Constitutional Carry Laws In the Works for Texas, South Dakota

texas flag holster constitutional carry bill jonathan stickland owb

courtesy Savoy Leather

The picture hasn’t been all that rosy for the gun rights cause of late. What with the President virtually ordering the ATF to reclassify bump fire stocks as machine guns (a dangerous precedent) and the Californication of Washington state gun laws with the passage of I-1639, there hasn’t been much good news lately.

However, two states look to join to constitutional carry club, giving their citizens the unfettered right to keep and bear arms, just as the Bill of Rights clearly specifies.

First, the long push toward constitutional carry in the Lone Star State is moving forward. From star-telegram.com:

State Rep. Jonathan Stickland has filed a bill to allow “Constitutional Carry” — to let any Texan who legally owns a handgun carry it openly or concealed without first getting a permit— across the state.

Constitutional Carry Laws In the Works for Texas, South Dakota jonathan stickland

courtesy texasbikerradio.org

“It is a major legislative priority for the Republican Party and very popular with my constituents,” said Stickland, R-Bedford. “I think there’s a real need for it.”

This isn’t the first time Stickland has pushed for constitutional carry in Texas.

Stickland filed bills to allow constitutional carry in Texas in both 2015 and 2017, but they were overshadowed by other gun proposals.

The measure last year made it farther than in the past, being heard in a committee hearing, although it never reached the Texas House floor.

In 2015, constitutional carry lost out to the intermediate step of a more politically palatable bill that allowed open carry for CHL holders. In 2017 campus carry and a reduction in fees for gun owners sucked all the legislative air out of the room. Stickland’s hoping 2019 will finally be the year for constitutional carry.

As for the anti-gun side, they’re trotting out the usual hoplophobic talking points.

“Unlicensed carry is out of the mainstream,” said Marsha McCartney, a spokeswoman for the Texas chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “It is not what Texans want.

“Maybe (Stickland) should pay a little attention to what they do want.”

McCartney uses that term “mainstream,” but I don’t think she really knows what that means. There are currently 13 states with full constitutional carry — no permit required for concealed or open carry — either for everyone or just residents. That makes constitutional carry mainstream by any definition.

Oh, and she also forgot to mention blood running ankle-deep in the streets and fender-bender shoot-outs. Probably just an oversight.

TTAG talked to Gun Owners of America’s Texas Director, Rachel Malone, who had this to say:

Constitutional carry is simply a term to mean that we shouldn’t have to ask the government for a permission slip to carry our guns. If somebody legally possesses a handgun, that person absolutely should be able to carry it either open or concealed without needing a special government permit. …

Over a quarter of the states recognize constitutional carry, where law abiding citizens can carry open or concealed without needing a permit. Well over half of the states have no problem with people carrying guns openly without a permit. Texas, on the other hand, was the 45th state to allow licensed open carry. It’s high time for Texas to catch up and start leading in gun rights.

That’s a sentiment with which we couldn’t agree more.

And then there’s South Dakota.

After years of unsuccessful attempts, supporters of legislation that would allow people to carry concealed handguns without a permit in South Dakota anticipate revived prospects for the conservative prize once GOP Gov.-elect Kristi Noem takes office in January.

Constitutional Carry Laws In the Works for Texas, South Dakota Governor-Elect Kristi Noem

courtesy argusleader.com

The legislation languished under retiring Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard, but Noem offered support for a so-called constitutional carry law during her campaign. Incoming GOP Sen. Lynne DiSanto, sponsor of a permitless concealed carry bill that Daugaard vetoed, said such legislation is likely in the upcoming session and she’s optimistic about its prospects.

Of course, there’s many a slip between the cup and the lip when it comes to campaign promises and signing a bill into law.

Backers (of constitutional carry) are likely to get a boost from Noem, who triumphed over Democratic state Sen. Billie Sutton in the November election. Noem in January urged passage of a permitless carry bill.

At the time Noem didn’t endorse a specific plan, though her campaign said she supported the policy “in principle.” Transition team spokeswoman Kristin Wileman said in a statement this week that Noem won’t commit to legislation until she can review its text, but said she’s a strong Second Amendment supporter and thinks provisions like constitutional carry can “protect and even strengthen this right for South Dakotans.”

So the outlook at least looks promising for South Dakota. In theory. We’ll be watching closely.

 

comments

  1. avatar DoomGuy says:

    Unfortunately Abbott, Patrick and Strickland will listen to the Brady bunch and the other gun grabbers because they’re all feckless chamber of commerce RINO bastards.

    1. avatar bryan1980 says:

      Uhhh, Stickland (no “r” in there, bud) is who’s pushing the Constitutional Carry bill, so I doubt he’s going to get the counsel of a group that opposes it.

    2. avatar Roman of Texas says:

      Maybe I’m out of the loop, but I thought (in general) that Abbott has been good for us in TX? Stickland is a downright saint in my book if he gets this passed (I’ll still prob renew my LTC).

      Now, for more serious question: PTR 9mm MP5 clone, or the B&T TP9 for Xmas?

      1. avatar Felix says:

        Neither. Get a 6.4 Creedless for your carry pistol.

      2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        Gov. Abbot had a group of people from all sides in a conference about safety in schools and the gun violence people were there. This conference was about actual answers and not political wishful thinking. The gun grabbers that spoke recited their talking points and the pro gun side gave statistical information and testimony from experts. When the smoke cleared the gun grabbers lost and the pro gun people won . I think we are good for Constitutional Carry there but you can never tell about the traitors in the legislature.

        1. avatar frank speak says:

          it’s proving popular across the country…which means it’s a vote-getter…expect some politicians to jump on board….

        2. avatar Andy says:

          I think you are on to something Ed. I also think we stand a better chance now that Joe Strauss is no longer in the speakership.

      3. avatar Jon in CO says:

        Gotta say B&T, just because they look super cool. If going 9mm though, I’d opt for the GHM9 personally. The TP9 is just too small.

      4. avatar Matt in SC says:

        I had a PTR 9 with folding brace and Franklin Armory trigger bookmarked for a couple months. The one they had in stock sold just when I had the cash to get it. Talk about a black Friday.

  2. avatar possum says:

    Well cool, now if Nebraska gets constitutional carry I can drive from here to there with no worries, pretty sure Ks. and Ok. have CC

    1. avatar Newshawk says:

      Possum, Oklahoma does not have Constitutional Carry. The legislature passed the bill last summer but Gov. Fallon vetoed it. Hopefully, incoming governor Kevin Stitt will finally get the job done.

    2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Nebraska is an odd duck. Some parts of the state are quite pro-liberty, other areas however, are somewhat draconian.

      Esoteric Inanity’s cousin had his shotgun seized in Sidney by a sheriffs deputy. The department took it and wouldn’t release it to said cousin due to him being only 17 years of age at the time. Needless to say, he didn’t get any pheasants on that trip.

    3. avatar Jon in CO says:

      The sad part about this is a bunch of states bordering CO have it, cept NM, UT, and the aforementioned OK. Then, bunch of states bordering those states have it. MT, MI, AR, ID. It’s weird being stuck right in the middle of all of this freedom.

  3. avatar Texican says:

    Speaker of the House RINO Joe Strauss was the reason Constitutional Carry was tabled in Texas. With him out of the way it should pass and be law September 1, 2019! Greg Abbott us pro gun and will sign it the day it hits his desk.

  4. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

    According to some, constitutional carry cannot pass in Texas. Too much lost revenue in training and licensing fees. Also can’t have somebody unlicensed coming into Texas that hasn’t passed a comprehensive and state accepted process carrying a pistol either openly or concealed (Wyoming and Idaho’s current stance Constitutional Carry for residents only, out of staters can open carry unlicensed though).

    1. avatar Elaine D. says:

      I’m the one who said that. And am curious to see how that works out – so will there just not be a LTC process anymore because it isn’t needed? I do notice that the price has dropped recently so maybe it’s not that much money to lose anyway at this point.

      It would be weird to retain a licensure procedure if there was no need for it – there wouldn’t be any real life benefits unless it meant something different than just the right to carry. I’ve enjoyed having mine because it does make interactions with LEO and border patrol a lot easier, and wouldn’t mind renewing it, but the question is whether the whole process will just evaporate.

      1. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

        Wow, you really haven’t been in this game very long, have you? The more comments you make on this site, the more we see how shallow and undeveloped your knowledge of the shooting world truly is…

        Most (or all) states that pass Constitutional Carry retain their permitting system afterwards, so that their residents can continue to carry in states with reciprocity agreements. Otherwise those people would lose the ability to carry out of state without acquiring non-resident licenses from other states such as Utah, Florida, or Pennsylvania.

        Many of us study the carry laws of various states and try to keep up with the changes in said laws – keep in mind that until 1991 there was only ONE Constitutional Carry state, whereas now there are 13 (soon to be 15, I hope.) Each of those 12 new CC states has faced this same choice, and I believe all of them have retained their permit system for the same reason. (Correct me if I’m wrong, CC-state residents.)

