Some SB1108 questions...

Mudjack said:

I think the real truth of the matter is that God is pisses off at America and he's in the process of kicking the living **** out of her.

Click to expand...

Geeez, go back inside and play the penny slots. Stop bothering us.

Mudjack said:

I have never and will never watch, let alone rely on, "news" from FAUX.

And it is so... it is dead. As in, not coming back. You are almost as funny as the guy on this forum who said the Heathcare bill WILL BE repealed. You guys are a laugh a minute sometimes.

No need to move to Arizona anymore. What was once the freest state in the union is, in one fell swoop from a Federal judge, just like all the others.

Click to expand...

Its not dead. Just delayed. I guess you don't know that 3 years ago, when Employer Sanctions was passed, it had a temporary injunction as well, then was upheld by the 9th.

Go do your homework.

Homework's done...

I say it's dead, you say it isn't.

Arguing with me will not solve the problem.

Have it your way.

You win. Enjoy.

Mudjack said:

No need to move to Arizona anymore. What was once the freest state in the union is, in one fell swoop from a Federal judge, just like all the others.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, I don't have to ask a sheriff for permission to get a concealed carry permit here in AZ. Heck, now I don't even need to get permission from anybody. But they're nice enough to keep the permits around so i can travel to other states and still CCW, including states like Texas where there's no open carry.

Oh, wait, Nevada doesn't recognize Arizona's permit. And several cities don't allow any firearms, and there's no state preemption.

So a federal judge said we have to keep putting up with illegal immigrants, I don't see how that makes us 'just like all the others' in regard to freedom.

Oh, wait, Nevada doesn't recognize Arizona's permit. And several cities don't allow any firearms, and there's no state preemption.

IIRC, Nevada has total preemption, except for a few local ordinances from before the preemption law that were grandfathered in.

Arizona is "like all the others" in the sense that the Fed can tell y'all what to do and how to do it on a mere whim. Like they just did yesterday with your illegal immigration law -- that never was a law -- and that, to my mind, will never be a law.

Just like all the others.

It's not supposed to be that way.

Like I said, you disagree, and that's fine. Enjoy.

COMMENT REMOVED DUE TO RULE 15: WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts

me812 said:

Oh, wait, Nevada doesn't recognize Arizona's permit. And several cities don't allow any firearms, and there's no state preemption.
IIRC, Nevada has total preemption, except for a few local ordinances from before the preemption law that were grandfathered in.

Click to expand...

And Arizona just trumped that with HB 2543 which gets rid of all "grandfathered" and conflicting guns laws, and SB 1153 which establishes knife preemption.

Add in Constitutional Carry which makes the permit optional while liberalizing the requirements (ala Florida) to get a permit, HB 2629 which prohibits local gun registration under the guise of temprorary storage, HB 2307 the Firearms Freedom Act, and HCR 2008 which proposes a constitutional right to hunt and fish, and I'd say we're moving in the right direction.

Fred

Since this has nothing to do with OC...

I will bring it back to topic. I too have some questions about constitutional carry. We all know that we no longer need permits and whatnot for CC. However, in what ways did this bill change the laws to either benefit or hurt OC? Are there now more ways for me to OC? Can I now keep my firearm on my belt in a car? How was all that affected by this bill?

Snakemathis said:

I will bring it back to topic. I too have some questions about constitutional carry. We all know that we no longer need permits and whatnot for CC. However, in what ways did this bill change the laws to either benefit or hurt OC? Are there now more ways for me to OC? Can I now keep my firearm on my belt in a car? How was all that affected by this bill?

Click to expand...

Open Carry greatly benefits from the new lanugage. Gone is the language about belt holsters, etc., along with the vehicle carry lanugage. That also means that the 1994 Adams and Moerman decisions, which all but made open and vehicle carry illegal without a permit, no longer apply. So, if no one can see your openly carried gun it's not an issue. There is new language about open carry if you are between 18 and 21, but it's broader than the old langauge regarding holsters, etc.

Fred

me812 said:

Oh, wait, Nevada doesn't recognize Arizona's permit. And several cities don't allow any firearms, and there's no state preemption.

IIRC, Nevada has total preemption, except for a few local ordinances from before the preemption law that were grandfathered in.

Click to expand...

That will get you jacked up with a face plant in sections of Clark County... But, that sort'a thing keeps me 'n mine outta 'Vegas, so it's all good in the end. Legalized thuggery was never one of my things to experience.

Mudjack said:

Arizona is "like all the others" in the sense that the Fed can tell y'all what to do and how to do it on a mere whim. Like they just did yesterday with your illegal immigration law -- that never was a law -- and that, to my mind, will never be a law.

Just like all the others.

It's not supposed to be that way.

Like I said, you disagree, and that's fine. Enjoy.

The only way to stop them now is by outright force. But that won't happen either because Americans have lost their country and are too weak and stupid and lazy and uncaring to stand up and take it back.

Click to expand...

Ahhh... a communique straight from the bunker. Take it over to Stormfront... 'jack.

azcdlfred said:

Open Carry greatly benefits from the new lanugage. Gone is the language about belt holsters, etc., along with the vehicle carry lanugage. That also means that the 1994 Adams and Moerman decisions, which all but made open and vehicle carry illegal without a permit, no longer apply. So, if no one can see your openly carried gun it's not an issue. There is new language about open carry if you are between 18 and 21, but it's broader than the old langauge regarding holsters, etc.

Fred

Click to expand...

I myself am one of those between 18 and 21 who actively open carry. How does the new language affect me?

Arizona recognizes Nevada permits however...

which is why I frequent the state carrying open or concealed -- no problemo -- anywhere I go.

Thanks, Arizona!

Oh, and I forgot...

Montana, Idaho, Florida, Utah and a whole bunch of others. Enjoy!

Sorry to jump off topic again, but...

I have to say that I forgot to add why I think they stopped the AZ law from being implemented:

They are stalling for time while they get the amnesty ready to ram down our throats.

We defeated it in 2007. This time we aren't going to be so lucky.

Then, once the amnesty is given to all the scum, they might let you have your law back. Because the law will make little or no difference to them once amnesty is given.

Snakemathis said:

I myself am one of those between 18 and 21 who actively open carry. How does the new language affect me?

Click to expand...

See ARS 13-3102.B.1 & B.3 ARS 13-3102 .

Fred

azcdlfred said:

See ARS 13-3102.B.1 & B.3 ARS 13-3102 .

Fred

Click to expand...

So if Im reading the correctly, this now means that any holster where the firearms is partially visible, such as IWB, is now considered OC in Az?

Yeah... but, it doesn't matter unless you're under 21.

Yup

"(a) A manner where any portion of the firearm or holster in which the firearm is carried is visible.

(b) A holster that is wholly or partially visible.

(c) A scabbard or case designed for carrying weapons that is wholly or partially visible."

It says at least part of the firearm, or the holster carrying it, has to be visible. IWB should be OK as long as you tuck the outermost layer of clothing in behind it.

Now, for those who are 18, 19 or 20 years old, it looks like the old Illinois fanny pack argument gets to come to Arizona. You see in Illinois, people concealed carry legally by unloading the gun and putting it in a special fanny pack that was designed for firearms. It doesn't scream gun, but it was designed to carry a gun.

There are all sorts of cases out there designed for carrying guns, some look like day planners, others are just backpacks with space for a holster.

And then there's the old argument over what is and isn't considered luggage.

As broad as that language is, it looks like the 18-20 crowd gets to concealed carry too.

I was just looking at my Crossbreed Supertuck and if I tuck my shirt between my 1911 and my pants, the clippy part that goes around the belt is still visible. With a tiny gun, it wouldn't be very visible at all and the holster would still be showing.

I myself am one of those between 18 and 21 who actively open carry. How does the new language affect me?

It doesn't, really. Just keep doing what you've always been doing.