.jpg)
Concealed carry of a firearm may soon become a less
red-tape bound activity in Arizona.
(Photo: Frederick Giordan)
On February 1, Arizona's State Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of a bill that would eliminate criminal penalties for people who carry firearms concealed without a permit. The measure has provoked opposition from an association representing chiefs of police in the Grand Canyon State -- which some cynics might well take as an implicit endorsement of the proposal.
Arizona already allows open carry -- carrying a firearm in plain view -- without a permit, and is a "must-issue" state in which carry permits are readily available to people with a clean record who satisfy basic requirements. But it's not uncommon for un-permitted Arizonans to tuck guns in their pockets when stepping out for a hike, to run dogs or for other purposes, and so risk criminal penalties for a victimless act if caught. That has prompted legislators to consider following in the footsteps of Vermont and Alaska, states which don't require carry permits and have seen little in the way of a downside from removing one pitfall among many from the lawbooks.
The proposed bill, SB 1102, strikes language from the law that penalizes carrying any concealed weapon, except a pocket knife, without a permit, and that also bans having a weapon "concealed within immediate control of any person in or on a means of transportation." The measure passed the Senate Judicary Committee by a 4-3 vote.
If it becomes law, the bill would still leave permits available for those who want them -- especially people who want to carry their guns in other states that offer reciprocity to Arizona permit-holders.
In response, John Thomas, the lobbyist for the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police, said, "SB 1102, if enacted into law, will take Arizona back to the Wild West carry, with no consideration of officer safety.''
Historians might note that Arizona should be so lucky -- several studies have found the "Wild West" to have lower crime rates than modern America. In Gunfighters, Highwaymen & Vigilantes, author Roger D. McGrath, a professor of history, referring to the "rough" mining towns he researched, wrote, "Bodie's rates of robery, burglary and theft were dramatically lower than those of most U.S. cities in 1980." He added, "Aurora and Bodie women, other than prostitutes, suffered little from crime or violence." Not to minimize the crimes suffered by women in the sex trade, but women in that socially and legally stigmatized business continue to suffer more severely from crime than other women.
The towns McGrath studied did have high homicide rates but "those killed, with only a few exceptions, had been willing combatants, and many of them were roughs or badmen." Basically, the violence was largely confined to a subculture of voluntary participants -- which is almost the only part of the Old West we see in the movies.
Tellingly, McGrath found, "[t]he citizens themselves, armed with various types of firearms and willing to kill to protect their persons or property, were evidently the most important deterrent to larcenous crime."
It's not to much of a stretch to infer that Arizona's modern chiefs of police oppose SB 1102 and its looser firearms restrictions because they just don't want to be rendered unnecessary.
email J.D.: civilliberties (at) tuccille.com
You might also enjoy these
Civil Liberties Examiner is now on Facebook!
Or follow the latest civil liberties news on Twitter: Libertywriter
Comments
That would be a step in the right direction. I do think that the power for real change in this direction lies with ordinary people, though. Just stop asking for permission. Ever. Overwhelm the badged thugs who oppose liberty for you and me.
The story is a little deeper than that. The state's open carry law has been slowly strangled by activist judges who have declared several types of open carry to be actually "concealed." There was one instance where a man was arrested for "concealing" an openly carried firearm just because he kept that side of his body angled away from an officer who was interviewing him. The law says that if a holster is visible, the gun is not concealed, but a judge has ruled that that doesn't apply to off-body carry in an automobile. We have even had cases where a driver -- who had a concealed carry license -- stowed his gun in a center console, and had his passenger arrested during a traffic stop because the passenger was not similarly licensed. So Arizona gun owners are doing the only thing we can -- fighting back with new laws that tie the hands of authority-worshipping judges.
The 'wild wild west' story is Hollywood made, and without actual historic fact!!!
Only law enforcement and military personal should be allowed to carry weapons in the public. In Switzerland, we have such laws for decades and can proudly present the lowest murder- and suicide rates carried out by firearms. Americans, who confuse freedom with an archaic wild-west habit to wear guns and accept to jeopardize the lives of innocent cititzens, should be placed on the electric chair. It's still a wonderful piece of furniture.
An armed society is a polite society. Take back the rights that our forefathers fought so hard to attain on our behalf. The namby pamby huggers will give the country away if we continue to allow them to take away every freedom we have enjoyed.
Rabbid, it is you sir, who confuses freedom...
We have a RIGHT to protect ourselves/families while you seemingly do not under your form of government.
You are FORCED by law into military training and to keep a government issued weapon in your home.
And you say we're confused?
Thats an excellent idea and if people want to get CWP's they will be able to buy a firearm without having to do the phone call part of the sale.
However you can bet your bottom dollar that the police in that state will cry bloody murder. Frankly as a person goes I see myself and my family and friends as better people than police. We don't suck off of the citizens and refuse to disobay our oath by refusing to up hold the laws during union contracts. We would never sit by and allow someone to take an oath in a court of law and lie to send someone to jail. Frankly, most citizens are far more decent people than most police.
Rabbid - that's an aptly chosen moniker. Your own words reveal you to be a clear danger to "innocent cititzens"(sic) with your advocacy of state execution for people who merely see things differently than you do.
John Thomas, lobbyist for the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police: you Sir - reveal your hand too readily. You obviously have no consideration for the safety of the constituents of the people who sign your checks. You would deny effective self-defense to ordinary people of this state in order to perpetuate this cops and robbers game that affords shills like you a platform.
If you and your crony paymasters actually had any regard for the safety of the people of Arizona - you would applaud and endorse S.B. 1102.
I see a troll has poked its virtual had out of its mommy's basement. Probably wants see if the adult world is infantile enough yet for it to feel superior.
I know that y'all are tired of seeing this but: There is a period after the phrase "shall not be infringed" in the 2nd Amendment. That period cannot be debated.
[W-III]
The only way for the people to be defended is to do it yourself. I own a gun and have trained my wife diligently in how to use it. God forbid she or I ever has to but those are the facts of the world we live in. I would love for the cops(who are mostly sadists)to be irrelevant. They only show up to do something after the crime has been committed anyway. What good does that do me? None.
"Wild West?" Are Vermont and Alaska newspapers full of stories about street shootouts? Uh, no. Do law abiding citizens go around mowing down the peace officers? Uh, no.
Personally I am not concerned with the "safety of officers", since they already are in the safest occupation in the US and they don't deserve any greater "safety" than any other citizen in any other occupation.
Wild west indeed;
FACT: The only occasion where Wyatt Earp, his brothers, or Doc Holiday ever fired their guns in Tombstone was at the OK Coral. That shootout would never have happened had the Earps not decided to disarm the Clantons and McLowerys. As shoot outs go, it was pretty much over before it started. We can thank the likes of Ned Buntline for the "colorful" glorification of the event. It seems that Holywood has taken over where old Ned left off.
Nice to see an article like this and would hope more people here in Canada read it and think about it. Things are changing here and it is time i feel for something like this to happen on this side of the border. Personal safety is up to us not the police if it was not so then you could sue them in court when they dont show up to rescue you from a violent crime.
Hey Rabbid:
F*u*ck you!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!