Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: Where in the NM statutes does it state that loaded open carry is legal?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4

    Where in the NM statutes does it state that loaded open carry is legal?

    I keep reading and hearing how it's legal to open carry a loaded handgun in NM.

    But, I've scoured the statutes and can't find anything that specifically states it is legal.

    Can anyone help?

    Thanks!

    Shooter

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    81
    Find anything saying it's illegal?


  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    I keep reading and hearing how it's legal to open carry a loaded handgun in NM.

    But, I've scoured the statutes and can't find anything that specifically states it is legal.
    Scour the statutes all you want, and I'll bet you also won't find anything specifically stating that it's legal to breath, eat fried chicken, or go to church.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    shooter505,

    Yes, look as much as you will, you'll find no law/statute specifically stating you CAN Open Carry.

    It's very reasonable to assume that some such law IS to be found but in NM, it's a case of "if the laws doesn't say you can NOT do something, then that something is LEGAL." In other words, there's no law against it.

    See the NM State Constitution, Article II, Bill of Rights, Section 6, "The Right to Bear Arms" -- it only addresses CONCEALED carry (which is allowed with a permit of course), not OPEN carry. So, OC is legal according to the law-of-the-land in NM, its Constitution. Also, Section 6 has a pre-emption clause so cities/towns/villages can NOT pass any laws contrary to the Constitution...in this case, making OC illegal.
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 12-06-2010 at 08:56 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudcroft View Post
    shooter505,

    Yes, look as much as you will, you'll find no law/statute specifically stating you CAN Open Carry.

    It's very reasonable to assume that some such law IS to be found but in NM, it's a case of "if the laws doesn't say you can NOT do something, then that something is LEGAL." In other words, there's no law against it.

    See the NM State Constitution, Article II, Bill of Rights, Section 6, "The Right to Bear Arms" -- it only addresses CONCEALED carry (which is allowed with a permit of course), not OPEN carry. So, OC is legal according to the law-of-the-land in NM, its Constitution. Also, Section 6 has a pre-emption clause so cities/towns/villages can pass any laws contrary to the Constitution...in this case, making OC illegal.
    Do you mean to say Can NOT pass any laws contrary to the Constitution?


    Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
    No law shall abridge the right of the citizen
    to keep and bear arms for security and
    defense, for lawful hunting and recreational
    use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing
    herein shall be held to permit the carrying
    of concealed weapons. No municipality
    or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident
    of the right to keep and bear arms. (As
    amended November 2, 1971 and November
    2, 1986.)
    http://www.sos.state.nm.us/pdf/2007nmconst.pdf


    To paraphrase, the NM Constitution Art II(Bill of Rights) Sec6(Right to keep and bear arms) specifically states that municipalities cannot regulate the Right away. But it does NOT specifically allow concealed carry. Which is covered by statute.
    Last edited by wrightme; 12-06-2010 at 08:59 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    You're right...sorry! It was a typo and I just corrected it.

    Thanks for the notice.
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 12-07-2010 at 06:31 PM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Scour the statutes all you want, and I'll bet you also won't find anything specifically stating that it's legal to breath, eat fried chicken, or go to church.
    Was my question really that stupid?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by mserr View Post
    Find anything saying it's illegal?

    No...but, it just seems wierd that you can do something if it's not specifically prohibited in NM, where other states have statutes that specifically allow something.

    For example, in AZ one of the statutes says, "...The defensive display of a firearm by a person against another is justified when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force."

    For something as sensitive as the open carry issue is, you'd think that NM would have a statute that says, "Open carry of a loaded firearm is allowed" rather than depend on a form of circular logic centering on "if it's not prohibited, you can do it."

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    454
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    For something as sensitive as the open carry issue is, you'd think that NM would have a statute that says, "Open carry of a loaded firearm is allowed" rather than depend on a form of circular logic centering on "if it's not prohibited, you can do it."
    It's not circular logic, and it's not the way it is only in NM. It's the way it is everywhere- if it's not specifically stated to be illegal, it is indeed legal.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    Was my question really that stupid?
    No, it wasn't "stupid." But it was uninformed.
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    No...but, it just seems wierd that you can do something if it's not specifically prohibited in NM, where other states have statutes that specifically allow something.
    Only where such act is already prohibited, then allowed through exception.

    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505
    For example, in AZ one of the statutes says, "...The defensive display of a firearm by a person against another is justified when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force."
    This looks to be an excellent example of a statute that provides an exception to an act disallowed by statute; for instance, is this an exception to an "unlawful display" of a firearm?

    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505
    For something as sensitive as the open carry issue is, you'd think that NM would have a statute that says, "Open carry of a loaded firearm is allowed" rather than depend on a form of circular logic centering on "if it's not prohibited, you can do it."
    No, you'd not think that at all.

    Statutes disallow behaviors. If it is not disallowed (made criminal) by statute, it is de facto 'allowed.'

    Your view of it is contrary to how it actually operates.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    Was my question really that stupid?
    I wouldn't call it stupid, but....

    Imagine asking "Where in the NM statues does it say that eating a cheese hoagie is legal? or Where does it say that wearing white after Labor Day is legal?

    Laws tend to be written to prohibit actions with very few exceptions.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    There is something known in The Legal World called: DeFacto.
    The Word DeFacto most Closely means: That which is NOT ILLEGAL is NOT PROHIBITED.
    This Stems from Common Law.
    In New Mexico, Open Carry of a Loaded Pistol is LEGAL, so as long as you can LEGALY Own The Pistol, in EVERY Place, except the following Places: 1. Schools, 2. Colleges/Universities, 3. Places that Sell Alcohol, 4. State Parks.
    For more Precise Information, Please Contact Mr. Steve Aiken, who is a Professional Firearms Educator and Instructor from New Mexico, and His Colleges.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    Well, I for one would like to see something clearly stated, too. Besides a sometimes dimwit like Yours Truly, I think lots of cops (and DAs who twist things every which way but loose) probably would find something clearly stated in black & white easier to find and remember/check on the street.


    OT: Did something happen to the text formatting bar menu and smiley icons (not the "Post Icons") that used to be available for use in our responses here? I don't see them anymore...so I can't use emoticons or bold text, etc...where'd they go?

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Where does it say that it isn't?

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    143
    Nothing any clearer than this.

    NM Constitution and Gun Ownership

    CONSTITUTION OF THE
    STATE OF NEW MEXICO
    ADOPTED JANUARY 21, 1911
    (AS AMENDED THROUGH 1974)

    Sec. 6. No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and
    bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and
    recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing
    herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed
    weapons.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    snoball,

    It's still not clear enough for me, just like the 2nd Amdenment of the US Cosntitution isn't (apparently) clear enough to MANY people, either, which is one big reason we continue to have a problem there.

    We (and I) were talking about STATING in no uncertain terms that open carry is legal -- rather than simply leaving something out (not specifically named) to make it legal (by omission) and only name what is ILLEGAL -- meaning soemething like this (if I may paraphrase Sec. 6 here):

    "No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and
    bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and
    recreational use and for other lawful purposes, and nothing
    herein shall be held to prevent the open carry of weapons."

    And then add-on a sentence re: concealed carry NOT being permited (except with a permit). Whatever works best.

    Anti-gun citizens, media, politicians and law enforcement need it CRYSTAL CLEAR what the law says...there can't be ANY wiggle-room, therefore in cases of something this hugely important (the RKBA) I think something needs to be STATED as legal, not implied due to omission.

    [I would use bold type to show my changes to the original wording of Sec. 6 but we don't have those editing tools here anymore]
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 12-10-2010 at 08:00 PM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    454
    Cloudcroft,

    I understand what you mean. It would certainly be more clear that way.

    However, the laws are constructed the way they are. If something is not specifically prohibited in the laws as written, it is legal.

    That is the way the laws are written. You can choose to accept that or not, it's not going to change.

    Open carry is legal here in NM. You can choose to take advantage of that or not. If not, it's your loss.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    143
    AH.74 is right. We are fortunate that we are an open carry state and as far as I know it has never been questioned. It would be very difficult to change the precedent that has been set. So why do you need more if it is authorized and routinely done? Seems like better things that they could change the laws on that one that currently recognizes open carry even if the wording is not to your liking.
    We should be asking for guns to be permitted in our state parks (like we are now permitted in National Parks) and for a Castle Doctrine to protect us in case we do have to use deadly force. Now those are things that do not exist today!

  19. #19
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Can you imagine the volumes and volumes of law we would have to have to define what is legal? For instance, eating dinner at a fast food place at 2:00 am. No law against it, so it is legal. But if we did go to the system of defining what is legal, then some cop stops you for checking your mail in your bare feet and you would have to search through the volumes of law to find the one that said you could it.

    Personally, I like being told only what is illegal.
    Amen, I'd much rather try to remember the 100 things that affect me by being illegal than the 1,000,000 things that affect me by being Legal.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    AH.74,

    You don't know me, so you don't know that I OC almost every time I go to NM (but with a different (smaller) gun as it's the only OC holster I own...need to get an OC holster for my bigger gun) so there is no "loss" for me to experience (I don't know why you'd say that). In fact, I am getting my car and my stuff ready for my annual Christmas Trip back West (to El Paso, TX, and Rio Rancho, NM) right now. Also, a few of us in the ABQ/RR area are planning to have an OC-outing-get-together. And when I lived in El Paso, I carried every time I went up to Las Cruces (actually, as soon as I crossed the state line into NM -- usually on my motorcycle, I'd stop and OC).

    So you miss my point of what I was saying since I was not arguing whether it's legal or not to OC in NM...I go WAY BACK (I'm an older person) so I know that, and know parts of NM better than some of the residents there. Besides, as always, I wasn't just talking about NM, I was thinking of the bigger picture, about all states and their mish-mash of often contradictory laws and/or confusion about them. And even bigger, meaning the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution...how long has THAT "simple" sentence been argued? [a rhetorical question, no need to respond]


    NavyLT,

    Yes, you have a good and very logical point there...didn't think of that. BUT again -- and as I keep saying -- I think in cases of gross misunderstanding/misinterpretation -- such as INFRINGEMENT on the RKBA as "clearly stated" in the US Constitution's 2nd Amendment -- something MORE CLEAR needs to be stated to remove all doubt...it does not need doing for EVERYTHING that is legal. Just the "unalienable rights" stuff, especially those NOT enumerated (like the RIGHT of self-defense). And to say CLEARLY what to "bear" arms means. Apparently, some states are don't understand that since they have been UNconstitutional for DECADES (like Hawaii, since it doesn't allow any of its citizens to BEAR arms outside of their homes).

    Maybe the talk about changing the Constitution (IF it evers happens) could include rewriting the 2nd Amendment since the Founding Fathers could never have forseen the outright idiocy of politicians/judges (and most so-called Americans) -- and the deliberate anti-gun "disarmament" agenda of those people -- seen rampant TODAY. Things need to be spelled-out for such people.


    Now please, enough already...I get everyone's point -- but it's becoming boring and tiresome. We dance now.. (SNL -- "Sprockets").
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 12-11-2010 at 11:28 PM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    454
    Cloudcroft, there is no need to be defensive or to justify yourself to me, nor I to you. We're all here together.

    I answered the question you were posing. If you go way back you know as people have been saying that it would be impossible to categorize the laws according to what IS legal. It's just simply impossible.

    AFA why I said that, I feel it's true. Just as I don't know you, you also don't know me. I'm originally from an Eastern state that has very restrictive gun laws. I truly feel that if you choose not to take advantage of existing laws and do something you have the right to legally do, it really IS your loss. So I didn't mean you directly, I meant "you" collectively.

    If a gathering does happen and I'm able to make it I will. It would be a pleasure to meet you and everyone.

  22. #22
    Regular Member rushcreek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs. CO
    Posts
    924
    The propensity, or inclination to ASK THE GOVERNMENT FOR PERMISSION to freely exercise a right that SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED by the government constitutes THE SURRENDER of that RIGHT to the government. Slow but sure unabated deference to government authority has brought us to the brink of potentially losing ALL of our liberties.

    I understand , and appreciate the corner that we have worked ourselves into, but we are going to have to realize at some point that WE will have to remove these self-imposed "chains" -OURSELVES.

    THAT is precisely WHY the OPEN CARRY MOVEMENT is important . If we do not ASSERT THE RIGHT TO SPEAK simply because some people may not like what we have to say - we in effect surrender the RIGHT TO SPEAK. By the same logic if we to not ASSERT THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS - we have surrendered THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. Simply citing and referencing our 2A protected RTKBA DOES NOT ASSERT THE RIGHT, DOES NOT EXERCISE THE RIGHT, OR PRESERVE RESPECT FOR THE RIGHT.

    The judiciary has been allowed to insert a "wedge" under our constitutionally protected rights in the form of the often repeated cliche that our rights "are not absolute", and to case-by-case take upon itself presumptive authority to chew on, savor, digest, and eventually regurgitate our rights back to us-ALWAYS in a slightly diluted form. This amounts to nothing less than " SHALL NOT BE then INFRINGED - unless it becomes expedient for some agency of the government to do so."

    We have to shift away from this "Simon Says" mentality and restore respect for our freedoms by actually ASSERTING them. Like muscle mass - ANY FREEDOM can be lost through atrophy.

    I understand the hesitancy to assert a right - and actually exercise a freedom - in the midst of a concerted conspiracy to suppress the free exercise of the " inconvenient right" and the benefit that right affords - preservation of our lives. Unfortunately that is the history of human civilization and it is not going to ever change.

    If WE ARE UNWILLING TO UNDERTAKE THE TASK (AND RISKS)OF EXERCISING OUR FREEDOMS IN ORDER TO RESTORE RESPECT FOR THEM - who will ?

    I remember a time when there were no "fire ants " in Central Texas. Then slowly but surely they just started "showing up". The government didn't "allow" them in. Ofcourse whenever they annoy people enough - they are apt to get "treated" with extreme prejudice.
    Last edited by rushcreek2; 12-12-2010 at 02:26 PM.

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    Was my question really that stupid?
    Yes, yes it was. But that's doesn't mean you're stupid. Lots of people are raised by the Gov under the false impression that the law 'allows.'

  24. #24
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by shooter505 View Post
    I keep reading and hearing how it's legal to open carry a loaded handgun in NM.

    But, I've scoured the statutes and can't find anything that specifically states it is legal.

    Can anyone help?

    Thanks!

    Shooter
    Many others have answered... so I'll just add this..

    Read the book "ANTHEM" by Ayn Rand, if you like audiobooks it is under 2 1/2 hours listening time, public domain and can be downloaded into an IPOD or other mp3 player for FREE.

    Basicly, our society has collapsed and the UGLY regime that follows has made it so that for something to be LEGAL there must be a regulation stating so....

  25. #25
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958
    If my memory is correct, NM didn't have a CCW type permit until 2004. I think that was mainly for reciprocity with Texas (for most) so you didn't have to get a non-resident permit from someplace else. Open carry has been the norm in NM since 1911 (statehood) and prior... 'same as AZ (1912) upon ratification of the state constitutions. Many people are under the false assumption that the government has to allow the exercise of a right. No. What government does is deny, restrict or regulate the exercise of a right (any).

    In the absence of something being specifically prohibited... anything else is 'legal'. Carrying a sidearm here is just part of getting dressed.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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