FPC, FPF Join Challenge to Colorado Gun Magazine Ban, File CO Supreme Court Brief

Standard Capacity 223 Magazine Bans Ammunition
FPC, FPF Join Challenge to Colorado Gun Magazine Ban, File CO Supreme Court Brief

DENVER, CO-(Ammoland.com)- Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) announced the filing of an important brief before the Colorado Supreme Court in Sternberg v. Colorado, a case challenging the State’s ban on so-called “large-capacity” firearm magazines. The brief may be viewed at www.firearmspolicy.org/legal.

Despite strong protections for the right to keep and bear arms in Colorado’s constitution, the State’s General Assembly enacted a ban on so-called “large-capacity magazines.” The law barred the sale, possession, and transfer of such magazines after July 1, 2013.

FPC and FPF’s brief, authored by attorney, historian, and FPC Legal Scholar Joseph Greenlee, was joined by Second Amendment Foundation and Millennial Policy Center. In the 28-page brief, the groups provide significant historical facts and context to persuasively counter the State’s false arguments made in defending the gun control scheme, such as the notion that Colorado’s constitutional framers had no concept of repeating rifles and ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 15 rounds.

“Bans on modern-day firearms are often rationalized by the argument that federal and state founders could not have envisioned today’s guns,” explained Greenlee. “Our brief shows that the framers of Colorado’s constitution were intimately familiar with firearms capable of firing more than 15 rounds, and that they intended to protect them through an exceptionally strong arms provision in the state constitution.”

“Firearms that could hold 15 or more rounds of ammunition pre-date even the founding of Colorado as a state,” FPC President Brandon Combs said. “Such firearms and magazines are constitutionally protected today, period. Time and technological evolution do not change the fundamental nature or the scope of constitutional rights against government infringement.”

“This is an important case because it is testing state gun laws against Colorado’s strong right-to-keep-and-bear-arms state constitutional provision,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Frankly, joining in this brief has been a delight, not only because we enjoy working with our colleagues, but also because it offers an opportunity to add a historical perspective to this discussion.”


About Firearms Policy CoalitionFirearms Policy Coalition

Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

About Firearms Policy Foundation

Firearms Policy Foundation logo

Firearms Policy Foundation (www.firearmsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPF’s mission is to defend the Constitution of the United States and the People’s rights, privileges and immunities deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, especially the inalienable, fundamental, and individual right to keep and bear arms.

  • 38
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    12 Comment threads
    26 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    18 Comment authors
    Wild BillBarbaraPeter BrunettoJonathan LemaireRocky Mountain Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    Barbara
    Guest
    Barbara

    Only COWARDS that kneel to governmental tyranny as ‘gun control laws’ will obey a magazine ban.
    All ‘gun control laws’ are un-Constitutional.
    Try acting like Americans and not slaves.

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    @Babs, What do you propose be done, exactly?

    scott
    Guest
    scott

    Why has no one asked, WHY did it take since 2013 for a gun rights group to challenge this???

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Dues. ($)

    Gotta keep those dues rolling in.

    If 2A is constantly under perceived threat dues get paid.

    Aka, corporate tyranny.

    Follow the money, always!

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    It’s funny, my Attorney worked on the original case and when I was talking with him about it this in his office I whipped out my stuff and dumped it on his desk and he said, “you didn’t comply” and I said “prove it” and we both laughed because he couldn’t which did in fact prove the stupid law is unenforceable from day 1.

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Then I told him I could prove he is a fraud and the court is fake not operating under the organic Constitution and he said he could not represent me in that case because he needed to remain employed and we both laughed again.

    Peter Brunetto
    Guest
    Peter Brunetto

    I live in NJ and Gov. Murphy had put restrictions on Magazines
    And I had to go crazy when buying a firearm .
    Nobody stopped him so now it’s Law!!

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    You guys are alright. If I were President I would write an EO making it unlawful to not have and carry firearms and make your gun purchases tax deductible plus I would issue to you FREE ammo on a yearly basis to include armor piercing goodies. All gun control would be abolished and I would give tax credits for each criminal that you killed. Double credit on pedo’s and traitors.
    This would be my commitment to you and it would be law inside of my first 10 days.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    I got the memo. Twice. Being a contributing member, I get ALL THE SPAM. EVERY DAY.

    Look, just take my money and STOP SCROUNGING FOR MORE! I give what I can get away with.

    GOA has their communication style right.

    joefoam
    Guest
    joefoam

    The common fall back used by anti-gun types is the reliance on standards for firearms when the 2A was written. If you want to do that then we should be able to ‘bear’ blunderbusses, cannon and warships as the early Americans did.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    That old canard is easily countered with “It said freedom of the press, they only knew about the printing press and could never have envisioned the Internet! If I need a license and registration for my 2nd Amendment protected rights, you need a government license for each reporter and a registration for each story. Published ideas can be weaponized, you know.”. Your retort to their claims still sells us short, though. The 2nd Amendment would empower the individual citizen to keep and bear an F-16 with sidewinder and hellfire missiles if properly interpreted and enforced against the “government’s compelling interest”… Read more »

    Ansel Hazen
    Guest
    Ansel Hazen

    Hey if you got the bucks to fill the tank on one of those things I think it would do wonders towards keeping Congress and the DOJ in line.

    Personally I’d be happy reliving the Rat Patrol with a GE M134 on a Jeep.

    Jack Mac
    Guest
    Jack Mac

    Where is our NRA or ILA during all of this. Running out of money is bad enough. Are they now just running out. Think Nugent would at least play us a farewell tune. The BOD needs to shift its gears to drive or get out of the drivers seat. It is best that the non-payed non-board members form separate member groups to recruit lawyers to file lawsuits, briefs and do what ever is needed. The organization needs to be steered in the right way by better drivers. If the BOD does not like our driving then they can get off… Read more »

    Bob Koceja
    Guest
    Bob Koceja

    The question is, why are all these laws being in acted in the first place in blatant violation of the Constitution?

    Shame on any Gun Owner who votes Democrat

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    @Bob Koceja, While the preemptive character of the Second Amendment is clear to any and all that can read above a first grade level, the rich, the powerful, the elected, and the socialist left are intentionally blind to the founders intent to preempt later Congresses, legislatures, courts, executives, and bureaucrats.

    Jack
    Guest
    Jack

    Wild Bill, you give too much credit when you say the are blind–they simply choose not to care about the Constitution .

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Constitution gets in the way of criminal conspiracy to commit tyranny.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    True, scheming interests have built legal avenues around it since it was ratified.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    The slow road to the new serfdom. Boiling the frog over generations of increasing complacency and comfort. Our government “leaders” lick the boots of the richest. I’m all for getting rich, but against any government “leader” without my people’s founding principles at heart, and who would sell short our rights to the whims of their masters. How do they get so rich on a government salary, again?

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Because election after election The People keep voting for tyranny regardless of candidate because tyranny is all there is. Nothing else exists and if The People didn’t vote it in it would vote itself in. The desire to be ruled by a corrupt person is overwhelming. Bootlickers can not resist.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    We need advocacy! Is Fox News really the only mainstream TV avenue for classical liberal values, when they surface? (DuckDuckGo the term “classical liberal values”, not Google)

    Jonathan Lemaire
    Guest
    Jonathan Lemaire

    You say the left is messing with the Constitution, while you voted for the worst enemy to the Constitution we have ever seen! Or is the only part of the Constitution you care about is guns?!

    Harry Edmunds
    Guest
    Harry Edmunds

    Not sure if they will get the ruling they desire from the Colorado Supreme Court. Too many liberal Judges on the Court. Many appointed by the DemocRAT Governors of the past. This state is screwed even more, now that we have a DemocRAT homosexual Governor who is backed by a totally DemocRATic House and Senate. Denver is a sanctuary city and now parents are not legally permitted to deal with their own children’s sexual identity. Our Constitutional rights are getting flushed down the DemocRATic toilet here in Colorado.

    Core
    Guest
    Core

    We just need to enforce Article VI within the US Constitution AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT. Problem solved. By doing so we defund, disbar, and discharge any official in office who knowingly violates the US Constitution or is: “not in good standing with the US Constitution. Most of our leaders swear an oath to the US Constitution, it’s long over due that US Citizens demand accountability! We are supposed to be a free people, not subjugated citizens! ALL of the States, Inferior Courts, and Politicians violating the Bill of Rights need to be immediately de-funded until they regain compliance.

