Visiting Tucson This Weekend...

azcdlfred said:

Constitutional Carry means you can carry openly or discreetly ("concealed" implies the criminal act of hiding something) without needing to ask permission from the government via a "permit."

Arizona's constitution orginially protected all forms of carry. In 1990 a state appeals court ruled that discreet carry wasn't protected. The state supreme court upheld the decision by refusing to review it. In 1994 Arizona's onerous CCW law was created.

Fast forward to 2010 and we (AzCDL) succeeded in removing the requirement, in statute, to have a permit to carry discreetly.

Even though discreet carry is not protected in the New Mexico constitution, there is no reason why the legislature can't pass a law saying a permit is not required to carry discreetly.
Fred

Click to expand...

When I first came to Arizona (1966) you were either heeled or not and there was no discussion or question as to how. It wasn't an issue for consideration or conversation. It was just a 'given' that people carried guns. How they did it... or if they did it, or with what was never an issue. Then came the GCA of 1968 on the heels of the MLK riots and media hype. The media spread this idea that ya had to have a permit to carry a gun. The media also spread the mis/disinformation that guns had to be registered as well. We still hear/read this crap from so-called journalists. Where'd this come from? Consider the MSM is based to a large degree in NYC and DC. The 'Sullivan Act' has been imposed upon NYC since 1911. (An onerous unconstitutional law enacted for and by the benefit of onerous politicians.) This is the culture these media types live and work in. We just witnessed an example of this when the guy carried an AR-15 at a Tea Party event in PHX last year or so... 'n the MSM TV weenies went nuts in Chicago... MSNBC or somethin'... They couldn't believe it!

I remember the 'permit' thing in '90... and the arguments of unconstitutionality (State Constitution). I take a bit of issue with Fred's stance that a 'law' "saying a permit is not required to carry discreetly." Laws don't tell ya what you 'can ' do. Laws tell ya what you can't. They don't need to pass a law... they need to omit/nullify the damn thing 'n make it an option for reciprocity carry or whatever... such as 'Campus/Restaurant Carry' if that's what it takes to satisfy the bed-wetters. I have an Az CWP... to cover all the 'gray' areas that might prove a problem. My primary concern was transiting or riding/hiking the national parks... 'til that stuff went by the boards not long ago. Hell yes I carried a gun in the parks. There's nothin' out there... and cell phone usage is spotty. Not that a cell phone is gonna do you much good anyway. I don't own a GPS unit to give coordinates in the event somethin' went down. 2-3 miles (much less more) off road 'n you may as well be on another planet. You're on your own.

Sonora Rebel said:

I take a bit of issue with Fred's stance that a 'law' "saying a permit is not required to carry discreetly." Laws don't tell ya what you 'can ' do. Laws tell ya what you can't. They don't need to pass a law... they need to omit/nullify the damn thing 'n make it an option for reciprocity carry or whatever

Click to expand...

You are correct. To get to Constitutional Carry, we didn't add a law saying you could carry discreetly, we eliminated the law that said you had to have a permit. We're working on the rest of the stuff that requires a permit or prevents carrying. It's a long battle and it is a lot more Sun Szu and Saul Alinksy than it is "Mr. Smith Goes to Washingon."

Fred