It's sad how willingly everyone is going along with having to show you papers whenever you leave your house.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
It's sad how willingly everyone is going along with having to show you papers whenever you leave your house.

You know you're including yourself in that statement.

You're being overly dramatic, no one has asked for "my papers" and no one is going to.

What would you do? You talk the talk, you gonna walk the walk or just "go along".

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:
I was listening to Stephen Tubbs yesterday, he had a couple of sheriffs on, they weren't notified of Polis' order until after it was issued.

That seems to be a common complaint. I'm listening to a County Commissioner comment right now who said he and his fellow county commissioners are frustrated because Governor Polis is making decisions and issuing orders that affect their respective counties and that they are expected to implement, but he doesn't first talk or coordinate with them. They want to try and legally comply with these orders but they need time to review them and plan before doing so. The Governor's Stay at Home order blindsided them and they are now trying to find a way to meet (legally) to discuss and implement the order.

Reportedly, the Governor's office didn't release any guidance or written explanations until hours after the order. I checked after yesterday's press conference and couldn't find any clarification then, but I'll have to make time and check again.

Denver Mayor Michael Hancock stated in a press conference (before Governor Polis's latest order) that he speaks with him daily and that he was pushing him for a state-wide order.

For a Governor who keeps repeating "we will get through this together" in his press conference statements, he has a very limited and exclusive sense of "together".

"Some animals are more equal than others".

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
It's sad how willingly everyone is going along with having to show you papers whenever you leave your house.

You know you're including yourself in that statement.

You're being overly dramatic, no one has asked for "my papers" and no one is going to.

What would you do? You talk the talk, you gonna walk the walk or just "go along".

What the fuck are you even talking about?
I was referring to these stupid letters you're supposed to produce to LE to show you are an essential business.
What is your problem?

We're seeing a little glimpse of how Polis reacts when he gets scared.

Polis isn't a leader, he possesses no new ideas for governance, he's just another reactionary embracing tyranny, typical democrat.

The thing you are already starting to see is all of those wanna be tyrants that some people have gladly handed their Rights over to aren’t willing to give that new found power up.

For days we’ve listened to “listen to the experts”. The President wants to reopen the country to business by Easter, and now there is significant push back that we shouldn’t listen to the “experts” that is guiding our President.

Those who have latched on to power won’t want to give it up.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
It's sad how willingly everyone is going along with having to show you papers whenever you leave your house.

You know you're including yourself in that statement.

You're being overly dramatic, no one has asked for "my papers" and no one is going to.

What would you do? You talk the talk, you gonna walk the walk or just "go along".

What the fuck are you even talking about?
I was referring to these stupid letters you're supposed to produce to LE to show you are an essential business.
What is your problem?

Well you weren't clear and I don't make assumptions.

So now that I know what you're talking about. Polis and the counties have put LE, businesses, and individuals in a precarious position. What would you have a business do when asked?

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:
We're seeing a little glimpse of how Polis reacts when he gets scared.

Polis isn't a leader, he possesses no new ideas for governance, he's just another reactionary embracing tyranny, typical democrat.

So far, I am not impressed with the Governor or the way he governs or even speaks. I find no inspiration or even calm measured confidence in his words...so far , despite his hollow words, he has been a partisan drama queen, quick to over react rather than consult or deliberate.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
The Governor's Stay at Home order blindsided them ....

Not to mention the rest of us.

The previous rules dictated by my county health department and city government had already severely limited most people’s activities, but there were a few things I would have done in advance of this statewide order had we been given a couple of day’s advance warning. I’m trying to figure out now why that wasn’t possible or desirable. I’m really trying to give the authorities the benefit of the doubt in the face of all the uncertainties surrounding the pandemic, but it’s hard to avoid the feeling that much of what has been ordered and the how is simply a demonstration of “I can, and therefore I will.”

But for anyone else in Colorado who is basing their understanding of the order on BS media or other second hand accounts, I recommend checking the colorado.gov web site, and specifically the actual Department of Public Health and Environment order here:
https://drive.google.com/file/...Y_b9Cf1OMPOdlxH/view

I was surprised to see, for example, that this is included under “Necessary Activities” that permit leaving one’s residence:

“Engaging in outdoor activity, such as, by way of example and without limitation, walking, hiking, nordic skiing, snowshoeing, biking or running. For purposes of outdoor activity, State parks will remain open to the public to engage in walking, hiking, biking, running, and similar outdoor activities but all playgrounds, picnic areas, other similar areas conducive to public gathering, and attended areas shall be closed.”

Thanks, MDS, for keeping us up on this.

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
It's sad how willingly everyone is going along with having to show you papers whenever you leave your house.

You know you're including yourself in that statement.

You're being overly dramatic, no one has asked for "my papers" and no one is going to.

What would you do? You talk the talk, you gonna walk the walk or just "go along".

What the fuck are you even talking about?
I was referring to these stupid letters you're supposed to produce to LE to show you are an essential business.
What is your problem?

Well you weren't clear and I don't make assumptions.

So now that I know what you're talking about. Polis and the counties have put LE, businesses, and individuals in a precarious position. What would you have a business do when asked?

California Governor Newsome is now sending out "ambassadors" to businesses that remain open during their Shelter in Place order. If the business can't prove they are "essential" and refuses to shut down, the Governor is now ordering that their electricity and water be turned off...

...and we all know that Governor Polis has a track record of taking his cues from California/ Leftist leadership.

Despite the order, I'll be venturing out into the fray... if you don't see me posting anymore, well...

quote:

I was surprised to see, for example, that this is included under “Necessary Activities” that permit leaving one’s residence:

“Engaging in outdoor activity, such as, by way of example and without limitation, walking, hiking, nordic skiing, snowshoeing, biking or running. For purposes of outdoor activity, State parks will remain open to the public to engage in walking, hiking, biking, running, and similar outdoor activities but all playgrounds, picnic areas, other similar areas conducive to public gathering, and attended areas shall be closed.”

So, what if I want to take my RZR for a spin in the foothills? That is an outdoor activity that keeps a pretty good 'social distance'.

Also, I see Firearm stores are on the Essential business list. My Firearm store has a range attached to it. Does that mean its okay for me to go to the range as long as they only occupy every other lane?

ugh.....

quote:

Originally posted by ugeesta:
So, what if I want to take my RZR for a spin in the foothills? That is an outdoor activity that keeps a pretty good 'social distance'.

I of course am not the one making or interpreting the rules, but I would certainly think so. If we can hike or bike, I cannot imagine why your activity wouldn’t be permitted.

As for the other, though, if “areas conducive to public gathering, and attended areas shall be closed,” I would be surprised if the gun store kept its range open.

Polis can go fuck himself.

I have to chuckle, I see plenty of traffic. "You must stay at home, can only leave for essential activities, we're keeping the liquor and pot stores open BLAH BLAH BLAH" EAT SHIT. Wanna see a middle finger? Here's two!

^^ I'll buy you a beer when the bars open back up.

He's not the boss of me. I do what I want.

My gun club is open. They sent all members a great email explaining what they are doing to make sure the lanes and store are sanitized to their best abilities and politely asked us to adhere to some common sense rules.
I think after I hit Lowes (I need to get a new deep freeze) I may head over and unstress myself with a few mags of .45acp.
Molon Leave me be!

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Thanks, MDS, for keeping us up on this.

You're very welcome...and thank you for the link to the CDPHE order. I've read and referenced it several times now.

I've been monitoring the Colorado General Assembly website, waiting for updates on when the session would resume. After the emergency was declared and the legislature was suspended the initial note on the GA website was that the suspension was in effect until 30 March, although, as previously mentioned, the expectation was that the suspension would be extended...however, when the date came and went the posting was changed to simply noting the session was suspended.

