Colorado has NO PREEMPTION statute. Time for Coloradans to get on the ball.
WOW, thats completely wrong and I'm glad the guy under me went ahead and corrected the subject, Colorado does in fact have a preemption, and Denver is in fact the only city that has a ban in place because they took it to the courts and won.
http://www.rmgo.org/2004-news its just down the page a bit. but then Gray Peterson took the manager of Denver to court on the subject of the ban which the decision again was in Denver's favor,
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?77035-Peterson-v-LaCabe-(Denver-CO)-MSJ-Filed thread there, and there is links to the documents within the thread. So he entered it into the 10th circuit court of appeals thread here for hopefully updates soon!
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...rtinez-(10th-Circuit)-Official-Appeals-Thread, so we are indeed fighting Denver over the legality of there ban, still and forever until they realize they have to follow our constitution and preemption just as every city in Colorado has to. heres our preemption.
CRS 29-11.7-103. Regulation - type of firearm - prohibited.
A local government may not enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the sale, purchase, or possession of a firearm that a person may lawfully sell, purchase, or possess under state or federal law. Any such ordinance, regulation, or other law enacted by a local government prior to March 18, 2003, is void and unenforceable.
(editorial note: The City and County of Denver are exempted from Preemption at this time. Current court cases now pending in the 10th and 7th district courts may change their status in the near term.)
And:
29-11.7-101. Legislative declaration.
(1) The general assembly hereby finds that:
...
(b) Section 13 of article II of the state constitution protects the fundamental right of a person to keep and bear arms and implements section 3 of article II of the state constitution;
...
(d) There exists a widespread inconsistency among jurisdictions within the state with regard to firearms regulations;
(e) This inconsistency among local government laws regulating lawful firearm possession and ownership has extraterritorial impact on state citizens and the general public by subjecting them to criminal and civil penalties in some jurisdictions for conduct wholly lawful in other jurisdictions;
(f) Inconsistency among local governments of laws regulating the possession and ownership of firearms results in persons being treated differently under the law solely on the basis of where they reside, and a person's residence in a particular county or city or city and county is not a rational classification when it is the basis for denial of equal treatment under the law;
...
(2) Based on the findings specified in subsection (1) of this section, the general assembly concludes that:
(a) The regulation of firearms is a matter of statewide concern;
(b) It is necessary to provide statewide laws concerning the possession and ownership of a firearm to ensure that law-abiding persons are not unfairly placed in the position of unknowingly committing crimes involving firearms.
29-11.7-104. Regulation - carrying - posting.
A local government may enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area within the local government's jurisdiction. If a local government enacts an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area, the local government shall post signs at the public entrances to the building or specific area informing persons that the open carrying of firearms is prohibited in the building or specific area.
