Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: W.Va. Senate OKs bill to allow concealed carry without permit
Source:
The Charleston Gazette
URL Source: http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150227/GZ01/150229285
Published: Mar 3, 2015
Author: Eric Eyre
Post Date: 2015-03-03 18:58:33 by Hondo68
Ping List: *Bang List* Subscribe to *Bang List*
Keywords: inherent right, God given CCW, natural rights
Views: 35562
Comments: 113
Senators approved a bill Friday that could make West Virginia the sixth state to allow residents to carry a concealed firearm without a permit. After reading aloud from the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, senators voted 32-2 for a bill (SB347) that allows people 18 and older to tote concealed guns. “The bill eliminates the crime of carrying a concealed weapon in West Virginia,” said Sen. Charles Trump, R-Morgan. The legislation next goes to the House of Delegates. Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont and Wyoming are the only states that allow residents to carry a hidden gun without a permit. West Virginia already allows open carry of a handgun without a permit. West Virginia law enforcement officials have expressed concern about the bill. They said the legislation could put officers more at risk. They also noted that the weapons-permit fees generate funds for sheriff’s departments across the state. Last year, the permits raised $3.4 million for the departments. However, senators who supported the bill kept coming back to the Second Amendment. “This is a United States constitutional right,” said Robert Karnes, R-Upshur. “The Second Amendment recognizes this inherent right.” Sens. Corey Palumbo, D-Kanawha, and Ron Miller, D-Greenbrier, voted against the bill. Sen. Mike Romano, D-Harrison, supported the concealed-carry permit repeal, but first offered what he called “common-sense” revisions that his colleagues ultimately rejected. Romano wanted to require that residents be at least 21 years old before they could carry a handgun without a permit. “To carry a .357 Magnum, we really should require them to be 21 years of age,” Romano said. But other senators said a 21-and-up age limit was “arbitrary.” “At the age of 18, we’re talking about parents of small children,” Karnes said. “And we’re going to say an 18-year-old who is able to enter into the contract of marriage, to have children, is not responsible enough to defend the family that he has?” Romano also wanted to require people to take a handgun safety course before they could carry a concealed weapon. Karnes argued that the training requirement was a “backdoor licensing scheme,” and senators voted down the amendment. Romano later voted for the bill that didn’t include any of his suggested changes. “I concluded long ago that the permitting process through the sheriff’s department is simply a hurdle for law-abiding citizens who carry a gun,” Romano said. “Criminals will carry a gun regardless of the process.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 74.
#1. To: hondo68 (#0)
: )
In the county I worked for, all the pistol permit fees went to and were payable to the county clerk. The sheriff's department was only expected to do backgrounds on the applicants. It literally took money out of the budget by tying up officers time. After the UnSafeAct was passed, people flooded the clerk with so many applications, that background checks were handed out to even the road patrol officers. Pistol permits, licenses or any regulation is bullshit. Constitutional carry is the model every state should follow.
I got a permit to purchase a handgun handwritten by the sheriff. I chatted with him for half an hour or so, told him I wanted a handgun because the district had elected a pinko congresscritter that had no regard for gun rights and might agitate for a gungrab and that I also wanted one because I lived in a very isolated rural place. There was no charge. The permit requirement was just so a sheriff would be able to put the brakes on people with obvious mental problems. It was not a pistol permit as is common in some states. It was a permit to buy a handgun from a retail vendor. AFAIK, buying a gun via private sale was not covered by the law. It was a one-time permit to be able to buy the handgun and didn't need renewal.
You have it better than where I policed. After you pay 125.00 to the clerk for the application, then you pay 50.00 to the clerk for your fingerprints. After the pistol permit is approved by the county judge, you have to pay the county clerk 5.00 to get a signed coupon for each gun you want to buy. The only decent part of all that tyranny, was the pistol permits were lifetime unless revoked. The UnSafeAct changed all that. Cuomo can go F*** hinself
Fingerprinted like some criminal? No thanks. Midwesterners get kinda uppity at even the suggestion.
You were in the Navy,so your fingerprints are already on file. You have nothing to lose.
No, they aren't.
Yeah,they are. Everybody in the military that had a security clearance has their fingerprints on file. Maybe even those who didn't have security clearances,for all I know. I had a Secret clearance when I was a Private E-2 because I was trained to work with cryptographic machines and code pads,and everybody in SF has a Secret or Top Secret security clearance. It's a basic requirement. I may be wrong,but I THINK I have read that the military now even keeps DNA samples from all service members in order to make their remains identifiable if needed in the future. Or are you trying to tell us that you were a Naval officer without a security clearance? Or that security clearances weren't a requirement for Naval officers?