I know the current emergency has taken center stage, but I expected both a new date to be posted and for the news/ pundits to track the session status...but I never even caught a whisper of the issue. I was caught unaware that the issue of the legislative session had even been escalated to the Colorado Supreme Court, and only learned of the ruling last night.

So, it's anyone's guess as to how the legislature is going to proceed after the emergency orders are lifted...but we need to be prepared for either/both a continuation of the Regular Session as well as the possibility of a Special Session.

State Supreme Court ruling could endanger our freedoms

Posted Apr 6, 2020 at 10:46 AM

The Colorado Supreme Court has decided with a 4-3 vote that when the governor declares an emergency, Colorado’s constitution can be ignored.

The court’s majority found that the amendment to the constitution detailing legislative session length is ambiguous and that the legislative rule applied when the governor declared a health emergency could be followed instead of the constitution.

That’s right: A joint rule of the General Assembly has been found to be superior, legally, to the constitution.

Here’s what the constitution says: Regular sessions of the General Assembly shall not exceed 120 calendar days.

That seems fairly clear to this country boy.

This amendment was approved by the voters in the 1980s and it was meant to give the citizens of Colorado the surety of knowing when the Legislature would adjourn sine die. When then-Sen. Wayne Allard and Rep. Chris Paulson referred the measure to the voters, Paulson explained that “it would limit both sessions of the legislature to 120 consecutive calendar days.”

One justice’s written dissent in the court’s opinion cites the legal dictionary definition that clarifies “calendar days” is meant to be consecutive days, including weekends and federal holidays. There really should have been no question about it.

The constitution is supreme and no legislative rule should ever be allowed to supersede it. The decision should have been 7-0. The Colorado General Assembly should be finished by May 6 this year, the day that marks 120 days from the start of the session.

What might be even more disturbing is the precedent set by this finding. If a legislative rule is superior to the constitution during a declared emergency, what other constitutionally protected rights could be ignored during the emergency?

Does this give Democrats the idea that they can ignore the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights and raise your taxes without asking your permission? It’s an emergency, after all, and they might decide they need your money more than you do.

What about your right to purchase firearms? Might they decide that during this emergency they need to restrict purchase of guns for some invented safety concern?

At this point, it seems none of your rights are secure.

We, the members of the General Assembly, really should go back to Denver before the end of April to do our essential work as safely as possible, make provisions for citizens to testify remotely so they can still participate and then adjourn.

A special session can be called either by us or the governor to do any other work deemed necessary and important, if not quite “essential.” We ask health care workers, farmers, ranchers, truckers, prison guards and grocery store employees to do their essential work wisely. We should do the same ourselves.

The Colorado Supreme Court made a tremendous mistake with this 4-3 finding. I trust that the justices will get a chance to revisit the subject and I think it would be best for the majority party in the Legislature to be cautious when it comes to any legislation passed after May 6.

I am confident that legislation which passes after the end of 120 calendar days will be challenged and, ultimately, this Supreme Court will get to revisit the question ― this time in a much more rigorous and formal setting than a mere interrogatory.

Jerry Sonnnenberg is a farmer/rancher and state senator from Sterling.

Note: hyperlinks can be found at the linked website article.

Natelson: Polis lock-down order adds chaos to unconstitutionality

March 26, 2020 By Rob Natelson

In my last column I explained that the Denver lock-down order is probably unconstitutional because it is over-broad. The U.S. Supreme Court recognizes a fundamental constitutional right to travel—and while state and local governments may infringe that right somewhat during an emergency, their response has to be a targeted one. The Denver order is not targeted but sweeping.

Now Governor Jared Polis has issued a statewide executive order. Some media personalities predicted this would create statewide uniformity. In fact, the governor has piled Pelion upon Ossa: to unconstitutionality, he has added legal chaos.

