Broomfield.,Colorado.,Usa
Shutterstock
Previous Post
Next Post

In its Bruen decision earlier this year, the US Supreme Court noted that the Second Amendment means what it says and says what it means. SCOTUS ruled that any modern gun control measures would have to follow the text, history and traditions of the 1790s.

Enter Broomfield, Colorado, a Denver suburb with a population of 74,000. Local leaders there have moved forward with a radical, comprehensive plan to make criminals’ lives easier.

Not only would the Broomfield City Council ban the possession, sale and transfer of popular self-defense firearms — so-called “assault weapons” — and the magazines that feed them, it would also raise the purchase age on some guns to 21.

The city council wants to require the registration currently-owned guns, ban homemade firearms and firearm kits, require warning signage at gun shops and a ten-day waiting period that starts after a background check approval is received.

But wait, there’s more, as the Sham-Wow guy says.

The city council would also ban carrying a gun – openly or concealed – at parks, government buildings, medical facilities, churches, stadiums, courthouses, banks, theaters, daycare centers, grocery stores.

Here’s the story from Complete Colorado . . .

After nearly three hours of discussion that included a rare allowance for public comment during a work session, the Broomfield City Council advised its legal staff to bring back for first reading a comprehensive list of new gun rights restrictions, despite an acknowledgement they will almost certainly be sued over at least some of the ordinances if passed.

At its recent work session, Broomfield legal council Nancy Rogers and Courtney Thiemann presented six ordinances for council to consider:

    • Ordinance A
      • Part 1 would make it illegal to possess sell or transfer an “assault weapon, large capacity magazine, or rapid-fire trigger activator” it would be a criminal violation punishable by up to $2,650 fine and up to 364 days in jail.
      • Part 2 would raise age of sale of shotguns to 21 — criminal violation.
      • Part 3 would create a grandfather clause for possession of:
        • Any “assault” weapon or large capacity magazine prior to effective date, but the owner would need to register the items with the Broomfield Police Department and follow several other regulations such as storage.
        • Rapid trigger activators would need to be removed from the city limits of Broomfield or surrendered for destruction.
    • Ordinance B
      • A ban on so-called “ghost guns” (unserialized homemade kit guns).
        • First violation of single weapon — fine up to $250
        • First violation of one or more weapons and an intent to sell — up to $2,650 fine and up to 364 days in jail.
        • Second or subsequent violations — up to $2,650 fine and up to 364 days in jail.
    • Ordinance C
      • Require signage for gun dealers: “Warning: Access to a firearm in the home significantly increases the risk of suicide, death during domestic violence disputes, and the unintentional death of children, household members, or others. If you or a loved one is experiencing distress and/or depression, call ….”
        • Criminal violation, first violation results in mandatory warning, second violation and on results in $500 fine.
    • Ordinance D
      • 10 day waiting period, up to $2,650 fine and up to 364 days in jail.
        • Both seller and purchaser can be held liable.
        • 10 days from initiated background check AND dealer has received approval.
    • Ordinance E
      • Open carry prohibition.
        • Any public place where public has access, except where firearms are stored or sold.
          • Criminal violation, first violation is a $500 fine, second violation and on is a $1,000 fine and/or up to 30 days in jail.
    • Ordinance F
      • Open and concealed carry ban.
        • Two groups.
      • Open and concealed.
        • Government buildings, public parks, playgrounds or open space, Broomfield recreation or community centers, within 500 feet of polling places.
      • Open and concealed unless given permission from the operating authority.
        • Other medical facilities, churches, stadiums, courthouses, banks, theaters, daycare centers, grocery stores.
      • Civil offense first offense up to $50 second and more $500, refuse to leave criminal trespass.

The city council is flexing its anti-gun muscles after the state’s preemption law was repealed earlier this year. And they don’t seem to care about the constitutionality of the laws they’re proposing.

It probably won’t surprise you to find out that certain key Broomfield city officials have close ties to national gun control organizations.

Mayor Guyleen Castriotta, Councilwoman Heidi Henkel, and Cori Shaff, wife of Councilman Deven Shaff co-authored a paper with Mom’s Demand Action Northern Region Director Lacey McGinty titled: “Social change starts with you.”

How long do they think these local ordinances, if passed into law, will remain on the books? Are they unaware of what’s happened to similar “assault weapons” bans in other Colorado cities? Perhaps they don’t care since the taxpayers will be the ones to foot the bill when these political hacks lose in court.

These radical utopian local “leaders” need to have their noses rubbed in the humiliation of defeat, rapidly and prominently, before they end up costing residents six or seven figures in legal bills.

Previous Post
Next Post

60 COMMENTS

    • They’ll keep their positions, won’t spent a day in jail, and you’ll keep pointlessly rage typing on Internet comment boards. Oof.

        • “Are you for the Communists, red wolf? If not, you must be terrible at making new friends.”

          Truth telling can be a real downer.

          People calling for prosecution of politicians for voting in disfavored ways always seem to forget where the authority for prosecutions comes from. Yet, when has any party really tried to prosecute a politician for their voting record? (yes, the Jan6 committee wants to charge Trump with crimes, but when was the last, prior attempt to criminally charge a politician for such?)

          So, here’s the truth: posting on social media for “someone” to prosecute politicians for votes delivered is just pointless (although useful for blowing off steam).

          We, here, demand the Dims know the law, and follow “the rule of law”, we often don’t really know what the law is, or how it operates. Pointing out the uselessness of calling for politicians to “pay” for their “crimes” is not the same as endorsing, supporting, or fomenting favor for communists. Such a drawing of equivalence is what Dims are masters of.

        • Kevin was almost certainly “rage typing” and “blowing off steam”. Clearly, no laws by the “neo-leftists” were broken, so Kevin (and to a degree, myself) were “preaching to the quire”. Red Wolf seems more disgruntled at Kevin than the neo-leftists, and at least could have articulated his view, like you have.

      • If you agree with the council you are a leftist fool. If you disagree with the council then you must have a hard time making friends.

    • Each Council member who votes in favor of this ordinance should be immediately sued for PERSONALLY and intentionally violating the civil rights of their constituents.

      ANY politician anywhere in America who proposes, supports and/or votes in favor of any legislation they are warned in advance is in violation of any of the Bill of Rights must be held personally responsible for the violation of those rights.

      I think a nice, fat class-action suit by the residents of Broomfield is in order.

      It’s really rather a shame that the tradition of tar and feathers has fallen out of vogue.

      • That’s true, but some people just gotta piss on the electric fence for themselves. The only cure for them is to dial up the amperage.

  1. ‘These radical utopian local “leaders” need to have their noses rubbed in the humiliation of defeat…”

    Not sure “defeat” is a deterrent. Per Alinsky, double down when “defeated”.

    For Dims, etc., “defeat” energizes; serves as a badge of honor, and proof of the need to be even more bold.

    The only way to actually defeat Dims, etc, is to cause them to be rendered as relevant as the Whig Party.

    • It really happens when people start openly laughing at them. That’s like a sun lit cross soaked in garlic at the end of a wooden stake.

      • “It really happens when people start openly laughing at them. ”

        Yeah, well….

        I laughed at an anti-gunner in Hooters, one night. He/She/It threw an empty beer mug at me. While trying to make my escape, someone stepped on my shootin’ iron hand. Not sure I ever recovered.

  2. The simplest way to beat any new laws is through non-compliance. Police are not going to go out of their way to enforce these things unless they see them when enforcing other laws. These leftist legislators are simply following the NY model which has already been struck down.
    Broomfield residents should go to meeting and let these folks know they have served their last term in office.

    • “Police are not going to go out of their way to enforce these things unless they see them when enforcing other laws.”

      Oh, they have that *covered*.

      From the source article :

      “Thiemann told the board that enforcement of the laws would not be easy, relying on others to report violations.

      “We’re talking about things that are not obvious to the naked eye,” Thiemann said. “These will be complaint based. Somebody in a park might see something and they will call the police to respond.””

      How *literally* fascist of them, report your next-door neighbor to the police.

      I suppose “Snitches get stitches” may apply… 🙂

      Oh, there’s this gem that just dropped by Colion Noir, a DGU that never made the media, for some reason. A guy shot in the head and blinded in one eye stops a mass-shooter from more killing :

  3. Progressive liberals spilling over from California, with zero constitutional law education. Idiots. I’m tempted to move there, and violate every part of their silly law, so that I can get rich when I win at the Supreme Court.

  4. The whole point of these games is to exhaust the bank accounts of the people who sue to overturn. They seem to think that the groups will give up. The other aspect is that folks who are “convicted” will never have the conviction overturned or forgiven. Rights lost forever.

  5. By passing those laws they themselves are in violation of the law and should be held accountable. You see with these Leftist its ok for them to break the law but not for you to ignore a law that is clearly unconstitutional. Founding Fathers said it was the people’s right to throw people like this out of office by whatever means necessary and that could include voting them out but not confined to that method alone.