They started collecting DNA samples about 18-20 years ago.
LOL! Why don't you just go ahead and show up at my door with a wheelchair and attendants to take me to the "home"? Geeze! Some people really know how to rub it in.
You aint that old yet pete, as stubborn as you are you'll live to be at least 90! BTW you're only as old as you act. The one question I have is do they keep these DNA samples forever or do they get rid of them after you get out or retire? And if they do keep them can the government use them against you in any criminal case they may bring against you? Cause at the time they were taken they were "not voluntarily" taken?
And if they do keep them can the government use them against you in any criminal case they may bring against you? Cause at the time they were taken they were "not voluntarily" taken? http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2012/title-10/subtitle-a/part-ii/chapter-80/section-1565a/ Title 10 - Armed Forces Subtitle A - General Military Law (§§ 101 - 2925) Part II - PERSONNEL (§§ 501 - 1805) Chapter 80 - MISCELLANEOUS INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DUTIES (§§ 1561 - 1567a) Section 1565a - DNA samples maintained for identification of human remains: use for law enforcement purposes MISCELLANEOUS INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DUTIES - 10 U.S.C. § 1565a (2012) §1565a. DNA samples maintained for identification of human remains: use for law enforcement purposes (a) Compliance with Court Order.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), if a valid order of a Federal court (or military judge) so requires, an element of the Department of Defense that maintains a repository of DNA samples for the purpose of identification of human remains shall make available, for the purpose specified in subsection (b), such DNA samples on such terms and conditions as such court (or military judge) directs. (2) A DNA sample with respect to an individual shall be provided under paragraph (1) in a manner that does not compromise the ability of the Department of Defense to maintain a sample with respect to that individual for the purpose of identification of human remains. (b) Covered Purpose.—The purpose referred to in subsection (a) is the purpose of an investigation or prosecution of a felony, or any sexual offense, for which no other source of DNA information is reasonably available. (c) Definition.—In this section, the term “DNA sample” has the meaning given such term in section 1565(c) of this title. (Added Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1063(a), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2653.)
Sound to me like, in practice, the Pentagon would have a lot of discretion in allowing their samples to be used for civilian police investigations.
Sounds to me like, in practice, if TPTB want the info released, it will be released, and if they want if withheld, there is ample room to state a reason to withhold it. Think of it being about as private and secure as a social security number for social security purposes only.
#77. To: nolu chan (#74)
Actually, I did think of that comparison. It's as legal and private as the elites say it is. And can change at any time, no matter what solemn assurances and laws supposedly protect its confidentiality and exclusive use for its lawful purpose.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThey also noted that the weapons-permit fees generate funds for sheriff’s departments across the state. Last year, the permits raised $3.4 million for the departments.
#2. To: TooConservative (#1)
They also noted that the weapons-permit fees generate funds for sheriff’s departments across the state. Last year, the permits raised $3.4 million for the departments.
#5. To: GrandIsland (#2)
(Edited)
The sheriff's department was only expected to do backgrounds on the applicants.
#6. To: TooConservative (#5)
was not a pistol permit as is common in some states. It was a permit to buy a handgun from a retail vendor. AFAIK, buying a gun via private sale was not covered by the law. It was a one-time permit to be able to buy the handgun and didn't need renewal.
#7. To: GrandIsland (#6)
After you pay 125.00 to the clerk for the application, then you pay 50.00 to the clerk for your fingerprints.
#33. To: TooConservative (#7)
Fingerprinted like some criminal? No thanks.
#34. To: sneakypete (#33)
#35. To: TooConservative (#34)
No, they aren't.
#40. To: sneakypete (#35)
I may be wrong,but I THINK I have read that the military now even keeps DNA samples from all service members in order to make their remains identifiable if needed in the future.
#51. To: CZ82 (#40)
They started collecting DNA samples about 18-20 years ago.
#56. To: sneakypete, redleghunter, TooConservative, Nolu Chan (#51)
Geeze! Some people really know how to rub it in.
#63. To: CZ82, redleghunter, TooConservative (#56)
The one question I have is do they keep these DNA samples forever or do they get rid of them after you get out or retire?
2012 US Code
#64. To: nolu chan (#63)
#74. To: TooConservative (#64)
Sound to me like, in practice, the Pentagon would have a lot of discretion in allowing their samples to be used for civilian police investigations.
Replies to Comment # 74. Think of it being about as private and secure as a social security number for social security purposes only.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 74.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]