City of Boulder Can’t Even Get 100 Gun Owners to ‘Certify’ Their Newly Outlawed ‘Assault Weapons’

In May, the city council of Boulder, Colorado, unanimously passed an “assault weapons” ban, along with a ban on bump stocks and “high capacity” magazines. The ban will officially take effect on January 1, 2019, at which point possession of a prohibited weapon or accessory will be punishable by 90 days in jail and/or a $1,000 fine.

Weapons already owned by Boulder residents will be grandfathered in, provided that their owners come forward before December 27 to receive an official “certificate” from the city government. According to Boulder police Sgt. Dave Spraggs, “certification is not a registry” (uh huh) and the police department isn’t keeping any records besides a handwritten count (again, uh huh).

Even better, certifying your guns will cost you. The price is $20 for the first gun and $5 for each additional one. And because police (allegedly) aren’t keeping records, they can’t issue a replacement certificate in case the original is lost.

“It’s a simple process, it’s a reasonable cost,” said Spraggs. “We encourage people to get it done.”

“The ordinance specifically excludes a .22 long rifle,” Spraggs also said, “even though it looks like assault gun (because) it takes rimfire versus centerfire ammunition.”

With only 21 days left to go before the certification period closes, a total of 86 certificates have been issued (there are just over 100,000 residents in the college town). Two of those certifications were for the same firearm shared by a husband and wife (for some reason), that means only 85 guns have been certified so far.

City Attorney Tom Carr, who drafted the law to try to fit “the council’s vision,” openly admits that it’ll be difficult to enforce.

“I can’t imagine a way to do proactive enforcement,” Carr said. “Obviously, there’s no circumstance where we go door-to-door and ask people if they’ve violated the law. So, I think it would mostly be responsive.”

Carr also “thinks” a lot of other things about the law he’s written:

“The code gives officers discretion,” Carr said. “For example, if the weapon was discovered during an investigation of a crime of violence, I would think that it is more likely to be seized. If the investigation was for something more administrative in nature, I would expect most officers would advise the person of the law and how to comply.”

Boulder resident John Ramey, who worked together with Councilwoman Mirabai Nagle to propose an alternative to the ban, made the following statement via email when the law was being proposed:

“By definition, effective governing must be practical and enforceable. When something isn’t enforceable, like the war on drugs, that’s a huge sign that the underlying legal model doesn’t match the actual problems and realities.

“At best, ineffective laws just displace or morph the problem. Mass shootings declined after Australia’s weapons ban, but gun-related crimes doubled in just five years. In countries like the UK and China, they now deal with daily fear of acid, knife, and vehicle attacks.”

In addition to rimfire weapons, firearms owned by Boulderites, but stored outside of city limits are exempt from the ban. Officials suspect that many gun owners are using that option, but just as with registration mandates in California and New York, they expect a lot of non-compliance.

comments

  1. avatar D says:

    Looks like the city got a big FU from most gun owners!

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      You don’t understand, the Leftists are just *fine* with this.

      The fact only 100 ‘registered’ their guns is proof in their minds all the rest of the gun owners are law-breaking felons.

      Who will *deserve* to have their un-registered ‘assault weapons’ confiscated from them…

      1. avatar arc says:

        Don’t be surprised if good men go full felon after being put on the ‘wrong’ side of the non-law. If possession of your own property makes you a criminal, then there is very little incentive to not convert to full SBR machine gun.

        1. avatar viper says:

          absolutely right on….

        2. avatar George the deplorable says:

          When firearms are outlawed, I Will Become an OutLaw…..#2A

      2. avatar Salty Bear says:

        This is why I can’t stand thd “law-abiding gun owner” trope. When laws are tyrannical (and they almost always are), the law-abiding are slaves.

        1. avatar Kevin says:

          The Constitution gives us the right to abolish any all forms of government we deem tyrannical and unjust we’re people this is our country .

          Tell the government no !!!! And that’s that . It’s are right to vote on the laws that govern us . All everyone does is bitch about the laws there making . Take action . Before we they try to get ride of the whole bill of rights.

          So far freedom of speech and press are gone now right to bear arms. Taxation without representation .

      3. avatar John Ramey says:

        A large percentage of gun owners in Boulder are liberal, including myself (who fought for 2A rights in this story).

        1. avatar Steve says:

          The council is not liberal, they are leftist statists. Most gun owners are classical liberals, supporting liberty, freedom and not slaves to the state.

