Colorado CCW?

Now I'm a little confused. In the handout given by the El Paso County Sheriff's Office to successful applicants for CCWs, it states that handguns are forbidden in "...establishments whose primary purpose is to sell and dispense alcoholic beverages." Now, to me, that would mean bars and nightclubs, not restaurants whose main purpose is to serve food, but who happen to serve alcohol too. But, according to the CRS section that Labgrade quotes, that is not true. It's enough to give me a headache. What is right? Is my interpretation of the above quote correct, or am I way off the mark?
DAL

------------------
Reading "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal," by Ayn Rand, should be required of every politician and in every high school.
 
The EPCSO CHL app has a few amusing little inaccuracies. State law says no guns in a business which sells alcohol for consumption on the premises, meaning pretty much any restaurant, but liquor stores are OK.

Well, guys, I find that to be an unwarranted restriction of my right to self-defense, so I disregard it. Yes, I know, at my own risk.

Hell, I figure that since I commit a crime just by walking out of my house, since I live within 1000 feet of a school and I don't go out unarmed at *any* time, I may as well go for the gusto. :)


------------------
"The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it."
-- John Hay, 1872
 
Colorado constitution specifically notes that "nothing herein shall be construed as to allow the carrying of concealed weapons."
(slightly paraphrased) but, I am of the opinion that if you don't have the means to defend yourself (wherever/whenever) all else is a moot point.

Here's the text "21-7-103: POSSESSION OR DISPLAY
A. Possession.
1. It shall be unlawful for any person, as a patron of an establishment where beer or alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption
A,1) on the premises, to possess or carry or display any dangerous or deadly weapon, whether concealed or not, while on the premises of such establishment. Possession of a permit or license for the carrying of the weapon in question is no defense of a violation to this subsection."

I take that to mean a liquor stores OK but not Chilis, etc. That sucks, IMHO, but, hey, some laws are meant to be broken.
 
Hence the NEEd for REAL instruction in the laws regarding concealed carry, as opposed to rubber stamping someone's hunter saftey card "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is a time honored saying.

And if you all didn't already know... booze and guns don't mix.

Dr.Rob
 
Dr.Rob
"Hence the NEEd for REAL instruction in the laws regarding concealed carry, as opposed to rubber stamping someone's hunter saftey card "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is a time honored saying."

I'm all for personal responsibility in the acquiring of applicable firearms safety/use instruction. However, I am not in favor of it being gov't mandated. Hunter's saftey card is a joke - especially regards to CCW.
"Well regulated militia" meant proficient in the use of arms & regular drills to ensure such. Are we all willing to "maintain our proficiency" as proscribed by the gov't? I think not. Fact, I'll start a new topic to explore that avenue.

"And if you all didn't already know... booze and guns don't mix."

Too true, but, if I'm not drinking, then what's that got to do with me? I think I catch the drift of the law, in that if you are in an area where other folks are drinking, the possibility of a "hassle" are greatly exacerbated. Drinking leads to loud mouths which leads to confrontations (sometimes), etc. Prolly the thought behind the law. However, & again, what's that got to do with me? I can control my temper & would even let some slouch slug me & walk away rather than expose myself to a legality that would, in the end, cost me ~$10K+ to "get off." Give some of us credit (this is to the pols, not you or anyone in particular in this fine forum). We, collectively & as individuals, can be very responsible in our actions & in fact prove it daily by our restraint in not blowing away every idiot who cuts us off in traffic
& endangering our & family's lives or ad naseum.
 
Can someone post a source for 21-7-103 ?
The statute manager I usually use for
reference (http://www.intellinetusa.com/statmgr.htm) only lists 21-1 -> 21-2.

-z
 
smithz,

I'll have to get back to you on this but I don't think it'll do any good 'cause mine didn't list the -103 either. Bombed somewhere 'bout where yours did. I have teh CRS in hard copy & did get it confirmed by local LEO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top