Search Me!

Think about it...

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Hope Montana Follows This Path

Arizona to allow concealed weapons without permit

Governor Brewer signs legislation into law

Starting later this summer, U.S. citizens 21 and older can begin carrying a concealed firearm without a permit in Arizona.

Gov. Jan Brewer signed Senate Bill 1108 into law Friday afternoon. It eliminates the requirement for a concealed-carry weapons permit, but does require gun owners to accurately answer if an officer asks them if they are carrying weapon concealed. It also allows officers to temporarily confiscate a weapon while they are talking to an individual, including during a traffic stop.

"I believe strongly in the individual rights and responsibilities of a free society, and as governor I have pledged a solemn and important oath to protect and defend the Constitution," Brewer said in a news release. "I believe this legislation not only protects the Second Amendment rights of Arizona citizens, but restores those rights as well."

The law goes into effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for this session, which could happen in the next couple of weeks.

Arizona joins Vermont and Alaska in not requiring such permits.

"If you want to carry concealed, and you have no criminal history, you are a good guy, you can do it," bill sponsor Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, has said of his bill. "It's a freedom that poses no threat to the public."

National Rifle Association lobbyist Matt Dogali said the new state law would not violate any current federal requirements.

"There is no federal requirement for a permit or lack thereof," Dogali said.

The federal government oversees the background-check program required to purchase a weapon, which will still be required in Arizona in most cases.

Brewer last week did sign a separate law that exempts guns made and kept in Arizona from federal regulation, including background checks.

Arizona had 154,279 active permits as of April 4. Permit holders are spread across all ages, races and counties, but White males older than 30 in Maricopa and Pima counties hold the majority, according to the Arizona Department of Public Safety data.

The permits generated $1.8 million in revenue last fiscal year, according to DPS. The money is used to help cover costs for enforcing laws related to the Highway Patrol, operating the concealed-carry weapon-licensing program and impounding vehicles.

Arizona's permit process will remain in place, and many gun owners may still choose to get a permit. Permits would still be needed in order to carry a weapon into a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol. They would also be needed if an Arizonan wants to carry his or her gun concealed in most other states.

For those who do choose to get a permit, the education requirements do change under the new law. Classes are no longer required to be a set number of hours or include any hands-on use of the weapon. Those who don't get a permit would not be required to get any training or education.

Retired Mesa police officer Dan Furbee runs a business teaching permit and other gun safety classes. He said if most people choose not to get a permit, it will put several hundred Arizona firearms instructors out of business.

"It's going to hurt," he said.

But he said what really concerns him is that the new law will allow people who have had no education about Arizona's laws and no training on the shooting range to carry a concealed gun. The eight-hour class currently required to get a permit includes information on state law and gun safety, as well as requires students to be able to hit a target 14 out of 20 times. Furbee said his class at Mesa-based Ultimate Accessories costs $79, plus $60 for the five-year permit.

"I fully agree that we have a right to keep and bear arms," Furbee said. "But if you are not responsible enough to take a class and learn the laws, you are worse than part of the problem."

He said it's not uncommon for students to walk into his classroom and pull a new gun out of a box with no idea how to hold it and no understanding of the laws surrounding it.

"If you are going to carry a concealed weapon, you should have some kind of training and show that you are at least competent to know how the gun works and be able to hit a target," he said. "You owe the people around you a measure of responsibility."

This new law is the latest of several that have passed over the past year since Brewer took over the office from former Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat.

Napolitano vetoed at least a dozen weapons bills that crossed her desk during her seven years in office, all of which would have loosened gun restrictions. In 2005, Napolitano rejected a bill that would have allowed patrons to carry loaded guns into bars and restaurants. In 2008, she also vetoed a bill that would have allowed people to have a hidden gun in vehicles without a concealed-carry permit.

In January 2009, Napolitano resigned to become U.S. Homeland Security secretary and Republican Secretary of State Brewer became governor.

During her first year in office, Brewer signed a bill allowing loaded guns in bars and restaurants, as well as another that prohibits property owners from banning guns from parking areas, so long as the weapons are kept locked in vehicles.

(Me)

4 comments:

Linnea said...

I sincerely hope MT does NOT go this route, simply because of this aspect:

The permits generated $1.8 million in revenue last fiscal year, according to DPS. The money is used to help cover costs for enforcing laws related to the Highway Patrol, operating the concealed-carry weapon-licensing program and impounding vehicles.

Arizona's permit process will remain in place, and many gun owners may still choose to get a permit. Permits would still be needed in order to carry a weapon into a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol. They would also be needed if an Arizonan wants to carry his or her gun concealed in most other states.

For those who do choose to get a permit, the education requirements do change under the new law. Classes are no longer required to be a set number of hours or include any hands-on use of the weapon. Those who don't get a permit would not be required to get any training or education.

Retired Mesa police officer Dan Furbee runs a business teaching permit and other gun safety classes. He said if most people choose not to get a permit, it will put several hundred Arizona firearms instructors out of business.

"It's going to hurt," he said.

But he said what really concerns him is that the new law will allow people who have had no education about Arizona's laws and no training on the shooting range to carry a concealed gun. The eight-hour class currently required to get a permit includes information on state law and gun safety, as well as requires students to be able to hit a target 14 out of 20 times. Furbee said his class at Mesa-based Ultimate Accessories costs $79, plus $60 for the five-year permit.