        There are millions of people in this country who have carried self-defense guns every day for many years, both inside and outside cities… the wide world of shooting is not restricted to meeting friendly cops and “operators” at your local range to participate in competitive sports. Please, please, try to gain more knowledge about firear ms and the people who use them before attempting to pass yourself off as a POTG (although I see that you’re now ashamed to use that term because some of us think differently than you…)

        1. avatar Elaine D. says:

          @Shall

          I’ve been quite honest about, and have no issue with, my time in the shooting world (about 2.5 years) and the fact that I am in a particular line of shooting training, that being self defense.

          It matters not whether anyone thinks I am a “POTG” or not as I have said elsewhere. It has literally no meaning in my life. It’s not a term I would use to anyone I shoot with or any of my teachers because I’ve never heard it used BY them, either, so it must not be that important in that world, right?

          If you want to use it to describe yourself, and it means something to you or in your world, go for it. I don’t need it for anything that I do.

        2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          “Wow, you really haven’t been in this game very long, have you? The more comments you make on this site, the more we see how shallow and undeveloped your knowledge of the shooting world truly is…”

          Now, now. Remember that the pro 2A community prides itself on its openness to everyone. One’s ignorance should not be disparaged, but rather used as an opportunity for dialogue and to inform. Pride can be an asset, but hubris rarely leads to optimal results, none know all and all at one time knew nothing.

          “Most (or all) states that pass Constitutional Carry retain their permitting system afterwards, so that their residents can continue to carry in states with reciprocity agreements. Otherwise those people would lose the ability to carry out of state without acquiring non-resident licenses from other states such as Utah, Florida, or Pennsylvania.”

          An excellent summary that is, to this one’s knowledge, correct.

          “Many of us study the carry laws of various states and try to keep up with the changes in said laws – keep in mind that until 1991 there was only ONE Constitutional Carry state, whereas now there are 13 (soon to be 15, I hope.) Each of those 12 new CC states has faced this same choice, and I believe all of them have retained their permit system for the same reason. (Correct me if I’m wrong, CC-state residents.)”

          To Esoteric Inanity’s recollection, with the exception of Vermont, ShallNotBeInfringed is correct. Vermont never passed prohibitions on the carrying of firearms, and as such has never had a permitting process.

          “There are millions of people in this country who have carried self-defense guns every day for many years, both inside and outside cities… the wide world of shooting is not restricted to meeting friendly cops and “operators” at your local range to participate in competitive sports.”

          Amen.

          “Please, please, try to gain more knowledge about firear ms and the people who use them before attempting to pass yourself off as a POTG (although I see that you’re now ashamed to use that term because some of us think differently than you…)”

          What is a “Person Of The Gun”? Somebody who owns firearms while believing in restricting others rights? Or perhaps somebody who has never even held a firearm, yet believes that all fellow countrymen should fully be able to excercise their inalienable rights?

          Being pro liberty is about far more than just the 2nd Amendment.

        3. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

          @Elaine

          Perhaps I was a bit harsh, but my comments were not meant as condemnation; only as a means of provoking thought. When I say “how shallow and undeveloped your knowledge of the shooting world truly is”, that shouldn’t be taken as criticism, because you are learning as you go. Merely stating that you have a long way to go, and as others have said here, you don’t know what you don’t know.

          Also note that rather than condemn you, I immediately provided the piece of knowledge you were previously lacking – an attempt to educate, if you will. Helping you to become more knowledgeable in the future, I hope. If I came across as a jerk… well, at least you’ll remember what I said, won’t you?

          I simply feel that you pass yourself off as being knowledgeable in this area, but many of us see through that and know that you are not. You shouldn’t be offended by that fact, it’s just the way things are.

          And to be honest, that was probably the first time I’ve even used the term POTG, so no, it has no special meaning to me beyond its face value.

        4. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

          @ Esoteric

          Thank you for the laurels, but allow me to correct one minor point: you replied, “To Esoteric Inanity’s recollection, with the exception of Vermont, ShallNotBeInfringed is correct. Vermont never passed prohibitions on the carrying of firearms, and as such has never had a permitting process.”

          You are absolutely correct However, I specifically stated, “Each of those 12 new CC states has faced this same choice, and I believe all of them have retained their permit system for the same reason.” The “12 new CC states” does not include Vermont, the “original” CC state.

          Also, notice my comments in response to Elaine; they might explain some of my callousness toward her original post. Otherwise, excellent counterpoint, as usual.