      4. avatar Some blocke on the internet says:

        Those ‘assault weapons’ are as much as ‘assault weapons’ as a bow or a shotgun is.

        You know what ‘buckshot’ is, right? It’s a shotgun cartridge that has a few little balls that spread out, dealing a lot more damage than a single bullet. How about a slug? Still a shotgun round, only one projectile, but a LOT bigger than what these ‘assault’ weapons are shooting, and weighing a good 3-4 ounces.

        But those are fine, cuz the guns that shoot them all look like huntin’ guns, yeah?
        Ya derpy doorknob.

        1. avatar Jon Dough says:

          er,…Some Blocke On the Internet;
          , I would’nt be callin folks names…at least not until I’d done MY homework.
          E.G. a 12 gauge slug most generally weights 437 grains, Avoirdupois,
          -or 1 ounce whichever weight measure you prefer to call it… Certainly not 3-4 ounces …
          Just saying

        2. avatar Boris Badenov says:

          Even the ATF doesn’t recognize an ‘assault rifle’. So the Marxist fools can go pound each other.

      5. avatar Dan says:

        The city of boulder should be outlawed. I lived in fort Collins for a few years.I don’t know how they think now but back then they were also what you would call liberals. I was like an island in the stream. I don’t know how people can be so ignorant.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      true…and that is probably the best response…widespread disobedience breeds disrespect for the law…something they should think about…

      1. avatar DaveL says:

          Because attempts to enforce by legal sanctions, acts obnoxious to so great a proportion of Citizens, tend to enervate the laws in general, and to slacken the bands of Society. If it be difficult to execute any law which is not generally deemed necessary or salutary, what must be the case, where it is deemed invalid and dangerous? And what may be the effect of so striking an example of impotency in the Government, on its general authority?

        -James Madison, A Memorial And Remonstrance

        Madison was talking about a law to find religious instruction, but the same principle obtains. The man knew how laws work.

        1. avatar Alex G says:

          You make an excellent point. This is a most timely quote of a “Founding Father’s” warning about the adoption of needless, poorly conceived, and unenforceable laws!

    3. avatar Steve J says:

      My guess – 100 ex-wives turning in guns that scare them.

  2. avatar GS650G says:

    The californication of Colorado continues.

    1. avatar Kendahl says:

      Boulder always has been Colorado’s equivalent to Berkeley, California.

  3. avatar Reginald says:

    This is a test case for the libs. Giving the police your information will put you at the head of the line when they come for your guns. I’m glad I live in a red state that wouldn’t allow this nonsense.

    1. avatar UpInArms says:

      Um, yeah, right. “Can’t happen here”.

      1. avatar GunnyGene says:

        “It” could happen here (the reddest of red States), but it’s a very, very low probability. We already fought this legal battle over the last 10years, and we ain’t about to give up the ground we won: Permitless carry, Legal protections, etc., etc., etc. If the gun grabbers want to force a real fight, with real bullets – which they don’t – they would lose that also, and they know it.

        1. avatar HP says:

          You needn’t worry about your state; you should be more concerned with the eventuality that someday there will be a Democrat President who has both houses of Congress with Democrat majorities. Then the “won’t happen here” thing is suddenly rendered moot when laws are passed that effect every state.

    2. avatar Helms Deep says:

      This is what New Jersey Local and State will do next ( at least with handguns ) they will look at the ” Form Of Register ” and see if that Make / Model can hold a Magazine with over 10 round capacity, that owner is now instantly ‘ flagged ‘ as a possible criminal and it is not much to assume liberal judges will gladly sign off on search warrants.

      Mr. Smith , you own a Taurus pistol type PT- 1234 , factory stock with 15 Round Mags.
      We will now toss your home looking for this ‘ contraband ‘.

      Since NJ also uses Federal No-Fly lists for gun buyer screening ( made law by Christie ) it is also not a stretch to think NJ has a full Long – Gun registry as well.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        And, … after 15-20 abuses such as this, we introduce “bang-thump, bang-thump”, and suddenly it is not so much fun for LE. Sure, citizen dies and LE is absolved, but 2 jackwads don’t go home tonite. Another 5 abuses, 2 more fall by the wayside, then the ratio goes to about 1-1 fucking over citizens vs. killing jack booted thugs, and how long does anybody think that goes on, before JBTs find another way to entertain themselves?

