Colorado sheriffs sue over new gun restrictions
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Colorado sheriffs sue over new gun restrictions

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sepra Peratus/Arkansas
    Posts
    1,638

    Colorado sheriffs sue over new gun restrictions

    Colorado sheriffs sue over new gun restrictions

    The lawsuit involves sheriffs from 54 of Colorado's 64 counties, most representing rural, gun-friendly areas of the state
    By Ivan Moreno
    Associated Press
    DENVER Colorado sheriffs upset with gun restrictions adopted in the aftermath of last year's mass shootings filed a federal lawsuit Friday, challenging the regulations as unconstitutional.
    The lawsuit involves sheriffs from 54 of Colorado's 64 counties, most representing rural, gun-friendly areas of the state.

    Weld County, Colo., Sheriff John Cooke, left, with El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa, center right, and other sheriffs standing behind him, speaks during a news conference at which he announced that 54 Colorado sheriffs are filing a federal civil lawsuit against two gun control bills passed by the Colorado Legislature. (AP Image)

    The sheriffs say the new state laws violate Second Amendment protections that guarantee the right to keep and bear arms. Opponents are criticizing the lawsuit as political maneuvering.
    The filing targets Colorado laws that limit the size of ammunition magazines and expand background checks. The regulations passed the Legislature this spring and are set to take effect July 1.
    It isn't yet clear whether the sheriffs' challenge will delay or jeopardize the laws. The filing, however, guarantees the renewal of a fierce debate over gun control.
    Colorado lawmakers passed the restrictions in reaction to the shooting rampage at a suburban Denver movie theater last summer, where 12 people were killed and dozens more were wounded, and the massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.
    The gun control debate was one of the most emotionally charged of the legislative session, with lengthy debates and national attention. President Barack Obama added to the attention on the Colorado Statehouse, as his administration unsuccessfully pushed Congress to enact similar gun controls.
    Sheriffs' attorneys are considering whether to ask the court for a preliminary injunction, which would block the Colorado laws while the lawsuit moves forward.
    The law enforcement community is divided on the issue. In contrast to the sheriffs, the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, which includes urban departments, supports the laws. The chiefs said the measures were "common-sense approaches" to protect the public "while not taking guns from law-abiding citizens in any way."
    Unlike sheriffs, police chiefs are not elected.
    Democrats maintain the public is on their side, and say legislators carefully crafted the proposals that were signed.
    "These laws were not constructed haphazardly," said Democratic Sen. Mary Hodge, the sponsor of the magazine limit. "They were constructed to protect us from massacres like the ones we suffered in Aurora and Newtown."
    Relatives of victims of the Colorado shooting criticized the sheriffs for filing the lawsuit and accused them of playing politics.
    "As a parent who lost my son Alex at the Aurora theater shooting, I ask these people to put themselves in my place," Tom Sullivan said in a statement. "I do not understand why these politicians are picking guns over people."
    Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said he and his colleagues were "not the ones playing politics with this."
    "We believe that the Legislature were the ones who were playing politics," he said.
    Gun control opponents say the language in the regulations is unclear and doesn't provide safeguards to prevent people from inadvertently breaking the laws.
    Ammunition magazines, for example, are easily converted to larger sizes, which the bill bans. Gun rights advocates also say the law expanding background checks doesn't provide enough exemptions for temporary transfers and that people conducting private transactions will have a difficult time getting appropriate checks.
    Lawmakers allowed several exemptions in the background check legislation, including transfers between immediate family members, shooting events and temporary transfers of up to 72 hours.
    State officials, including Attorney General John Suthers, have worked to defend the intent of the laws. Suthers, a Republican responsible for defending the law against the legal challenge, issued a statement Friday giving guidance to law enforcement on how the magazine limit should be enforced.
    He said magazine features "must be judged objectively" and that magazines that hold 15 rounds or fewer can't be defined as "large capacity" simply because it can be modified to include more.
    The state has 30 days to respond to the lawsuit.
    Colorado sheriffs sue over new gun restrictions
    ~Responsible people who understand that their personal protection is up to them, provide themselves with protection. Those that don't have only themselves to blame.~Proud NRA ~SAF~GoA Member~

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sepra Peratus/Arkansas
    Posts
    1,638
    Sorry couldn't fix the format of pic and text
    ~Responsible people who understand that their personal protection is up to them, provide themselves with protection. Those that don't have only themselves to blame.~Proud NRA ~SAF~GoA Member~

  4. I hope they will win but either way it's good that the people in Law Enforcement is helping with the fight.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Reno NV
    Posts
    174
    Our state, NV. is in the middle of trying to enact the same kind of restrictive crap. My local County Sheriff is already on record as saying he won't enforce the law if passed.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed​ lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin

  6. #5
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,250
    It really its refreshing to see elected officials who actually take their oath to support and defend the Constitution seriously. I am so angry at those who violate their oaths to the governing document that gave us the greatest country the world has ever known. In spite of its flaws, a result evil and disingenuous politicians, we have the most liberty that any people have ever known throughout all of human history.

    Go to any American military cemetery, either here or in Europe, and you'll quickly learn the great cost of our liberty. To think that that liberty is in danger because of the lying pieces of crap, that have been placed in office by those who have contributed nothing to this country, is extremely disturbing. Finally there are a few elected officials who willing to stand for liberty.

  7. #6
    Well said Mr. Buckeye
    If it doesn't fit, FORCE it! If it breaks then it needed to be replaced anyway.


  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    What amazes me is that in face of overwhelming negative reactions from Colorado voters the state dems still insist that this is what the people want and that they have our full support.

    I pray to God that Colorado's voters are still this pissed off in 2014
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sepra Peratus/Arkansas
    Posts
    1,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    What amazes me is that in face of overwhelming negative reactions from Colorado voters the state dems still insist that this is what the people want and that they have our full support.

    I pray to God that Colorado's voters are still this pissed off in 2014
    Right Treo, I agree and hope the people rise up and place both feet violently square on their backsides on the way out the State Capitol door!
    ~Responsible people who understand that their personal protection is up to them, provide themselves with protection. Those that don't have only themselves to blame.~Proud NRA ~SAF~GoA Member~

  10. This was filed a while back. The sole defendant is Hickenlooper which is odd. Not the AG just the Gov. There's already 4 recalls going too. Gov. "Gun manufacturers sell death" Dan Malloy (and all of his States Attorneys) out in CT have been sued too over that "An Act Concerning...*vomit*" by a bunch of disabled and elderly people all permit holders too (retired SEAL with MS, elderly widower who lives alone, elderly widower who lives with his son's family, cancer survivor who lost an arm because of cancer, a guy who had a stroke, to name a few) along with a few FFLs and associations. About 6 counts in the complaint.

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast