Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Only carrying one concealed handgug at a time

  1. #1
    Regular Member jamesisel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee ,WI
    Posts
    76

    Post imported post

    Can anyone shed some light as to the reasoning behind this is law in NM?

    Do you thing it's a good restriction?


    ******Handgun, I mean

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    No, it doesn't make any sense *I* can come up with. Many cops carry 2 guns, even though one is OC and the other CC (BUG)...don't know why civilians couldn't carry 2 CC guns.

    But then, most all gun laws are written up by people that have little or noknowledgeofguns-- and especially about theUSE ofguns (i.e., TACTICS). Maybe there was no 'reasoning,'just 'write up something and pass it.' Did they ever ask for debate/input from citizens on the issue? Did they do any research on it?

    Other states -- such as Texas -- allowpeople to carry as many guns CC asthey wish, but Idon't know if they went any deeper into what and how one would carry, either.

    -- John D.
    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  3. #3
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Clovis, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    219

    Post imported post

    cloudcroft wrote:
    No, it doesn't make any sense *I* can come up with. Many cops carry 2 guns, even though one is OC and the other CC (BUG)...don't know why civilians couldn't carry 2 CC guns.

    But then, most all gun laws are written up by people that have little or noknowledgeofguns-- and especially about theUSE ofguns (i.e., TACTICS). Maybe there was no 'reasoning,'just 'write up something and pass it.' Did they ever ask for debate/input from citizens on the issue? Did they do any research on it?

    Other states -- such as Texas -- allowpeople to carry as many guns CC asthey wish, but Idon't know if they went any deeper into what and how one would carry, either.

    -- John D.
    Almost correct John D.. Gun bills are introduced by knowledgeable firearms professionals, normally in association with the NRA, and are negotiated and compromised down to something they can get passed in their legislature at that time. Once a bill is passed - after being watered down to something liberal legislators would agree to - it is open to revision in the future. The ground work is laid out as a starting point.

    The single gun restriction was added to the original CHL bill in a compromise between the bill sponsor, NRA and state lobbyists, DPS and one legislator, who is also responsible for another provision we are working to correct.

    Do we like it when legislators take a good bill and water it down to something we have to keep working on year after year to fix? No, of course not. However, we have a choice - we can allow them - even HELP them - water our bills down to something they can agree on, pass,and keep working to fix it, or we can let them kill the bills, gain nothing and have to start all over from the beginning if we want the change made. I had to kill a bill this past session as a compromise to get SB 40 passed. It's ok, we gained some ground and I'll be back in 2011 to get that bill I killed back on the table. It's a process. Do we like it? Absolutely not. Does it work - absolutely.

    I'm not at liberty to share what we're working to fix but I will tell you that the single concealed firearm issue is one issue being considered. It is, however, a long way down on the list of significantly more important issues we need to fix first. We have to choose our battles carefully depending on what we feel we can gain support for.

    John D.- You asked "Did they ever ask for debate/input from citizens on the issue? Did they do any research on it?" The answer is yes. I have asked time and again for NM residents to contact their legislators with comments on this, and every other forum I am on, on every web site I own, with almost no success. Everyone likes to offer their opinions on open forums where they are anonymous but for some reason, when it comes to actually disclosing who they are, standing up for what they profess to believe and actually do some good to move their goals forward - they just can't muster the time or effort. Further, everyone is always invited to attend and speak their mind at every single committee meeting and all hearings related to firearm legislation, bills and Administrative Code changes. A perfect example was the promulgation hearing regarding the Administrative Code change requested by Gov. Richardson on the recent alcohol Statute change - held Apr 23rd. It was widely advertised and held in a huge auditorium in Santa Fe - to a screaming throng of - ONE PERSON - that wasn't either part of the DPS team required to host it - or those of us that were part of getting the legislation passed. ONE PERSON. Tara Mica, our NRA Lobbyist, had to fly from Austin, TX, I had to close my business and drive 450 miles round trip to Santa Fe and back and DPS had to bring five Officers, support staff and attorneys from Alb - so that ONE PERSON could be there to speak his mind. He was from Santa Fe -- and never said one word for the record. I'm thrilled that even that one person took time to drive across town to attend. There have been some that NO ONE from the public has taken time to show up.

    We're not going to ever satisfy everyone. It's simply not possible. Unfortunately, the average individual doesn't understand the political processes in their respective states and doesn't take time to educate themselves on what they can and can't get accomplished legislatively.

    Folks, I have said before and I say this again. If there is something you don't like in our laws, complaining to your friends, making your views known - to your friends - accomplishes nothing - your friends already know your positions and agree with you. It's kinda like petting your dog. You care for your dog day in and day out. You love your dog. Your dog loves you and appreciates you sharing your life with him. But all you gain from that association is a warm and fuzzy feeling inside. No different than when you hop on a firearms forum and tell everyone you like firearms and don't like some restriction in the system. You get that warm fuzzy feeling, but accomplish absolutely nothing to effect change to what you don't like. Take your voice to the legislators that have the ability to change what you don't like, for you. Show up at hearings and committee meetings and speak up. Act when someone asks you to contact legislators - we know not everyone can make time and travel to attend all the BS we have to work through, but everyone that has a computer can email their legislators, make phone calls and write letters to help to actually accomplish something positive in our states.

    This is not a rant. It's simply straight talk on how we get stuck with what we have in our Statutes and Administrative Code, and what it takes to fix it.


    What it takes - is you helping when asked.

    Steve Aikens



  4. #4
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Clovis, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    219

    Post imported post

    Hmm. Duplicate post removed.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the explanation, Steve. To us looking at the end result of legislation, we'd never know any 'experts' were involved. But after reading your post, I feel I may be one of the people you are talking about so I think I should say something in my defense...

    RE: people who post in forums but don't get involved, or, disappear when they are needed:

    I've 'gotten involved' for years in variousthings...I'm not quite the wallpaper type.I HAVE written/contacted politicians (including governors and even TX US Senators...even US Presidents, Prime Ministers of other countries such asSouth Africaand Israel re: one issue or another, and the South Vietnamese Embassy in 1975 when lots of us RVN vets were trying to get back over thereto helpwhen the North invaded -- now that's involvement!), was a member of the TCDL (Texas Citizens Defense League based on the VCDL of Virginia) here in TX and even donated a fair amount of $$ to it (I don't think NM has a NMCDL -- it should). While I did not feel qualified to function in any leadership role (partly because I do not do a blase/deadpan/wishy-washy Ted Kopple very wellsince I am too 'intense' in my views (I call it passionate/action-oriented instead),I decided I MIGHT make pro-gun people look bad if *I* got to speaking in public/on TV),I thought I could at least help fund (although not rich, just a disabled vet on a fixed VA Disability income) the TCDL effort yet be out of public sight (a 'silent partner' if you will). Kind of like my view re: Christian missionaries abroad: If you won't or can't go,help/enable those who DO go!

    So I tried to aid the TCDL $$-wise...until it unraveled.

    I would also run for political office so I REALLY could have a way to get things done (as I have said earlier), but can't due to my 'colorful' past. And, I'm probably too honest to be a politician...and being a non-PC no-nonsense conservative, probably would never get elected, or the campaign donations even to RUN for office to find out. I have ancouraged a 'big-talker' in the TX forum to run for office, but when it comes down to it, he doesn't step up.

    If I lived in NM (and might someday, 6 years from now), I'll be an even older guy (66) but still might be able to help (health permitting) by participating somehow -- if NM needs any help in 6 years (but I suspect by then NM would have just about all that can be gotten re: pro-gun laws). I visit NM once a year (my sister lives in Rio Rancho, but she is not very pro-gun and is not a 'get involved' person anyway), but since I'm not a resident of NM, or vote there, I don't see how I could be of any help OR would NM politicians be interested in anything this TX 'foreigner' has to say.Interesting: We're all supposed to be Americans and SHOULD all have the very same civil rights -- including exercising our Constitutional right of the RKBA and the right of self-defense, regardless of what state we live in -- but it still comes down to the individual states, doesn't it. So what's the point of the "American" label? What does THAT really mean? [rhetorical questions]

    Anyway, as for nowin TX, I'll just be here 2 more year at most then I'm leaving the state for good, whether OC passes or not. As I said, there is no TCDL here anymore, so apparently, even THAT wasn't doable (not enough interest or support I guess), so maybe one should conclude that the 'Great State of Texas' doesn't deserve any further help -- kind of like maybe the traditional/old America as we knew it doesn't deserve to survive if there are so many wanting PC, liberal, socialist 'change' -- so likewise, maybe the people of TX deserve what they have now because apparently that's the waythe majoritywants it. I don't know why Texans can't come up with a serious group effort as VA has demonstrated for years now, but they haven't (I'm not talking abut the TSRA (too similar to the NRA), but a grass-roots thing like VA's VCDL).

    On top of that, our Governor Perry doesn't LEAD (Governor Brewer of AZ puts him to shame), and I found out yesterday he won't support similar immigration legislation to what Brewer signed...so he is proving to be useless -- we need another governor who will LEAD and support issues important to Texans (OC and stopping rampant illegal immigration here just for starters).Perry can't/won't LEAD. Like the President of the US is supposed to LEAD, I expect Governors of states to LEAD also.

    If I move to repressive (gun-rights-wise) Hawaii for 3-4 years after TX, THAT state seems a lost cause even getting any bill SPONSORED, let alone voted on...but if no one else (firearms 'experts') is asked to give input on anything by the Hawaii legislature/bill sponsors, should I be living there at that time, I would be pleased to get involved (again, though, I may be too 'passionate' in supporting the pro-gun postion). Unfortunately, I'm VERY sure the Honolulu POLICE CHIEF will be asked to give testimony -- being an 'expert' of course (!) andhis 'expert testimony'would be AGAINST any CC or OC legislation for the people of Hawaii -- but I WOULD try to do my part anyway. That's 2 years from now though, and only if I decide to move there.

    In short, I have gotten involved in things all my life, and have won most of those battles. Lost a few, but won most. My support of the TCDL here in TX wasn't enough, the TX legislature doesn't meet in 2010 (now THAT's wrong), and many say 2011 won't get anything done, either. I have no idea what's wrong with TX.

    And as for me, maybe I have just 'gotten involved' with losing causes. I mean, trying to prevent the fall of South Vietnam didn't work out too well, did it.



    Regardless, I remain a pro-gun/2nd Amendment/self-defense advocate...wherever I am.

    -- John D.

    P.S. I agree with you: 'Preaching to the choir' in these forumsis pretty useless, things don't change because of our 'rants' here in a vacuum, and that's one reason I have stopped posting inmost forums now. And, Isometimes wonder why I continue posting in this one, too. Sometitmes, getting banned from a forum is a blessing in disguise...


    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, NM
    Posts
    114

    Post imported post

    Thanks, Steve. Relatively new to NM and it helps to get some historical perspective.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •