So how does Denver get away with it?

Hi guys, Springs newb here, and I've been reading through this forum enough to know that the Colorado Constitution enables us to openly carry a firearm for personal protection, and that right "Shall not be called into question"....so, what gives in Denver County then? How did this happen? How is this even "legal," given the wording of our own Constitution?

I suppose the same rules will apply in States like Illinois; but how can a certain state, or county within a state, not abide by the Laws of the Land?

SpringsColt said:

and that right "Shall not be called into question"....so, what gives in Denver County then?

Click to expand...

Howdy Colt!
The Meier's Decision in Federal court evidently accorded Denver's exception due to their ordinance having been in effect -before- the Colorado Constitution was crafted. Established as a "home rule" city, and having their firearms ordinance in place prior to the existence of the language of the Constitution, their firearms language was "grandfathered" in as exempt from the preemption law. When argued in court, the ruling was based on whether the State of Colorado had a significant interest as related to preemption in this case, to overrule Denver's ordinance. Denver argued they are an urban municipality where, due to the density of population, it was in their best interest that their firearms restriction be upheld. Oddly enough, I didn't see anywhere that indicated why the urban nature of Denver made any difference between a handgun carried concaled with a permit or one openly carried.

Anyhow, I haven't explored the subject fully, and what I provide above is my impression of the basics of the case as expressed in the Meier's decision. If you'd like to learn more, you can find a sticky at the top of the Colorado board that has all the relevant facts of the case,
Peterson v. LaCabe (Denver, CO) MSJ Filed
and can give you the language of the actual decision handed down in federal court.

Interestingly enough, the state capitol is located smack in the middle of Denver.

Maybe we should start a movement to move the state capitol out of Denver to a city that upholds the Constitution of the State of Colorado, like Colorado Springs? Or even Aurora? If Denver does not wish to adhere to the Constitution of the State of Colorado, maybe the State of Colorado should move to a city that does!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

Interestingly enough, the state capitol is located smack in the middle of Denver.

Maybe we should start a movement to move the state capitol out of Denver to a city that upholds the Constitution of the State of Colorado, like Colorado Springs? Or even Aurora? If Denver does not wish to adhere to the Constitution of the State of Colorado, maybe the State of Colorado should move to a city that does!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin[/QUOTE]

I still cannot for the life of me figure out how to just quote a part, so sorry ha. But I'm with ya all the way! Springs in a much cleaner, much more of a city i would want as the Capital of My state. i wonder how hard it would be to get a state capital changed i haven't heard of it happening much. suppose i haven't been looking into it too hard either. oh and Great response to the question as always, couldn't of explained it better myself and Ive had to quite a lot. it seems a lot of people have the very same question.

Semper-Fi
~Wolf~

Maybe we should start a movement to move the state capitol out of Denver to a city that upholds the Constitution of the State of Colorado, like Colorado Springs? Or even Aurora? If Denver does not wish to adhere to the Constitution of the State of Colorado, maybe the State of Colorado should move to a city that does!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin[/QUOTE]


I think that its a great idea..

M-Taliesin said:

Maybe we should start a movement to move the state capitol out of Denver to a city that upholds the Constitution of the State of Colorado, like Colorado Springs? Or even Aurora? If Denver does not wish to adhere to the Constitution of the State of Colorado, maybe the State of Colorado should move to a city that does!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

Click to expand...

Not really that hard.

To quote part of a post that is.

Denver would have lost the Meier's decision had the 7th CO Supreme Court justice not recused herself from the case due to the conflict of interest of having originally argued the State's case against the Denver ordinance in the lower court.

This matter is "settled" for the time being only. The "home rule" argument strikes me as a invention of desperation - a gerry-rigged coat rack on which to hang this exception to, and transgression upon the Colorado Constitution.

This "home rule" loop-hole needs to be addressed again . Denver is being allowed to nullify Article 2, Section 13. That is a very bad precedent to allow to stand.

rushcreek2 said:

Denver would have lost the Meier's decision had the 7th CO Supreme Court justice not recused herself from the case due to the conflict of interest of having originally argued the State's case against the Denver ordinance in the lower court.

This matter is "settled" for the time being only. The "home rule" argument strikes me as a invention of desperation - a gerry-rigged coat rack on which to hang this exception to, and transgression upon the Colorado Constitution.

This "home rule" loop-hole needs to be addressed again . Denver is being allowed to nullify Article 2, Section 13. That is a very bad precedent to allow to stand.

Click to expand...

