How NOT to bring a gun into a theater

BearMtnHIB wrote:

RCCL wrote: So very odd how much violence is directly attributed to the vessel which delivers it.

As a counterpoint... and not that it would ever happen, but what if it had been Betty White who walked into a theater with a gun strapped to her waist, open-carry style? Would anyone have called the police?

Guns have a lot of power, which is why I agree with earlier posters. You may have every right in the world to open carry (in places that are not limited), but you will be harassed and you will be labeled as a threat, and I'm amazed by anyone who doesn't understand that.

Well I happen to dis-agree with all the people out there who think this is stupid- we should be allowed to open carry. In Jeffco it's legal. I do it all the time and I don't get harassed. It's only those hysterical idiots who do not understand the law that make a big deal about it.

Go back to New Jersey.

Don't get me wrong, I started out my post by saying how silly it is to blame the vessel of violence for the violence itself, and on top of that, never did I say that it was stupid to open carry, I just have a realistic idea of what to expect when I fill my holster.

http://library.municode.com/HTML/15041/ ... l#TOPTITLE


Colorado state law is also quite clear on the topic of the open carrying of firearms. Unless a city specifically bans it, which Thornton has not, or the business posts a sign prohibiting it, it is allowed.

All of this leads me to believe that Mapes was entirely lawful in his actions, albeit not too smart. By arresting him, the City of Thornton may very well have set themselves up for a civil rights lawsuit
like this
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/27 ... etail.html

BearMtnHIB wrote: All they can do is ask him to leave. This guy probably did not even see the posting.

If he refuses to leave- they can charge him with trespassing, which they did not do- they charged him with this thornton law- which they had no authority to do- according to CRS 18-12-214 (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."

Better stick with your day job because you clearly do not understand the law

18-12-214 (5)
(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.

18-12-105(c)
(c) A person who, at the time of carrying a concealed weapon, held a valid written permit to carry a concealed weapon issued pursuant to section 18-12-105.1, as it existed prior to its repeal, or, if the weapon involved was a handgun, held a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214;

In 2006, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that state laws that expressly preempted firearms regulation unconsitutionally infringed on home rule authority with respect to ordinance that address the open carrying of firearms and banning assault weapons and Saturday night specials. State v. City and County of Denver, 139 P.3d 635 (Colo. 2006).



Thus, you are quite wrong on numerous accounts. First, home rule cities may enact their own ordinances regarding open carrying of firearms regardless of the state law. Thus the Thornton ordinance is valid and constitutional. Second, even under state law, carrying a concealed weapon into a private business that has posted a ban on weapons on premises violates state law and is punishable as a class 2 misdemeanor up to a year in jail and/or up to $1000 fine (plus forfeiture of the weapon). Further, a CCW permit only applies to concealed weapons as noted in the law. So this guy was clearly and unequivocally guilty of breaking the Thornton code if he open carried and guilty of state law if he carried concealed.

That he is only guilty of trespassing is just nonsense.

Just for that reason- more of us should open carry. It's become such that people just freak out when they see a gun. If more of us would practice our right to carry- maybe more would become educated about it.

We- in our efforts to show contemporary congeniality, put our guns away years ago- but there was a time not long ago when it was common place. When I moved to Evergreen in the 70's, most everyone I knew had a gun in the car.

Maybe it's time to bring um back out.

Martin Ent Inc wrote: library.municode.com/HTML/15041/level4/C...DIV2WE.html#TOPTITLE


Colorado state law is also quite clear on the topic of the open carrying of firearms. Unless a city specifically bans it, which Thornton has not, or the business posts a sign prohibiting it, it is allowed.

All of this leads me to believe that Mapes was entirely lawful in his actions, albeit not too smart. By arresting him, the City of Thornton may very well have set themselves up for a civil rights lawsuit
like this
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/27 ... etail.html

Thornton bans open carrying of dangerous weapons which includes handguns 38-237 is quite specific about it.

Sec. 38-241. - Prohibition on the open carrying of firearms.

The City of Thornton hereby prohibits the open carrying of a firearm, as defined in Section 38-237 of the Code, in any city building or in or upon any city property including but not limited to parks, open spaces or trails that exist within the City of Thornton and that have a sign posted at the entrance to any city building or city property informing persons that the open carrying of firearms is prohibited in such building or area.

I know this...I know that if I see some Dirty-Harry open-carry type swaggering around with it in a restaurant or any other place of business, I make it a point to find the manager and tell him I will not be shopping or doing business with him in the future until he posts a "DO NOT CARRY" sign--and plans to enforce it.

I don't care if it's legal; I don't give a sh*t about your 2nd Amendment rights; I will let the business know that it just cost them a customer. (Somehow, I think there are more of ME than there are of YOU...)

Democracy4Sale wrote: I know this...I know that if I see some Dirty-Harry open-carry type swaggering around with it in restaurant or any other place of business, I make it a point to find the manager and tell him I will not be shopping or doing business with him in the future until he posts a "DO NOT CARRY" sign--and plans to enforce it.

I don't care if it's legal; I don't give a sh*t about your 2nd Amendment rights; I will let the business know that it just cost them a customer. (Somehow, I think there are more of ME than there are of YOU...)

The positive side of that post is that you guys will never end up having lunch together! I call it a win-win!

Another Brilliant post that weighs so much in to the discussion. :Snooze

RCCL wrote:

Democracy4Sale wrote: I know this...I know that if I see some Dirty-Harry open-carry type swaggering around with it in restaurant or any other place of business, I make it a point to find the manager and tell him I will not be shopping or doing business with him in the future until he posts a "DO NOT CARRY" sign--and plans to enforce it.

I don't care if it's legal; I don't give a sh*t about your 2nd Amendment rights; I will let the business know that it just cost them a customer. (Somehow, I think there are more of ME than there are of YOU...)

The positive side of that post is that you guys will never end up having lunch together! I call it a win-win!

rofllol

You got that right!