slapmonkey, you began the discussion w/YOUR post 11 leading with LR-130 & HB 102...
then when challenged for clarification regarding the point you were attempting to make w/this MT ballot & statutes affected by said ballot!
Updated with changes regarding LR-130. Restriction on local government regulation of firearms/State Preemption.
I will be updating again once HB102 is signed by the governor and asking John to update the opencarry.org site details for Montana (Permitless carry maps and other applicable changes related to HB102 and LR-130).
I clearly stated in the very first post that I only made changes regarding LR-130, which I specified was changes in "Restriction on local government regulation of firearms/State Preemption", <--
this is a section on the first post of this sticky thread.
I further stated that
I would be updating again once HB102 is signed by the governor, at which point I would ask John to update the opencarry.org site with information changes as well.
When challenged with what's going to be updated
I replied with a summary bullet point list of things that HB102 was going to do for us once signed. I agree that I never cited HB102 text, the closest I got was a bullet point list of things. This was by design, as I am not yet complete in my changes to the sticky thread or opencarry.org with changes from HB102. Given the pressure I threw you a bone with the summary bulleted list. I FURTHER clarified at the end of that poste that I was currently working on updated documentation regarding HB102.
yet you have failed to articulate how the discussion "...do quite a bit for conceal..(constitutional carry) statewide..."
HB102 of the current legislative session has passed both the state house and state senate and will be working its way to the governor who has already signaled his acceptance of the bill. This bill does
some of the following:
- Officially makes Montana a 100% permitless carry state (constitutional carry). Previously, MT was permitless only outside of an incorporated city.
- Enables Campus Carry. Restricts the board of regents of the university system from restricting 2nd amendment rights with exceptions. Previously, while there were no state statutory restrictions on campus carry, the board of regents could and did enact rules and policies restricting 2nd amendment rights.
- Enables concealed carry in many locations that were already permitted for open carry but were explicitly restricted for conceal carry. (Such as restaurant and bar carry)
- Repeals a MCA section regarding carrying on trains
- Adds a section regarding remedy for violations of deprivations of rights against any governmental entity.
I am currently working on updated documentation regarding HB102 for the sticky and opencarry.org, so that its ready for when the governor signs the bill. The new documentation will have information regarding Open Carry, Conceal Carry with permit and Conceal Carry without permit.
After that exchange, color of law & OC for ME piped in, with old references to 45-8-351 (state preemption) with their analysis of it. I provided a post citing the currently active 45-8-351 for everyone's clarity.
You, solus, continued on the analysis of 45-8-351 by improperly (and continue to improperly) reference "public occupied building", which IS NOT what the codified language is. Your continued use of the improper reference of codified language of 45-8-351 hampers your continued misanalysis in your most recent post.
The actual language reads:
CURRENT: MCA 45-8-351 said:
A county, city, town, consolidated local government, or other local government unit has power to prevent and suppress the carrying of unpermitted concealed weapons or the carrying of unconcealed weapons to a publicly owned and occupied building under its jurisdiction.
A "public occupied building" as you keep referencing is NOT a "publicly owned and occupied building".
further you have failed to articulate what remains in the statutes regarding local government can regulate PUBLIC "occupied" buildings,
and failed establish an sort of MT statutory definition of public occupied buildings !
[...]
looking through MT administrative code as well as general statutes has failed to locate a state level definition of the term "public" or "public building" or finally "public occupied building" ?
I don't need to provide, cite or articulate anything relating to the term "public occupied building" because that is not how it is codified. A plain reading of "
publicly owned and occupied building" is clear and concise and needs no further definition or articulation. A publicly owned building is not a privately owned building, your argument that a inn, hotel, motel, supermarket, restaurant, etc are invalid as they are not publicly owned.
EDIT:
I see now where you found "public occupied building", you got it directly from the ballotpedia synopsis. That is a term ballotpedia came up with within their synopsis and is not reflective of the actual codified language.