how can anyone be barred from gun ownership as a coloradan?

I am curious as to why I always see people state article 2 section 13 as the right to a gun as opposed to section 3. The way I am reading it is section 3 gives me the inalienable right to defend myself. Section 13 only affirms that I have a right to use a firearm in corilation to section 3. And under the definition of inalienable no one can be barred from gun ownership. Especially after the supreme court case castle Rock vs. Jessica Gonzales. Stating it is not a right or obligation to receive police protection as an individual. Also. Article 7 section 10 states that all rights of citizenship will be invested without further action unless otherwise addressed in this constitution. Finally us code 18 subsection 921 (20) if civil rights are restored will not be considered conviction in this chapter. With all this what it the legal defense in Colorado from barring any coloradan from owning a firearm again. Other than the nanny states. Because I'm in charge defense?

Welcome to the forum..

OP may wish to search google scholar and post back with more specific questions.

http://scholar.google.com/

Of course, any public official that says we cannot own, carry, etc arms is blowing into the wind -- they all are void.

So full disclosure I have a mcdv. And I may be uninformed about Google scholar. Since I was unable to find any case law pertaining to article7 section 10 which unless specificly addressed in the constitution reinstates all rights after your time is served. This compounded with article 2 section 3; stating I have a certain, essential, and inalienable right to protect my life, family, and property. Reinforced by article 2 section 13 which stats that my use of a firearm in defense of said rights can not be questioned. Which individual right I presume to be reinforced by the 2005 supreme court case Castle Rock vs Jessica Gonzales. That it is my responsibility and not that of any LEO to protect me as an individual and not society as a whole. The federal law states title 18 subsection 921. If civil rights are restored then for purposes of this chapter will not be considered a conviction. I guess my question is am I paving new ground here because I can't seem to find any case law on this? I hope I have been more specific in my question as I have been unsuccessful in my own search on this topic

woolbright said:

I am curious as to why I always see people state article 2 section 13 as the right to a gun as opposed to section 3. The way I am reading it is section 3 gives me the inalienable right to defend myself. Section 13 only affirms that I have a right to use a firearm in corilation to section 3. And under the definition of inalienable no one can be barred from gun ownership. Especially after the supreme court case castle Rock vs. Jessica Gonzales. Stating it is not a right or obligation to receive police protection as an individual. Also. Article 7 section 10 states that all rights of citizenship will be invested without further action unless otherwise addressed in this constitution. Finally us code 18 subsection 921 (20) if civil rights are restored will not be considered conviction in this chapter. With all this what it the legal defense in Colorado from barring any coloradan from owning a firearm again. Other than the nanny states. Because I'm in charge defense?

Click to expand...

In Colorado you have two sets of laws. The written laws and the unwritten laws. The written laws are manipulated and molested at the free will of the courts and cops. The unwritten laws have just as much force and enforcement as the written laws and those are whatever those in power wish it to be. You can be a law abiding tax paying citizen with a spotless record, and the state will tell you what rights they will allow you to keep.

I was born & raised in Colorado and lived there for over 30 years, moving out most recently in Dec. 2011. I kid you not when I say that Colorado is one step shy of communist power.

I am not a legal scholar, but my understanding is that people convicted of certain crimes (felonies) are barred from ownership of most weapons. In this state, after they have served their sentence they can get their rights restored. I don't know the details of the process, but I do recall there was a case not too long ago where a guy was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, and it was overturned because he was in a "rights restored" status and had the gun in the house for defense of self and family (best recollection I have of it, don't know the case name).