Swordsmyth
01-07-2019, 06:45 PM
The day after Boulder enacted its anti-gun law in May banning “assault” rifles, large-capacity magazines and “bump stocks,” Jon Caldera joined with the Boulder (Colorado) Rifle Club, a member of the University of Colorado Shooting Team, and others to file suit against it (https://www.scribd.com/document/379897809/Jon-Caldara-et-al-v-City-of-Boulder-et-al).
The suit claimed the law violated numerous federal, state, and local laws, and for that Caldera and his school-age daughter are taking heat. Caldera said his daughter has been bullied at her school, “[You know,] the one with posters celebrating tolerance and diversity all over its walls.” Both teachers and students have “ganged up on her,” telling her that “her father is a murderer.”
Added Caldera:
I have a fifteen-year old daughter who’s already been bullied about this at school. She’s been yelled at; she’s been called a murderer.
My son has Down syndrome so he doesn’t understand this, but my daughter doesn’t want me to go to jail.
I’m concerned about the people I love being taunted because we’re a political minority.
The suit’s language was clear as well as combative:
On May 15, 2018, the Boulder City Council voted 9–0 to approve Ordinance 8245, banning some of the most popular firearms and magazines in use by law-abiding citizens across the United States. In addition, Ordinance 8245 raised the age for legal firearm purchase and possession from eighteen to twenty-one years of age. Upon passage, Ordinance 8245 immediately became law in the City of Boulder, thereby infringing upon the rights of all of Boulder’s 108,707 residents.
Ordinance 8245 and the actions of Defendants violate multiple provisions of the U.S. Constitution, including Article VI, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment.
Ordinance 8245 and the actions of Defendants violate multiple provisions of the Colorado State Constitution, including Article 2, section 3 and Article 2, section 13.
Ordinance 8245 and the actions of Defendants violate multiple Colorado State Statutes, including C.R.S. §§ 29-11.7-102 and 29-11.7-103.
The suit went on to say that the plaintiffs were going to continue exercising their rights while the matter is being adjudicated:
Plaintiffs intend and desire to continue to acquire, possess, use, sell, and/or transfer the lawfully-owned, constitutionally-protected firearms and magazines that are banned by Ordinance 8245, but justifiably fear punishment if they do.
As The New American pointed out last month in its coverage of the matter, the law is unenforceable:
If national averages of gun ownership are applied to the citizens of Boulder, then there are one or more firearms per citizen, most of them owned before the ban. Roughly speaking, that means there are approximately 150,000 firearms that need to be “certified” [under the law’s grandfather clause] by December 27.
As of December 1, the Boulder Police Department had certified 85 of them.
As of January 3, that number has jumped to 87.
More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/31115-left-ramps-up-attacks-on-lead-plaintiff-in-lawsuit-against-boulder-gun-law
The suit claimed the law violated numerous federal, state, and local laws, and for that Caldera and his school-age daughter are taking heat. Caldera said his daughter has been bullied at her school, “[You know,] the one with posters celebrating tolerance and diversity all over its walls.” Both teachers and students have “ganged up on her,” telling her that “her father is a murderer.”
Added Caldera:
I have a fifteen-year old daughter who’s already been bullied about this at school. She’s been yelled at; she’s been called a murderer.
My son has Down syndrome so he doesn’t understand this, but my daughter doesn’t want me to go to jail.
I’m concerned about the people I love being taunted because we’re a political minority.
The suit’s language was clear as well as combative:
On May 15, 2018, the Boulder City Council voted 9–0 to approve Ordinance 8245, banning some of the most popular firearms and magazines in use by law-abiding citizens across the United States. In addition, Ordinance 8245 raised the age for legal firearm purchase and possession from eighteen to twenty-one years of age. Upon passage, Ordinance 8245 immediately became law in the City of Boulder, thereby infringing upon the rights of all of Boulder’s 108,707 residents.
Ordinance 8245 and the actions of Defendants violate multiple provisions of the U.S. Constitution, including Article VI, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment.
Ordinance 8245 and the actions of Defendants violate multiple provisions of the Colorado State Constitution, including Article 2, section 3 and Article 2, section 13.
Ordinance 8245 and the actions of Defendants violate multiple Colorado State Statutes, including C.R.S. §§ 29-11.7-102 and 29-11.7-103.
The suit went on to say that the plaintiffs were going to continue exercising their rights while the matter is being adjudicated:
Plaintiffs intend and desire to continue to acquire, possess, use, sell, and/or transfer the lawfully-owned, constitutionally-protected firearms and magazines that are banned by Ordinance 8245, but justifiably fear punishment if they do.
As The New American pointed out last month in its coverage of the matter, the law is unenforceable:
If national averages of gun ownership are applied to the citizens of Boulder, then there are one or more firearms per citizen, most of them owned before the ban. Roughly speaking, that means there are approximately 150,000 firearms that need to be “certified” [under the law’s grandfather clause] by December 27.
As of December 1, the Boulder Police Department had certified 85 of them.
As of January 3, that number has jumped to 87.
More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/31115-left-ramps-up-attacks-on-lead-plaintiff-in-lawsuit-against-boulder-gun-law