{"id":5103,"date":"2017-04-05T11:37:00","date_gmt":"2017-04-05T18:37:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/?p=5103"},"modified":"2017-04-05T11:42:05","modified_gmt":"2017-04-05T18:42:05","slug":"thirteen-states-now-honor-the-right-to-carry-without-a-permit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/?p=5103","title":{"rendered":"Thirteen states now honor the right to carry without a \u2018permit\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

A version of this column appears in the April 10 edition of \u201cFirearms News\u201d (formerly \u201cShotgun News\u201d), now arriving in newsstands and mailboxes.<\/em><\/p>\n

In late February, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu signed a bill abolishing the requirement that residents obtain a \u201cpermit\u201d to carry a concealed handgun.<\/p>\n

It was already legal to carry openly in New Hampshire without a permit. But state Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley saw no reason why concealing the handgun should suddenly require a \u201cpermit.\u201d<\/p>\n

(For starters, allowing open carry but restricting concealed carry tends to discriminate against women, whose clothing styles may not lend themselves to hip holsters, who often prefer to carry in a purse — and who are of course more likely to need an \u201cequalizer\u201d if stalked or assaulted. Proliferation of concealed carry also does a better job of discouraging thieves and assailants in general, since they can never be sure which prospective victims are armed.)<\/p>\n

New Hampshire is the first state to enact permit-free carry \u2013 \u201cConstitutional carry\u201d — since the Missouri Legislature overrode Democrat Gov. Jay Nixon\u2019s veto last September. It\u2019s the 12th state to adopt some form of permit-free carry since 2003.<\/p>\n

Three other states — Idaho, Mississippi and West Virginia \u2013 joined the club in 2016. The rest of the 12 (or is it 13?) \u201cConstitutional\u201d carry states are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, Maine, Wyoming, and peaceful Vermont, which has never restricted the carrying of firearms in any way, for residents or anyone else.<\/p>\n

Some analysts include Montana as a \u201cConstitutional carry\u201d state, because Constitutional carry is the law outside city limits. Others contend Arkansas law is similar to that of Vermont, which has been permit-free since before statehood in 1791.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

That makes permit-free carry the second-most-common variety of gun-carry law in the country, according to Dean Weingarten of Ammoland Shooting Sports News.<\/p>\n

Eight collectivist states — California, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware and Hawaii (all of which went for Hillary Clinton, talk about your weird coincidences!) — still allow government officials to deny permits to any applicant regardless of background or training. The other 29 states have \u201cshall issue\u201d laws requiring government officials to issue \u201ccarry\u201d permits to any applicant who obtains required training and\/or passes background checks.
\nAnd with Republicans in control of every branch of government in 25 states, activists expect more progress quickly, Mr. Weingarten reports.<\/p>\n

(On the related topic of \u201ccampus carry,\u201d AWR Hawkins of Brietbart News updates us on March 31: \u201cGeorgia lawmakers passed campus carry legislation early Friday morning, which now heads to Gov. Nathan Deal\u2019s (R) desk for a signature.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is not the first time campus carry has been sent to Deal\u2019s desk. The Georgia House passed campus carry on February 22, 2016, and the state\u2019s Senate followed suit on March 11. Deal campaigned for campus carry as it moved from House to Senate, only to do an about-face and veto it on May 3.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe point of contention in 2016 was that law-abiding concealed carry permit holders would be able to carry their guns into on-campus daycare facilities. Such facilities have been exempted this year in hopes of appeasing Deal and securing his signature. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution reports that other exemptions \u2018include dormitories, fraternity and sorority houses, and buildings used for athletic events.\u2019\u201d)<\/p>\n

On March 28, Georgia Carry\u2019s executive director, Jerry Henry, told Hawkins \u201cThis is not the bill we wanted, but it is a step in the right direction. It will decriminalize carrying a firearm on a college or university campus. It moves the ball a little further down the road.\u201d<\/p>\n

Deal has not indicated whether he plans to sign the legislation or veto it again.<\/p>\n

Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas signed campus carry into law on March 22, bringing the total number of campus carry states to ten. ( http:\/\/www.breitbart.com\/big-government\/2017\/03\/31\/georgia-lawmakers-pass-campus-carry-sending-governors-desk\/ .)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