        5. avatar Elaine D. says:

          @Shall

          Thanks for that clarifying response. I have never once claimed to be knowledgeable about anything other than exactly what I’m learning about. There are other areas of life in which I have far more knowledge than guns. What I know is what I know at the time. It’s that way for everyone.

          You know, it isn’t always easy to write for, or participate in, a gun forum AS a gun owner where you are a minority and people automatically assume that you are stupid because you don’t vote like they do. This dis-ease is greatly increased by constantly having being a Democrat conflated with being a Communist, Fascist, or Socalist, all of which are different things, and three of which appear to be very poorly understood indeed by many of the folks on here.

          There is a lot of mud slinging on here that seems to me not only ill informed but unnecessary when it comes to my own political orientation. It’s both amusing and frustrating when people who hate Communists sound almost exactly like Yuri Bezmenov.

          So thanks for the civility and the discourse.

        6. avatar ShallNot BeInfringed says:

          @Elaine,

          You’re welcome, and your feelings about the way you’ve been addressed on this site are understandable. Please note that I have not attacked you for being a liberal (or anything else), as many others here have.

          I do have my own reservations about your political beliefs, but (at least in this discussion) I choose to keep them to myself. Have a good evening.

        7. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          @ Esoteric

          “Thank you for the laurels,”

          It was this one’s pleasure. After all, Esoteric Inanity rarely gets to play the role of a didactic self righteous prick lol. Usually he is the cryptic clown that occasionally finds the bone that a blind dog was looking for when it went whistling past the grave yard.

          “but allow me to correct one minor point: you replied, “To Esoteric Inanity’s recollection, with the exception of Vermont, ShallNotBeInfringed is correct. Vermont never passed prohibitions on the carrying of firearms, and as such has never had a permitting process.”

          You are absolutely correct However, I specifically stated, “Each of those 12 new CC states has faced this same choice, and I believe all of them have retained their permit system for the same reason.” The “12 new CC states” does not include Vermont, the “original” CC state.”

          Ah yes, very good. Esoteric Inanity overlooked that specific detail. Apologies.

          “Also, notice my comments in response to Elaine; they might explain some of my callousness toward her original post.”

          The first paragraph of ShallNotBeInfringed’s initial post came off as a tad harsh. However, the rest, in this one’s opinion, appeared to be a genuine attempt to inform. The subsequent response to Elaine D. also seems to be benevolent.

          Esoteric Inanity understands that it can be damn frustrating when conversing with somebody who has a differing view of one’s dogma. Things can become personal very quickly. However, staying impersonal tends, in this one’s opinion, to be the best course for productive dialogue (Hence Esoteric Inanity’s use of illeism. Committing to commenting in the 3rd person tends to make this one think especially hard of how statements are interpreted by others. It’s also his shtick). Sadly though, Esoteric Inanity isn’t always successful in this endeavor, and has had some slightly contentious conversations with other posters. Usually such instances involve not so much a difference in stance, but the degree to which a common stance can differ.

          Esoteric Inanity, as a teen and young adult, once believed in “practical restrictions” on rights. Machine guns seemed too dangerous for any civilian, only the guilty have something to hide and god forbid that people like the Westboro Baptist Church spew their “hate speech” (Their antics truly are atrocious, no doubt) in public, let alone at funerals. Eventually however, he came to understand after many arguments with pro rights advocates (R.I.P Alan and Bill) that reasonable restrictions are merely oppression in the present and tyranny in the future. Now, this one tends to get into arguments while representing the pro rights end of the spectrum against firearms advocates/self proclaimed patriots that favor restrictions on the rights of those they dislike. Funny how a person’s paradigm can shift isn’t it?

          None of this is meant to be preachy, just this one’s own thoughts.

          “Otherwise, excellent counterpoint, as usual.”

          Appreciate the compliment. Logical progression of a thought isn’t always Esoteric Inanity’s forte. Although, every so often he tends to find that bone and some approval (Never from a paramour though lol).

          Love the handle by the way. Four axiomatic yet powerful words. Amusing how some people can be vexed by the meaning of Shall not be infringed.

        8. avatar Scoutino says:

          Please don’t get us wrong, Elaine. We don’t automatically assume that you are stupid because you don’t vote like we do. We just point out that for a gun owner and user, voting for party with explicit goal of civilian disarmament in its platform (and history of gun grabbing wherever they can get away with it, to prove they really mean it) is not the smartest thing to do.

      2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

        “I’m the one who said that.”

        A tad presumptuous, there are others with the same sentiments. Whether such people are pessimists or realists will be revealed in time.

        “And am curious to see how that works out – so will there just not be a LTC process anymore because it isn’t needed?”

