U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)-– On Thursday, 3 March 2022, the Alabama Senate passed House Bill 272, Constitutional Carry, with Amendments. The Amendments were added the previous day. From alreporter.com:
The Alabama Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday approved a bill that would repeal the state’s law requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The bill now heads to the full Senate for consideration of final passage.
Looking at Legiscan, HB 272 passed the full Senate, 23 to 5, with 7 abstaining, on March 3rd, 2022. Four Republicans and three Democrats abstained from voting. They may have agreed not to vote, with offsetting votes. It is a common tactic that does not affect whether the bill passes or not.
Three amendments were added to the Senate committee.
The first amendment was a requirement for an armed person to inform an officer of the law if the armed person was asked by the officer if the person was armed. In this case, being armed includes if a firearm is in the vehicle occupied by the person. The armed person is required to answer the officer truthfully.
The second amendment made clear if a person was on private property, and were personally informed they were not allowed to be armed on the property, they would be required to leave. If they did not leave, they would be charged with criminal trespass. This is a reinforcement of the way trespassing is enforced in most states. What is different in this statute, is the law requires the prosecution of armed trespassers if they refuse to leave, removing much discretion about enforcement of the law. From the amendment:
“(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a violation of this section shall be prosecuted as a criminal trespass in the third degree pursuant to Section2613A-7-4.
The third amendment is a way for the state to reimburse Sheriff’s offices for revenue lost if the number of permits decreases. That provision sunsets after three years.
Because of the amendments, the bill will go back to the House for concurrence. If HB 272 is passed in the House, as it was passed in the Senate, then it would be sent to Governor Kay Ivey for signature or veto.
It appears to this correspondent, the amendments will be accepted by the House, in order to pass HB 272.
The Constitutional Carry bill in Ohio is in the administrative process of being sent to Governor DeWine. Because of the amendments to the Alabama bill, it is likely the Ohio bill will be signed first, making it the 22nd state to become a member of the Constitutional Carry club.
The Alabama Constitutional Carry bill, HB 272, appears to be likely to be passed and to be signed by Governor Ivey.
Neither bill is yet law. Many things can happen before they become law.
When either bill becomes law, Constitutional Carry will be the most common way for state legislatures to treat the issue of carry of handguns outside the home. This might have some bearing on the New York Rifle and Pistol Association case now before the Supreme Court. The opinion is expected in June of 2022.
It seems likely both bills will become law before the end of March, 2022. If that happens, Ohio and Alabama will become the 22 and 23 Constitutional Carry states in the Constitutional Carry club.
The current members of the Constitutional Carry club are:
Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Other states are considering Constitutional Carry in their legislatures, including Georgia, Nebraska, Florida, and Wisconsin.
Pennsylvania passed a Constitutional Carry bill, but was unable to override the Governor’s veto.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
They abstain from voting so it can’t be used against them in the future. This is wrong and should never be allowed. Force politicians to do their job
Good stuff, looking forward to congratulate two new Constitutional Carry states!
“The third amendment is a way for the state to reimburse Sheriff’s offices for revenue lost if the number of permits decreases.”
And here we have one big reason that police departments tend to oppose constitutional carry laws – loss of revenue. Another is the ability to settle scores – sometimes from previous generations of families. Other than wanting to be “the only ones” who are armed, there don’t seem to be any other reasons to oppose “civilians” carrying. Certainly no good reasons.
Funny how all these “constitutional carry” bills seem to come with a lot of not very constitutional stuff attached to them.
The third amendment is a way for the state to reimburse Sheriff’s offices for revenue lost if the number of permits decreases.
Oh yea, you know the extra monies received from permits, and apps were instrumental in stopping crime. (sarcasm intended)
The only reason objections are made is because they didn’t want to relinquish power.
Not all LEOs are scum sucking, lying thieving, hypocrites, but there are many that are!
lets get her done
The Constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Enough said on that. I have had to deal with LEO’s that have the power to “May issue” or “Shall issue.” Most would not be aware of the difference in a Constitutional Right.
I just renewed my permit for 3 years, hope I live to see it expire. I am 79 years old. Only bad thing I shake so bad I have to carry a Taurus judge. My Sheriff was my partner when I was a peace officer so I didn’t mind giving him the money anyway. And if by the grace of God I make it for another three years I will renew my permit again to support my best friend.
As in other “red” states, Alabama sheriffs did their best to torpedo this legislation. They were able to put pressure on the state senators to include this amendment which creates a dangerous situation for “civilians:” “The first amendment was a requirement for an armed person to inform an officer of the law if the armed person was asked by the officer if the person was armed. In this case, being armed includes if a firearm is in the vehicle occupied by the person. The armed person is required to answer the officer truthfully.” They also got funding… Read more »