ANOTHER JUDGE WHO CAN\u2019T READ<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the Bad News Department, also in late February, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of Maryland’s “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazine\u201d ban.<\/p>\n

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled 10-4 to uphold Maryland’s ban on certain \u201cscary-looking\u201d semi-automatic rifles and normal-sized magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, reports Stephen Gutowski of the Free Beacon. Writing for the majority, Judge Robert B. King said because the rifles in question have been used in high-profile shootings and are “like” military weapons, they are not protected by the Second Amendment.<\/p>\n

“Both before and after Newtown, similar military-style rifles and detachable magazines have been used to perpetrate mass shootings in places whose names have become synonymous with the slaughters that occurred there,” King wrote in a ruling oddly ignorant of judicial precedent. “We are convinced that the banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are among those arms that are \u2018like’ \u2018M-16 rifles’ — ‘weapons that are most useful in military service’ — which the Heller Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach.”<\/p>\n

\u201cPut simply,\u201d Judge King concluded, \u201cwe have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war.\u201d<\/p>\n

So, instead of using the Supreme Court\u2019s Heller test of whether a firearm is \u201cin common use” — combined with whether it\u2019s “dangerous and unusual” — the Fourth Circuit focused on whether or not a firearm is “most useful in military service” . . . and then applied that test exactly backwards.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cNo judicial power is required to \u2018extend\u2019 the Second Amendment to cover weapons of war, because they\u2019re precisely what it was intended to cover in the first place,\u201d points out Thomas Knapp of the Libertarian Institute.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Second Amendment was ratified only a few years after a citizen army — many of its soldiers armed, at least at first, with weapons brought from home — defeated the most fearsome professional military machine in the history of the world, the army of a global empire.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe express purpose of the Second Amendment was to guarantee the continued maintenance of an armed populace,\u201d Mr. Knapp wrote on Feb. 24.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn fact, the Second Militia Act of 1792 legally required every adult able-bodied white American male to own and maintain \u2018weapons of war\u2019 (a musket or rifle, bayonet, powder and bullets) just in case the militia had to be called out.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cEven in the 1939 case usually cited to justify victim disarmament (\u2018gun control\u2019) laws, U.S. v. Miller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the reason Jack Miller\u2019s short-barreled shotgun could be banned was that it WASN\u2019T a weapon of war: \u2018It is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense,\u2019 (the high court ruled in 1939.)<\/p>\n

\u201cYes, you read that right,\u201d Mr. Knapp continues, quite correctly. \u201cThe Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment applies ONLY to \u2018weapons of war.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

(In fact, short-barreled shotguns HAD been used in the trenches in World War One; the Miller case was wrongly decided because when the judges asked the U.S. attorney about that, he lied. Miller\u2019s defense raised no objection, since the moonshiner Miller had long since disappeared, and he was not represented at the Supreme Court. There WAS no defense.)<\/p>\n

Mr. Knapp expresses the opinion that the rationale for Miller was too restrictive, but nonetheless concludes \u201cShame on King and the 4th Circuit for failing to uphold the plain meaning of \u2018shall not be infringed.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, one of the plaintiffs, said it\u2019s considering appealing the case further . . . as they certainly should.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

DOES ATF SEE DEREGULATORY HANDWRITING ON THE WALL?<\/strong><\/p>\n

A senior official at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) recommended reducing some regulations in an internal memo published by the Washington Post Feb. 9.<\/p>\n

Ronald Turk, the ATF’s associate deputy director and chief operating officer, argued that reworking the way the agency enforces certain laws would be beneficial to both the firearms industry and the ATF. The memo argues regulations should be reduced or eliminated on firearms silencers, interstate gun sales, the importation of certain firearms, and individuals who sell guns exclusively Online or at gun shows.<\/p>\n

Those steps could be taken \u201cwithout significantly hindering ATF’s mission or adversely affecting public safety,” Turk said in the memo, \u201c(allowing) ATF to further focus precious personnel and resources on the mission to combat gun violence.”<\/p>\n

