Concerns about 2016 SB 48: "Constitutional Carry"

Maverick9 · Feb 1, 2016

Grapeshot said:
Constitutional Carry has been our Holy Grail since day one.

The question is 'how do you define it'.

Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, and Wyoming have CC but it's not easy to find anything online where it is defined, codified, stated.

Virgina will undoubtedly end up not doing it because nobody will be able to 'detail' how it should work in 10 million words or less (g).

Grapeshot · Feb 1, 2016

Thundar said:
Shows how weak our grass roots are.

Disagree. It shows the power that one person in the right spot can wield.

MAC702 · Feb 1, 2016

Maverick9 said:
The question is 'how do you define it'.

Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, and Wyoming have CC but it's not easy to find anything online where it is defined, codified, stated.

Virgina will undoubtedly end up not doing it because nobody will be able to 'detail' how it should work in 10 million words or less (g).

My understanding is that Vermont (at one time the only state with it) has it because it has never been codified to be otherwise illegal, like all the other states.

As for the others, what is misleadingly called "Constitutional" Carry, is in the statutes. I've read AZ and WY (residents only), and they are pretty straight-forward. I'm not going to go look for them now, but www.handgunlaw.us will probably have the direct links to the state statutes.

TFred · Feb 1, 2016

Maverick9 said:
The question is 'how do you define it'.

Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, and Wyoming have CC but it's not easy to find anything online where it is defined, codified, stated.

Virgina will undoubtedly end up not doing it because nobody will be able to 'detail' how it should work in 10 million words or less (g).

As I expressed in my original post, I had concerns about this bill. It wasn't "Constitutional Carry" at all, rather it was, "Take a GUESS on whether you can carry concealed, and by the way, if you guess wrong, you GO TO JAIL!!"

What we should ultimately strive for is the removal of any state-level restriction on carry in any form, essentially defaulting to: "Any person not federally prohibited from possession, may carry in any fashion they desire."

There would of course still be a need for the issuing of permits, for those who need reciprocity. Again, based on federal possession requirements.

It may take more than one step to get there.

TFred

MAC702 · Feb 1, 2016

Well, since we are hoping for a fantasy, I would even go so far as to have states ignore federal possession requirements. Too many of them, also, are wrong. If you aren't currently in prison, welcome back to society.

davidmcbeth · Feb 1, 2016

MAC702 said:
My understanding is that Vermont (at one time the only state with it) has it because it has never been codified to be otherwise illegal, like all the other states.

As for the others, what is misleadingly called "Constitutional" Carry, is in the statutes. I've read AZ and WY (residents only), and they are pretty straight-forward. I'm not going to go look for them now, but www.handgunlaw.us will probably have the direct links to the state statutes.

Ex: Kansas...from their constitution, bill of rights..

All men are possessed of equal and inalienable natural rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

No law can be true if it violates a natural right. All this jockeying for P4P is silly as all men have the RKBA ~ its a natural right. Saying that a government (or anyone) agency can regulate this is absurd.

MAC702 · Feb 1, 2016

That said, many of us will continue to discuss the de facto laws to keep ourselves out of prison.

Thundar · Feb 2, 2016

[Quote TFred"..Any person ------ may carry in any fashion they desire."]

Fixed it for you TFred. If the Feds want to regulate, let the Feds do the work. No reason for Commonwealth assets to be used by the Feds to suppress civil rights.

Thundar · Feb 2, 2016

Grapeshot said:
Disagree. It shows the power that one person in the right spot can wield.

I am not barking up the VCDL Tree Grapeshot. They came out swinging for the fence.

This was a failure from everybody supporting the bill, including the Libertarians. The Libertarian Party of Virginia is so busy trying to get the voter petition threshold lowered from 10% to 5% that other more important work, including Constitutional Carry took a back seat.

I just find it very disturbing that we can't even get 21 out of 40 votes in Virginia! Really sad day for liberty.

Thundar

TFred · Feb 2, 2016

Thundar said:
[Quote TFred"..Any person ------ may carry in any fashion they desire."]

Fixed it for you TFred. If the Feds want to regulate, let the Feds do the work. No reason for Commonwealth assets to be used by the Feds to suppress civil rights.

You mean "broke it."

You cross the line from the possible, well beyond the impossible, into the realm of damaging the cause. Do you, for a minute, really think that ANY General Assembly, and then Governor, would enact a new law that says any person, no matter what their background, prior convictions, drug habits, mental state, etc, is legally permitted to carry a gun, open or concealed in Virginia?

Is there really ANY person who would really want that?

TFred

Thundar · Feb 2, 2016

TFred said:
You mean "broke it."

You cross the line from the possible, well beyond the impossible, into the realm of damaging the cause. Do you, for a minute, really think that ANY General Assembly, and then Governor, would enact a new law that says any person, no matter what their background, prior convictions, drug habits, mental state, etc, is legally permitted to carry a gun, open or concealed in Virginia?

Is there really ANY person who would really want that?

TFred

No, TFred,

What we want is no Virginia law on carrying weapons. What is not illegal is legal. Just delete the current Virginia laws on weapons carry and weapons possession.

We do not want a Virginia law that says you can carry however you want as long as the federal government says you can carry. If the feds make stupid laws, let the feds enforce their stupid laws. I do not want our resources spend doing the Feds work for them.

TFred · Feb 2, 2016

Thundar said:
No, TFred,

What we want is no Virginia law on carrying weapons. What is not illegal is legal. Just delete the current Virginia laws on weapons carry and weapons possession.

We do not want a Virginia law that says you can carry however you want as long as the federal government says you can carry. If the feds make stupid laws, let the feds enforce their stupid laws. I do not want our resources spend doing the Feds work for them.

From that perspective, I agree. I'm not sure there is much chance to completely delete the CHP law though, save for optional permit for reciprocity. That would still be needed, as some states do not accept non-resident permits.

ETA: My thoughts above on POSSESSION still stand.

TFred

homestar · Feb 2, 2016

Turns out HB 443 is still in play which mirrors what SB 48 set up... I had forgotten about it.

Marco · Feb 2, 2016

Hanger has never been a supporter of Constitutional carry. VCDL even stated as much during Hanger's recent re-election.
It's not like McAwful was going to sign this bill anyway.

Re: Support Constitutional Carry (SB 48)‏

Sen. E. Hanger
11:49 AM
To: Marco

Thank you for your comments regarding Senator Hanger’s vote against SB48. As one of the strongest defenders of our Second Amendment rights in the General Assembly, he has a long record of votes for gun bills that make sense and for legislation that strengthens law abiding citizens’ rights to bear arms. His vote was not with the Democrats, but rather against a bill that would have undermined our current system for obtaining a carry permit. To protect our right to conceal carry, we need a system that will allow responsible people to carry while limiting the ability of untrained, irresponsible and potentially dangerous people from having that legal opportunity.

Additionally, Senator Hanger is carrying legislation (SB 713) to address reciprocity issues and work to increase opportunities for permitted gun owners to carry in the Commonwealth and in other states. His votes continue to strengthen legal gun ownership in VA.

Take a look at what is going on politically in Washington right now, people are tired of elected officials taking positions based on nothing more than party affiliation. We need more people to vote with commonsense and a true understanding of the issues at hand. Senator Hanger voted against SB48 and he believes most Virginians, Republican, Democrat or Independent, will agree with him when they look at the issue and not the politics of the moment.

Senator Hanger remains one of Virginia’s most ardent gun rights supporters.

Holly Wyatt HermanSenior Legislative Director
The Office of Senator Emmett W. Hanger, Jr.
24th District of the Virginia Senate

bolded part is complete BS,imho... just another elected official that thinks he needs to hold dominion over the citizens.

TFred · Feb 3, 2016

Another thought I had, after reading all about the political maneuvers under way by McAuliffe - paving way for a possible national role, we know this bill would not survive a veto, so it might be better for us (which sadly is another way to say worse for his ambitious career) to NOT let him veto this one. If this bill made it to his desk, and he vetoed it, and it was upheld by the General Assembly, he gets major gun-control points from his supporters. Why give him the free points?

TFred

Concerns about 2016 SB 48: "Constitutional Carry"

Maverick9

Regular Member

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior

MAC702

Campaign Veteran

TFred

Regular Member

MAC702

Campaign Veteran

davidmcbeth

Banned

MAC702

Campaign Veteran

Thundar

Regular Member

Thundar

Regular Member

TFred

Regular Member

Thundar

Regular Member

TFred

Regular Member

homestar

Regular Member

Marco

Regular Member

TFred

Regular Member