April 4th, 2007 09:49 PM
OK, why I'm pissed at the attitude of some LEOs right now...
Had a bit of consternation when I went into the HQ of the Colorado State Patrol recently.
They had an "unauthorised weapons prohibited" sign up, citing CRS 18-9-117. The statute regarding CCW and the carrying of firearms on public property is 18-12-214, which states:
In short, you can carry in any public building save a courthouse, a school which is a highschool or less, a building which has security personnel and equipment permanently in place, or a building prohibited by Federal law. The CSP HQ is and has none of the above.
(1) (a) A permit to carry a concealed handgun authorizes the permittee to carry a concealed handgun in all areas of the state, except as specifically limited in this section. a permit does not authorize the permittee to use a handgun in a manner that would violate a provision of state law. a local government does not have authority to adopt or enforce an ordinance or resolution that would conflict with any provision of this part 2.
(b) A peace officer may temporarily disarm a permittee, incident to a lawful stop of the permittee. the peace officer shall return the handgun to the permittee prior to discharging the permittee from the scene.
(2) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into a place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law. page 18-senate bill 03-024
(3) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun onto the real property, or into any improvements erected thereon, of a public elementary, middle, junior high, or high school; except that:
(a) A permittee may have a handgun on the real property of the public school so long as the handgun remains in his or her vehicle and, if the permittee is not in the vehicle, the handgun is in a compartment within the vehicle and the vehicle is locked.
(b) A permittee who is employed or retained by contract by a school district as a school security officer may carry a concealed handgun onto the real property, or into any improvement erected thereon, of a public elementary, middle, junior high, or high school while the permittee is on duty.
(c) A permittee may carry a concealed handgun on undeveloped real property owned by a school district that is used for hunting or other shooting sports.
(4) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into a public building at which:
(a) Security personnel and electronic weapons screening devices are permanently in place at each entrance to the building;
(b) Security personnel electronically screen each person who enters the building to determine whether the person is carrying a weapon of any kind; and (c) Security personnel require each person who is carrying a weapon of any kind to leave the weapon in possession of security personnel while the person is in the building.
(5) nothing in this part 2 shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, private tenant, private employer, or private business entity.
(6) the provisions of this section apply to temporary emergency permits issued pursuant to section 18-12-209.
CRS 18-9-117 states:
This law states specifically what is covered by the law... and firearms are not included. So, why is the Colorado State Patrol ignoring black-letter law and attempting to bully the public into setting aside their legal rights by citing a law which clearly and plainly does not prohibit what they are claiming it does?
(1) It is unlawful for any person to enter or remain in any public building or on any public property or to conduct himself or herself in or on the same in violation of any order, rule, or regulation concerning any matter prescribed in this subsection (1), limiting or prohibiting the use or activities or conduct in such public building or on such public property, issued by any officer or agency having the power of control, management, or supervision of the building or property. In addition to any authority granted by any other law, each such officer or agency may adopt such orders, rules, or regulations as are reasonably necessary for the administration, protection, and maintenance of such public buildings and property, specifically, orders, rules, and regulations upon the following matters:
(a) Preservation of property, vegetation, wildlife, signs, markers, statues, buildings and grounds, and other structures, and any object of scientific, historical, or scenic interest;
(b) Restriction or limitation of the use of such public buildings or property as to time, manner, or permitted activities;
(c) Prohibition of activities or conduct within public buildings or on public property which may be reasonably expected to substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of such places by others or which may constitute a general nuisance or which may interfere with, impair, or disrupt a funeral or funeral procession;
(d) Necessary sanitation, health, and safety measures, consistent with section 25-13-113, C.R.S.;
(e) Camping and picnicking, public meetings and assemblages, and other individual or group usages, including the place, time, and manner in which such activities may be permitted;
(f) Use of all vehicles as to place, time, and manner of use;
(g) Control and limitation of fires, including but not limited to the prohibition, restriction, or ban on fires or other regulation of fires to avert the start of or lessen the likelihood of wildfire, and the designation of places where fires are permitted, restricted, prohibited, or banned.
(2) No conviction may be obtained under this section unless notice of such limitations or prohibitions is prominently posted at all public entrances to such building or property or unless such notice is actually first given the person by the officer or agency, including any agent thereof, or by any law enforcement officer having jurisdiction or authority to enforce this section.
(3) (a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this subsection (3), any person who violates subsection (1) of this section is guilty of a class 3 misdemeanor.
(b) Any person who violates any order, rule, or regulation adopted pursuant to paragraph (g) of subsection (1) of this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor and shall be assessed a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars and not greater than one thousand dollars. The fine imposed by this paragraph (b) shall be mandatory and not subject to suspension. Nothing in this paragraph (b) shall be construed to limit the court's discretion in exercising other available sentencing alternatives in addition to the mandatory fine.
(c) Any person who violates any order, rule, or regulation adopted pursuant to paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of this section concerning funerals or funeral processions is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.
I can understand a law enforcement agency being uncomfortable with teh general public carrying firearms into their building, but the law is the law. There are legal ways to prohibit the carrying of firearms into their building if they want to do that... why are they attempting to do so in an apparently blatantly illegal way?
Before anyone mentions it, CRS 25-13-113 referenced above deals with construction projects on public recreation areas.
"I am a Soldier. I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight." GEN George S. Patton, Jr.
April 4th, 2007 10:06 PM
The sign says "unauthorized weapons prohibited," right? So what's the problem? Your CCW specifically authorizes you to carry in that building. Your weapon is not "unauthorized."
Of course, don't ask me to volunteer to be the test case!
April 4th, 2007 10:07 PM
Are you sure they were trying to keep you from carrying? From what you said the sign said and the laws you quoted, you are authorized to carry, therefore the sign does not apply. Seeing as how it only prohibits UNauthorized weapons.
Was there some incident that followed this that makes you think otherwise?
April 4th, 2007 10:36 PM
If they were trying to prohibit unlicensed carriers, why wouldn't they cite the CCW law instead of an obscure public lands regulation?
I contacted the RMGO about this. I was told that many govt organizations and agencies try to intimidate the public by posting "no firearms" types signs even tho internal memos admit that they have no authority. The Denver Zoo was given as an example.
"I am a Soldier. I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight." GEN George S. Patton, Jr.
April 4th, 2007 10:44 PM
It sounds like you didn't fully understand the sign. In a case like this I would ask someone in charge if the ccw was an authorized weapon. It sure wouldn't hurt to ask.
April 4th, 2007 10:55 PM
Yes, send the Chief a letter asking him under what authority do they exactly use to justify this and quote what you said here. C.C. the letter to your Congressman, State Governer , etc and ask for a response to you question. Be exact in you wording so he has no wiggle room forcing him to admit to no law or lie.
April 4th, 2007 11:05 PM
Admin will try all kinds of tactics. we had the DNR try to ban CCW in state parks. Luckily a AG decision clarified that the DNR has no athority to make such regulations. As others suggested, take it to the law makers.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset
April 4th, 2007 11:07 PM
As seems to be the usual case, it appears it is most likely the Chief or other head LEO, not the line LEO that has said intentions.
The only thing that stops bad guys with guns is good guys with guns. SgtD
April 4th, 2007 11:10 PM
My take on it is, if the sign dose not state no firearms. In either words or picture. And all other regulations are meet, then you should be ok.
If you don't protect your self, who will?
By Trav in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: February 18th, 2011, 12:14 PM
By Miggy in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: July 30th, 2007, 02:35 PM
Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors