Self defense in Colorado, a commentary


Self defense is among the most essential and primal of human action. The very nature of it alone is what keeps us alive. It goes from something as small as the white blood cells that defend us from infection to the great military forces we have to defend America.

Self defense is not something that anyone should ever be refused. As seen in C.R.S. Section 18-1-704, Colorado recognizes the importance of self defense. And this is good. But can anyone be exempt from this law?

In a recent case a fellow miner, "Q", was arrested by USFS rangers and held against his will without the ability to utilize his Miranda rights and without cause. He was released later as the arrest was apparently to "defend" USFS personel from him. This was on USFS property, but on a mining claim that Q had legally obtained. Q had the neccesary documents to show that he was in compliance with STATE laws. But, was he in compliance with federal laws? Good question. but even then, *had Q physically defended himself, he would have been justified under C.R.S. Section 18-1-704*.

The so-called "Make My Day law" (C.R.S. Section 18-1-704) is not over JUST defending your home. It's not just defending your wife from rape. And it's certainly not just for defending your children from kidnappers. It's there for the COMPLETE self defense of an individual from the illegal acts commited by others.

We are not talking about just anyone, mind you. But those that intend on performing acts of illegal nature against you, your home AND your family as well as defend a third party from the same or similar threats. So if you're walking down Colfax Blvd. in denver and find a woman being accosted, you have the right to use whatever force is needed to defend her. Likewise, if you are on a mining claim, patented or unpatented, and you are under physical assault, you have the right to defend yourself and your personal property. Take note that I didn't say that you could defend your claim. THAT is a different can of worms.

In defending your mining claim you need to clarify a few issues before hand. Is it patented or unpatented? That is very important. If it is patented, yes. This is because it is no longer USFS or BLM ground and is considered by both the state and federal government agencies as well as the county the claim is in as private property. But an unpatented claim is still USFS or BLM, and to know the answer on that one must first consult with an attorney. But to defend property that is certainly yours, such as truck, trailer, generator, or ever your family and yourself is still there. You have that right so long as you are within the boundaries of the State of Colorado.

An arguement has been made that the "Against the Wall" laws and "Obligation to walk away" have to still be obeyed before defending oneself. I do not beleive this is so. And the last person you should ask is a cop or ranger. They do not know these laws and they know only enough to arrest a person. They aren't there to defend you. In fact, "law enforcement" is all they can do. Law enforcement does not have an obbligation to defend you if they are present during an assault. This has been proven in court repeatedly. They are the proverbial "clean up crew". They come in after it;s over and they clean it up and arrest anyone they feel needs it.

Please keep in mind that I am not a lawyer, so it's best to hire one to find out. I know what I have read, I can refer you to where you can find it, and I have "been there done that got the t-shirt".

Just make sure you know what the laws are, and watch your six!
Carl

To clarify , As Carl pointed on a Unpatented Mining claim (BLM or USFS Land), One should Never Confuse a Mining claim with Property Ownership , a mining claim is more or less a mineral lease on the public lands and the land still is public property, If One was to fence off a Mining Claim and refuse Access to the Public acting like its private land ; The BLM would simply Revoke a claim in violation like this in a heartbeat......... When actual Mining opperations are taking place Public access is usually detoured indefinately ;) and such land if worth anything it is purchased and made "patented" and thus Private... Patents are no longer being Granted but few knowlegable individuals including myself know how to aquire a patent : ) ...
ANYWAYS Make sure your claim is whell marked. . . . . . .
and even if you temporarily get away with it , Dont put your claim in "recreation area" BLM Guidelines Prohibit Claims so far FROM such landmarks like Picnic areas rec areas ect...............
in other words the BLM wants you to Explore the lands and Get a Claim , But They arent fond of claims in public areas..........
we all know That ALL claims are accepted by the BLM reguardless of faults errors or whatever .....

