OC prohibited in Lakewood open space?

Copied over from AR-15 forums...here's a link as well: http://www.ar-15.co/forums/showthread.php?t=60855

Rooskibar03 said:

So I'm finally trying to get some exercise again and since my home backs up to the Bear Creek Trail I went out for a few miles. I come across one of the "trail boards" with the map and rules of the open space and there is an 8.5x11 piece of paper taped to the board with the following message.

"Open Carrying of firearms is prohibited. Ordinance 9.32.050"

A. The open carrying or wearing of a firearm within or upon the grounds of any community center, recreational facility, the Lakewood Civic Center, City park, City trail, or City open space including any City owned, operated, or leased building or property is unlawful when said City building or City property is posted with a sign at the entrance to any City building or City property informing persons that the open carrying of a firearm is prohibited in such building or area.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I've seen this come up before but is simply taping a sign to board suffient to fulfill the law? There are trails into the open space everywhere, so how can you post a sign at the "entrance"?

Click to expand...

I would assume preemption would apply here, but I just wanted to see if there was some caveat this person was missing.

kanekutter05 said:

Copied over from AR-15 forums...here's a link as well: http://www.ar-15.co/forums/showthread.php?t=60855



I would assume preemption would apply here, but I just wanted to see if there was some caveat this person was missing.

Click to expand...

Colorado statutes do have a provision to allow a municipality the right to ban OC on city property under the proviso that they must have a sign posted on every public entrance. But the provision only applies to city owned and operated property. So it is possible, however, the idea that they have a sign at every public entrance to a park is questionable.

CRS 29-11.7-104:

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.

Preemption does not apply in this case.

mobiushky said:

Colorado statutes do have a provision to allow a municipality the right to ban OC on city property under the proviso that they must have a sign posted on every public entrance. But the provision only applies to city owned and operated property. So it is possible, however, the idea that they have a sign at every public entrance to a park is questionable.

CRS 29-11.7-104:

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.

Preemption does not apply in this case.

Click to expand...

So in theory if they didn't have signs posted at EVERY entrance you could fight to say that it's not a legal OC ban?

kanekutter05 said:

So in theory if they didn't have signs posted at EVERY entrance you could fight to say that it's not a legal OC ban?

Click to expand...

In court, you could make that case. Likely the judge would also agree that the law says every enterance and therefore the case is dismissed. It is possible that he disagrees.
Either way, it's the getting to court part that sucks. How many times it's been proven that cops don't know the laws that they enforce...
There is still the citation, possible arrest, likely confiscation of firearm, definate inconvienance in plans, rescheduling to take a day off to go to the court...

How much do you want to spend to prove what you are doing is legal? Where do you personally draw the line in the sand?

I think you'd have a tough time starting with the definition of "entrance." Is an entrance as defined by the CRS only the place that is officially recognized as an entrance? Or in other words, the trail head? I would bet the city would argue that it is unreasonable to assume that they would need to place a sign every single location that a person could enter the park because the boundaries are simply too large and too varied. Most laws are held to the "reasonable person" standard. The city will argue that a reasonable person should be expected to enter a park at one of the recognized entrances and therefore those are the only place that are required. I'd bet they win that argument. Otherwise, the city would have to treat a park like a private property. We all know that to properly inform a person they are on private property, there must be a sign posted every X number of feet along the perimeter.

So I would bet you will have a tough time winning a case against the city even though they may not be technically 100% in line with the wording of the law. IF you did win, expect to see a lot of city park and open spaces lined with signs. LOL.

mobiushky said:

IF you did win, expect to see a lot of city park and open spaces lined with signs. LOL.

Click to expand...

There's a pick of such in this forum. I think it's from Westminster.

I obtained a permission slip in late May to ccw, I have been taking my daughter to Carmody Rec Center in Lakewood since early June and have ccw into the center because there is a sign in the foyer of the rec center that states "No OC Allowed". After the 12 pre-meditated first degree murders in the Aurora theater the rec center affixed small white signs on the front doors to the center that read "Alcohol, Drug and Weapon Free Zone" but when you step into the foyer the sign that states "Open Carrying of a Firearm or any Unauthorized or Unlawful Possession of a Firearm is Prohibited". So being a Jefferson County CHP holder in good standing am I allowed under Colorado law to enter the rec center with my handgun concealed?

yotebuster223 said:

I obtained a permission slip in late May to ccw, I have been taking my daughter to Carmody Rec Center in Lakewood since early June and have ccw into the center because there is a sign in the foyer of the rec center that states "No OC Allowed". After the 12 pre-meditated first degree murders in the Aurora theater the rec center affixed small white signs on the front doors to the center that read "Alcohol, Drug and Weapon Free Zone" but when you step into the foyer the sign that states "Open Carrying of a Firearm or any Unauthorized or Unlawful Possession of a Firearm is Prohibited". So being a Jefferson County CHP holder in good standing am I allowed under Colorado law to enter the rec center with my handgun concealed?

Click to expand...

As long ass you have that government issued permission slip, you are good.