Posted on 01/07/2019 1:35:10 PM PST by DOC44
By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Thursday, January 3, 2019 BOULDER, Colorado — Boulder’s newly enacted “assault weapons” ban is meeting with stiff resistance from its “gun-toting hippies,” staunch liberals who also happen to be devoted firearms owners. Only 342 “assault weapons,” or semiautomatic rifles, were certified by Boulder police before the Dec. 31 deadline, meaning there could be thousands of residents in the scenic university town of 107,000 in violation of the sweeping gun-control ordinance. “I would say the majority of people I’ve talked to just aren’t complying because most people see this as a registry,” said Lesley Hollywood, executive director of the Colorado Second Amendment group Rally for Our Rights. “Boulder actually has a very strong firearms community.”
The ordinance, approved by the city council unanimously, banned the possession and sale of “assault weapons,” defined as semiautomatic rifles with a pistol grip, folding stock, or ability to accept a detachable magazine. Semiautomatic pistols and shotguns are also included. Current owners were given until the end of the year to choose one of two options: Get rid of their semiautomatics by moving them out of town, disabling them, or turning them over to police — or apply for a certificate with the Boulder Police Department, a process that includes a firearm inspection, background check and $20 fee.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Staunch liberals? Nope.
Libertarians. (Not much of a difference, but still....)
i am ready.
i will not comply.
Some police departments have publicly stated they WILL NOT be enforcing laws like this.
I have to give their leadership credit for that.
While I do believe LEOs should enforce the laws on the books, if those laws are not compliant with our Constitution, all bets are off.
Let this be a lesson to the legislative bodies of the nation.
Comply with our Constitution, or become a rogue legislative body nobody will respect.
Obviously, from this story, there are very significant differences.
“assault weapons ban”
More leftist scam language. Everything is an “assault weapon”. What they are really saying is this is a ban on a constitutional right.
Pretty sure it is completely unconstitutional just because it is “Ex Post Facto” alone. All laws are absolutely forbidden by the Constitution to be retroactive in any form or fashion.
Ca started this unconstitutional retroactive stuff and it needs to be pointed out and addressed in mass or they will all be doing it soon. An very strong example against these needs to be made before it gets any worse.
I have my doubts that a police department could do those two things for $20.
If a few thousand Boulder residents applied for a certificated they might cause their police department so financial headaches.
They would probably end up with backlog of thousands of applications and a waiting list that would stretch on for years.
Very true.
But it is one of many constitutional prohibitions that are routinely ignored.
Why are these prohibitions ignored? Because a ignorant and lazy citizenry do nothing about it. They usually don’t even make a protest, phone call or write a letter to the editor.
If you ignore your rights don’t complain if you lose them.
Civil disobedience if necessary. We must all be willing to do what it takes to protect our Right to bear arms
Molon Lave baby. Tell them to go pound sand
I absolutely agree... But I am going to attribute much of it to lack of education and the deception that it is within their legal powers. Along with the indoctrinated who agree with these laws Constitutional or not. All these need to be strongly challenged. The rest will adjust out of financial concern.
The one that would set a great example would be the requirement that all “preexisting” Diesel Engines in Ca and coming into Ca had to be retrofitted for emissions control. They should have to pay back EVERY DIME this whole nation had to shell out to comply with that one.
It was Ex Post Facto and absolutely unconstitutional. They could indeed require it on all new models coming out, but never on preexisting models. Because they got away with this one, they just started to ignore this pesky detail with everything to follow.
My kind of Hippies.
i am ready.
i will not comply.
I don’t even bother to check how long I haven’t complied with New York’s stupidity.
France has their yellow shirts to tell their government to FO, seems appropriate for supporters of the 2nd Ammendment in Boulder to wear blaze orange shirts or other item. Definitely let’s people know where you stand on the issue w/o making any old or new snowflakes feel threatened by an open carry.
We often blame ‘the government’ as tho its an innattiment object. What people fail to see is ‘the government’ is comprised of people who think they are entitled to tell you how you should live based on their beliefs. My reply has always been: ‘You don’t look or sound like my mother so shut the phu-cup’.
Hippies? If there’s truth beyond the speculation, they’re probably prohibited because of the lack of reliable competence that goes with drugs.
Boulder is a town if far left liberals. I have heard it described as 5 square miles surrounded by reality.
When Justice Kavanaugh was a U.S. appeals court judge, he wrote an opinion against a municipal assault weapons ban. He and Thomas are the only originalists on the Supreme Court that I know of, so we need at least three more like Kavanaugh.
Colorado is Legalizing
“Magic Mushrooms”,,,,
Yeah, I’m Ready!
Consider that the possible intent of this ordinance is not to register guns, but to create situations of violent conflict between armed citizens and the police that will be used as a pretext to push even more radical gun control if not outright confiscation. For example, a phony tip is given to police by an anonymous source that citizen X is preparing to do mass killings. Citizen X owns guns legally, but chose not to comply with the registration and is a law abiding citizen with no history of mental illness or propensity to violence. Based on the phony tip a SWAT team storms citizen X’s home in the middle of the night and citizen X defends his home from what he sees as unknown armed invaders. In the melee several LEOs are killed possibly by friendly fire and citizen X is also killed. The media will brand citizen X a violent gun nut, will publish faked photos of a huge arsenal and demand that dangerous “ gun nuts” like citizen X be disarmed. Citizen X is dead and cannot provide any defense or rebuttal. The radicals make this a lightening rod for gun confiscation and push for tough new gun laws to make society safe. Note Hitler used this same technique with a fire at the Reichstag set by his own henchmen as a reason to ban all weapons in civilian hands for public safety.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.