"I fully agree that we have a right to keep and bear arms," Furbee said. "But if you are not responsible enough to take a class and learn the laws, you are worse than part of the problem."

He said it's not uncommon for students to walk into his classroom and pull a new gun out of a box with no idea how to hold it and no understanding of the laws surrounding it.

"If you are going to carry a concealed weapon, you should have some kind of training and show that you are at least competent to know how the gun works and be able to hit a target," he said. "You owe the people around you a measure of responsibility."


We are already in desperate need of funding for programs. Losing more in a way that allows the average idiot to carry a concealed weapon without first showing basic understanding of safety and proper handling AND puts even more people out of work is NOT intelligent nor prudent. The sentiment behind AZ's law is sound. The logistics of putting it into effect are, unfortunately, not worth the problems they will cause.

Jim Handcock said...

Well, since 99% of the state (The only place a Montana CCW permit is required is within incorporated city limits)already requires NO permit to carry concealed, I suppose it is NBD.

Financial impact? CCW holders times $50 times 3 years, not quite the revenue generator it is for AZ.

I still favor it.

Linnea said...

Ok, finances aside. What about the idiot who buys a gun to carry because "it's now legal in city limits, wheeeeee!" and hasn't the foggiest how to handle it? I'd rather not run into that person on my street. Nor at a park (or near a schoolyard, or anywhere else) where kids are playing, where that person (already dumb enough to carry a weapon they don't know how to use, and now are able to conceal it so that no one around them knows to be cautious) can whip out the gun to show their friends (or whomever, including themselves) how cool they are, and have it misfire into the crowd of children because they never took a safety course to learn how to properly load and use the safety catch. An extreme example? Perhaps, yet still completely plausible. There is nothing wrong with folks in city limits where there IS population density needing to either show that they're wearing a gun so that others around can be cautious, or get a permit showing they're not that idiot and at least have training. The constitution says (and don't even get me started on the warping of the original intent of that document, that's a debate for another time) "the right to bear arms", not the right to conceal them. Carry a gun if you want, but until you can prove you understand basic safety, you don't get to hide the fact and infringe upon others' rights to protect themselves or leave the area.

I'm still against idiots, and there are far too many to make it safe for the folks who aren't.

Why do folks think they need to hide the fact they're carrying, anyway? Just wear your damn gun if you're going to wear one. Who cares if others see it? If it makes them nervous, all the better to protect themselves from the ones who are idiots.

Jean&Vic said...

Interesting to note when I went to look into a ccw permit it is something the issuing officer decides if you need training or not. That and using a firearm is a very simple thing, it is after all a point and click system ;-) Kidding aside, I trust no one to carry a weapon safely. Especially in city limits, but at the same time, I assume no one is unarmed, ever in this state. Why? The law enforcement here always assumes everyone is armed unless otherwise stated. So looking down the road at this line of thought, if you believe everyone should have training to use a fire arm (bear with me here) and the government is sponsoring a lot of education right now (for all the public who are not otherwise employed and a few who are) then take the demographics of the intelligence of all the people you know, and remember, half the people you know are below average I.Q. Add in the no child left behind mentality, and I start to think education is not the answer.
Remember when you lead a horse to water, the horse has to decide to drink. What might you ask am I inferring? Simply educating some one unable to understand a firearm is not going to solve the problem.
On to a second important point that needs to be mentioned. With each new in the box firearm, there is an instruction manual. If you don't open that book and read it, then go out and misuse the firearm, who is to fault? It is certainly not the manufacturer of the firearm (they were kind enough to include the manual after all) It was not the clerk who rung up the sale, or sold the ammunition to power the weapon. so who does that leave? I am only finding the person holding the gun.
Legalit of where they can be taken is also another point to bring up here. banks don't allow them. schools don't allow them. Most respecatable (yes there are some that exist) bars don't allow them. Also consider the thing called common (used to be known as horse) sense. It was something taught by parents or other responsible adults. as far as I am aware, it still is. While that is not a legality, it is a law of probability that it is usually the stupid who have the majority of accidents. next in line are the ignorant (but ignorance can be cured. It requires a bit of applied knowledge ;-) and finally those who have bad, or dumb luck. I am sure there are statistics out there to back up part of that if you might care to look.
And finally why do you need to hide a gun? Having lived places it was illegal to carry a pocket knife, I know when faced with a gun, your hands are only useful if you are close enough to wrestle a gun away. chances of getting close when you are 10 feet away? pretty slim. What better reasons are there to carry a firearm concealed? To start, personal protection. if a thief tries to mug you, and you pull a gun, chances are they will leave you alone, especially if they don't have a gun. On the odd chance you are caught in a gun fight, you can shoot back (having been in over 5 of them and only armed in 3, I prefer being armed to not). it is an element of surprise that is on your side, to be prepared for any eventuality (especially an armed confrontation again refer to gun fights). and best of all, when you are carrying a fire arm, it is at YOUR discretion as to IF you think it needs to be drawn, and or used. Would I support it? yep, without batting an eye.
After all, if everyone is armed, there is a lot more polite people out there walking around than not.
Thanks for the post Jim, and Linnea, don't take my rant personally, I have given my mom (among other loved ones)the same speech after she down braided me for this opinion.
Vic

 
...