        Look to states that have recently passed constitutional carry for an idea. Most (Including Esoteric Inanity’s home state of Wyoming) still offer permits to residents for the purpose of reciprocity with other states. Sadly, states like Wyoming don’t extend the “privileges” of unlicensed concealed carry to non residents. It’s a Wyomingite’s only perk here. Those of a more consertive mind tend to favor such a setup, can’t trust out of staters after all. However, the more liberal leaning tend to want all countrymen to be able to excercise their rights here.

        *Disclaimer: Liberal and conservative are used above in the traditional context, rather than in that of the recent perversions of the terms.

        “I do notice that the price has dropped recently so maybe it’s not that much money to lose anyway at this point.”

        Esoteric Inanity tends to favor the aphorism that in cases such as this: It isn’t about the money darlin’. It’s all about the control.

        “It would be weird to retain a licensure procedure if there was no need for it – there wouldn’t be any real life benefits unless it meant something different than just the right to carry. I’ve enjoyed having mine because it does make interactions with LEO and border patrol a lot easier, and wouldn’t mind renewing it, but the question is whether the whole process will just evaporate.”

        States with Constitutional Carry can still extend exclusive priveledges to those with permits. A few years back, Wyoming’s Congress attempted to allow those with CFPs to carry in what are considered to be sensitive areas under the state’s control e.g. public schools, court rooms, bars etc. Unfortunaly, the measure was shot down by statists from Park, Teton, Albany and Lincoln county (Among others). Most unfortunate was that Esoteric Inanity’s former doctor was one of the representatives that killed the bill (Ironically, said bill was sponsored by this one’s former high school biology teacher).

        1. avatar Elaine D. says:

          @Esoteric

          To clarify: I said “it” directly on TTAG. That’s what I was referring to.

          Thanks for the info. I looked for information on this question previously but could not find it, so this helps a lot.

        2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          “To clarify: I said “it” directly on TTAG. That’s what I was referring to.”

          Yes, Esoteric Inanity was poking a bit of fun at Elaine D., sadly though, her premise may prove to be correct. Not necessarily due to lost revenue, but rather lost control and fear.

          “Thanks for the info. I looked for information on this question previously but could not find it, so this helps a lot.”

          Not a problem, Esoteric Inanity is always happy to inform while relaying other trivial aspects. However, take what he says with a grain of salt, Esoteric Inanity may be mistaken, misinformed or outright lying. As one may know, always verify.

          Further reading if one is interested:

          https://www.nationalgunrights.org/all-news-items/item/238-wyoming-passes-constitutional-carry-3

          https://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/wyoming-firearms-lobby-pushes-for-repeal-of-gun-free-zones/article_6339a542-d697-5746-ae32-f9e8f57e80c1.html#comments

          https://www.gunlaws.com/ConstitutionalCarryIndex.htm

    2. avatar Andy says:

      Maintaining the LTC process and licenses won’t mean much for Texas, but, it will provide for reciprocity to other states. As for lost revenue, pffffftttt. It’s not that much.

  5. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Over the last few years we see one or 2 States who manage to pass some form of permitless carry. With 13 down and 37 to go, it will be approx 18.5 years before every State joins the club – assuming the left coast and the other blue states can get it done at all – and the current membership doesn’t revert to the bad old days. The chickens ain’t been hatched yet.

    1. avatar Adam says:

      Places like Maryland, New Jersey, New York, etc will never even allow permitted concealed carry unless the Supreme Court forces them to let alone permitless carry. Likewise, I can easily see us losing states like Virginia and maybe North Carolina now that they are turning blue.

      We still have a big fight ahead of us. We need to keep hitting them hard at the local level with state laws and the federal level with new circuit court judges.

  6. avatar Bill says:

    I can’t speak for everyone but i held a chl four years. I let it expire. I still carry today because of today’s crazy world. If i were to get into a oh shit situation, then i will deal with the consequences. Bottom line is we should not have to pay. To protect ourselves.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I understand your position. If I’m on your jury you won’t be found guilty. But I’m not too certain it’s a real smart decision. Courageous, yes, but perhaps not smart.

  7. avatar Patrick H says:

    Maine passed constitutional carry a couple years ago. I don’t think there has been a single problem with it.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      ..each example like that strengthens the case for it….

  8. avatar SteamTroller45 says:

    This is awesome, hopefully if we get this in the books it’ll be a deterrent for all the Californians that keep moving here. Might even clear up some traffic on I-10.
    Although as a college student, I do wonder how this will affect Campus Carry.

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