ldmaster, thanks for those posts. That was some real "eye opening" information that you furnished. I'll certainly be very careful with my Spyderco POLICE model.
Printable View
ldmaster, thanks for those posts. That was some real "eye opening" information that you furnished. I'll certainly be very careful with my Spyderco POLICE model.
Idmaster:
Your quotes are not completely accurate and I would ask you to put all the information out if you are going to provide it.
One, county's don't use municipal code; from the name, municipality, they are offenses codified by a home rule city. A statutory city follows state statute only. Counties can and do have ordinances. The offenses may be spelled out one way or the other in municipal code, but are reported by NIBRS (National Incident Based Reporting System) coding. This coding allows for all the different types of agencies with different language to properly report their incidents to the CBI, who then forwards it to the FBI. If interested, look up NIBRS and you'll see how many different codes there are for very similar incidents. That information is collected and the UCR is generated. Not every agency in Colorado reports their incidences (crime stats) to CBI. Go to CBI's website if you want to see what this looks like. FBI's as well.
Two, Denver does have a length limit as listed in the below sections. "A flick of the finger" isn't in the municipal ordinance. See them listed at the end of this rant. Please be accurate, especially if you are quoting something as gospel.
Three, please stop perpetuating the myth that there are quotas in law enforcement. The only agency I've been aware of having such a thing is the CSP and they are required to have a specific amount of stops per hour. It doesn't say citations, it says stops. That's not to say that a CSP Trooper won't write their own mother, but that's a rant for another thread. Staying busy, showing activity doesn't necessarily mean writing tickets. Your agency have quotas? PM me and let me know which agency. I'd be interested in knowing that.
Four, Municode.com is a service provided for payment for organization of municipal and county ordinances. There are 25 cities and 2 counties in Colorado that subscribe to their service out of 271 municipalities and 64 counties. All home rule cities have their own municipal codes, which do allow the writing of offenses into their smaller municipal courts and do keep revenue generated by them. However, municode.com doesn't appear to assist in writing any ordinances. Most ordinances are written by the legal arm of the city or county, city attorney, county attorney and they do tend to utilize language that has passed muster in courts. That's why you usually will see mirror language to state statute or a neighboring agencies language. Additionally, most of the municipalities, especially in the Denver area, have the same law firm they use as a city attorney and language used in one city is usually generated for another city.
Five, municipal courts are limited to the maximum fine of $1,000.00 period. Not five $1,000.00 fines. CRS:
13-10-113. Fines and penalties.
(1) Any person convicted of violating a municipal ordinance in a municipal court of record may be incarcerated for a period not to exceed one year or fined an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars, or both.
Sixth, Denver successfully defended their municipal ordinance that has tighter restrictions on gun related items so far. The Colorado state law has been successfully challenged by different municipalities regarding certain aspects pertaining to their conflicting ordinances. In City and County of Denver v. State, No. 03 CV 3809 (Colo. Dist. Ct. Nov 5, 2004), upheld Denver’s ordinances addressing the open carrying of firearms, the banning of assault weapons and junk or “Saturday night special” guns, and the open carrying in city parks. A similar court decision in Aurora Gun Club v. City and County of Denver, No. 3 CV 8609, reached similar conclusions. Denver, Vail, and Boulder have prohibitions on assault weapons and Denver and Vail have prohibitions on large capacity (over 21 rounds) detachable magazines. Denver and Broomfield have prohibitions and regulations on firearms on public property and the open carrying of firearms in any park, parkway, mountain park or other recreational facility.
Seventh...crap. Tell you what. I'm going to stop because I don't want to sound as though I'm attacking another officer on this forum. I realize Denver and the Denver PD are their own strange little world and things that go on there that don't fly anywhere else in this state.
I apologize if it sounds as though I am attacking you, Idmaster. It isn't my intention. I do not like mis-information being put out on a public forum that someone will read and might get into trouble for following. That's it.
Sec. 38-117. - Dangerous or deadly weapons—Prohibitions.
(a)
It shall be unlawful for any person, except a law enforcement officer in the performance of duty, to wear under their clothes, or concealed about their person any dangerous or deadly weapon, including, but not by way of limitation, any pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, machine gun, air gun, gas operated gun, spring gun, sling shot, blackjack, nunchaku, brass knuckles or artificial knuckles of any substance whatsoever, or any switchblade knife, gravity knife, or any knife having a blade greater than three and one-half (3½) inches in length, or any explosive device, incendiary device or bomb, or other dangerous or deadly weapon.
Sec. 38-119. - Certain knives unlawful.
(a)
It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, display, use, possess, carry or transport any knife or instrument having the appearance of a pocket knife, the blade of which can be opened by a flick of a button, pressure on the handle, or other mechanical contrivance.
(b)
Any such knife is hereby declared to be a dangerous or deadly weapon within the meaning of section 38-117.
(c)
In addition to any other penalty imposed by lawful authority, every person convicted of any violation of this section shall be required to forfeit any such knife to the city.
(Code 1950, § 845.3)
And...I would be up for this!Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldmaster
This is why you keep your damned mouth shut. I love watching all the cop shows on TV and it amazes me every time what people will freely admit to LE. Many officers are very tricky, and well trained in verbal Judo to get people to fess up to things freely. ALWAYS watch what you way when you are talking to a LEO.
I just caught up fully on this thread and had at least 5 different tabs open trying to quote/respond to all the great info added here, particularly from OneGuy67 clint45 and ldmaster. It was getting ridiculous so I'll keep it short and just again offer my sincere thanks to you guys for all the very welcome and truly educational info and perspectives.
ldmaster, I do want to call out your story about the backup mag [HiFive]
...and the brief bit about the origins of the GCA and some of these related laws you mentioned in that post. I love learning about the origins of things...
Here's something I've wondered about concerning what state law says about switchblade knives:
First, the law defines the meaning of "knife":
(f) "Knife" means any dagger, dirk, knife, or stiletto with a blade over 3-1/2 inches in length...
Then it defines the meaning of "switchblade knife":
(j) "Switchblade knife" means any knife, the blade of which opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in its handle...Going by the previous definition of "knife", it would appear you could make the argument that an automatic knife with a blade 3 1/2 inches or shorter does not qualify as a "knife", hence it is not a "switchblade knife" either.
What do you think of that logic?
I note that New Hampshire recently rescinded the state ban on switchblade knives. I think that most switchblade bans were enacted back when movies like West Side Story were in vogue, with street punks flashing stilettos, and politicians thought they were going to suppress the growth of street gangs by outlawing switchblades. I read a news story that quoted a NH state senator commenting on why he voted to do away with the switchblade law as saying that "the Sharks and the Jets would be in their 80's now". From what I've read, few crimes are ever committed with switchblade knives. The majority of knife crimes are committed with kitchen knives in the heat of passion. Sounds to me like the hoopla over banning switchblades is akin to the more recent hysterical rhetoric over "assault weapons".
Flawed logic, sorry. You are using two different definitions and combining them to make your argument. You have to read farther into the statutes that use the described definitions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyhound
I wouldn't argue with you that crime using a switchblade is pretty non-existent. I don't make the laws; I merely enforce them. You'll need to speak to someone on high who pull new laws out of their tail pipe for change.
Thanks for the reply. I guess the two definitions stand alone, rather than interpreting the second one by the first.
One reason I asked that question was that I encountered a rather cocky gun store employee who was showing off his Microtech OTF knife from behind the counter. When I questioned him about it, he used that very argument to claim that his knife was a "tool", rather than a switchblade knife. He also mistakenly claimed that anything with a blade less than four inches was not considered a knife.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldmaster
Here's my thought: a lot of times we (general public) are subjected to interpretation of the laws by LEOs, which may or may not be entirely accurate. My quoted exampled from Idmaster show that he "quotes" the statute as "flick of a finger" but when he posts the actual statute, it clearly says "flick of a button, pressure on the handle or other MECHANICAL contrivance." That represents a big difference in the construction of the knife. Take my CRKT SF-13 for example. It CAN be opened with the flick of a finger, because it has a lever on the blade, which allows it to be opened with the flick of your finger, or upon pulling it out from your pocket, much like the "wave" feature on Emerson knives.Quote:
Originally Posted by ldmaster
Um, yeah? I would say most LEO's do know the law as it tends to bite them in the tail end if they would do an enforcement action and be wrong. If Idmaster were to enforce his interpretation of the law (mind you, my post also discussed this point ad nauseum) and it was to be found in court to be wrong, depending upon which agency he worked, the citation would be dismissed, a letter would be sent by the D.A. to his agency (dependent upon the D.A.'s office and their relationship with his agency) and he would be open to a complaint by the citizen and possible civil remedies from a lawsuit. An officer wouldn't be covered under governmental immunity if he was plain wrong and couldn't be covered under good faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by al-x
That's one reason why the attorney general's office and most local D.A.'s offices conduct training with law enforcement on the new statutes, changes in statute and new non-funded mandates required by statute in order to keep the majority of law enforcement out of trouble. Most good agencies will enhance that training with training of their own on a monthly basis, discussing new case law, new trends, new tactics, new municipal ordinances, etc. Continuous training is necessary in law enforcement to keep up with all the ever changing statutes, case law, circumstances, and such.