New Mexico no longer recognizes Utah Carry Permit

imported post

FYI:

State of New Mexico Department of Public Safety
April 23, 2010 Contact: Peter Olson (505) 827-3361

New Mexico No Longer Recognizes Utah Concealed Carry License

Santa Fe—Effective immediately New Mexico will no longer recognize concealed carry licenses issued by the State of Utah for the purposes of reciprocity in New Mexico, as the requirements for licensure in Utah do not meet the standards required in New Mexico statute. Rules governing the concealed carrying of weapons and issuance of licenses require that training and other provisions be as stringent or substantially similar to New Mexico requirements.

Questions concerning licenses obtained from Utah by New Mexico residents have made it necessary to reevaluate which states will be recognized as valid in New Mexico. “We’ve had situations where certain concealed carry instructors in New Mexico solicit clients with the promise that if they train here and obtain a Utah license, which entails significantly less training than does a New Mexico license, it will qualify here,” said Department of Public Safety Secretary John Denko. “This is incorrect, and is nothing less than an effort to circumvent New Mexico concealed carry requirements which are designed to protect the public safety while honoring individual rights under the Second Amendment of the constitution.”

The state will also review the status of eighteen other states currently recognized on an informal basis, with the intent of entering into written agreements with these states to ensure compliance with New Mexico law. These states are: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming.

New Mexico currently has a written reciprocity agreement in place with Texas; the status of this agreement will remain unchanged.

imported post

Thread on the New Mexico portion of the site at http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum39/42917.html

imported post

Thanks for briniging this to our attention utbagpiper. It is too bad, but unfortunately in my personal opinion we have cheapened our own permit by allowing individuals to get a utah permit without ever having to come to the state of Utah. It appears that there was some consideration given to dropping the Utah permit as a result of instructors offering New Mexico resident Utah permits in lieu of going through the more rigorous New Mexico standards, and I think that hurt us. I am not saying I am in favor of tightening up the requirements or making them more stringent here in Utah, but we really should be more protective of the permit and require those that get it to at least come to the state for instruction. I don't care what those from out of state think of my opinion, I fear however that this is just the beginning of what could be a future pattern of lost reciprocity or recognition. Thanks again for the post!

imported post

Speaking of reciprocity, I heard a rumor that Nevada repealed its decision not to recognize Utah permits. Is there any meat to this, or is it just conjecture from a co-worker? Last I heard, their position on the matter was unchanged.

Kevin

imported post

LovesHisXD45 wrote:

Speaking of reciprocity, I heard a rumor that Nevada repealed its decision not to recognize Utah permits. Is there any meat to this, or is it just conjecture from a co-worker? Last I heard, their position on the matter was unchanged.

Kevin

Click to expand...

That is true as well... I had a trip planned to Las Vegas, but decided against it due to their decision

imported post

Rottie wrote:

Thanks for briniging this to our attention utbagpiper. It is too bad, but unfortunately in my personal opinion we have cheapened our own permit by allowing individuals to get a utah permit without ever having to come to the state of Utah. It appears that there was some consideration given to dropping the Utah permit as a result of instructors offering New Mexico resident Utah permits in lieu of going through the more rigorous New Mexico standards, and I think that hurt us. I am not saying I am in favor of tightening up the requirements or making them more stringent here in Utah, but we really should be more protective of the permit and require those that get it to at least come to the state for instruction. I don't care what those from out of state think of my opinion, I fear however that this is just the beginning of what could be a future pattern of lost reciprocity or recognition. Thanks again for the post!

Click to expand...

My question is, why don't they just say, "if you live in New Mexico, you need a permit from New Mexico."? Or like Colorado, and accept Utah permits as long as the holder is a Utah resident?

I think I'm going to send a letter to NM and NV, any ideas who to send them to?

imported post

YoZUpZ wrote:

My question is, why don't they just say, "if you live in New Mexico, you need a permit from New Mexico."? Or like Colorado, and accept Utah permits as long as the holder is a Utah resident?

Click to expand...

That may have required a legislative change, where ending reciprocity was an administrative change.

I'm just guessing, but it makes sense, and fits.

imported post

YoZUpZ wrote:

I think I'm going to send a letter to NM and NV, any ideas who to send them to?

Click to expand...

In New Mexico, send it to the State's Department of of Public Safety
April 23, 2010 Contact: Peter Olson (505) 827-3361.

In Nevada it is the association of Sheriffs who makes the determination of which permits to recognize and which to reject.

But in both cases, I'd suggest also sending a letter to the tourist board and State legislators letting them know why you are choosing to spend your vacation/tourist/convention dollars in Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, etc, RATHER than in Nevada or New Mexico.

Charles

imported post

One more thought here. NM will happily issue you a non-resident permit (for a fee). And, NM enjoys extended domain so it is perfectly legal to carry in your car without a permit.

On the flip side, NM bans carrying (even with a permit) into ANY establishment that sells alcohol, including for off premises consumption. Good luck finding a gas station, grocery store, etc that doesn't sell at least beer. All are off limits to legal carry anyway. You cannot legally carry a gun while eating out except maybe at a McDonalds. You can't legally walk into a gas station with a gun anyway.

Simply put, while I'd rather have recognition than not, it isn't like we've lost anything huge here.

Any corrections or counter-thoughts?

Charles

imported post

Charles I agree that we have not lost anything huge here. I do worry about the message this sends to those observing as well as other states who are experiencing the same problem with the Utah permit. I'd like to lobby here and get it so that out of staters may not get Utah permits without coming here. I am sure that New Mexico's decision also had financial reasons for no longer recognizing the Utah permit. I heard Clark Aphosian talking about it on the radio today and he stated that he thought the financial reasons of loss of revenue for out of state permits was a contributing factor. I can see that point. I think NM went about this the wrong way though. It would have been just as easy to say they will only honor Utah permits held by Utah residents and it would have accomplished the same thing. My initial knee jerk reaction was that we should turn around and not recognize New mexico permits, however after 5 seconds of thought it is clear that this helps nothing and would only hurt second ammendment supporters from NM.

I would like to see the Utah permit more protected and not given out so easily to those out of state, though I think it should still be available to those who actually come here. While I want to lobby to have this happen I am not oblivious to the law of unintended consequences. Can you think of what some of the negatives might be for trying to get this changed?

imported post

Rottie wrote:

I would like to see the Utah permit more protected and not given out so easily to those out of state, though I think it should still be available to those who actually come here. While I want to lobby to have this happen I am not oblivious to the law of unintended consequences. Can you think of what some of the negatives might be for trying to get this changed?

Click to expand...

It's a step in the wrong direction, for starters. Why impose further limitations on what should be a protected right?

imported post

Rottie,

I'm not unsympathetic to your views here. Speaking only for myself, I am slightly less charitable than some others and if the choice were to clearly be between preserving the value and acceptance of the Utah permit for Utahns, or in keeping the permit as easy as possible for non-Utahns to acquire at the expense of losing recognition, I'd side with protecting the permit.

It is, after all, Utahns who have worked to make our permit laws what they are. But I don't know that this was the case here. The problem is Utah's permit is in certain ways less onerous to get than New Mexico's. Plus, there are clearly instructors who are too willing to encourage people to skirt their State law rather than working to improve it. NM residents need to work to just accept all permits, or go permit-free ala Arizona.

Until then, I'd suggest that Utah consider either no changes to our law, OR, requiring non-residents applying for a Utah permit to provide either a copy of their home State permit or an affidavit that their State does not provide shall issue permits. Those living in shall issue States really should get a home State permit first and then get a Utah permit just to avoid this problem.

Charles

imported post

utbagpiper wrote:

The problem is Utah's permit is in certain ways less onerous to get than New Mexico's.

Click to expand...

Why can't the problem be that New Mexico's Permit is tougher to obtain than ours?

I imagine that this problem is similar to Nevada's. Rather than a legislature making the decision on which permits to recognize, such as the case is here in Utah, that a small group of law enforcement officials decided that our standards did not quite mesh with theirs.

imported post

Kevin Jensen wrote:

Why can't the problem be that New Mexico's Permit is tougher to obtain than ours?

I imagine that this problem is similar to Nevada's. Rather than a legislature making the decision on which permits to recognize, such as the case is here in Utah, that a small group of law enforcement officials decided that our standards did not quite mesh with theirs.

Click to expand...

Good point about the real problem. Of course on that front, the real problem is that permits are needed in the first place.:banghead: I sure don't have a permit to attend church, read a newspaper, or to demand a lawyer if I am questioned by police.

Not much I can do about how other States run things. I can work to make sure Utah's permit strikes that fine balance between being as non-oppressive as any permit can be, while still be "credible" enough to be widely accepted.

If additional onus is required to keep the permit widely accepted, I'd prefer that onus be born by non-Utah-residents, rather than Utah-residents, all else being equal.

Charles

imported post

utbagpiper wrote:

... Speaking only for myself, I am slightly less charitable than some others and if the choice were to clearly be between preserving the value and acceptance of the Utah permit for Utahns, or in keeping the permit as easy as possible for non-Utahns to acquire at the expense of losing recognition, I'd side with protecting the permit. ... Until then, I'd suggest that Utah consider either no changes to our law, OR, requiring non-residents applying for a Utah permit to provide either a copy of their home State permit or an affidavit that their State does not provide shall issue permits. Those living in shall issue States really should get a home State permit first and then get a Utah permit just to avoid this problem.

Charles

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. Those who would like to have a Utah permit should be required to get a permit from their own state first or show that their state does not provide shall issue permits. Is there any negative you could see that could come from pushing for this in order to preserve the recognition of the Utah permit?

imported post

utbagpiper wrote:

Until then, I'd suggest that Utah consider either no changes to our law, OR, requiring non-residents applying for a Utah permit to provide either a copy of their home State permit or an affidavit that their State does not provide shall issue permits. Those living in shall issue States really should get a home State permit first and then get a Utah permit just to avoid this problem.

Click to expand...

I like it. I don't think an affidavit is required, though. The set of may-issue and no-issue states is well-known.

imported post

swillden wrote:

I like it. I don't think an affidavit is required, though. The set of may-issue and no-issue states is well-known.

Click to expand...

Agreed. We could just have a check box on the form that you live in a non-shall-issue State. BCI can easily keep the list of which States are which.

Charles

imported post

New Mexico updates -- Actually, since 2007, one can conceal carry into an establishment that sells liquor for consumption off-premises. (One may not OPEN carry into an establishment selling liquor for off-premises consumption. I never thought open carrying into a liquor store was all that bright in the first place, but that's just me.)

Effective July 1 of this year, one can conceal carry into a restaurant that serves liquor and derives at least 60% of its revenue from food sales. Things are slowly improving.

Think Utah licensing got a might loose in the eyes of those administering the New Mexico program. Of course, this meant that NM residents were sending their $$ to Utah, rather than taking the more stringent NM course. States hate to lose revenue. I would think they would have the decency to honor Utah permits for Utah residents, but apparently not.

imported post

I believe this has nothing to do with revenue, but has everything to do with gun control.

imported post

Kevin Jensen wrote:

I believe this has nothing to do with revenue, but has everything to do with gun control.

Click to expand...

I think it is a little of both. Word is that a new head of NM DPS is hostile to concealed carry, whereas his predecessor was supportive of it. If true, that is clearly gun control.

However, we are also hearing that NM permit instructors are upset at other instructors pitching the less expensive Utah permit and "stealing" their students who would otherwise have paid for the NM permit training. If true, that is clearly a revenue issue, though admitedly less on the goverment side than on the private sector side. I do suspect that if true, someone in government also figured that selling fewer NM permits was costing the State some money as well.

Just as we can and do change laws and policies to advance RKBA, we have to remember that the other side can sometimes change laws and policies to attack RKBA. Bearing that in mind, there are times to push the limits of the law and there are times to stay well within the lines, so to speak. We have chosen to convince the Utah legislature to recognize permits issued throughout the US. I kind of cringe every time I see someone publicly encouragnig someone who--usually do to age--cannot get a Utah permit to go geta Maine permit instead. Doubly so if that person intends to use the Maine permit for OCing.

No doubt or argument this is 100% legal today. But I do have some concerns it could lead to calls to make our laws more restrictive if it were to become at all widespread. "What good is a right/privilege if it isn't exercised?" some may ask. My answer is simple. It is of great benefit to those who travel through our State using such permits. It may be of great benefit to a few who really need or want to carry, but can do so discretely for a couple of years--and probably never have to produce a permit in that time--rather than advertising that they are carrying a gun at 18.

Ditto when someone chooses to routinely CC into a postedd church--and doubly so if they advertise (however obliquely) that they do so--because the penalty is "just" an infraction. That penalty could be raised and if the right entities were pushing to do so, we might find it pretty tough to fight it. That would really hurt the guys who carry regularly and on rare ocassion honestly forget to disarm before running into a church on a weeknight. Ditto the gal who really needs to carry 24/7.

Bottom line, at the end of the day, our RKBA is subject to political realities and we need to remember that. We need to pick our battles wisely and then be bold. But there are areas where we need not to pick battles (at least not yet).

Charles