WOW.........ummmm Bennie.......that is way wrong! Sorry but you need to read up alot more.

Minerals that are locatable are a completely different list than those that are leasable and they both have their own set of laws and regulations.

Location claims are real property according to law/court precednces and are able to be sold, leased, traded, willed to others.
Claim owners have "claimed" the minerals in that ground and they are theirs by law.....although the "surface use" (camping, hiking, etc) may still be allowed, if there is no danger to the public.

Fences on location claims? Yepper, all the time and many times dictated by the authorities (FS/BLM) as safety to the public.

Only lands you can not claim? Lands already claimed or lands withdrawn (legally) from "mineral entry". Picnic areas, roads, campgrounds are often within claims.
There are many types of "withdrawls" that do not apply to minerals too, only withdrawn from "mineral entry" are unclaimable.
But you can still prospect upon those.....hand carried equipment like sluices and pans are just fine.

The BLM doesn't make arbitary rules/distances from this or that either. For instance, the law says, it's illegal to "mine" within 200ft of the centerline of any highway.........but the claim can still contain it!

Like I've said to you before Bennie, KEEP READING! Especially if you are ever going to actually file yourself. All this information can be found around the CP forums and links within.

To everyone, when in the field, even if a claim is not well marked any longer...........you the prospector are responsible to know you aren't on someone elses calim. Sometimes claim jumpers knock down markers and there is no law stating that claim owners must continually maintain or re-erect those monuments.

CP

I beg to differ

If land is withdrawln from mineral entry : It is closed to prospecting and Closed to mining claims , Since the mining act of 18whatever doest cover such "withdrawln" lands
One could only "rockhound" which is "casual use" and is disasscocated with mining all togather (hands only) and no acts of outright MINING !

My opiniion is the best sites are probibly going to be deep in the brush and in less public areas ,,, + you would Honestly have a less chance of farmer john deciding THIS would be a good place for a ranch seeing how theres roads and such, and farmer john buys the surphase on your claim and then refuses you access..........
what good would your claim be if it was now on private property.....
Your claim had such awesome access roads and , the area wasnt completley rural , so much farmner john purchased THAT same section where you were........
it could happen , $hit ; Ive seen it happen

If the land is claimable then it certainly can not be bought by a farmer!

If you can't prospect in a withdrawn area Bennie then why are all those folks panning along the Arkansas river headwater rec area with the BLM's consent all year long?.....which is largely withdrawn from mineral entry for a water reservior.

Where are you getting your info from Bennie, it seems really off!

CP

Why would I Lie

todds post here showed an access problem in a rural area
toddariceDec 24 2007, 01:40 PM http://www.coloradoprospector.com/forums/l....php?t2077.html Access to a claim never gets blocked , Never Happens , Nothing ever happens ,Wrong! BLM AND NF LAND IS SOLD EVERY DAY , If you wanted to buy fed land simply a request could make any piece of fed land go for sale at public auction.... How is federal land sold , simply you ask ,and if theyll sell it -you bid on it
If you Watch any area of NF or BLM land youll see Bits and Pieces are sold Off every year........
Why would I Lie,,,,, ask the Blm If a Mining Claim Constitutes Land Ownership and ability to put fenses , a claim is only a mere agreement earlier i said a claim is "more or less a lease" I never said "leasable minerals" thats childish......
"Coloradoprospector" Why would I consider paying you a penny the way you talk to me ;I have shared a great deal of information and NONE of it was misleading I Authored This Section in the Forum on mining and mining claims and Mining Leases http://www.coloradoprospector.com/forums/i...?showtopic=2488 you sure didnt tell me I was misleading and or in error , shoot you May have learned somthin sheesh
I feel disrespected for sharing knowlege , and believe me , You can call the BLM and ask them if Im makin it up, "Need to read more" not to toot my own horn but; read This http://www.coloradoprospector.com/forums/i...?showtopic=2488

"Coloradoprospector", Thanks Count me out of Club membership !
I dont need ur 2 Cents

Naw you didn't lie Bennie, you just don't have the right information.
You've heard some things (half of it) and made up the rest as you went along.
Where is the link for requesting FS/BLM lands to come up on auction? I know alot of folks would love that.....although I think that procedure is way different than you've described.

Around here at the CP site folks are looking for the real information and that is what they find. Sorry if you don't like me calling you on bad posts or information.

As far as you in the club membership......what you do with your money is your choice, the CP site is still open for you and those who DO WISH TO LEARN! Too bad though, I think you could learn alot! As you already should have from all the free info I and others have posted all over the CP website.
As I said earlier Bennie, Keep on readin'.

CP

to question someones comment is to strengthen the knowledge of all! Bennie has made a lot of comments and its up to each individual to "also" look up the statements for ourselves to verify or to see if these actually do apply to our circumstances. and by doing this we can see"for our selves" if the info is correct, or just to build our knowledge in our rights! sometimes each of us "assume" something or understand it incorrectly. ive done it and ive been corrected about it(thankfully) and now i know! Bennie,CP and a lot of other people have done a lot to inform us of different things to all of our beneift! Bennie, i hope you dont go away! we all enjoy/benefit from your comments! its up to each of us to verify them completely for our own good.PLEASE dont take offense!

Dan, maybe I'm with a huge misunderstanding as well. I have always known unpatented claims to still be public land, you just have a claim or "lease" on the minerals for the duration of the claim. Patented claims are essentially real property/real estate (go hit up Central City, Cripple Creek, & Aspen and see what they did with their patented claims!) In fact back when the USBM was around I knew a guy that worked for the USBM and he said, government records can be wrong, always verify- check-double check-and triple check.

On unpatented claims, you CAN fence, but only the immediate workings to protect not just tools & equipment but "lookie-loos". Like buildings, equipment, mines, any place you don't want people, but have a good reason to not want them there. In doing so I've always known that since it was unpatented, you notify the BLM. I recall when we did that a few times we told them afterwards and they never had a problem.

So perhaps I'm wrong about this.

Where am I wrong, Dan?

ETA: BTW Bennie, I am not cutting you down so please don't take it like that. I know what I speak of very well as I know it from first hand experience. Even then I realize that there are times when laws and procedures change.

Well, in a way you are right, unpatented claims are still public lands and the claim owners have claim to the minerals. And you should always triple check all research for sure.......good advice!

What is wrong is, the word "lease" used in the context with claim ownership.........there is clearly a distinct difference between leasable and claimable minerals.
For instance coal is leasable where as gold is claimable, but a claim owner can lease his/her location claim to others......but it's not the same as "leasable" minerals concerning the government or mining rights for claimable minerals/gems.
A location or unpatented claim owner is just that......an owner. That person has claimed and owns (in a real property sense) the minerals or gems within that claim. Location claims are in fact real property that can be leased to others, sold, willed etc. They are also still public land in the sense that there isn't a deed to the claim owner for the land, but yet claim owners have exclusive rights of the land during mining....which is stated in the laws/regs. In other words, when filing plan of ops the claim owners then have a say so in what other activities are allowed as their ops may be disturbed which isn't allowed and or safety of the public is a concern as I mentioned earlier.
Location claims are still accessable to the public for other activities but propsecting would be claim jumping, and as long as those other activities do not disturb mining ops on that claim.

Pantented claims are entirely private land and today pantented claims are refered as just that....privately owned as they were actually deeded to the claim owners through the pantenting/perfection process in the past and they pay a tax on those lands each year.
Location/unpatented claims are not taxed by the federal government as there is no deed to the land.

Hopefully this explains it a bit better. I know there are quite a few other claim owners who read this forum and will be happy to jump in and correct me if I'm wrong.

CP

What if there was a first half certificate for patent issued to a diffrent owner of the claim in the past? R