A screen image from a YouTube video posted by an 18-year-old Aurora man. The man was carrying a 12-gauge shotgun on Colfax when contacted by police. He was charged with obstruction when he refused to tell police his name or show them his ID.

AURORA | When Aurora police stopped an 18-year-old man for carrying a shotgun Sunday — eventually citing him for obstruction when he refused to show ID —  they apparently believed he may have been too young to tote the weapon.

But city law no longer bars juveniles from carrying a rifle or shotgun, said Deputy City Attorney George Zierk. The city used to have a law barring juveniles from possessing all firearms, he said, but that law was lifted. Zierk said he wasn’t sure when the city law changed, but said it likely was aimed at bringing city law in line with state law. Colorado still bars juveniles from possessing handguns in most cases.

Steve Lohner, the teen cited Sunday, is due in court next month on an obstruction charge. He said he refused to show his ID because he wasn’t breaking any law by carrying his 12-gauge shotgun down East Iliff Avenue.

A screen image from a YouTube video posted by an 18-year-old Aurora man. The man was carrying a 12-gauge shotgun on Colfax when contacted by police. He was charged with obstruction when he refused to tell police his name or show them his ID.
A screen image from a YouTube video posted by an 18-year-old Aurora man. The man was carrying a 12-gauge shotgun on Colfax when contacted by police. He was charged with obstruction when he refused to tell police his name or show them his ID.

Police said they stopped Lohner Sunday afternoon near Iliff and South Buckley Road in part because they were;t sure he was old enough to possess a shotgun.

Gun rights advocates say because it didn’t matter what age Lohner is, police had no business stopping him.

“This young man was well within his rights. People’s fears don’t trump our Second Amendment rights,” said Danielle Thompson, a spokeswoman for Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, later adding that  the right to carry a gun openly stretches far.

“A 10-year-old could walk down the street with a rifle, there is no law (against it),” she said.

Still, police said the incident Sunday with Lohner shows the difficult gray area officers face when confronted with people carrying guns openly.

Officer Frank Fania, a spokesman for the department, said that while the city law apparently allows juveniles to carry guns, they are still barred from purchasing guns. Plus, in Lohner’s case, one of the officers who stopped him recognized him as a witness in a previous burglary where guns were stolen. Officers needed to make sure the gun he had wasn’t connected to that case, Fania said.

All those variables — whether a person poses a threat, whether they are a felon, how old they are, their previous contacts with police, and their constitutional rights — have to be considered by officers in a matter of seconds, Fania said.

“This is what officers have to deal with when they come in contact with these people,” he said.

Lohner was stopped again on Thursday for carrying his shotgun in Horeshoe Park, a short distance from where he was cited Sunday. In that incident, he was not charged with a crime.

Steve Loner of Aurora in a picture he provided to the Aurora Sentinel. Police said they insisted on seeing his ID because he looked younger than 18, the legal age to carry a gun in Aurora.
Steve Loner of Aurora in a picture he provided to the Aurora Sentinel. Police said they insisted on seeing his ID because he looked younger than 18, the legal age to carry a gun in Aurora.

Fania said officers are reviewing that incident, too, because there are questions about the legality of carrying a weapon in a city park.

Lohner, who recorded his interaction with police and posted it to youtube.com, said Thursday he regularly carries the gun for protection. He said he has had more than a dozen run-ins with police for doing so, but was never cited before.

On the video and in police reports, officers said they needed Lohner’s ID to determine whether he was old enough to possess the gun.

While legal experts said the case could hinge on whether Lohner looked 18, it’s unclear whether that will in fact matter when Lohner goes to court next month considering city law does;t bar people under 18 from having a gun.

Lohner said he plans to fight the charge.

58 replies on “AURORA: Law barring juveniles from carrying guns no longer on the books”

  1. Much debate could be made from both sides of the fence in this case. It seems that the best way would be for the police to drop the charges, since it sort of, kind of looks like they may have trumped-up the charge from the start. If one of the policemen recognized him as a previous witness, it seems he should also have known he was over 18. The age is not relevant in any event! Is this harassment, fear or what?

