• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

HB 113

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

Heads up!

It looks like Alaska "type" carry is headed to Wyoming, but it only applies to those who have been living in the state for 6+ months.

Here it is from NRA-ILA
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=13388

AP release
http://cbs4denver.com/wireapnewswy/Bill.to.allow.2.1489346.html

AP needs to do a better job of checking their facts. :quirky

A better report...
http://www.trib.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/article_069b58b2-b67b-50ef-8812-4edf4de7f287.html
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

Look like a a good law, but Wyoming puts strange time limits on gun owners.

I remember when I moved there, I went to buy a new pistol to celebrate and when I got there they told me I had to be a WY resident for at least a year.

This was at Frontier Arms in Cheyenne.

I have never heard of anything so strange. What would it matter how long I lived there and as long as I passed the background check and had a valid WY license and residence.
I dont get it.

Same goes for this law and the 6 month requirement.



.
 

Paladin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
12
Location
, ,
imported post

Wyoming has no restrictions on how long one must live in the state to buy a firearm. A valid drivers license is all it takes.

They do however have restrictions on how long one must be a resident to buy resident hunting licenses, which is one year as actually living in the state.
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

Paladin wrote:
Wyoming has no restrictions on how long one must live in the state to buy a firearm. A valid drivers license is all it takes.

They do however have restrictions on how long one must be a resident to buy resident hunting licenses, which is one year as actually living in the state.

Huh....

Now that makes me a little pissed. I dont know why they would have told me that.
 

MatieA

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
400
Location
Egbert, Wyoming, USA
imported post

Because Fromtier Arms is NOT the best place in Cheyenne to do business.

In fact my shadow never crosses their door.
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

MatieA wrote:
Because Fromtier Arms is NOT the best place in Cheyenne to do business.

In fact my shadow never crosses their door.

They must be bad.

Im a clean cut, respectable guy. I have no idea why they would have flat out lied to me like that.
Really makes me pissed. And what business man doesn't want to sell a product for god sakes?

Ah well, if I move back to WY (hope so) I wont ever go there again.
 

Grinch

New member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
5
Location
Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA
imported post

Sig229 wrote:
MatieA wrote:
Because Fromtier Arms is NOT the best place in Cheyenne to do business.

In fact my shadow never crosses their door.

They must be bad.

Im a clean cut, respectable guy. I have no idea why they would have flat out lied to me like that.
Really makes me pissed. And what business man doesn't want to sell a product for god sakes?

Ah well, if I move back to WY (hope so) I wont ever go there again.
I have never had a problem with them. They also seem to be alot cheeper than the other gun stores here.
 

MatieA

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
400
Location
Egbert, Wyoming, USA
imported post

I have never recieved anything but bad attitude and next to NO service. I take my business elsewhere even if it might cost me a bit more.

This is all my personal experience and feelings though, if you've never had a problem then that is good.
 

Grinch

New member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
5
Location
Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA
imported post

I have never had a problem at any of the gun shops here. However some of the prices are outragous at some of them. The service at the three i go to all the time is always good. I am sorry you have had bad experiences with them.
 

Mjolnir

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
469
Location
, , USA
imported post

marvs is a good place with some really nice people while guns and gear are not any better than fromtier arms (expensive and rude) the last couple times I was in guns and gear store were not only rude but ignored me standing at the counter in front of the pistol display while one guy just a few feet down was stuffing his face. he did not even acknowledge me standing at the counter after looking at me but kept on eating.

then they were rude all except the lady but she kept refering to the guy who ignored me in the first place.

rly enterprise is not bad but a tad expensive

i will keep dealing with marvs as at least they have the worst coffee in town for free and are nice and polite. can order anything over the web and have it shiped to them and they smile and are happy to have you as a customer.
 

AB

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
240
Location
ACTIVIST Cheyenne, Wyoming
imported post

[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]
[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"][font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]

Great News...your grassroots efforts have payed off.

[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]HB-28 was tabled and committee moved forward with HB-95.
[/font]
[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"][font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]
HB-95 Jaggi Wyoming Firearms Freedom Act-2
[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]Passed!!! with a vote of 8 to 0, 1 excused.

[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]Also HB-113 Concealed Weapon Authority
[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]Passed 6 to 2, 1 excused.

