• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Loaded handgun while OC in Boulder

mahkagari

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
1,186
Location
, ,
I'm wondering if Bouldereich's actions of keeping up signs without any legal support from state law constitutes a mere nuisance, or if it's actually criminal for them to do so?

Is anyone aware of any provision under state law which makes it illegal for any city official or agency to falsely inform or willingly mislead the public?

Nuisance or impossible to prove, I'd say. E.g Thornton's law that requires liquor stores to post signs that in essence say "It's illegal to carry an illegal gun illegally (but we won't tell you that your gun is probably legal here)". In Thornton, they're simply stating the law. If you want to try to prove "intimidation", go for it. In Boulder's case, they're within their rights to post at "entrances", just as the Northglenn(?) park above. Whether more people will shy away from an unenforceable posting is a different question. I don't think there's any state law against a municipality posting unenforceable ordinances.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
Clearly there's not. Enforcing them is where they fall on their faces. If it goes to trial, a simple motion for dismissal solves the issue for you, but not them. They could be faced with a malicious prosecution lawsuit. Usually they will push up to the time you tell the Town Attorney or DA 'see you in court.' Then they "find" their error.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I don't think there's any state law against a municipality posting unenforceable ordinances.

Perhaps I'll have a talk with my friend in the state legislature about a bill requiring municipalities to remove signs running contrary to state law. How about within 30 days of written notification, else the fines will ensue?

Signs are communications to the public. If they're telling the public one thing, when state law says otherwise, they're intentionally misleading the public. That's contrary to the interests of both the public and the state.

Same goes for Boulder LEOs' harassment of law-abiding citizens lawfully carrying their firearms: It's contrary to the interests of both the public and the state.
 

Bebop

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
113
Location
Thornton, Colorado, USA
Perhaps I'll have a talk with my friend in the state legislature about a bill requiring municipalities to remove signs running contrary to state law. How about within 30 days of written notification, else the fines will ensue?

Signs are communications to the public. If they're telling the public one thing, when state law says otherwise, they're intentionally misleading the public. That's contrary to the interests of both the public and the state.

Same goes for Boulder LEOs' harassment of law-abiding citizens lawfully carrying their firearms: It's contrary to the interests of both the public and the state.

It would be interesting to see if the bill would get passed. I can't think of a downside to a bill reacquiring that they don't have signs posted contrary to state law. I would however think that IF any law like that was to get passed you would have to prove that the city was putting the signs up intentionally to try to keep people from doing what the law says they can. Not saying it is right just saying I think most laws that are written so that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show intent. Otherwise the judge may just order them to remove the signs and you wouldn't get compensated. If you objective is to just get them to take down the signs then it would be a win but it seems like an expensive way of going about doing it.

Why not also have a law that says it is illegal for LEO's to give out false legal info. Example if a LEO where to come up to you and say "It is illegal to open carry in the state of Colorado"
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
It would be interesting to see if the bill would get passed. I can't think of a downside to a bill reacquiring that they don't have signs posted contrary to state law. I would however think that IF any law like that was to get passed you would have to prove that the city was putting the signs up intentionally to try to keep people from doing what the law says they can.

Thanks. However, why would intent matter? If the law says no signs contrary to law, the only issue would be whether it's contrary to law. If it is, first time might be a warning, and they have to take the sign down. If they repeat the infraction, the state general attorney would press charges.

Not saying it is right just saying I think most laws that are written so that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show intent.

The state would be the plaintiff. Whoever put up the sign would be the defendants.

Otherwise the judge may just order them to remove the signs and you wouldn't get compensated.

Why would I be expecting compensation? All I'm concerned with is striking down illegal signs which infringe upon my Constitutional rights.

If you objective is to just get them to take down the signs then it would be a win but it seems like an expensive way of going about doing it.

I think it would be as simple as sending the state attorney's office a picture, lat/lon coordinates of its location, and the date/time the photo was taken. The AG dispatches a state trooper to verify. Upon verification, the AG sends a letter to the local governing body. If the body complies, with evidence, the matter is dropped. If they fight it, they're charged with violating the state law, and it goes to court.

Will the sequence of events described above cost some money? Yes. However, after one or two of the most uppity locales is fed their shirt, the word gets around and it ceases being a widespread problem. I think this approach would be fairly inexpensive, overall, and just a few pennies would come out of my pocket for reporting the infraction.

Just don't report it to the local authorities...

Why not also have a law that says it is illegal for LEO's to give out false legal info. Example if a LEO where to come up to you and say "It is illegal to open carry in the state of Colorado"

Excellent idea! Better yet, how about a law making it illegal for an LEO to act as legal counsel for another without having passed the state bar exam?

Oh, wait! That one's already on the books... I suppose the first question in response to an LEO giving out bad legal advice is to ask, "Are you an attorney?"
 

mahkagari

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
1,186
Location
, ,
Excellent idea! Better yet, how about a law making it illegal for an LEO to act as legal counsel for another without having passed the state bar exam?

Oh, wait! That one's already on the books... I suppose the first question in response to an LEO giving out bad legal advice is to ask, "Are you an attorney?"

Hmnm. Good to know. If I know the law and it's apparent they don't, it's easy then for me to say "unless you're illegally acting as my legal counsel, I'll abide by the statutes I've seen on the books". Need to figure out how to phrase it less confrontationally.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Need to figure out how to phrase it less confrontationally.

Perhaps, "I appreciate the tip, Officer -- really! My attorney advises me to remain within the law."

Sort of gives them pause for thought, as in, "Did I just tell this OCer to do something illegal?" At the very least, you're putting forth a statement with which they can't possibly disagree: "No, we advise you to break it..." Furthermore, you're actually thanking them, but the way it's said is almost as if you're agreeing with them, without agreeing with anything. Finally, you're communicating to them in a non-threatening and non-confrontational manner you have legal counsel.

Note to self: LEOs are not the law. LEOs are officers who enforce the law. When they attempt to enforce that which is not the law, they're breaking the law and subjecting themselves to civil and possibly criminal repercussions.
 
Last edited:

mahkagari

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
1,186
Location
, ,
ROFL:

"Discharging or carrying firearms, crossbows, fireworks, explosives or projectile weapons of any kind are not permitted except as expressly mandated by Article 12 of Title 18 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended."

http://www.bouldercounty.org/play/recreation/pages/posrulesandregs.aspx

In essence, it says "We've made a policy that says it's illegal to have a weapon where the state already says it's illegal except where the state says it's legal 'cause then it's legal."
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
ROFL:

"Discharging or carrying firearms, crossbows, fireworks, explosives or projectile weapons of any kind are not permitted except as expressly mandated by Article 12 of Title 18 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended."

http://www.bouldercounty.org/play/recreation/pages/posrulesandregs.aspx

In essence, it says "We've made a policy that says it's illegal to have a weapon where the state already says it's illegal except where the state says it's legal 'cause then it's legal."

Boulder. When the sinkhole swallows Denver, let's hope it branches out and includes the other PDR in our state.
 
Top