter-argument: "Guns are used by 20-50 times x# of people every year to SAVE lives from ALL types of crime and violence."

Then send/cite them one, two or three news stories - easy to find - that illustrate, lopsidedly that there are many, MANY more people alive and unharmed in America today because they were armed when it counted. FORCE them to counter-argue their original point. They won't be able to do it!

We have to go on offense now - verbally speaking. Just my .02 cents worth.
 
Whutmeworry said:
... there are many, MANY more people alive and unharmed in America today because they were armed when it counted. ...
Click to expand...

You're forgetting that by selfishly saving themselves, they snuffed out the life of a young person with potential to do AMAZING things in this world.

What if that youthful offender would have grown up to be the next Albert Einstein?

Yes, the libs really do think like that...
 
Boulder, Colorado ‘assault weapons’ ban met with mass noncompliance

Only 342 “assault weapons,” or semiautomatic rifles, were certified by Boulder police before the Dec. 31 deadline, meaning there could be thousands of residents in the scenic university town of 107,000 in violation of the sweeping gun-control ordinance.
Click to expand...

One longtime Boulderite who has openly refused to comply is Jon Caldara, president of the free-market Independence Institute, who writes a column for the Denver Post and hosts the public-affairs show “Devil’s Advocate” on Colorado Public Television.

What made him decide to take one for the team was the specter of the tolerance-espousing Boulder City Council cracking down on a maligned minority, namely gun owners.

“In this town that spouts tolerance for alternative lifestyles, that actually puts posters all over its buildings and schools about it, when it comes to a lifestyle they don’t like, there is no tolerance,” Mr. Caldara said. “So for me, this all works around the word tolerance. And tolerance means tolerating things you dislike, that you find scary.”
Click to expand...

:emoji_tiger:
 

Similar threads

Biden Nominee to 7th Circuit Supported Banning ‘Assault Weapons’ But Cannot Define Them
Replies
23
Views
468
HARRYM
H
CO Democrats’ ‘Assault Weapons’ Legislation Bans 9mm Pistols With Threaded Barrels
Replies
0
Views
112
Reptile
Reptile
Gov. Youngkin Vetoes Virginia Democrats’ ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban
Replies
21
Views
631
rudiewhitebwoy
rudiewhitebwoy
Watch: Biden Calls For ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Amid Growing Illegal Migrant Crime Crisis
Replies
1
Views
182
HorizontalHunter
HorizontalHunter
ATF new report shows FFLs are not the problem
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
SkilledSovereignty
S
Back
Top Bottom