The question is: How? It's already been decided at the State Supreme Court, and since it's a state issue, it's unlikely to be allowed to enter the realm of the federal court system. Colorado State legislators could always pass a law making it crystal clear neither Denver nor any other "home rule" city is excluded from our state's Constitution, but that would just be ignored by Denver until challenged in court. The legislature could also amend our state's Constitution to better define the parameters of home rule, but that's a slippery slope, and one that's unlikely to happen, anyway.

I submit that a hung court isn't a decision at all, that they need to re-hear it until a proper decision is made.

M-Taliesin said:

Howdy Colt!
The Meier's Decision in Federal court evidently accorded Denver's exception due to their ordinance having been in effect -before- the Colorado Constitution was crafted. Established as a "home rule" city, and having their firearms ordinance in place prior to the existence of the language of the Constitution, their firearms language was "grandfathered" in as exempt from the preemption law. When argued in court, the ruling was based on whether the State of Colorado had a significant interest as related to preemption in this case, to overrule Denver's ordinance. Denver argued they are an urban municipality where, due to the density of population, it was in their best interest that their firearms restriction be upheld. Oddly enough, I didn't see anywhere that indicated why the urban nature of Denver made any difference between a handgun carried concaled with a permit or one openly carried.

Click to expand...

As an example, we have urban areas here in the Springs that exist exceptionally well with open carry.

Interestingly enough, the state capitol is located smack in the middle of Denver.

Maybe we should start a movement to move the state capitol out of Denver to a city that upholds the Constitution of the State of Colorado, like Colorado Springs? Or even Aurora? If Denver does not wish to adhere to the Constitution of the State of Colorado, maybe the State of Colorado should move to a city that does!

Click to expand...

I am ALL for that. Many states have their capitols located in their smaller cities. Let's see how Denver likes being on the downhill side of what's rolling their way. They are, after all, downhill from us...

If I'm not mistaken the Denver position in Meier' s benefited significantly from the fact that Colorado statutes only regulate concealed carry, and therefore do not "preempt" the open carry issue.

I may be wrong - but I doubt that the "home rule" provision relied upon by Denver was ever intended to negate the CO Constitution, or bestow immunity from the laws of Colorado.

Is Denver part of Colorado - or not ? Or - have the courts just carved out a handy little exception for Denver from that "problematic" Article 2, Section 13 ??? That is the paramount question that needs to be addressed by CO courts.

So is the ban on open carry just in Denver city or the entirety of Denver county?

I just moved here 1 moth ago from Kentucky and called the Denver County Sheriff's Office today about applying for my CCW. They told me that my KY license expires after 30 days of residency. I specifically asked about the legality of me open carrying and made it perfectly clear that I lived in Denver County. The woman I was speaking with stated that I WAS allowed to open carry.

So I was just thinking maybe it is only in Denver proper?

ChrisJ said:

So is the ban on open carry just in Denver city or the entirety of Denver county?

I just moved here 1 moth ago from Kentucky and called the Denver County Sheriff's Office today about applying for my CCW. They told me that my KY license expires after 30 days of residency. I specifically asked about the legality of me open carrying and made it perfectly clear that I lived in Denver County. The woman I was speaking with stated that I WAS allowed to open carry.

So I was just thinking maybe it is only in Denver proper?

Click to expand...

Here's the thing: Denver proper is Denver City / County, a unified jurisdiction, meaning anywhere in the borders, it's both Denver City and Denver county. Denver even 'owns' property in the form of parks outside of the area we normally consider Denver, and I believe their laws are also said to apply there. That said, the Denver Sheriff's Office is not commonly regarded as a law enforcement agency, they generally only take care of the courts and prison duties in Denver, as well as administering some other things. So, that illustrates why it's not a good idea to rely only on the opinion law enforcement regarding the legality of, well just about anything. Maybe they're looking for more customers?

There are a lot of areas which are in the metro area which aren't Denver, naturally, and OC isn't generally a problem there, which I think nullifies Denver's argument against the activity..

ChrisJ said:

The woman I was speaking with stated that I WAS allowed to open carry.

Click to expand...

Howdy Pardner!
To refer to Denver proper is an abuse of the word, since there just ain't much proper when it comes to Denver.
That being said, and I doubt it ever was, I wouldn't trust that advice any further than I can throw a police car.

Best advice I can give.... don't carry in Denver county anywhere without a CCW.

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

Denver IS in violation of the constitution for infringing upon open carry! Perhaps the sheriff can do his job and declare it legal, and be willing to punish those who violate his order.

George Mann said:

Perhaps the sheriff can do his job and declare it legal, and be willing to punish those who violate his order.

Click to expand...

Must have missed the part of the constitution where local county sheriff's have dictatorial legislative powers in their job descriptions. I'll check again.