  2. This is disgusting. Obstruction?
    I am strong advocate of gun control/restrictions, but citing him for refusing to show an ID is bullpucky.

  3. So the officer recognized him but still needed his name and age? If they recognized him and the department had so many interactions with him that he ties up their resources it is very hard to believe that they didn’t know his name and age.

    Second, they recognized him as a witness, not a suspect, which undercuts the idea that the weapons were stolen.

    Third, they don’t even know the law regarding juvenile gun possession, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

    Drop the charge, apologize, and update the department training standards.

    “Officer Frank Fania, a spokesman for the department, said that while the city law apparently allows juveniles to carry guns, they are still barred from purchasing guns. Plus, in Lohner’s case, one of the officers who stopped him recognized him as a witness in a previous burglary where guns were stolen. Officers needed to make sure the gun he had wasn’t connected to that case, Fania said.”

    1. These are all sorry excuses generated after the fact to cover their asses. Some would call it dishonesty but I guess the Aurora PD lives by a separate set of rules.

      1. I think you’re confused with Sheriff Maketa in El Paso County in judge, hypocrite town Colo Spgs.

  4. One of these days he will run into a good guy with a gun,who thinks he is a bad guy with a gun.How many times during
    the school years will the police be called
    Because of this guy ?

    1. Since this gentlemen was not brandishing his weapon and carrying it safely there is no reason for the good guy to do anything other than say hello.

    2. Until dispatch starts educating the callers that this is an open carry state and if he isn’t brandishing is perfectly legal and protected by both Colorado and United States Constitutions.

  5. This is a disgrace. I support are officers 100% Send this disrespectful “child” to basic training to learn some respect and learn freedom is a privilege and never free. Fix the laws Colorado so these poor officers dont have to deal with this BS.

      1. Aldo you’re an idiot, it doesn’t matter if it is right, an 18 yr old has no need to walk around with a loaded shotgun. He is just being a big p***y, and trying to show It off. He even said in an interview that he carries to for self defense because he was bullied on the walk that he takes. So we really want a kid who has been bullied to be carrying a loaded shotgun? Why does he need to open carry a freaking shotgun!! over conceal carry or open carry a pistol. Or better yet how about he man up and take some self defense classes he looks fat anyways he could use the workout.

          1. ” an 18 yr old has no need to walk around with a loaded shotgun. ”

            He even said in an interview that he carries to for self defense because he was bullied on the walk that he takes. So we really want a kid who has been bullied to be carrying a loaded shotgun? Why does he need to open carry a freaking shotgun!! over conceal carry or open carry a pistol. Or better yet how about he man up and take some self defense classes he looks fat anyways he could use the workout.

    3. They would have to amend the state Constitution to change the law and I think the recall elections prove that ain’t gonna happen any time soon, mum.

  6. “Plus, in Lohner’s case, one of the officers who stopped him recognized him as a witness in a previous burglary where guns were stolen. Officers needed to make sure the gun he had wasn’t connected to that case, Fania said.”

    This was not mentioned in the video. Looks like the bad cops talked with their lawyers. This was an unlawful stop. The cops need to be disciplined and educated on the law.

  7. “Fania said officers are reviewing that incident, too, because there are questions about the legality of carrying a weapon in a city park.”

    Is everyone in the Aurora government incompetent?

    https://www.guns.com/2013/12/13/co-man-awarded-23k-wrongful-arrest-open-carrying-city-park-video/

    “The city of Colorado Springs has had to fork over $23,500 to a man who was wrongfully arrested last summer for openly carrying a firearm in a city park.”

    City of Aurora government, your stupid will cost me and the other tax payers a lot of money.

    1. What’s legal in one city may not be legal in another. The question is what is legal in Aurora, not Colorado Springs.

      1. State law trumps local law. City law cannot be more restrictive than state law. That is why the Springs got sued and is why Aurora will get sued.

          2. Are you aware of state statute? A federal judge will toss it.

            Walking around an urban area with a shotgun is not only weird and odd, its not the most advantageous tactic or in the best interest of public safety. Someone buy him a holster and a handgun please (make sure it looks real but only shoots caps.

            Next thing we’ll see, is him with the same long gun, wearing a tin badge, plastic cuffs, alongside his walkie talkie patrolling the mall on a Vesta.

            Gotta run……

          3. “Are you aware of state statute?”
            Yes. There is no state statue barring the carrying of long guns.
            Federal judge has not authority to toss it. Please only comment on the things you are knowledgeable of.

          4. No s Sherlock……. That’s good faith. Are you able to memorize everything in CRS? He was contacted in good faith. Attorneys sure can’t. He wasn’t treated badly. He was handed a summons, which in all likelihood will be dismissed.

            Seeing a teenager (or any person) strolling down the street with a long gun is odd and concerning to most. Is it illegal? No.

            I have no prob with arms, but the teenager has no business anywhere near a gun.

            And in all fairness, I had no idea, until I re-read it yesterday that it only covered handguns. I was away of certain exemptions.

  8. Who is up for an open carry rally around Sable and Alameda?

    City of Aurora, this will be in your near future if you do not respect the rights of the citizens you serve.

    1. Your future is the legislature changing open carry law. Be a responsible gun owner and carry smart, not stupid. Guns don’t make you look cool.

      1. Again please educate yourself before commenting. Bearing arms is a natural RIGHT enshrined in the US and Colorado Consitutions. You would need to admend the colorado constitution.

        1. Actually, you’re correct on having to amend it. I erred. Hold on a second though…… But you’re still brainwashed. And trust me, Jesus would want nothing to do with guns. I’m well aware you’re right wing, pseudo Christian.

          2. Get real dude. I know the Bible quite well (in human terms), and Spirit. Instead of preaching guns, go feed the poor and needy.

            You’ll probably tell me Sodom and Gomorrah was about homosexuals too.

  9. Disappointed…

    Regardless of what is legal or not, I believe this is a matter of maintaining good order. It am not aware of it being normal or socially acceptable for an individual of ANY age to walk down a street with a loaded shotgun, one in the chamber…anywhere…maybe in an extremely remote, rural spot where that 18 year old is actually the sheriff also.

    Let’s suppose for a moment that during that contact, when that punk kid refused to cooperate…the officers just happened to say…”You know what, we have a smart kid here who knows his rights and won’t give us any substantial identifying information. We’ll just let him run off because he looks like a good kid that wouldn’t possess a stolen firearm. Any it is also COMPLETELY normal and legal for someone (especially a kid) to walk down a major street in this city with a loaded weapon. Know one should be scared or intimated by that resulting in more calls to the department. It’s normal.”

    Now let’s suppose that right after officers let that kid walk away with his loaded shotgun during which he is not at least substantially identified, that kid walks down the corner and does something unthinkable with shotgun. Robs a 7/11, killing someone in the process; takes the shotgun to a gathering of fellow kids and lets loose on them, begins firing at passing vehicles…maybe a bus carrying many; movie theater; the possibilities are endless. Now I know that a young adult who feels that life and the system in general is unfair, unjust and set up against them would NEVER do something like that (***think Columbine, Century 16, Arapahoe High School, Troutdale, Oregon, Newtown, Connecticut…keep going on your own, if you would like…there’s many.***)

    So when that young punk LEGALLY walks around the corner with his shotgun and does something unthinkable and reprehensible, I wonder how many people are going to feel satisfied with how law enforcement did their job and with the cop saying, “You know what, we have a smart kid here who knows his rights and won’t give us any substantial identifying information. We’ll just let him run off because he looks like a good kid that wouldn’t possess a stolen firearm. Any it is also COMPLETELY normal and legal for someone (especially a kid) to walk down a major street in this city with a loaded weapon. Know one should be scared or intimated by that resulting in more calls to the department. It’s normal. We did all we could”

    *For the record, so that I am not misrepresented…I am all for ownership. I own three guns myself. But I don’t use them in a way that most ordinary people would consider not normal. This isn’t the wild west and it’s certainly not the 1800s.

