Handgunlaw.us: Carry Law Update

(courtesy pbase.com)

Slider at handgunlaw.us writes:

New Hampshire has added Alaska back on the list of states it honors. NH removed them late last year and gave no reason. They didn’t give a reason for adding them back either. They have added Ohio to the list of states they honor. Click here for the change. In other states . . .

Tennessee – Effective May 15. Reworded parking lot storage law so employees can’t fire a person with a permit keeping their firearm in their locked vehicle on company property. They passed the law previously and the AG put out an opinion stating, they would not be breaking a law but an employer could still fire an employee for keeping a firearm company property if it was against their policy. This law change fixed that.

West Virginia – Effective Around June 10. Permit holders can keep their firearm in their locked vehicle on the Capitol Complex. Cleaned up what is considered a Loaded Firearm and carrying a firearm for defensive purposes while hiking in the woods etc. The Governor vetoed Permitless Carry and since the Legislature session ended an override was not possible under WV law. There is a good chance Permitless Carry will come to West Virginia next year.

Idaho – Effective July 1. Limited Permitless Carry. Carry outside the limits of an incorporated area does not require any type of permit/license to carry. Rewrote their carry laws to make it easier to understand.

Kansas – Effective July 1. Permitless Carry. Allows staff to carry in Schools or other city, county or state buildings if their policies allow it even if posted with proper signage.

Mississippi – Effective July 1. Limited Permitless Carry. No Permit needed to carry in a Purse, Briefcase, Fanny Pack. From Handgunlaw.us reading of the law anything that completely encloses the firearm and is carried in the hand or by a strap over the shoulder or around your body outside your clothing would meet the definition of the law. Lowered the cost of permits.

Michigan – Effective December 1. Concealed Weapon Licensing Boards will be disbanded and the County Clerk will handle all applications. No more going before the board to get their OK. Meet the requirements and supply the proper documentation and the Clerk will issue the permit.

There are still many good bills in the different states under consideration at the time of this post. The above will be added to their states pages when their new laws take effect.

comments

  1. avatar beefeater says:

    New York – You’re fucked.

    1. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

      New York New York is terrible, New York State is region dependent.

  2. Well according to their map it looks like 82% of the states are now shall issue. We will never get CA NY or DC, but we are getting darn close. This is great news.

    1. avatar FUDD says:

      Oh, yes, we will have CCW in CA.

      Peruta v Gore is on its way to SCOTUS. Next to last step is the second round of “en banc” review in the 9th Circuit of Appeals – orals scheduled 6/15 in San Francisco.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        I hate to say it FUDD but you are screwed in California. The 9th Circuit will rule against Peruta, Peruta will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court will refuse to hear the case.

        I apologize for being a wet blanket. And I hope and pray that I am wrong for the sake of everyone who lives in and visits California.

  3. avatar Another Robert says:

    Re that Mississippi law: Wonder if one of those military “clamshell” type holsters would qualify? Just looked at some on Google images, some of them do indeed completely enclose the pistol. That law just fascinates me, any type of no-permit carry is a good thing, but beyond that, it’s just unique, I can’t figure the rationale for allowing it and not just allowing no-permit CC.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Why allow “off body” CC but not normal CC without a permit?
      Cynical observers might say it’s to confuse and ensnare would-be lawful carriers.
      Civil rights activists might say it’s a step towards eventual Constitutional Carry.

  4. avatar FUDD says:

    Thanks for updating us on this. Its up to us to keep up the good fight, and we arent done yet.

    The success of CCW rights is entirely due to tenacious dedicated gun-rights folk who worked the grass-roots, state by state, even county by county. POTG like Dean Weingarten. A bow of respect to you, sir.

    https://www.blogger.com/profile/07026716292548440054

  5. avatar FUDD says:

    PS: slightly OT but best place to post a reminder- Jackson v SF cert at SCOTUS April 24 conference
    – we may have an answer tomorrow. fingers crossed…

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=813984&page=10

  6. avatar SteveInCO says:

    Ohio and Colorado now recognize each other, in fact I imagine a lot of states now have reciprocity back and forth with Ohio that didn’t before.

  7. avatar Calvin says:

    That Mississippi law is just plain stupid. What is the point?

  8. avatar William Ashbless says:

    Nothing to add but the observation on the irony of the state motto on the New Hampshire plate.

    1. avatar Mario says:

      Well, they’ve already got some of the best gun laws in the nation. Better than states like Texas, by far. And they’re about to pass constitutional carry. I wouldn’t say it’s ironic. It’s pretty spot on.

      1. avatar Jon in NH says:

        NH Pistol/Revolver License
        – $10 for 4 years for residents
        – Application is a single sided sheet of paper. I drop mine off at the local PD.
        – Lots of reciprocity
        – No photo, references, fingerprints or training (I’m lukewarm on that one) required. Technically there is no minimum age either.
        – Must be issued within 2 weeks or denied in writing with the right to appeal to a judge.
        – Right to carry anywhere you are legally eligible to be (federal buildings exempt, state house carry flips flops with the party in power)
        – Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground
        – Class 3 Friendly

        The only downsides to NH:
        – Non-resident license fee is $100
        – Reciprocity does not acknowledge non-NH non-resident permits
        – No reciprocity with Maine.

  9. avatar Bob says:

    A private citizen is not free unless he or she is free to associate with anyone they want and is not free if they cannot disassociate with anyone they want for any reason. So laws like the Tennessee one are immoral.

    1. avatar AllAmerican says:

      No, what’s immoral is trying to tell someone what they can and cannot have in their property, that being a vehicle. Don’t like it? Don’t have a parking lot where people can park their mobile property.

      1. avatar Bob says:

        You have a right to tell guests at your house they can’t come inside with their shoes on or for any other reason including no reason at all. A private business is no different. I think a private business owner who doesn’t allow his workers to carry guns is an asshole, but he has a total right to alone determine who enters his property and how they enter it and any other terms he likes.

        1. avatar pyratemime says:

          A private business owner may have the right to prohibit weapons from their establishment but they do not have the right to leave me defenseless on my commute to and from their business. This law strikes the balance where the business proprietor can control what happens in their business but leaves employees able to control their decisions before and after work.

          After all we aren’t just talking about white collar pristine business parks work 8 to 5 hours here where employees only commute through low crime neighborhoods. This law protects people in the above but it also helps the second shift worker in downtown Memphis and Nashville who lives and commutes through the shit parts of town at night and has an increased likelihood of needing that protection.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Bob,

      Yes, we should uphold free association to the highest degree. And yes, we should uphold human life to the highest degree. And therein lies the conflict: what gives when freedom of association infringes on our right to life? What gives when our right to life infringes on our freedom of association?

      It is noble and virtuous when a responsible person carries a firearm to defend their lives, their family, and the people around them. Contrast that with a property owner who claims a “right” to tell potential guests that guests cannot defend anyone’s life as a condition to enter the property. I see nothing noble or virtuous in that case. Rather, I see the property owner leveraging their property to demonstrate contempt for human life.

      Finally, consider a very real possibility. A predator (human or animal) drags a human victim onto private property. A good Samaritan sees the victim and prepares to enter the private property to save the victim’s life. The private property owner also sees the action and immediately runs out and tells the good Samaritan to stay out of his/her private property. Thus, the good Samaritan should stay out and the victim should die because private property rights are supreme, right? And taking it a step further, law enforcement cannot come in to retrieve the victim to rule out foul play because private property rights are supreme, right?

      1. avatar Bob says:

        Your example seems an extremely fringe and unrealistic scenario. Nevertheless, I’ll go with it. In a truly free society (no government) no-one would support the property owner interfering with saving someone’s life like that.

        Yes, the travelling thing is a problem for the worker, but how does that justify the people who call themselves government to initiate force against the owner? Suddenly he doesn’t get to determine the terms for entering the property he owns? If not, then who really owns it? The owner has not harmed anyone. Workers can choose to work elsewhere. Looking to government to solve problems have gotten us into this mess in the first place.

        “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” – Thomas Jefferson

        1. avatar Jason says:

          Deed or not, no one “Owns” property because property taxes…….RENT……..are paid to the state. If they are not paid, the property is taken away.

  10. avatar Dustin says:

    If an employer would fire you for being armed, it is likely that said employer is abusive and fears retaliation for their abuse… Don’t tell, or find a different job with a less vicious boss.

  11. avatar S.CROCK says:

    Anyone know where I can find a list of states where private no gun signs hold the weight of law?

    1. avatar Kelly in GA says:

      The app cow 50 states (symbol is a gun with the U.S. As a backdrop will tell you. It isn’t a list, but you can put in your permits, and it shows you on the map where you can and can’t carry. It then has links to state laws and tells you signage on the states page. Very useful and definitely worth the $ if you carry and travel at all.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      S.CROCK,

      I believe private “no guns” signs are nothing more than a matter of trespassing in the overwhelming majority of states. The only state I know where “go guns” signs include potential misdemeanor and/or felony consequences is Texas — and only then if the signs meet the infamous “30-06” specifications.

      Others can chime in if private signs include possible misdemeanor or felony consequences in other states.

  12. avatar Will says:

    This is fantastic news, looks like things are heading in the right direction, finally!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email