LF: ‘I Cannot Comply’: A Second Amendment Advocate’s Fight Against the City of Boulder, Colorado

Title: ‘I Cannot Comply’: A Second Amendment Advocate’s Fight Against the City of Boulder, Colorado
Source: Blacklisted News/The Daily Signal
URL Source: https://www.blacklistednews.com/art ... ainst-the-city-of-boulder.html
Published: Jan 7, 2019
Author: Bethany Blankley
Post Date: 2019-01-14 09:13:41 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1951
Comments: 12

A Second Amendment advocate fighting against a constitutionally questionable gun ban and certification ordinance in the city of Boulder, Colorado, says he and his daughter have been targeted and bullied as his case winds through the court system.

The city last May passed an ordinance requiring gun owners to “certify” their “assault weapons” or remove their firearms from city limits. Those who didn’t could face fines, jail, and confiscation and destruction of their firearms.

The next day, attorneys from the conservative Mountain States Legal Foundation sued the city on behalf of Jon Caldara, Boulder resident and president of the Independence Institute; the Boulder Rifle Club Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation; a member of the University of Colorado Shooting Team; and others.

The foundation argues that the ordinance violates multiple provisions of the U.S. Constitution and the state constitution, and at least two state statutes.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

The foundation asks two key legal questions regarding whether a municipality “can undermine the exercise of fundamental and unalienable rights and ignore the U.S. Constitution and controlling Supreme Court precedent?”

Additionally, it questions if the city can legally “ignore its state constitution and state law by infringing upon and criminalizing an individual’s unalienable and natural right to self-defense, and the right to keep and bear arms?”

City Ordinance 8245 banned the sale and possession of guns in the city defined as assault weapons in addition to bump stock devices and large magazines, and banned the sale and possession of weapons to anyone under age 21. Gun owners of such magazines had until July 15, 2018, to either sell or dispose of these items.

The ordinance includes a grandfather clause that permits owners of these firearms to keep them in their possession if they receive a certificate from the local sheriff’s office proving their ownership and certifying their firearms. The law also bans them from openly carrying their rifles and shotguns.

“My hope is that we will see more bans at the state level and one day at the federal level so these weapons will no longer be available,” City Councilman Aaron Brockett said after the ordinance passed.

But Dudley Brown, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, told Watchdog.org, “The Boulder gun control ordinance is yet another dive into fantasy by a city already deep into socialism.”

Two groups not a part of the lawsuit, the Colorado State Shooting Association and Boulder-based Gunsport of Colorado, say the ordinance is invalid because it conflicts with state law.

Police and city officials have said that there is little they can do to enforce the ordinance. The Boulder Police Department has issued 87 certificates since the ban passed in May.

Plaintiff Jon Caldara does not have one.

“I did not comply. By my very core principles I cannot comply,” he told Watchdog.org.

Caldara added that no city or law enforcement authorities have contacted him, but his daughter has been bullied at her school because of his position.

“This is a very divisive issue where people have very strong feelings,” City Attorney Tom Carr told the Daily Camera. “The folks who oppose these kinds of bans … some of them suggest they’re not going to cooperate. I can’t predict what people are going to do, but I respect the feelings.”

In an op-ed Caldara wrote that was published in numerous Colorado publications, he argued that any other member of the public who is not a gun owner would never be subjected to such restrictions. He said they “would never be forced to self-identify to government authorities, to submit to inspection, to be registered, and made to pay fees to keep your core beliefs. My strong belief in my Second Amendment rights is core to who I am.”

Because he owns a long gun with a pistol grip and a detachable magazine, Caldara said he was required to self-identify to the police, present himself for investigation and his gun for inspection, and pay fees in order to receive a police-issued certification—or potentially go to jail, pay a fine, and have his firearms confiscated and destroyed.

But Caldara has not been charged with committing a crime.

Since he took his public stand against the city of Boulder, Caldara says his daughter has been bullied at her school, “the one with posters celebrating tolerance and diversity all over the walls.”

Teachers have criticized his stand on the Second Amendment to entire classes, and students “ganged up on” his daughter, telling her that “her father is a murderer.”

In September, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado deferred to the Colorado court system to determine whether the city had the authority to enact the ordinance at all.

“While we will always support the principle of federalism, this decision forces the people of Boulder to wait to vindicate their rights under the U.S. Constitution,” Cody J. Wisniewski, the lead attorney on the case, said. “We will not give up the fight to defend the constitutionally protected rights of the people of Boulder.”

Originally published on Watchdog.org

The city did no such thing. They said if you choose to defend yourself with a specific class of weapon, that weapon must be "certified".

I say the citizens of Boulder have the right to decide how they want to live. I'm certainly not going to tell them what to do.

You will support and encourage the Jack Booted Thugs when they use their certification list, to attempt to violate the God given rights of Americans, and steal their arms under color of law.

I’m 100% against registering or “certifying” weapons with government... however, I registered well over 50 different handguns in the State of New York, between 1986 and 2014. Big daddy gov never “confiscated” or seized, stole or even asked me about one of them. They didn’t even try and Orwellian stop me from removing all my guns from that over taxed, over regulated artic fucking Hell hole in 2014.

So,you are fine with the way the people of Cambodia lived under Pol Pot,Cubans lived under Castro,people lived under Stalin,and people lived under Hitler,because that was the way they wanted to live?

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

Just out of curiosity,how much did you have to pay in taxes for them? Not to buy,but to "be allowed" to keep them?

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

Each county was responsible for issuing the “pistol permits”. They varied slightly. It was around a hundred bucks to get the permit (50.00) was for the cost of the fingerprints. After that, no expiration on the permit or yearly fee. They did charge 3.00 bucks to add or 3.00 to remove weapons from your permit. The pistol permit clerk would issue a coupon after you pay 3 bucks that was transferred to the gun retailer. When I left the state, the going price for a permit was around 150.00.

The biggest pain in the ass about NY permits was the wait time to get a pistol permit application approved. In 1986 mine took like 5 months. When I left NY in 2014, it took 12 to 18 months for the background check.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.