S1: Constitutional Carry Act (Statute)

[Leinad]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsors: Ben Kenobi and Leinad

I now open this up to the floor for debate.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Support this as stated in plan

[Anna Komnene]

Just dropping in to point out that the Chamber already passed this insane policy in the first session.    So this would make two conflicting bills, one of which limits the kinds of firearms that can be carried and the other that doesn't.

[Blair]

ugh it's generally bad policy to say- Vermont has permitless carry- vermont has low homicide rates- therefore permitless carry is good

[Wisconsin+17]

It's not just confined to Vermont. Generally concealed carry holders have been shown to have less criminality than other segments of the population. Most gunowners are law-abiding and responsible people.

Also did it really get passed last session? Leinad?

[Leinad]

This was the bill last session: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=242591.0

I suppose it's a very similar concept, but the differences and any other ideas regarding gun policy should probably be discussed. I'm more than open to any actual suggestions--do we have any of these?

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Open Carry and Constitutional Carry are two very different things, Constitutional Carry does not have the unnecessary permits attached.

[Wisconsin+17]

Yeah, that's what I thought. Constitutional carry permits people to own and carry their firearm without having to seek a permit. Open carry just means they can carry the gun in public without having to carry concealed.

[Anna Komnene]

I'm not a member of this body... my name might be written on a chair somewhere or something...   I'd prefer to leave the debate to everyone who's here but yeah there are several issues.  First, the open carry bill provides that people can do that by holding an ordinary gun permit as long as it's a rifle, long gun, pistol, or hand gun.  This bill says that anyone can own (presumably any gun so including grenade launchers and stuff) without any permit at all.  That creates a conflict because under the other bill, people can open carry with a regular permit, but that permit will no longer exist if this bill is passed.  That is a problem. 

It also puts the burden of enforcing what guns can be open carried entirely on police and security because they will have to be able to tell the difference between guns okay for open carry and guns that aren't okay for open carry.  People like to say that police being armed to the teeth is a problem.  If you think they are armed to the teeth now, just wait until we allow anyone to own any gun they want.  No sane police officer is going to want to go after someone who has a military assault rifle with some little pistol or shotgun.  No permit means no restrictions on who can own a gun.  A former murderer/rapist out on parole?  Nothing stopping them from picking up an RPG at the store.  Lastly, there aren't any provisions that say where it's acceptable to carry your guns.  Drunk people walking around with guns at a crowded tavern doesn't sound like a great idea to me.  Letting people walk into a rally with a sniper rifle doesn't sound too great either.  Just food for thought.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The bill specifies 'firearm'. Pertaining to a rifle, shotgun, handgun, pistol, etc. Grenade launchers are not firearms.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No conflict exists. This is like arguing that the 14th amendment freed the slaves, that it was in conflict with a bill enforcing compensation to slave owners. You can't be compensated for what you do not own.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, no they don't. Just like with the 14th amendment that there would be no requirement to distinguish between slaves and freedmen.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This bill does not remove legal restrictions on the types of firearms which may be sold. All it states is that firearms that are legal to be owned do not require a permit to carry.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps you should speak with Vermont, or any of the other 11 states, including Mississippi, and Arkansas which have constitutional carry at present. As I stated earlier, people who own firearms are less likely to commit crimes than the general population. Permit holders are generally very responsible. Given that they are already inclined to follow the law, I see no reason why we cannot trust them to continue to do so.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Very false. What guns may be legally sold will still be regulated, as it has always been. Now, of course, there are illegal gun sales, but those do not require a permit either.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When was the last time you've been to your local gun shop? Please tell me if they have an RPG for sale to the public, along with the rockets.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's kind of the purpose of the bill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

With open carry in the South you can already legally carry your gun, openly, into a bar. Of course, any private establishment may choose to regulate whether or not they wish to allow people to carry into their establishment.

Let's be very clear about what this bill actually does.

1 - it permits the carry of a legally purchased firearm throughout the south. One would no longer need a permit in order to carry said firearm anywhere in the south.

What this bill *does* not do is -

1. Permit any sort of weapon to be purchased legally. The regulations regarding what guns are legal for sale to the public remain.

2. Override private owners from enforcing their desire not to have guns on their property. Owners do have the right to ask you to leave their establishment if they do not want someone carrying there.

The state - however, would not be able to do so. If someone wanted to carry openly into the Chamber of Delegates, they would be permitted. I don't know about you, but I trust the men and women who have proven worthy of that trust for years.

Gun owners and permit holders by and large are upstanding citizens. It's time we rewarded that.

[Anna Komnene]

Alrighty then.

[Pragmatic Conservative]

Support this as stated in plan

[Pragmatic Conservative]

I motion for a final vote on this bill.

[Leinad]

Motion seconded. I'll give a few minutes in case someone wants to object.

[NeverAgain]

Still very iffy on it, but I guess there is at least some acknowledgeable rationale for it. I would ask that the next bill this body look into, to help protect law-abiding citizens, is creating a full background check system, and a couple day waiting period. I will be working at the federal level to do this, and to stop the ability for terrorists on the no-fly list to get a weapon. I look forward to collaboration on supporting a citizen's right to safely and legally bear arms.

[Leinad]

Okay, I now open a 48-hour vote on this bill.

[Leinad]

Aye

[Blackacre]

NAY

[Pragmatic Conservative]

Aye

[Wisconsin+17]

Aye!

Let's wrap this puppy up.

[Leinad]

Sorry, got distracted by the election.

With 3 members voting in favor, and 2 against, this legislation now moves to the Governor's for his signature or veto.

[Terry the Fat Shark]