      1. Of course. Very absurd arguments. Like I said, those things would never happen.

        You’re right…that punk is not a kid…he’s 18 and adult which we should all know makes it perfectly ordinary to walk down the street with a loaded shot gun.

        Try reading what I wrote again smart guy. You might realize that it doesn’t matter whether one is a kid or an adult. Walking down the street with a loaded (or unloaded shotgun for that matter) is not something that most citizens would consider ordinary and acceptable.

        1. I would consider it very acceptable as would almost all the people I know. You might be the exception with your hoplophobia.

        2. Not concerned about all of the legally carried “concealed guns” in Colorado? You just scared of the ones you can see? You do know, don’t you, that thousand of Coloradans are carrying concealed everyday. And yet you don’t talk about all the fellow Coloradans who made it home safe each night. The concealed guns will kill people just as dead, right? But the concealed guns don’t give you a chance to sensationalize, do they?

    2. Societal norms do not define the law of the land. Homosexuals are not the norm either so are you going to rail against them too? How about punk rockers or long hairs? Muslims? Jews? You see where this goes?

      In your hypothetical “what if” scenario, other law abiding citizens have just as much right to bear arms as he does. So if he decided to something unthinkable they have the right to shoot back and if more people were armed crazies would be much less apt to go on rampages. I haven’t heard of any shooting rampages at gun shows or police stations.

    3. you are correct. I never really understand the mentality of “gotta have my gun”…frankly, I think there should be a psychological exam prior to the purchase of any gun. Might save a bunch of killings and put a lot of people in work as well 🙂

  10. Haha, I live around that area of Iliff. If I ever see this kid walking around with his shotgun I will go out of my way to pull over and harass the s**t out of him for being such a little B***h that he has to carry around a loaded shotgun for being picked on by “bullies”. Just words of course nothing physical I don’t want this special boy to shoot me, but I will use my RIGHT of freedom of speech just like his RIGHT at 18 to carry around a loaded shotgun.

    1. He got jumped by 4 thugs at McDonald’s and you want to harass him for wanting to defend himself? Btw, harassment is a crime, open carry isn’t.

        1. Ha! I think your the type of guy who gets an erection at the thought and chance to debate people about gun control on forums and comment sections online. You are all over these comments, it’s probably the highlight of your day trying to make yourself feel superior by correcting people and and telling them their “RIGHTS”. Go back to playing with your guns in your moms basement, tool.

          hmmm this news story sounds awfully similar.
          https://kdvr.com/2014/08/04/report-woman-shot-teenage-girl-because-she-was-picking-on-her/

      1. The reality is had officers seen him and blew it off, and killed a bunch of people at a bus stop, you’d be kicking screaming nothing was done.

        Sorry, walking around with a shotgun in an urban setting is bizarre. If I recall correctly, that teenager said he does this weirdo behavior to see what official will do. (I maybe incorrect).

          1. True…. I believe they had every right to make the contact. An actual stop (detention, Terry Stop). Any reasonable judge will agree. There was confusion in the law. CRS and municipal law changes every year. Had the CRS law included long guns, they had every right to demand him to identify himself. Reasonable suspicion was there as he was a young, possible under 18.

            Sorry, but walking down an urban street is bizarre and concerning. I can’t recall where he was stopped, but how do we know he was about to rob a business, do a shooting, etc.

            Opinion may sway on this entire issue in the years to come- people walking down a city street strapped with a shotgun, rifle, or RPG.

      2. He was stopped for a very short time period. He wasn’t handcuffed or mistreated. There was a good faith err. It’ll never make it past the first motion to dismiss.

        Correct me if in wrong, I think the kid said he does this yo see what the police will do.

Comments are closed.