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          I don’t see it ever going that far. Even if, by some miracle, the city wins in court their PD won’t enforce this.

          Boulder PD won’t even fight when their own off duty officers are told they can’t shop in certain locations because they are CCing. They’re not going to do fuck-all to enforce this law.

        2. avatar DN says:

          They’re not going to do fuck-all to enforce this law.

          You are wrong. this law is a slam dunk piece of cake to enforce. Have one of the types of firearm in your possession in your car in your home and can’t produce proof that it is certified? — super easy prosecution

      2. avatar frank speak says:

        the real issue is states interposing themselves between the buyer and the seller…something that should [and traditionally has] been reserved for the feds…the acquisition of information they shouldn’t have is the real issue here…and certainly worth a court challenge…

    3. avatar jbob says:

      That was the sentiment of a lot of Washington state residents a decade ago and now they’e looking more like California than Colorado.

    4. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

      They are doing it state by state. I fear for Florida we dodged a bullet last election. If California can stand as they are there is no reason it can’t happen to you

  4. avatar 22winmag says:

    Keltec CMR in 3… 2… 1

    1. avatar SKP5885 says:

      Speaking of KelTec, is anyone else seeing the KelTec adds on TTAG that read “the bark is worse than the bite” next to a PMR30? I own a pmr30 and guarantee that is bullshit. That little gun is as loud as anything I own and spits fire 8” out of the muzzle. I love it. In fact I think I Might just carry it to my work Christmas party tonight in honor of that add.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        The PMR30 ads are annoying because they are out of stock nearly everywhere.

        1. avatar Cloudbuster says:

          I think Paul Herrell demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if you’re set on a small caliber high capacity pistol as anything other than a range toy, you want an FN Five-seveN, not a PMR-30. But even Five-seveN performance is inferior to common duty calibers for most uses.

          https://youtu.be/xBAQoxHcBq4

        2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

          chicago armslist has a couple under four bills. they don’t seem to be moving.

  5. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    did they really think that gun owners would rush to register their guns to avoid being prosecuted under an unconstitutional law ?

    1. avatar Bruce says:

      Not just unconstitutional under federal law, but very likely illegal under a Colorado’s local firearm law preemption law.

  6. avatar Dave Lewis says:

    Irish democracy in action

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      We are talking about Boulder, Colorado: there may very well be only 85 people who own semi-automatic modern sporting rifles!

      1. avatar Gary Caudillo says:

        I was just thinking that same thing. Liberal elitist college town I’m surprised they even felt a need for the law there.

      2. avatar John Ramey says:

        Hi, I’m quoted in article / was point on this law’s negotiations. The estimate was 2-4,000 relevant guns in the city. There’s a prominent firearm community around.

  7. avatar Tom says:

    Sounds like a circle Jerk. A law that can’t be enforced. Why do these knee jerking polititions come up with this crap. Oregonia is working on this now. Potland, Screwgene and Mudford installed Californications In Famous Governor Jerry Browns, Sister Kate Brown in our Capitol. Now she is working overtime trying to take us down. What Jerry doesn’t think of she does. I believe they spend nights on phone discussing how to ruin the two states. California Voted Jerry out. So he will probally move to Oregoinia to help his sister finish Oregonia off.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      California did NOT vote Jerry Brown out. He fully served the two terms allowed by law and could not run again. I suspect that he would have been re-elected had he been allowed to run again since he not only balanced the budget, he produced a surplus. His replacement, on the other hand, is a typical elitist gun banning progressive. We go rapidly down hill from here.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Jerry didn t produce a surplus, the productive in California did. And they are slowly leaving.

      2. avatar Bob Jones says:

        California will be going back to Mexico within a couple of decades. The sooner, the better. The companies that generate California’s great “surplus” generate most of their income form overseas manufacture and out of state revenue.They will move once the peon class takes over and raises taxes to insufferable levels.

      3. avatar Boris Badnov says:

        That surplus is on paper only, they still owe the government unions trillions.

    2. avatar Jon Dough says:

      Tom asked: “Why do these knee jerking polititions come up with this crap?”
      They do it for the notoriety and publicity thinking (generally true) that it will help their ‘tough guy street cred. They’re all treasonous fuks

  8. avatar TheOtherDavid says:

    Wow. How generous of them to exempt rimfire. Up here in Washingfornia they just declared my Henry Survival Rifle an assault weapon.

