Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: 41magsnub on February 07, 2011, 08:06:56 PM
-
http://laws.leg.mt.gov/laws11/LAW0203W$BSRV.ActionQuery?P_BLTP_BILL_TYP_CD=HB&P_BILL_NO=384&P_BILL_DFT_NO=&P_CHPT_NO=&Z_ACTION=Find&P_SBJ_DESCR=&P_SBJT_SBJ_CD=&P_LST_NM1=&P_ENTY_ID_SEQ= (http://laws.leg.mt.gov/laws11/LAW0203W$BSRV.ActionQuery?P_BLTP_BILL_TYP_CD=HB&P_BILL_NO=384&P_BILL_DFT_NO=&P_CHPT_NO=&Z_ACTION=Find&P_SBJ_DESCR=&P_SBJT_SBJ_CD=&P_LST_NM1=&P_ENTY_ID_SEQ=)
This bill passed committee and is going to the floor.
Currently a CCW carrier is not allowed in a pretty standard list of prohibited places such as banks and bars while carrying. HB384 would lift that restriction for cops (presumably when they are in street clothes off duty).
On one hand, I like any sort of loosening of firearm laws. On the other hand, I REALLY dislike treating cops any different than Joe Blow's like me. Not that it is going to matter what I think since my Rep is Sue Malek who has never seen a gun control law she didn't like.
There is another bill that I really like though, that one dumps the MT Law prohibiting the carry of suppressors when hunting. The wording in the bill sucks and I'm not totally clear if it actually refers to the use of said suppressor to take a game animal or not. Folks say it does but it does not go out and explicitly say that. Either way it is a good step.
-
Put me in the "all animals should be equal" category. Police officers are civilians and the law should apply to them the same as everyone else. I guess I'm old fashioned that way.
-
as a survivor of police week in dc i think first law is a mistake
-
Put me in the "all animals should be equal" category. Police officers are civilians and the law should apply to them the same as everyone else. I guess I'm old fashioned that way.
Yep.
-
Put me in the "all animals should be equal" category. Police officers are civilians and the law should apply to them the same as everyone else. I guess I'm old fashioned that way.
I also kick it old school.
-
I'd be OK with this IF:
The law also stipulates that your LEO status is a 24/7/365 condition. That is, you are expected to maintain an on-duty status at all times. In that scenario, being armed/equipped everywhere you go makes sense. It also means never doing anything to impair yourself or make yourself unavailable to respond to an incident. Since that will never happen, I'm on board with the citizen equality argument.
-
I'd be OK with this IF:
The law also stipulates that your LEO status is a 24/7/365 condition. That is, you are expected to maintain an on-duty status at all times. In that scenario, being armed/equipped everywhere you go makes sense. It also means never doing anything to impair yourself or make yourself unavailable to respond to an incident. Since that will never happen, I'm on board with the citizen equality argument.
IMHO, those laws are a major part of the problem. Giving LEO's off duty status exempts them from being one of us.
-
[barf]
Count me in as another that doesn't like some pigs being more equal than others. Montana has been doing so well for the last few years with 10th Amendment issues, gun rights and privacy rights. I'd hate to see them backslide with something like this.
-
I don't see how this is going through here in MT. Not exactly our flavor of regular business...
-
And "constitutional carry" didn't make it out of committee :mad:
Well, I hope everyone likes seeing a big single action on my hip downtown :P
-
Yeah I saw that.. lame... very lame.
-
The bill applies to all CCW permittees, as well as off duty police officers.
-
The bill applies to all CCW permittees, as well as off duty police officers.
Indeed it will, but.... I rather dislike the special class of civvies.
-
wait.. did I totally misread that? I like it then. I still don't like the Peace Officer part.
-
Yeah, it does say all CCW holders are good to go in terms of prohibited places, but still makes special exemption for LEOs. :(
-
I swear line 2 was totally different when I read it 2 days ago!
-
It may have been, for all we know this moment. ;)
-
Yeah, it does say all CCW holders are good to go in terms of prohibited places, but still makes special exemption for LEOs. :(
What "prohibited" places?
Are CCW holders afforded the same "good person" standard as LEOs when it comes to court houses, police stations, schools and similar places? If so, that's awesome. I support that.
But, if we're just talking about bars and banks... meh. Not impressed. AZ has that, already. Constitutional Carry for all, except for a handful of non-governmental restricted places for the lay folks (bars, predominantly). CCW holders can carry in bars as long as the bar is not posted with a specific signage and they don't drink. 75% of bars seem to be posted. And I like a beer when I go into a bar anyways, so it's all moot.
-
Yes, bars, banks, etc. The ONLY places we won't be able to carry are governmental offices, both State and Federal - IF that goes through.
Well, actually, the only place that CCW holders won't be able to carry are blah blah blah.... I rather dislike the entire idea of a permit system.
-
I'm still confused about whether or not we can open carry in bars and banks ... =|
-
I wrote a letter, sent it to the local sheriff, and never received a response. The local PD said there's nothing against it but don't try it before asking the sheriff. He never responded.
So far as the law states, there is nothing against open carry in prohibited places (on a state level, obviously the PO and such are still a no-go) that I, nor my lawyer, can find. After previous OC incidents, I won't be testing it, though.