To understand why, you have to know how the governor’s directive interacts with other official pronouncements. Let’s start with three important characteristics of the governor’s order:

It applies only to “Coloradans,” not to out-of-staters.
It provides that county lock-down rules remain in effect—but only to the extent that the county rules are more restrictive than state rules. In other words, if you can do it under the state order but can’t under the county order, then you can’t do it.
Otherwise the governor’s directive contains relatively little substance. As is common practice in the Congress where he used to serve, Governor Polis (a) has made a public relations splash while (b) passing on to bureaucrats the difficult and unpopular responsibility of actually writing the rules. In this instance, the bureaucrats are located in the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE).
So if you want to see the rules governing you, reading the governor’s order won’t get you very far. You also have to inspect your own county’s orders (if any) and a CDPHE document entitled Public Health Order 20-24.

Public Health Order 20-24 is an 11 page, mostly single-spaced, mash of bureau-fog. It contains some striking features, however. For example, it says it is issued “pursuant to the Governor’s directive.” As just stated, that directive explicitly applies only to “Coloradans.” Yet the order attempts to impose rules on out-of-staters.

Specifically, its language seems to ban out-of-staters from traveling through Colorado unless they are returning home. Depending on how you interpret it, the order may also block Coloradans and out-of-staters from transporting most goods across the state, even en route to other destinations. In that respect, the order seems just as unconstitutional as the county decrees that say the same thing. (Observe that I’m using equivocal words such as “seems,” “may,” and “depending on how you interpret.” This is because these documents are poorly drafted and their intended meaning, if there is one, is often muddy.)

There are some important differences between the statewide order and county directives. In some parts, the statewide order is more restrictive—and therefore controls your behavior. In other parts, it is less restrictive, so according to the governor, the harsher county rules control your behavior.

Let’s look at a few examples of how the statewide order is more restrictive than local orders:

First, like the county decrees, the statewide order contains a marijuana exemption, but it imposes more restrictions on sale: the pot must be either medical marijuana or provided by “curbside delivery.”

Of course, it is difficult to justify exemptions for booze and pot as “essential” (in the language of the county orders) or “critical” (in the language of the state order) except on political grounds. That’s one of many reasons these orders are not targeted sufficiently to make them constitutional.

Interestingly, while county orders exempt booze and pot and the CDPHE pronouncement exempts pot and liquor, there is no corresponding loophole for tobacco stores such as Smoker Friendly. Clearly in our state the liquor and pot lobbies are stronger than the tobacco lobby.

A second way in which the statewide order is more restrictive than county orders is that that the former exempts only skilled tradesmen working in construction while the latter seems to exempt all skilled trades.

No doubt some Coloradans will be comforted by the fact that you still may travel to another person’s house to feed pet fish. Both the governor’s directive and the CDPHE classify that as “necessary.” But if you are like most people, you may not commute to your job, no matter how safe your work environment is. In the bureaucratic world, that’s not necessary.

In other respects, the statewide order is less restrictive than local orders. Perhaps the most important example is that county orders seem to ban travel to parks and outdoor activities outside the county. Thus, a Denver resident may walk to a Denver park, but not drive to, say Roxborough State Park in Douglas County.

On the other hand, the statewide directive permits travel to state parks and, by implication, outdoor recreation anywhere in the state. But Denver residents still seem to be confined to Denver because their local order says so, and the governor tells us that stricter rules prevail over looser ones.

No sensible person disregards the seriousness of the COVID-19 epidemic or the need for responsible government action to mitigate it. But every sensible person understands that response must be measured and proportionate, especially when people’s livelihoods and constitutional rights are at stake.

Unfortunately, Colorado has become a case study in bureaucracy run wild—and bureaucracies are not always sensible, particularly in a crisis. Citizens should challenge these house arrest orders in every legal way possible.

Editor’s note: After this article was written, several counties rescinded their orders, admitting the kinds of inconsistencies pointed out in the article. Other inconsistent local orders remain in effect.

Rob Natelson is both a retired constitutional law professor and a constitutional historian. He is Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Independence Institute.