• 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.

Governor signs Constitutional Carry!

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

YOU did it! Today, April 16, 2010, Governor Brewer signed SB 1108, the AzCDL-requested Constitutional Carry bill, into law. Arizona now becomes the third state to not require written permission from the government for law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to bear arms discretely. Because Arizona is the first state in the U.S. with a large urban population to take this significant step, this is a watershed moment for the entire country.

AzCDL has been working towards this moment since we formed 5 years ago. Constitutional Carry has always been one of our primary goals. Every success over the last 5 years has been pursued with today’s historic occasion in mind. However, having a goal is meaningless without the support and activism of over 3,000 committed members. The citizens of Arizona, along with the citizens of other states that follow in our footsteps, owe YOU, the members of AzCDL, a debt of gratitude.

If you don’t have a permit, don’t start carrying concealed just yet. The law won’t become effective until 90 days after “Sine Die” when the Legislature officially adjourns. Since they are still working through a slew of bills, we don’t expect Sine Die anytime soon. In past years, the effective date of bills has been around September.

CCW permits still have a purpose. You’ll need one to streamline gun purchases, to carry in states that honor Arizona permits and for carrying concealed in establishments that serve alcohol. And, the training you receive to obtain a permit is an added bonus. Along with restoring your right to bear arms, SB 1108 added additional training opportunities for obtaining a permit. NRA classes and training from places like Front Sight and Gunsite will be able to qualify as permit training.

If you decide not to obtain a CCW permit, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t train. The heaviest thing about wearing a firearm is the responsibility that comes with it. Take that money that you save on permit and renewal fees and spend it on quality training as often as you can. Lead by example – the world is watching.

For the record, AzCDL contacted the other major candidates for Governor, Terry Goddard, Dean Martin, Buzz Mills, and John Munger, about whether they would have signed SB 1108. At this point Dean Martin, Buzz Mills, and John Munger have responded that they support the bill and would have signed it. We are still waiting to hear from Terry Goddard.
 

Dahwg

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
661
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

Fred, if I may suggest.

I believe the current CCW permit is our "foot through the door" for the restoration of other rights. It may be more palatable for the politicos to allow campus carry for those who go through the trouble and training to get their permit. Very much like a permit is still required for carry in an establishment that serves alcohol and the other exceptions that are currently in place for CCW holders.

What are your thoughts?
 

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

Dahwg wrote:
Fred, if I may suggest. I believe the current CCW permit is our "foot through the door" for the restoration of other rights. It may be more palatable for the politicos to allow campus carry for those who go through the trouble and training to get their permit. Very much like a permit is still required for carry in an establishment that serves alcohol and the other exceptions that are currently in place for CCW holders. What are your thoughts?
The current permit system remains in place. Under federal law, only people with permits are allowed to carry on school (K-12) grounds, so that's the only option we have when rolling back the State restrictions. We'll also use it as an entry point for Campus Carry.

Fred
 

rmbrems

New member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
59
Location
, ,
imported post

Horray for AZ!

(a few questions though:)
I am a AZ permit holder, what happens when my permit expires?
will DPS still retain the permit division?
Any word on what will happen with reciprocity with other states?

Is AZ now like AK, where there will still be a CCW, but generally only for reciprocity?

sorry for being so ignorant, I just dont want to get caught "with my pants around my ankles" while concealing out of state.....
Thanks!!!
 

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

AZ Patriot wrote:
Horray for AZ!

(a few questions though:)
I am a AZ permit holder, what happens when my permit expires?
will DPS still retain the permit division?
Any word on what will happen with reciprocity with other states?

Is AZ now like AK, where there will still be a CCW, but generally only for reciprocity?

sorry for being so ignorant, I just dont want to get caught "with my pants around my ankles" while concealing out of state.....
Thanks!!!
The permit system does not go away. You can still renew your permits and DPS will still be issuing them. Reciprocity is unaffected, as long as you have a permit,because we still have a permit system that requires training.

I recommend reading the bil at the AZ legislature's site.

Fred
 

TOF

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
443
Location
Happy Jack, Arizona, USA
imported post

If Goddard responds with an affirmative that he would have signed the bill, DO NOT BELIEVE HIM.

I am happy so far with the Governor we have. She seems to irritate all sides from time to time which in my opinion is good.
 

aadvark

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,597
Location
, ,
imported post

Arizona is now one of the few: Alaska and Vermont!

Way to go Arizona!
 

lostone1413

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
199
Location
, ,
imported post

TOF wrote:
If Goddard responds with an affirmative that he would have signed the bill, DO NOT BELIEVE HIM.

I am happy so far with the Governor we have. She seems to irritate all sides from time to time which in my opinion is good.
I'm with you 100% on that. If I remember right Goddard was against Fish getting a new trial
 

Yard Sale

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
708
Location
Northern Nevada, ,
imported post

You are proud of a new law that violates the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments?

A. A person commits misconduct involving weapons by knowingly:
1. Carrying a deadly weapon without a permit pursuant to section 13‑3112 except a pocket knife concealed on his person OR WITHIN HIS IMMEDIATE CONTROL IN OR ON A MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION:
(b) WHEN CONTACTED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND FAILING TO ACCURATELY ANSWER THE OFFICER IF THE OFFICER ASKS WHETHER THE PERSON IS CARRYING A CONCEALED DEADLY WEAPON;

J. IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CONTACTS A PERSON WHO IS IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MAY TAKE TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF THE FIREARM FOR THE DURATION OF THAT CONTACT.
 

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

Yard Sale wrote:
You are proud of a new law that violates the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments?

A. A person commits misconduct involving weapons by knowingly:
1. Carrying a deadly weapon without a permit pursuant to section 13‑3112 except a pocket knife concealed on his person OR WITHIN HIS IMMEDIATE CONTROL IN OR ON A MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION:
(b) WHEN CONTACTED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND FAILING TO ACCURATELY ANSWER THE OFFICER IF THE OFFICER ASKS WHETHER THE PERSON IS CARRYING A CONCEALED DEADLY WEAPON;

J. IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CONTACTS A PERSON WHO IS IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MAY TAKE TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF THE FIREARM FOR THE DURATION OF THAT CONTACT.
The "when contacted" is a restatement of what is already in the false statements statutes.

The "temporary custody" is a codification of the Terry v Ohio U.S. Supreme Court decision that is alreadydefacto "law." By restating Terry v Ohio it keeps law enforcement to a tougher standard than the recent Arizona v Johnson which allows cops to disarm anyone they think appears dangerous - like an old man with a scowl, or more accurately, any minority.

Nothing new was given to law enforcement that they did not already have in Arizona statute or by court decisions. Meanwhile by eliminating ARS 13-3102.G wetook away the foundation for the 1994 Arizona Adams and Moerman decisions that clouded open and vechicle carry. And by removing the concealed weapons violations, we neutralized the 1990 Dano v Collins which gave us the CCW laws.

Real life is messy.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

Can one openly carry in an establishment which serves alcohol in AZ?

If so, this is pretty darn good. As a part-time Virginian, the notion of having to OC in establishments which serve alcohol is old hat (although that requirement no longer exists there), and being allowed to CC without a permit most anywhere is quite appealing.

I may have to spend some time in Arizona now. :celebrate
 
Top