TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.kswt.com/Global/story.asp?S=11922739" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gun Bill Allows Concealed Carry without Permit

February 2, 2010 Yuma, AZ -- A new gun bill would allow every adult in Arizona to carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Supporters say the bill would make everyone safer, but critics disagree. The Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police has already spoken out against concealed carry without a permit.

Michael Brick owns the Yuma Coin and Gun Shop, and he's a member of the Arizona Citizens Defense League which supports the bill.

"If you know nobody's armed therefore you attack. If you know everybody has a gun, you leave them alone," says Brick. He says gun owners do not need training from a concealed weapons course in order to defend themselves. Brick believes just the sight of his weapon has deterred robbers from targeting his shop.

"I carry both concealed, and I carry in the open and I know in my business, the open-carry has discouraged a lot of stuff. People see the weapon and they just go the other way."

Some law enforcement members fear the

Has this been mentioned?

Arizona had unlicensed open carry even before Texas had the CHL law, and I can't recall hearing about any real problems with that, so this seems like the logical next step toward the Bill of Rights.

boomerang wrote:Arizona had unlicensed open carry even before Texas had the CHL law, and I can't recall hearing about any real problems with that, so this seems like the logical next step toward the Bill of Rights.

Arizona had unlicensed open carry even before Texas had the CHL law, and I can't recall hearing about any real problems with that

It's what the Founding Fathers primarily had in mind when they wrote, "keep and bear arms".

Leave it to a bunch of Texans in the Legislature to disagree.

casingpoint wrote:

Arizona had unlicensed open carry even before Texas had the CHL law, and I can't recall hearing about any real problems with that

It's what the Founding Fathers primarily had in mind when they wrote, "keep and bear arms".

Leave it to a bunch of Texans in the Legislature to disagree.

True but they'll probably soon have to take a stand.

If the Supreme Court incorporates the 2nd Amendment against the States, as most court watches think it will, then the Legislature will have to decide if the current law is a violation of the US Constitution despite their authority under the Texas Constitution. If they don't, there will likely be a test case. If we remember that at the time the Texas Constitution was written it was well-settled law that the Bill of Rights limited only the federal government, it makes perfect sense for the drafters to describe the authority of the Legislature in this realm.

For those who support open carry, the timing couldn't be better. The SCOTUS should issue their ruling by the end of June. Given how the electorate feels right now about government interfering in their lives, the Legislature in early 2011 -- with some new more conservative members elected in Nov 2010 -- will be under pressure to revise the law. As well they should. What candidate wants to stand for election this November, after the Court has said that the 2nd applies to the States, and argue that the "bear" part really doesn't mean what we think it means? That's not going to fly in this state. They have gotten a pass up until now because the issue was never forced. It will be now.

SA-TX