    1. avatar Art out West says:

      Well it is called an AR-7 (Assault Rifle version seven). 😁
      Marlin 60s and Ruger 10/22s are assault rifles too you know. The Remington 7400 is as well.

      Weapons of war! 😂

      I guess you should have bought a Henry lever action instead of the assault rifle Henry.

      1. “AR-7 (Assault Rifle version seven)” The AR does not stand for Assault Rifle!!! It stands for Armalite Rifle. Armalite was the original manufacturer of the AR series of weapons!!!

        1. avatar Scott says:

          I think he knew that, hence the smiley face.

  9. avatar CCDWGUY says:

    Probably not going to register in Australia. Steve Lee

  10. avatar Stateisevil says:

    how many people in boulder own them?

    1. avatar CTstooge says:

      More than 85…

      1. avatar DJ says:

        https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/30834-massive-noncompliance-to-boulder-colorado-assault-weapons-ban

        Lets just say it’s more than 85. My understanding of the Boulder registration is any semi-auto rifle other than 22 is an “assault weapon”.

    2. avatar John Ramey says:

      The estimates are a few thousand.

  11. avatar former water walker says:

    But but but you can smoke all the pot you want😄😎😏

    1. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

      Keep the people numb or busy with bread a circus’s. They will be more compliant that way

  12. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Compliance is futile as it violates the U S Constitution.

    1. avatar DN says:

      People convicted and imprisoned in DC for pre-Heller violation of DC’s unconstitutional gun laws did not have their convictions overturned, nor were they released when Heller was decided by the court.

      1. avatar Paul Breakfield says:

        Wow, we live in disturbing times. My father used to teach me one thing over and over and I hated hearing it then… He said, “Life isn’t fair.” He was right. Nor logical most of the time.

        And the folks who trust the police are in trouble too. The ones who say, the police and the soldiers won’t enforce these unconstitutional laws – they are wrong. They will enforce them gladly, “just doing their jobs…”

        1. avatar Jim says:

          Sir you honestly believe that the US military will forget their sworn oath to the Constitution? You don’t know the military very well. Oh and the “just following orders” thing doesn’t work either well at least it didn’t for the German military.

  13. avatar Kyle says:

    lol

    Color me stunned

    Government;

    The only thing than can create an illegal policy, implement it over the will of the governed, have it prove to be a failed un-executable process, then punish those that they find out have failed to comply after the fact, even if they did because they’ve lost a scrap of paper.

    If the private sector tried this, they’d be in prison.

    1. avatar Salty Bear says:

      And yet, people go on believing in authority, unable and unwilling to fathom how much better off we’d be without it.

  14. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    Ok so being a non-complying outlaw vs laws like this sounds cool and all, but does this mean these owners, while keeping their snazzy guns off the books, essentially can’t go shoot them at the local range for fear of prosecution? Will they risk driving them to a range outside the city for target practice, what if your taillight burns out and you are stopped, I don’t think people will want to be a test case. Unless you can get the police to say will not enforce, hiding from the law isn’t freedom either.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “…essentially can’t go shoot them at the local range for fear of prosecution?”

      While I don’t pretend to know of every single range in the area, to my knowledge, pretty much all gun ranges the only gun range open to mere plebs within the City of Boulder is a “Members Only” affair with an astronomically long waiting list.

      A few years back I thought about trying to join until I was advised by the people who run the club that the waiting list to join the gun club was over 60 years long.

      It’s a short drive to Shoot Indoors range in Broomfield where such requirements don’t exist. Why not drive the extra 15 minutes… because unless you’re already an active member of the Boulder Rifle Club, you don’t have a choice anyway since Gunsport doesn’t have a range.

    2. avatar JT says:

      Keep it out of sight (trunk), and don’t do anything stupid that would give a lawful reason to a cop to search your vehicle.

      1. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

        Sure, that’s great – until someone rear-ends your car and causes enough damage to disable it, and the trunk lid pops open… now what?

        Which is just one spectacular reason why these onerous and unconstitutional “laws” should not be allowed to stand in the first place.

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      no it’s not…but squirreling them away…and keeping your mouth shut about what you own would seem prudent…

  15. avatar strych9 says:

    As someone who now lives on the outskirts of Boulder I say the following:

    Why bother complying? If the Colorado Supreme Court follows their own logic, and there is currently no reason to think that they would not, Boulder has no legal authority to create this law in the first place and will lose the court battle. Even if the court “gets political” they pretty much have to strike down Boulder’s law here or they will upset their previous ruling that Denver has the right to do what they’re currently doing which, due to population and voting demographics, would be a far larger political risk than ticking off Boulderites.

    Why comply and potentially end up on a registry over a law that is virtually guaranteed to be struck down in a court case that’s already ongoing (RMGO sued the city over this)?

    1. avatar Cloud says:

      If the colorado courts gives this shit law their stamp of approval then what’s to stop Douglas county from repealing the mah ban?

  16. avatar possum says:

    When The Book of Bible was translated from Sanskrit to Hebrew they misinterpreted the word Assault and Another. There is no assault rifles, the A in AR stands for another, another rifle. Bullets: 223 . ” And whoe upon My enemies, as My people who have suffered under great tribulation picked up Another Rifle and drove Yee out of My land

    1. avatar L says:

      easy on the catnip, possum

    2. avatar gds44 says:

      The AR does not stand for Assault Rifle!!! It stands for Armalite Rifle. Armalite was the original manufacturer of the AR series of weapons!!!

  17. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

    Ha, as a native Coloradan, I salute the “resistance” in the people’s republic of Boulder. There are easily 30,000 plus people in boulder who their entire life were law abiding citizens who are making a political statement by now kowtowing to the Apparatchiks in charge down there. Colorado is californicated but believe me the original people who have lived here for generations have not changed on their traditional views one iota.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Joseph Quixote,

      That is great and all — and it doesn’t mean anything since those born-and-raised Coloradans failed to produce enough children to maintain a majority voting bloc.

  18. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

    NOT kowtowing. Darn it.

  19. avatar David Hineline says:

    Any marijuana smoking resident of CO already can not own firearms by Federal Law so why should they care about complying with some city law?

  20. avatar Chuck in IL says:

    The citizens ought to march en masse with their rifles, every week, right past city hall. And give them the one fingered salute as they go.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      I’m not exactly sure what would happen if people did this but I don’t think the outcome would be positive.

      Really I wouldn’t worry about LE or anything, I’d be more concerned about the other residents of the city. A lot of the people in Boulder are completely fucking crazy. I can envision a situation where the ultra-liberal folks attacked the people marching in a way that everything devolved into a total shitstorm when someone got hurt.

      At that point the truth would cease to matter and the gun owners would be to blame.

    2. avatar Matt says:

      Chuck, our group Rally for our Rights has done just that, several times. 🙂

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        The difference/point being that this law wasn’t in force, and still isn’t in force, when you did that back in April.

        Everything you did back then was legal. Come next year, unless all those rifles “have a certificate”, the same action will not be legal.

    3. avatar Defens says:

      Wasn’t there a massive, unlawful gathering outside Denver City Hall or the Colorado Capital building the day that the mag limit/ban went into effect? With a large number of people handing now-illegal mags back and forth?

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Not that I recall. Not only would I have gone out of my way to attend such an event, either event would have taken place in Denver and there likely would have been a shitload of arrests for violation of City of Denver laws.

        Breaking gun laws in Denver is a bad idea. Unless you’re a LEO they’ll come down on you like a ton of bricks.

  21. avatar Matt says:

    Aaaaaaand last time I checked, not a single bump stock has been turned in to tge Debver Police Department. NOT. ONE.

    1. avatar Matt says:

      LOL typos *the *Denver Police Department

  22. avatar Ogre says:

    Most people don’t obey the law because it’s the law, but because it makes sense. When governments make idealistic unenforceable laws (or laws that can be easily circumvented), most people (including the law-abiding) end up saying “good luck with that,” laugh at government and develop contempt for not only the law in question, but for all law. They figure that the only real crime is getting caught, and only obey the law when cops are around. So let Boulder have its unenforceable law and see where that goes.

  23. avatar MLee says:

    I’m waiting for some idiotic initiative law here in Washington State. Any such law would be a huge FU from the east side and most counties. It’s only the retards on the west side and King county that need their collective heads caved in.

    1. avatar Grey W says:

      The 39th legislative district, west side, voted 58.2 to 41.8 against 1639. I hope we declare ourselves a 2nd Sanctuary district!

  24. avatar doesky2 says:

    So if they aren’t keeping names and it’s just for a count then someone should be able to register online via anonymous methods of their choice and with a user picked handle and get a uniquely generated receipt code that they can keep a record of. then it would truly be anonymous and just used “for a count”

    Let me guess, its nothing like that right?