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    @Core, while I admire your enthusiasm, I must point out that there is no penalty for violating the oath of office. Adhering to one’s oath, once sworn, was a matter of conscience. No penalty was necessary. It was beyond the founders contemplation that anyone would not have a conscience, as office holders today.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    And our “leaders”, save a few, have no conscience. They sell us out for campaign funding to toe the party line, the “2” parties being wholly owned brand names, obeisant to a few, not the many.

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    @SQWRLZ, It would be interesting to know the history of the political parties. Who first thought of the party system; the party leaders throughout history and how they used the parties to corrupt our system, for their own benefit and our detriment.

    SQWRLZ
    Guest
    SQWRLZ

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_in_the_United_States#History_and_early_political_parties
    The very founders, who railed against psrty systems. Heresy!
    It’s a natural tendency for deliberative bodies to band together in common interest. The problem is a protected duopoly (or monopoly), like we have now. By law, other voices are silenced until they reach an arbitrary threshold of support.
    And political corruption is as old as government.

    Samadams1776
    Guest
    Samadams1776

    Maybe the Firearms policy Coalition can explain why they are not attacking the legislation on the grounds that there is no authority to regulate the keeping and bearing of arms considering the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution which is part of the supreme law of the land forbids any infringement by government. Furthermore the writings of tench coxe as well as other Founders make it quite clear the purpose of an armed civilian population is to throw off to renneke governments and that is in fact Military Arms that are protected the ownership by civilians. Officially doubt you’re… Read more »

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    @Samadams, “… to renneke …” Renneke?

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Meant to say, certain concealed carry such as in your vehicle, place of business or on private property is legal without a permit (lease of a Constitutionally protected right for profit) and if you get an unlawful concealed carry permit/lease you can carry concealed wherever it is legal though it is legal to carry anywhere in USA except when on property of others that oppose it. USA is carry your gun zone from coast to coast and 2A is permit, registration and complete authorization. Nothing else is required so don’t be fooled, they lie. REFUSE TO COMPLY TO MUSLIM BEAST… Read more »

    Clark Kent
    Guest
    Clark Kent

    “Muslim beast system fake gun control’? What have you been smoking?

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Says so in the Bible Clark. Once again the info you question is open source. I know you had Hillary tell us to throw the Bible away but I did not comply. Call me rebellious.

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    Correction: Law DID NOT BAR the possession of magazines after stated date but rather barred the possession of magazines acquired after stated date. Magazines in possession prior to the stated date were grandfathered and legal to possess and if a criminal charge occurred for possession of any magazine after stated date the proof of burden is on the court so in other words if a person confessed to acquiring said magazines after the date their admission could be used as evidence of unlawful possession and if the mag in question had a date stamp on it after stated date the… Read more »

    tomcat
    Guest
    tomcat

    I liked the comment “bug repellant for criminal activity”. The only downside to that is the chance a criminal will come by when you are not home to partake in your stash of bug repellant or alert the cops for a red flag.

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    It’s not a very friendly environment where I live. Criminals are trying to lure and kidnap girls at the store and they come knock on your door saying they are the police and when you answer you’re dead. They murder you off here left and right and take your dead body out some dirt road and light you on fire. Dump you in the river. They even dump bodies at the Sheriffs Office to save cops the trip out to location. They break in murder you off then burn your house down all in a days work so yeah stealing… Read more »

    I Haz A Question
    Guest
    I Haz A Question

    Grandfathered and allowed…until they’re not. Look at California. They banned 10+ rd mags back in 2000, then disregarded that and attempted to ban them outright in 2016. Fortunately, a federal judge stopped it, but it took three years of court arguments to finally get an enforceable injunction.

    Rocky Mountain
    Guest
    Rocky Mountain

    and yet not a single gun group will argue the fact that as of this post since Jan 1, 2019 only 5,488 murders were committed using a firearm whereas 1,040,678 lives were saved by using a firearm because this evidence clearly proves the gun control agenda is a lie that has no basis in reality. 6,110 people died in this time frame from suffocation so why not make items that suffocate illegal? Those corp gun groups got the money coming in to line their pockets and nobody will ever get them to present real facts that destroy the illusion because… Read more »