 | ||||||
More Information or to Enroll in classes:
Phone: 260-459-2382Fort Wayne, Indiana
Fort Wayne, IndianaPublished articles
Fort Wayne Journal Gazette
and
News-Sentinel
(click on titles to view articles)
| ||||
Links
Constitutional, Unrestricted Carry
The whole subject of states’ handgun carry permits, recognition, reciprocity, and preemption is a convoluted, confusing, and, essentially, impossible-to-understand can of worms, with the worms always moving and always changing. Law abiding gun owners can, easily, run afoul of handgun carry laws in other states despite having valid carry permits from their home states.
For example (and the examples are legion!), a resident of Indiana with the Indiana License to Carry a Handgun (LTCH) who travels into Ohio while possessing a handgun commits a felony, because Ohio refuses to recognize the Indiana LTCH. I am perfectly legal in Fort Wayne, New Haven, and Woodburn, but, if I travel a few miles further east, I become a felon simply by crossing the state line into Ohio.
On November 16, 2011, the U.S. House of Representatives passed HR 822, The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. Basically, HR 822 says any person possessing a valid handgun carry permit from any state may legally carry a handgun in any other state that permits handgun carry, which translates every state but Illinois. People carrying handguns would still be subject to all laws of each state where carrying.
As expected, the shop worn chorus of “blood in the streets” was raised by the usual suspects: Carolyn McCarthy, Frank Lautenberg, Chuck Schumer, and the Brady Campaign, among others. In spite of all the predictable hand wringing, the bill passed by an overwhelming margin of 272 to 154 with 47 Democrats voting for it and only 7 Republicans opposed. There is no companion bill, yet, in the Senate, and in the unlikely scenario of passage by the Senate, it is even more unlikely it would be signed into law by the current President.
Even some pro-gun people are opposed to HR 822, seeing it as another dangerous abdication of power to a federal government that will corrupt the power and end up using it against law abiding gun owners. I, too, share that concern.
Enter the concept of what is termed “constitutional carry” or unrestricted carry. Two Supreme Court decisions, Heller and MacDonald, have established the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is 1) an individual right, and 2) that right applies to all states and federal enclaves.
Vermont has never had nor required a handgun carry permit for its residents. In 2003, Alaska removed the requirement for law abiding residents to have a permit to carry handguns. In 2011, both Arizona and Wyoming joined the constitutional carry club. Sixteen more states recently introduced constitutional carry legislation.
Leaders in those states are recognizing that law-abiding gun owners are among the people least likely to cause trouble and that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is, indeed, a right and not a privilege subject to permission and licensing by governmental entities. Criminals, especially violent criminals, are never deterred by licensing laws.
As more states join the twenty current states either having or considering constitutional carry, the need for a federal reciprocity law will diminish and, finally, go away.
Although Indiana already recognizes handgun carry permits of every state issuing them, Indiana lawmakers should take the next logical, common sense, and constitutional step: eliminate the requirement for law-abiding residents to purchase and possess a license to carry.