    Not that I would do it anyway.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “Let me guess, its nothing like that right?”

      The way it “works” [supposedly, *cough* *cough*] is that you go to the Sheriff or PD office, fill out your forms, pay your money and you are given a “certificate” for your firearm. The PD/SD make a note that they issued a certificate but retain no further information.

      As such, they have a count of how many firearms the city council hates but no “identifying information” for either the gun or the owner which means that if you lose your certificate you’re fucked because you have no way to prove that you followed the law and got said certificate.

      The idea is that if you get caught with one of the “banned guns” you can produce your certificate as proof that you had it before the ban and are therefore grandfathered in. Failure to produce the certificate is considered proof that you don’t have one and therefore evidence that you acquired the firearm after the ban went into effect and are therefore open to punishment under the law.

      How does it work in reality? I guess we’ll find out. Maybe. I don’t see Boulder winning the court cases on this one.

  25. avatar Felixd says:

    No compliance!

  26. avatar Chris says:

    “a total of 86 certificates have been issued” … “Two of those certifications were for the same firearm shared by a husband and wife” — If there is no record keeping, how did this little fact come to light?

    1. avatar John Ramey says:

      They record the number of certificates given, not the info about who/what.

      1. avatar Bill says:

        They “promised” not to keep records. 🙂

  27. avatar Cory C. says:

    It’s not accurate to say that mass shootings declined in Australia after they implemented gun control. They had practically no mass shootings, then they had a statistically insignificant number of mass shootings, then they passed a law and gave the law credit for fixing the thing that wasn’t remotely likely to occur again.

    1. avatar C.S. says:

      Yup, I recently passed a law against extinction events and there haven’t been any since…

      1. avatar Paul Breakfield says:

        That was you? Thanks!

    2. avatar HP says:

      Several years ago in my neighborhood, there was a black bear sighting. Bears are uncommon here. So I’ve been carrying a magic rock in my pocket since, I was told it can fend off bear attacks. Bears are scary. And it’s working, I haven’t been attacked by a bear yet!

  28. avatar Hannibal says:

    ““The code gives officers discretion,” Carr said. “For example, if the weapon was discovered during an investigation of a crime of violence..”

    Let me translate this: if we want to screw you because we think you’re bad, we can use this. If you are a political donor or a fishing buddy, we will let it pass. If you have to say “don’t worry, we won’t enforce this equally” about a criminal statute, you’ve got a problem.

    1. avatar Paul Breakfield says:

      THIS, THIS and THIS! The very fact that the people behind this law ADMIT that it will be enforced selectively shows that they don’t understand what is so wrong about selective enforcement. It is the typical “liberal mindset” that “you can trust authority.”

      But you CAN’T. This gives power to the local authorities to choose whether they want to ruin your life or not based on any number of criteria that may or may not be good. It goes against EVERYTHING our Constitution and laws are based upon.

      This is how you and I go to jail for 10 years for something that the local judge or mayor gets a ticket for doing. How is that a good idea?

  29. avatar Sora says:

    This is a Jim Crow law made to create criminals out of good citizens and discourage people from exercising their right.
    Compliance and effective results were never necessary nor expected.
    The intended effect to chill the people into slowly discard their weapons and imprison those who don’t is the key.
    Now when someone gets into a break-up, their ex can send death squad to the house just like in Maryland where the gun owner was shot by police for resisting confiscation.

    THIS is where we will find out if you’re truly “Cold Dead Hands” or you will simple give up your right.

    Donate to Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Association. They are the only ones fighting in every avenue in Colorado. A very small group but they work hard.

    1. Yes honey, you can go swimming. Just don’t go down by the river, don’t bring your bathing suit and be sure not to get wet. These kind of laws are presented as being “common sense gun control” and we are supposedly intransigent, unwilling to compromise fools for fighting them.

      You bring up a VERY GOOD point – find a local grass roots gun rights organization and step up to the plate folks. It takes money to keep these kinds of laws from being allowed to stand on the books. Freedom isn’t free and you have to support people who will fight them for you!

  30. avatar HP says:

    Just like the SAFE Act in NY, gun owners said “nope” to registration of rifles.

    1. avatar Bill says:

      That was then; now they elected Ocasio-Cortez.