  6. I wish I had a house up there, I’d walk around with a gun on each hip and shingle my roof with pmags daring them to arrest me.

  7. WHEW , JUST WHEN THOUGH COULDN’T ANY MORE STUPID …
    NO PLAN TO MOVE THERE ,, ONE WAY KEEP PEOPLE FROM MOVING IN
    LOOKING FOR WATER … ???

  8. There should be a rule that says if you have a history of making unconstitutional laws, your law-making authority gets revoked.

  9. How did Colorado get so fucked? Was it all just richie riches from NY and CA using it as a ski vacation that took the beach head and the cancer spread from their?

    • People elected the morons they deserved. First state to legalize recreational weed, the populace was too stoned to care.

    • in 1978/9, I was host at a table for a group of NYC swells who were visiting Colorado. One couple was talking about their ski vacation, and desire to buy property in “summit county” (about 90min from Denver),or Aspen. The main theme of their complaint was that prices were insanely high because of even wealthier people driving prices up.

  10. This is exactly why those in gov’t positions SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS… If these treasonous traitorous rat bastards were to be held accountable – as in pay the legal costs of any lawsuits – this illegal & unconstitutional BS would stop pronto!!!

  11. An aside;

    Hilarious. Just this afternoon I was stopped by the Deputies of my Sheriff’s Department, not that far from Broomfield because I had a bolt gun on my backpack in a rural area.

    Deputy rolls up, turns on the bubbles, jumps out and the first thing she tells me is that what I’m doing isn’t illegal but that they got a call and have to make contact. Never even asked me my name. She and her backup were more interested in my setup than anything else and told me straight out that they’d call up the complainant and tell them there’s no violation of law because Colorado is an open carry state and, basically, to please not call again unless they witness an actual crime.

    Jokes about pearl clutching then flowed like a river to the sea.

    ===

    Back to Broomfield. This is a city testing the limits of Home Rule because Broomfield is a place with Home Rule but not Home Rule in the same regard as Denver has. Denver’s special.

    What does that mean in Colorado?

    Broomfield is a Home Rule city, undeniably true. That gives it special powers to ignore state law for “local issues” but only for local-only issues, which this is not and which the State has openly declared it not to be in advance.

    Colorado states this as of 2020’s “brief” on the topic “Home rule empowers local governments to act and legislate on local matters. In general, home rule ordinances addressing local matters supersede state law. However, in matters of statewide or mixed concern, state laws may take precedence over conflicting home rule ordinances. Without a home rule charter, local governments are strictly subject to the laws of the state.”

    In this case there is a conflict, specifically with the following law:

    Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18. Criminal Code § 18-12-105.6:

    (2)(a) Based on the findings specified in subsection (1) of this section, the general assembly concludes that the carrying of weapons in private automobiles or other private means of conveyance for hunting or for lawful protection of a person’s or another’s person or property while traveling into, through, or within, a municipal, county, or city and county jurisdiction, regardless of the number of times the person stops in a jurisdiction, is a matter of statewide concern and is not an offense.

    Pass, headed off… at.

    Note that C.R.S. § 18-12-105.6 explicitly makes firearms laws statewide and not subject to local ordinance under Home Rule with the single exception of Denver, which gets into the way Denver became a Home Rule city, which gets deeper into the Colorado Constitution than is warranted here but suffice to say that Denver is not Home Rule due to statute or a local vote which governs the adoption of Home Rule but rather due to the Colorado Constitution itself as amended in 1902. That means, in some regards, that Denver as a political entity is a constitutional creation with powers that come from and are equal to the Constitution that governs the rest of the state.

    Which gets back to the Colorado Constitution, Art 2, Sec 13, which states “The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.”

    This *may* not apply to Denver since it’s power comes from the same document and therefore has “equal weight”. Denver allows CC but not OC, which is an inversion of the rest of the State where unlicensed OC is legal.

    Long story short: A lot of local pols ain’t real bright. They have Home Rule so they think they can do as Denver does. This is, simply put, untrue. They lose on statute first, the Colorado Constitution second. This is exacerbated greatly by transplants from California, which increased massively in the past two years.

    And then of course there’s that whole national level Constitution and the 14A incorporation doctrine…

    • Oh, and in case you’re wondering about that preemption repeal thing….

      That was SB-21-256 in 2021. It made alterations to the following parts of the C.R.S., which careful readers (or just those who know the numbers 0-9 reasonably well) will note I didn’t cite above:

      § 29.11.7-101
      § 29.11.7-103
      § 29.11.7-104
      § 18-12-201
      § 18-12-214

      No alteration to C.R.S. § 18-12-105.6 was in that bill as passed/signed. Because Democrats, again, not real bright. Zealous but, but far from smart.

      • Did they manage to pass a less constitutionally sound anti gun law than NY? We at least will make the circuit court with our mess but this sounds like it may get tossed before your state high court.

        • I’d have to look at NY’s constitution again to be able to answer that technically.

          In this case Broomfield has decided to violate, statute, the Colorado Constitution and the 2A. So, that’s a tri-tiered violation. The Idiot’s Trifecta, as it were.

          Is NY even dumber? I wouldn’t put it past that governor of yours.

        • Keeping the dumber title as she is still fighting the courts ruling of Covid camps being a no-go. But I think your trifecta is a level of doomed to fail that even we haven’t gotten to quite yet (haven’t seen the budget post election yet).

      • I said goodbye to Colorado 5 years ago. I do try to stay informed on what happens there, but missed the preemption repeal. Thanks strych9 for keeping us straight on that news.

        Colorado, another beautiful state that the socialist cancer has infected.

        • I fear that Texas and Florida may be next to get bad news from the political oncologist.

          People often have short political memories. Blue-tards from Cali and NY will likely revert to their former habits within a few cycles.

          Then again, we probably don’t make it “a few cycles” in the current environment anyway, so maybe that’s a moot point.

  12. “Ron Popeil popularized the phrase “But wait, there’s more!”.”

    Still have my Pocket Fisherman, but dang if I can find my can of spray-on hair.

  13. Sorry, John, but apparently you missed the fine print at the bottom of the constitution where it says “Void where prohibited by Democrats”

  14. Well thanx, I’ve been trying to remember that gals name. It was Courtney,,,,now I need to forget it, and her.
    I just love the way the Supreme Court upholds(some) of the constitution and these cities give them a big ole FCK You.

    • “I just love the way the Supreme Court upholds(some) of the constitution…”

      In the “Bruen” incident, the SC may be considered as “upholding”, but indirectly. It also appears that there are expectations that the SC established “law” in its decision.

      The nuance seems to be that the SC simply returned the case to the lower courts, for review/re-trial of the basic issues using “Bruen” as guidance, but not using “Bruen” as kryptonite to gun control laws.

      “Bruen” looks like it sets “guidelines” for how cases are to be decided, but there is no method which mandates an outcome at the lower courts. My observation is that the SC must declare, unmistakably that any infringement, of any kind, violates the Second Amendment, and any such laws are null and void, without further judicial review (along with language directing all proceedings under gun control laws must cease and desist, immediately). Any court, or governing entity refusing to comply might be subject to arrest by US Marshals, and criminal trials ensue.

      Short of that, each infringement will be required to be adjudicated up to the SC for GVR, and a new beginning of the revolving system of decision, review, appeal, requests for grants of Cert, repeat decision, GVR; wash, rinse, repeat, ad infinitum.

  15. I hace a feeling that someone had ties with a lawyer that is going to get paid a lot of public money for the failed defense of these blatantly unconstitutional ordinances. But it’s not like it’s the mayor’s or council’s money. The money is their constituents’, so they could squander it freely.

  16. @jwm
    “Second career as a basketball player?”

    Hhhhmmm….nah; too lazy.

    Besides, If someone told me to shoot the ball, the response would likely be a loud “bang”, and public panic.

  17. So they are enacting some laws that are sure to be struck down due to the city being sued.

    They are spending city time and money putting them into effect. They will spend city money defending them against the inevitable lawsuits. They will spend money backing them down.

    So a lot of the citizens of that city will be having their money spent on a publicity stunt.

    Sounds like the voters have a job to do there.

  18. Politicians with laws never stop bad guys with guns.
    They only control the good guys, which is their true agenda.

    The late Col Jeff Cooper commented in 1958, “Killing is a matter of will, not means. You cannot control the intent by passing laws about the means.”

    “One of the notable aspects of the democratic process is that one need not know anything about a subject in order to pass laws about it.” – the late COL Cooper, again.

    And per our nationally beloved simpleton, Forrest Gump….”Stupid is as stupid does.”

    Politicians will continue to do this unconstitutional crap, because We the Little Peeps allow it. I don’t fear these politicians for their treachery as much as I fear the power of Useful Idiot Free-Shit-Addicted Government Plantation Dwellers in masses that put those politicians into office. That’s where America has strayed.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here