Arizona to allow CCW without Permit

[crewdawg]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100416/ap_on_re_us/us_xgr_concealed_weapons_arizona

Arizona to allow concealed weapons without permit

PHOENIX – Favoring the constitutional right to bear arms over others' concerns about gun safety, Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a bill making Arizona the third state allowing people to carry a concealed weapon without requiring a permit.
The measure takes effect 90 days after the current legislative session ends, which likely puts the effective date in July or August.
"I believe this legislation not only protects the Second Amendment rights of Arizona citizens, but restores those rights as well," Brewer, a Republican, said in a statement.
Alaska and Vermont now do not require permits to carry concealed weapons.
By eliminating the permit requirement, the Arizona legislation will allow people 21 or older to forego background checks and classes that are now required.
Supporters say the bill promotes constitutional rights and allows people to protect themselves from criminals, while critics worry it will lead to more shootings as people with less training have fewer restrictions on carrying weapons.
Some police officials are concerned the law will lead to more accidental gun discharges from people untrained in firearm safety, or that shooters in stressful situations will accidentally strike innocent bystanders with stray bullets.
"I know a lot of 21-year-olds; the maturity level is gravely concerning sometimes," said El Mirage Police Chief Mike Frazier, an Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police board member. "If you're going to be carrying a weapon you should know what the law is and how to use it."
However, the measure was supported by police unions representing rank-and-file officers, who said their best friend on the streets is a law-abiding citizen equipped to protect themselves or others.
The police chiefs group initially opposed the bill but then took a neutral stance after some provisions were changed at their request. Brewer's office also participated in negotiations on changes to the bill.
A Democratic leader, Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, of Phoenix, said the bill deprives law enforcement of a tool "to separate good guys from the bad guys." With a permit requirement, police encountering a person with a concealed gun but no permit had reason to suspect that person was not a law-abiding citizen, she said.
The Arizona Citizens Defense League, a gun-rights group that lobbied for passage of the "constitutional carry" bill, said gun owners foregoing permits still should get training. "The heaviest thing about wearing a firearm is the responsibility that comes with it," the group said.
Arizona's permissive gun laws gained national attention last year when a man openly carried a semiautomatic rifle to a Phoenix protest outside a speech by President Barack Obama.
Nearly all adults can already carry a weapon openly in Arizona, and supporters of looser laws argue that gun owners shouldn't face additional restrictions just because they want to hide the weapon.
Currently, carrying a hidden firearm without a permit is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $2,500.
Forty-five other states require permits for hidden guns, and two states — Illinois and Wisconsin — prohibit them altogether.
Federal law requires anyone buying a gun from a licensed dealer to undergo a background check, but that requirement does not apply to sales by individuals who aren't dealers. Arizona's law won't change that.
Under the Arizona legislation, people carrying a concealed weapon will be required to tell a police officer that if asked, and the officer can temporarily take the weapon while communicating with the person.
More than 154,000 people have permits to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona.
The bill acted on by Brewer was the first attempt to lift the permit requirement to reach an Arizona governor's desk.
Brewer's predecessor, Democrat Janet Napolitano, in 2007 vetoed two related bills. One would have reduced penalties for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. The other would have allowed a person without a permit to carry a gun largely concealed as long as any part of it or its holster was visible.
Brewer in 2008 signed into law a bill allowing a person with a permit to take a gun into a restaurant or bar serving alcohol as long as the establishment doesn't prohibit it and the person isn't drinking alcohol. Napolitano vetoed a similar bill in 2005

 

[oleheat]

One word: Awesome.

 

[wbill024]

Anybody say CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT !!!

 

[ryan]

Now we just need every other state to follow as it is a constitutional right and not the right of the dept of public safety, sheriff or state police to tell you that you can carry a gun.

 

[wbill024]

well, we should put the pressure on the right people in this state ....we could get this done

 

[Suburbazine]

No, this isn't a truly good thing. The concerns mentioned are quite realistic...at minimum, they should require CCers to have a CCW class certificate in lieu of a formal permit. At least make reasonably sure the CCers have at least got a grip on the basics.

 

[thatwhichisnt]

No, this isn't a truly good thing. The concerns mentioned are quite realistic...at minimum, they should require CCers to have a CCW class certificate in lieu of a formal permit. At least make reasonably sure the CCers have at least got a grip on the basics.

Those concerns shouldn't keep average citizens from carrying a weapon to protect themselves.

 

[Ben Segrest]

No, this isn't a truly good thing. The concerns mentioned are quite realistic...at minimum, they should require CCers to have a CCW class certificate in lieu of a formal permit. At least make reasonably sure the CCers have at least got a grip on the basics.

wrong

 

[jimmyzshack]

well, we should put the pressure on the right people in this state ....we could get this done

i still can't get over the "If divorced, copies of the divorce settlement, decree, or final judgment along with any orders or injunctions of the court."

 

[flamatrix99]

i still can't get over the "If divorced, copies of the divorce settlement, decree, or final judgment along with any orders or injunctions of the court."

I am divorced and didn't have a hicup getting my permit. I understand why they require it. However, if someone is planning on doing something to an ex I don't think that a lack of CHP is going to stop them either.

 

[Wagon_Master]

No, this isn't a truly good thing. The concerns mentioned are quite realistic...at minimum, they should require CCers to have a CCW class certificate in lieu of a formal permit. At least make reasonably sure the CCers have at least got a grip on the basics.

Yeah, and then we should require a permit for couples to have sex, there is no greater responsibility than bringing a child in to the world. Look at all the bad parents we have, this could be cut down drastically if we required a class, maybe even a permit. I wonder what the fine should be for love making without a permit?

 

[charliepapa]

Yeah, and then we should require a permit for couples to have sex, there is no greater responsibility than bringing a child in to the world. Look at all the bad parents we have, this could be cut down drastically if we required a class, maybe even a permit. I wonder what the fine should be for love making without a permit?

Really? You think having an accidental discharge of lead that could end a life is equal to having a discharge that creates a life? Please explain... Your analogy works if compared to the adoption process but that's not really the point you were trying to make, was it?

The existence of bad parents is not on par with those same individuals being able to carry weapons without training, and possibly killing someone due to ignorance and/or negligence.

We still need those bad parents to raise the next generation of people to pick up the garbage, but what we DON'T need is some dildo sitting behind me in a theater letting a round off from his new Kimber that was cocked and locked in his pocket while he was getting situated in his seat.

 

[Wagon_Master]

Really? You think having an accidental discharge of lead that could end a life is equal to having a discharge that creates a life? Please explain... Your analogy works if compared to the adoption process but that's not really the point you were trying to make, was it?

The existence of bad parents is not on par with those same individuals being able to carry weapons without training, and possibly killing someone due to ignorance and/or negligence.

We still need those bad parents to raise the next generation of people to pick up the garbage, but what we DON'T need is some dildo sitting behind me in a theater letting a round off from his new Kimber that was cocked and locked in his pocket while he was getting situated in his seat.

My point was that parents abuse and neglect their children just like people abuse a neglect firearms. I could post several hundred reported instances of this if you would like but that would be tedious, really all you have to do is watch the news or read a paper. My point being that it is every persons God given right to reproduce just as it is our supposed right to be armed. I agree with you that there are stupid and dangerous people with guns, just as there are stupid and dangerous parents. The difference is when someone is stupid with a gun we call for licensing, but do not do the same with parents. In both instances lives are lost

 

[Wolfgang1952]

Typical nay sayers. It is a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The second amendment says nothing about where a person can and can’t bear that arm. Let Louisiana be the fourth state to do away with the requirement for a CCW permit.

 

[Aberdog1]

Ok..I think that if the laws actually prevented crimminals from having a pistol then the crimminals wouldn't have guns...I lost my train of thought..I got to go find it. I was going to say something really amazing and suddenly ..POOF...

 

[GIJeaux]

Typical nay sayers. It is a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The second amendment says nothing about where a person can and can’t bear that arm. Let Louisiana be the fourth state to do away with the requirement for a CCW permit.

What he said...^

 

[oleheat]

No, this isn't a truly good thing. The concerns mentioned are quite realistic...at minimum, they should require CCers to have a CCW class certificate in lieu of a formal permit. At least make reasonably sure the CCers have at least got a grip on the basics.

I'm not sure this is the case. It doesn't seem to be a huge problem in Vermont- where they've been doing it for years.

This is a copy of the basic regs in VT:

State Requirements
Rifles and Shotguns
•Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No.

•Registration of rifles and shotguns? No.

•Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No.

•Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No.

Handguns

•Permit to purchase handgun? No.

•Registration of handguns? No.

•Licensing of owners of handguns? No.

•Permit to carry handguns? No.

Other Requirements

•Is there a State waiting period? No.

•Is there a FBI *NICS check for firearm transactions? No. State system.

•Permit to carry a concealed weapon required? No.

•Record of sale: Yes.
*NICS - National Instant Check System

It's worked quite well for them, and they have some of the lowest gun crimes in the country. This is what can be acheived when a state has control over it's gun laws.
As far as the "record of sale" part goes, I'd have to look into that a little further, but from here their laws look very pro-2A....

 

[Tulse Luper]

I think overall it's great. Vermont and Alaska have been there for years. The issue I see with this is, it's publicized and 'new'. There are some strange types out there that will see this as a sort of mandate. I wouldn't bet on there not being some bad circumstance that go along with NEW legislation that many will see as government suggesting you carry. That's how some will view this; i.e., the government giving a right. Some will carry for the shear excitement. Others --the more wise-- will see this as a restoration of freedom and act 'sanely'. In its infancy, there might be a few yahoos that put this freedom to the test, but we can't defend against the monumentally stupid, and I certainly don't want a litany of legislation trying to.

 

[charliepapa]

Typical nay sayers. It is a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The second amendment says nothing about where a person can and can’t bear that arm. Let Louisiana be the fourth state to do away with the requirement for a CCW permit.

I am definitely not ur "typical naysayer". I was simply voicing my opinion on not wanting to get shot in the back at the movies. If forced to choose between the option of requiring the permit and not; I'd choose the latter. All I'm saying is that it would be BETTER if we could require some very basic safety training, such as we do with driver's licenses. Almost anyone can get one but there is at least a test of the most basic knowledge to ensure a certain amount of accountability is maintained.

I really think some of you would be surprised by the number of idiots out there that have enough money to go out and BUY a gun, but might try to load rounds into the magazine backwards, like the photographer who shot this magazine ad...

 

[wbill024]

I am definitely not ur "typical naysayer". I was simply voicing my opinion on not wanting to get shot in the back at the movies. If forced to choose between the option of requiring the permit and not; I'd choose the latter. All I'm saying is that it would be BETTER if we could require some very basic safety training, such as we do with driver's licenses. Almost anyone can get one but there is at least a test of the most basic knowledge to ensure a certain amount of accountability is maintained.

I really think some of you would be surprised by the number of idiots out there that have enough money to go out and BUY a gun, but might try to load rounds into the magazine backwards, like the photographer who shot this magazine ad...

Charlie, a DL is a privilege and not a constitutional right like freedom of speech .... There should be accountability and there would be accountability .... if you do something stupid ...go to jail for gross negligence or maybe manslaughter if that is the case .... In America, the constitution is set up for the people to retain their own freedom and to learn and maintain our values from our family and local community / state and therefore take responsibility for our actions accordingly. It is not the role of the government to teach me how, under what conditions or when I can handle my basic right. I agree, more accidents will happen ....but as somebody once said, if you would sacrifice security for freedom you deserve neither .... The 2A advocates need to learn a lesson from the pro-murder crowd ...any restriction, any restriction at all is a slippery slope to further and further restrictions ... then one day ...ILLEGAL (Note- of course abortion is NOT a constitutional right but they have done a hell of a job getting it interpreted as such by the courts) ...just another rant ...but it is just MHO
Rob