      1. avatar Paul Breakfield says:

        Yes, but she is gong to give them free “everything” so that is worth giving up a few rights for, surely?!?

      2. avatar Hay Nonnymoose says:

        There are two “New Yorks.”

        In Upstate, we hate the Safe Act and we voted for Trump.

        Below Westchester County (and in a couple “diverse” cities), the “diverse” and the Liberals re-elected that asshole Cuomo and elected that ditz beaner.

        You can’t blame us for New York’s government. We want to divide the state into two.

  31. avatar KENNETH G MAIDEN says:

    That police Sargent should resign! As he takes a big dump on the 2A. Really, the whole damn police Dept. should resign. But job and paycheck is more important than oaths, the Constitution, and yes the little serfs they are to serve, ah make that control. FOLKS, WE ARE TRULY AT WAR. WAKE THE HELL UP.

  32. avatar Sid says:

    Government is rarely the solution to any problem.

  33. avatar Craig in IA says:

    Widespread non-compliance on regs like ths is supposed to be news? Yeah- and there weren’t any handguns within the Morton Grove, IL city limits between 1981 and 2008. Just another case of The People actually “voting”.

  34. avatar Geoff says:

    I live in South Carolina. Guns are not registered and the only firearms I have that are actually registered are my two Form 1 suppressors with the BATFE, although the County Sheriff who signed off on the forms knows about them. 42,990 suppressors in SC as of Feb. 2018.
    6 C&R rifles I have are technically registered as they are entered in my Bound Book, but the BATFE doesn’t know about them until I surrender my FFL03.
    And only 1 of my 7 AR platform firearms has a serial number (300BLK Pistol), the rest are all 80% lowers.

  35. avatar JRoss says:

    They’re all at the bottom of Lake Colorado

  36. avatar John Galt says:

    Now, I can’t be speaking out of school to ask……….how long before they require all state ffls to turn over the applicable 4473’s?

    Where exactly is the line in the sand?

    Why hasn’t the president ordered his AG to pre-empt these totalitarian unconstitutional / anti constitutional bs state rules?

    1. avatar Bill says:

      The Ninth Circuit would overturn it and by the time it made it to SCOTUS Bernie will be President.

  37. avatar John Galt says:

    STOP THE PEARL CLUTCHING!!!!

    People openly defied marijuana laws for decades and look where we are today.

    We have a G*D given INALIENABLE RIGHT!

    I fail to believe that true Americans, the people of the gun are bigger P**sies than marijuana dealers and users.

    Proove me right…….please

  38. avatar m. says:

    f boulder council

  39. avatar Mike Shaw says:

    Isn’t that like converting a right into a privilege which is expressly and manifestly forbidden in the bill of rights?!

    1. avatar Bill says:

      To fight that you have to sue.

      What is the political lean of most judges today?

      The thing is, without courts to enforce it as written, the Constitution is just an old piece of parchment.

  40. avatar Dave Elmore says:

    $20 for the first firearm…just another tax. Maybe use all that pot tax money that seems to have disappeared.

  41. avatar Bill says:

    It’s fun to decry this as just Boulder, but the new Governor is from Boulder as is the new state AG and the Democrats hold a supermajority in both houses of Colorado government.

    Especially this to be the law state-wide by the end of 2019, and “red flag” laws (AKA we will search your house for guns and seize them but you have to go to court to get them back and oh look, THESE are illegal”) are promised as one of the first orders of business in January, along with new oil and gas extraction restrictions, higher taxes and a single payer healthcare system the Governor promised would make private insurance ILLEGAL.

  42. avatar Frederick Kithcart says:

    Wonder how many of those council persons are going to breach the door 1st ahead of law enforcement???
    Zero would be my guess

  43. avatar KaD says:

    GOOD. No one should obey this stupid, baseless law that will do NOTHING to prevent gun violence. FU Boulder.

  44. avatar Brian Blackden says:

    A law you have to pay to put into effect? Um check the legality of that one out. The last line of the 5th Amendment-“nor shall private property be taken for public use($), without just compensation.” Paying to enforce a crime bill?

  45. avatar Gary P says:

    Colorado Revised Statutes section 29-11.7-103 provides: 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

    Key word being possession

  46. avatar john yule says:

    So if you have a .22LR upper then you dont have to comply? Hmmmmm

  47. avatar Me says:

    Come get them
    I dare you
    No law shall trump the constitution period

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email