[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]This means we made it past the first hurdle,these bills moved out of the Judiciary Committee and are on their way to the floor.

We will see if the Committee members will stand with the bills and voteyeson the floor.

[/font]
[font="Courier New, Courier, mono"]HB-95 would have never made it this far without you, but remember the fight has just started. We will keep you abreast as these two bills move forward.[/font]


[/font]
[/i][/b]
 

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
imported post

It appears to me that HB 113 violates the Privileges & Immunities Clause of Art. IV, § 2 of the U.S. Constitution by limiting the right to carry without a permit only to Wyoming residents of more than 6 months (proposed Wyo. Stat. § 6-8-105(a)(vi), page 3, lines 4-6).

The Article IV Privileges & Immunities Clause means "that in any state every citizen of any other state is to have the same privileges and immunities which the citizens of that state enjoy. This section, in effect, prevents a state from discriminating against citizens of other states in favor of its own.” Hague v. Committee for Indus. Organization, 307 U.S. 496, 511 (1939)."A State may discriminate against nonresidents only where its reasons are ‘substantial,’ and the difference in treatment bears a close or substantial relation to those reasons."Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper, 470 U.S. 274, 288 (1985). Therefore, a state may not restrict licensure to state citizens to partake in a privilege,id. (“We conclude that New Hampshire’s bar residency requirement violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Art. IV, § 2, of the United States Constitution. The nonresident’s interest in practicing law is a ‘privilege’ protected by the Clause. Although the lawyer is ‘an officer of the court,’ he does not hold a position that can be entrusted only to a ‘full-fledged member of the political community.’ ”), nor may a state otherwise deny to nonresidents a privilege granted to its citizens even absent a licensing scheme.Lee v. Minner, 458 F.3d 194, 201-02 (3rd Cir. 2006) (“Pursuant to Article IV, section 2, a state may not discriminate against noncitizens with respect to any protected right unless the state has a substantial reason for the discriminatory policy that bears a substantial relationship to the state’s objectives. Delaware’s public records law discriminates on its face between citizens and noncitizens. Although the State has a substantial interest in ‘defining its political community,’ the citizens-only provision of its public records law does not bear a substantial relationship to that interest. Accordingly, we conclude that the provision violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV. We therefore will affirm the District Court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of Lee and enjoining Delaware from limiting FOIA benefits to Delaware citizens.”). However, a state may discriminate where the state granted privilege is discretionary and the state asserts a cognizable and substantial reason to discriminate where the difference in treatment bears a close or substantial relation to that reason. Bach v. Pataki, 408 F.3d 75, 95 (2nd Cir. 2005) (“Privileges and Immunities Clause cannot preclude New York’s residency requirement in light of the State’s substantial interest in monitoring handgun licensees.”).

HB 113 should be amended toeliminate the residency requirement.
 

Grinch

New member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
5
Location
Cheyenne, Wyoming, USA
imported post

WVCDL wrote:
It appears to me that HB 113 violates the Privileges & Immunities Clause of Art. IV, § 2 of the U.S. Constitution by limiting the right to carry without a permit only to Wyoming residents of more than 6 months (proposed Wyo. Stat. § 6-8-105(a)(vi), page 3, lines 4-6).

