Puerto Rico Goes Constitutional Carry

I wish people would stop referring to it as "Constitutional Carry. If you do a search opinions on the term will come up.
 
"I wish people would stop referring to it as "Constitutional Carry. If you do a search opinions on the term will come up."

I don't understand your objection.

From wiki:

"In the United States, the term constitutional carry is a neologism for the legal carrying of handgun, either openly or concealed, without the requirement of a government permit"

That's what was enacted.
 
Some believe the government granted an in praesenti permit to carry without a permit. I guess if there is any kind of a court decision or legislative act, that constitutes a permit, to the purists.
 
How about a copy and paste from the U.S. Constitution that states we have constitutional carry. Apples and oranges.
A quote from a thread search,
April 28, 2015, 03:30 PM #7
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member

Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 7,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
That could be dangerous, though. If Vermont doesn't want their agents enforcing it, that's their prerogative. It wouldn't protect someone from federal prosecution, though.
Absolutely correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koda94
So basically voting for constitutional carry makes our situation worse unless we repeal the GFSZA first.
No, not if the "constitutional carry" law provides for the option of obtaining a carry (or concealed carry) permit. That's exactly what happened in Alaska, Arizona, and Wyoming when they did away with mandatory licensing. To my understanding, Vermont is the only state that makes no provision for a firearms carry license/permit.

And, by the way, it can be argued that the term "constitutional carry" is a misnomer, as commonly used. This argument has arisen in multiple state courts where the state's constitution guarantees a right to carry. The highest courts in those states (Ohio and Idaho come to mind) have ruled that the government may not prohibit the carrying of firearms, but may regulate the mode of carry. As this played out in Ohio, for example, inasmuch as Ohio state law at the time expressly prohibited concealed carry the court ruled that open carry had to be allowed. This led to a spate of open carry-ins, with the result that the state legislature adopted a concealed carry permit system so that all the blissninnies wouldn't have to be exposed to all those horrible guns. So in Ohio (as in Pennsylvania) open carry is legal without a permit but concealed carry requires a permit.

Which boils down to: "Constitutional" carry does not have to include both open and concealed carry. The U.S. Constitution guarantees us the right to bear arms. It does NOT say anything about open or concealed. IMHO (and IANAL), laws allowing permitless open carry but requiring a permit for concealed carry are constitutional. Of course, it could go the other way -- a state could require a permit for open carry but allow permitless concealed carry.
Last edited by Aguila Blanca; April 28, 2015 at 03:44 PM.
Aguila Blanca is offline Report Post
Click to expand...

Another quote from the same thread,
Old April 30, 2015, 03:14 PM #22
Tom Servo
Staff

Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 11,722
Quote:
DonP, because having to ask for a permit to exercise a right is unconstitutional.
The problem is, many state constitutions disagree with that, as do numerous court precedents.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top