The views expressed in Turk’s memo are not necessarily shared by the agency and were intended only for internal dialogue, according to ATF spokesman Ali Berisha.<\/p>\n

Right. Which is why the memo was released to Washington\u2019s version of \u201cIzvestia,\u201d the Washington Post, and the ATF isn\u2019t denying everything? Despite this thin fig leaf of \u201cdeniability,\u201d the memo was obviously released as a trial balloon to test public reaction, meaning these overdue steps are under serious consideration.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The leftist Center for American Progress of course criticized the proposals as \u201ca disturbing series of giveaways to the gun industry that would weaken regulatory oversight . . . without adequate consideration of the impact on public safety.”<\/p>\n

Chris Cox of the NRA\u2019s Institute for Legislative Action, on the other hand, replied “We look forward to working with the new attorney general as he puts the focus of the Justice Department back where it belongs — on prosecuting violent criminals, not harassing law-abiding gun owners. After eight years of overreach by the Obama administration, it’s time to roll back regulations that serve no legitimate law enforcement purpose.”<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

CHICAGO STILL A SLAUGHTERHOUSE<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Chicago Tribune reports 513 people were shot in that city from Jan. 1 through Feb. 27 of this year, an increase of 37 over the 466 shot during the same time period in 2016.<\/p>\n

The number of murders Jan. 1 through Feb. 27 came in at 103, an increase of two victims over the 101 murdered during the same time period in 2016.<\/p>\n

Chicago\u2019s gun violence in 2016 was so high that it skewed national numbers for the country\u2019s 30 largest cities. The Washington Post reports the Brennan Center of Justice expected \u201cthe homicide rate for the country\u2019s 30 biggest cities . . . to go up by 14 percent (in 2016).\u201d But \u201cAn astounding 43.7 percent of this overall increase\u201d was the result of Chicago alone.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Add gun-controlled Washington and Baltimore, and three cities alone account for half the national increase.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis means Chicago\u2019s failed gun control experiment is affecting us all by making murder numbers appear higher across the nation than they actually are,\u201d reports Breitbart News Second Amendment columnist AWR Hawkins. \u201cThese elevated numbers give Democratic politicians an opportunity to claim concealed carry is not effective,\u201d etc.<\/p>\n

Obviously, gun laws disarm only law-abiding victims. \u201cGun control\u201d has failed and it\u2019s time for it to end.<\/p>\n

Chicago\u2019s problems also stem from the destruction of traditional neighborhood boundaries 50 and 60 years ago by shoveling masses of poor, fatherless families (thanks, Welfare!) into high-rise \u201chousing projects\u201d \u2013 which were then torn down when they became (surprise!) nothing but Towers of Crime.<\/p>\n

But a big part of the problem in these cities is also the \u201cWar on Drugs.\u201d For the most part, people don\u2019t shoot each other because they\u2019re ON drugs; people shoot each other because there\u2019s no legal way to settle disputes over distribution territories if their stock-in-trade is outlawed.<\/p>\n

Alcohol is one of the most addictive drugs known, and Chicago beer distributors USED TO fight running gun battles in the streets of Chicago. But Budweiser distributors don\u2019t have shoot-outs with Miller Lite distributors any more. Why? Because in 1933, after 14 years of failure and unintended consequences, Franklin Roosevelt and the Democratic Congress called off America\u2019s \u201cWar on Booze.\u201d <\/p>\n

Vin Suprynowicz was for 20 years an award-winning columnist and editorial writer for the daily Las Vegas Review-Journal. He blogs at www.vinsuprynowicz.com .<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A version of this column appears in the April 10 edition of \u201cFirearms News\u201d (formerly \u201cShotgun News\u201d), now arriving in newsstands and mailboxes. In late February, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu signed a bill abolishing the requirement that residents obtain a \u201cpermit\u201d to carry a concealed handgun. It was already legal to carry openly in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":true,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[8,12,52,13,78,51],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-2nd-amendment","category-common-defense","category-crime","category-drug-war","category-individual-liberty","category-self-defense"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pWqFl-1kj","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5103"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5103\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5118,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5103\/revisions\/5118"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5103"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5103"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}