The Article IV Privileges & Immunities Clause means "that in any state every citizen of any other state is to have the same privileges and immunities which the citizens of that state enjoy. This section, in effect, prevents a state from discriminating against citizens of other states in favor of its own.” Hague v. Committee for Indus. Organization, 307 U.S. 496, 511 (1939)."A State may discriminate against nonresidents only where its reasons are ‘substantial,’ and the difference in treatment bears a close or substantial relation to those reasons."Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper, 470 U.S. 274, 288 (1985). Therefore, a state may not restrict licensure to state citizens to partake in a privilege,id. (“We conclude that New Hampshire’s bar residency requirement violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Art. IV, § 2, of the United States Constitution. The nonresident’s interest in practicing law is a ‘privilege’ protected by the Clause. Although the lawyer is ‘an officer of the court,’ he does not hold a position that can be entrusted only to a ‘full-fledged member of the political community.’ ”), nor may a state otherwise deny to nonresidents a privilege granted to its citizens even absent a licensing scheme.Lee v. Minner, 458 F.3d 194, 201-02 (3rd Cir. 2006) (“Pursuant to Article IV, section 2, a state may not discriminate against noncitizens with respect to any protected right unless the state has a substantial reason for the discriminatory policy that bears a substantial relationship to the state’s objectives. Delaware’s public records law discriminates on its face between citizens and noncitizens. Although the State has a substantial interest in ‘defining its political community,’ the citizens-only provision of its public records law does not bear a substantial relationship to that interest. Accordingly, we conclude that the provision violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV. We therefore will affirm the District Court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of Lee and enjoining Delaware from limiting FOIA benefits to Delaware citizens.”). However, a state may discriminate where the state granted privilege is discretionary and the state asserts a cognizable and substantial reason to discriminate where the difference in treatment bears a close or substantial relation to that reason. Bach v. Pataki, 408 F.3d 75, 95 (2nd Cir. 2005) (“Privileges and Immunities Clause cannot preclude New York’s residency requirement in light of the State’s substantial interest in monitoring handgun licensees.”).

HB 113 should be amended toeliminate the residency requirement.
So what you are saying is more than a few states have unconstitutional laws because they requre you to be a resident. One example being CC licensing.
 

Wyocowboy

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
56
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
imported post

We got out the vote so to speak. We contacted alot of people and let them know what was going on and how they could get involved and it worked. Now we may be seeing, from what I understand, an attempt to table the legislation. It would , from my understanding, just set and not ever be brought out for a vote. Let's not give up on this thing. We need to keep contacting our legislators and let them know we want this fine piece of legislation passed as is.
 

press1280

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
399
Location
Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
imported post

I can't speak for WVCDL, but basically if WY allows unlicensed CC/OC, then anyone in the state must be allowed the same(visitors or new residents).

The CC permit system as it stands now is not necessarily unconstitutional, but there would need to be some avenue for non-residents and new residents to carry there, whether it be through reciprocity or non-resident permits. That's why I would guess states like CA have a big problem for these reasons:they are "may-issue", they don't allow any LOADED unlicensed carry, they don't recognize any non-CA permits, and don't issue permits to non-residents. Same goes for NY.
 

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
imported post

press1280 wrote:
I can't speak for WVCDL, but basically if WY allows unlicensed CC/OC, then anyone in the state must be allowed the same(visitors or new residents).
That's correct. That's why I said above that the language in HB 113 limiting unlicensed CC to residents of more than 6 months needs to be stricken.

press1280 wrote:
The CC permit system as it stands now is not necessarily unconstitutional, but there would need to be some avenue for non-residents and new residents to carry there, whether it be through reciprocity or non-resident permits. That's why I would guess states like CA have a big problem for these reasons:they are "may-issue", they don't allow any LOADED unlicensed carry, they don't recognize any non-CA permits, and don't issue permits to non-residents. Same goes for NY.
At this time, I won't press the issue of whether Wyoming should issue permits to nonresidents.

As a matter of state law, Wyo. Stat. § 6-9-104(b)(i), provides, in part, that "[t]he Wyoming residency requirements of this paragraph do not apply to any person who holds a valid permit authorizing him to carry a concealed firearm authorized and issued by a governmental agency or entity in another state that recognizes Wyoming permits, is a valid statewide permit, and the state has laws similar to the provisions of this section, as determined by the attorney general, including a proper background check of the permit holder[.]" (Note: SF 26, as amended and passed by the Senate, eliminates the licensing standards test in both the reciprocity provision of Wyo. Stat. § 6-9-104(a)(iii) and the residency qualification for a permit under Wyo. Stat. § 6-9-104(b)(i)). I read Wyo. Stat. § 6-9-104(b)(i) to provide shall-issue for both new residents and nonresidents as long as they have a reciprocal state's permit, but this interpretation is muddled by the fact that section also provides for application through the sheriff of the applicant's county of residence.

There may still be aPrivileges & Immunities Clauseargument for individuals who do not have a reciprocal state's permit--or all nonresidents and new residents if Wyo. Stat. § 6-9-104(b)(i) is not interpreted to provide a mechanism for shall-issue for nonresidents and new residents who have a reciprocal state's permit.
 
Top