North Dakota is considering a permitless, or “constitutional” carry bill. The sponsor is Representative Rick Becker (R-Bismarck). The bill is HB 1169, and has been heard in the House Energy & Natural Resources Committee. The vote in the committee will likely be this week.

From Rep. Becker’s facebook page on January 26, 2017:

We had a great hearing today for HB 1169, the constitutional carry bill.

There were about 10 articulate, impassioned advocates speaking in favor, plus many more supporting in attendance. There were only 3 against, most of whom employed the oft-touted emotionalism that gun control advocates often do. Lawmakers, as hard as it can be, must use reason and facts to design law, not emotions.

The ten-page bill mostly consists of language to neuter or repeal numerous sections of current North Dakota law that restricts the bearing of arms.

From agweek.com‘s short explainer:

In testimony to the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee Thursday, Becker said his bill would leave the current permitting process in place. North Dakota offers Class 1 and Class 2 licenses for carrying a concealed weapon, each with differing levels of training and reciprocity with other states.

As of Dec. 31, there were 48,700 active North Dakota concealed weapon licenses, 38,261 of which were Class 2 permits, according to the attorney general’s website.

North Dakota is one of 25 political trifectas in the United States where Republicans have control of both houses of the legislature and the governorship. In North Dakota, Republicans have 38 seats in the Senate to only 9 for the Democrats. In the House, the margin is 81 to 13.

Governor Dick Burgum was elected in 2016. Internet searches did not find any statements either in support or opposition to Constitutional carry.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Recommended For You

17 Responses to Constitutional Carry Coming to North Dakota?

  1. “Lawmakers, as hard as it can be, must use reason and facts to design law, not emotions.”

    This guy must not talk to politicians in Illinois.

  2. It’ll probably happen, it’s a rural state so the city slickers who need their safe spaces won’t be very vocal about this because there are no cities in ND, just plains that stretch for hundreds of miles.

  3. It seems like a slam dunk, what with those numbers. It’s surprising they didn’t do this earlier. I hope it works out for them.

      • Actually, I was going to say that it wouldn’t surprise me if it passed the legislature, only to be vetoed by Burgum. In many ways, he’s a lefty disguised as a Republican, and although he has a decent rating (Aq) from the NRA, this might be a bridge too far for him. His NRA rating is based on promises, as he’s never before held any public office, so we’ll have to see what happens.

        Given some of the folks I’ve come into contact with in CC classes and at the ranges, I’d like to see a required classroom-only class before folks could carry without a permit, designed only to educate them on CC laws and use-of-force. I’ve known more than a few people that expressed certain opinions before attending the current CCW classes, only to change their tune quite a bit after they had been educated in that class.

  4. I have this thought that puts a little smile on my face sometimes. A map that makes it impossible to drive coast to coast without passing through some stretch* of constitutional carry territory. Just makes me happy.

    *Obviously it would be best if that stretch encompassed all 50 (to 57) states but right now eating the apple one bite at a time I will consider it a major milestone when the above happens.

Leave a Reply

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