NRA Backs Challenge to Boulder Gun Ban

Seeks to Restore Gun Rights to Law-Abiding Citizens

Lawsuit
NRA Backs Challenge to Boulder Gun Ban

Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) recently announced support for a lawsuit challenging Boulder's ban on commonly owned firearms, so-called “high capacity” magazines, as well as its ban on adults under the age of 21 from purchasing any firearms.

“Prohibiting law-abiding 18-20-year-old adults from purchasing firearms and banning some of the most commonly used self-defense firearms in America will do nothing to improve public safety,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA. “Gun control only makes it harder for law-abiding citizens to protect and defend themselves. The NRA will do all we can to restore the Second Amendment rights of Boulder's law-abiding citizens.”

The Boulder City Council voted unanimously last month to ban the sale and possession of commonly owned semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines. The Council also voted to ban all firearm purchases for young adults under age 21.

The Colorado State Shooting Association (CSSA) filed suit today in the Boulder County District Court in Colorado.

“We will not stand by and allow the misguided gun control extremists on the city council to strip us of our rights, ” said CSSA executive director Anthony Fabian.  “We are grateful for the NRA‘s support of our lawsuit and look forward to restoring the rights of Boulder's law-abiding citizens.”

Lawsuit Challenging Boulder, CO Ban On Commonly Owned Firearms


National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

  • 8 thoughts on “NRA Backs Challenge to Boulder Gun Ban

    1. Restricting the rights of law abiding citizens, is the same as castrating yourself because your neighbor has too many children.

    2. You are all completely wrong when you use logic to see that these laws will do nothing.
      Gun control is about control of the citizens, it has nothing to do with crime, terrorism or any other of the reasons given for the gun control.
      They can’t repeal the second amendment in the U S, And they can’t get complete gun prohibition yet in Canada, so they go through all these incremental “commonsense“ gun laws.
      Each magazine ban, assault weapons ban, prohibiting open carry, etc. is all there only to chip away at the ownership of guns.
      The endgame is to stop the citizens from having any guns .
      they do not care about the criminals at all

    3. To restrict the rights of the innocent because of the crimes of the guilty is the classic definition of a tyrant .

    4. In America, there are OVER 21,000 “gun-control” laws on the law books.
      YET,
      who get punished when a THUG, as the Constitution says – is “WANTON”, uses a weapon to harm others?
      The LEGAL LAW ABIDING American CITIZEN is PUNISHED.
      How?
      The DemocRATic COMMUNIST/MUSLEM/NWO/’g.soros’ CABAL organizations want another SECOND AMENDMENT INFRINGEMENT “non-law” / NULLIFIABLE law is passed under the color of law.
      F Y I:
      THUGS, CRIMINALS and THUGS do NOT obey laws. This is why they are called CRIMINALS and often worm their way out of serving a PRISON term.
      It is time to HOLD the “BLEEDING HEART” Judges responsible, as an accomplice, for the actions of those they TURN LOOSE into the COMMUNITY of LAW ABIDING PEOPLE.

      1. @Laddyboy…That is an outstanding suggestion ! Lets add Parole Boards who become accomplices when some one paroled commits their next crime especially murder !

    5. There was photograph in the news earlier on this year of NY governor Andrew Cuomo at a children’s crusade pro-gun control rally. Governor Cuomo had at least three armed bodyguards with him.

      QUESTION: What is wrong with this picture?

      Three years ago in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, where I live, there were two shootings involving hand guns. By golly, there ought to be a law.

      NEWS FLASH: Canada has had a virtual ban on hand guns since 1934. In addition, there is a city of Hamilton by-law which prohibits the carrying of a firearm in a public place. Another city of Hamilton by-law prohibits the discharging of a firearm in a public place.

      QUESTION: What additional gun-control laws are needed here?

      Finally, early last year a Toronto woman was raped and robbed at gunpoint. (Read, every woman’s worse nightmare come to life) Police very quickly arrested a charged a suspect and the matter is before the courts.

      In addition to the original rape and robbery charges, the suspect has a whole list of gun charges the length of my arm against him. This includes violating a previous court order to not possess a firearm.

      I, and others, agree that when the matter finally goes to court, the gun charges will be plea bargained away and the man will serve a ridiculously short prison sentence. When he is let out, it is a certainly that the man will be in the news again.

      QUESTION #1: Why am I completely wrong with regards to the above?

      QUESTION#2: What additional gun-control legislation does Canada need?

      1. By golly I do believe you’ve summed up not only the situation but the Liberal mindset behind it very nicely. Mr. Trudeau may yet have competition when the next election comes around! 🙂

      2. Mark M. Tyrrell, our anti-rights politicians in the USA would tell you that mag limits, registration, licensing, liability insurance, and x number of hours of firearm training, “universal” background checks, and a safe for your firearms would have prevented it.

        When those “gun control” methods don’t work, I’m sure they will think of other means to further restrict the rights of the law-abiding citizens.

        If licensing, registration and background checks were so effective, why don’t they propose those for illegal drugs? It has got to work just as effectively as it would on firearms, then we also wouldn’t have all the issues we do regarding illegal drug use. Utopia will then be created and we can all live happily everafter – until reality knocks the sense into us, which will not likely ever happen to the anti-rights people.

    Leave a Comment 8 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *