The Washington Times:

COEUR D’ALENE, Idaho (AP) – Exactly one year after it went into effect, an Idaho gun law that allows people to carry concealed firearms without a permit has had little effect on crime rates, state law enforcement officials said.

It has, however, impacted the number of Idaho concealed carry permits being issued, some firearm trainers said.

The law allows most residents age 21 or older to carry concealed guns without a permit inside cities, in bars and in most government buildings.

When the Idaho Legislature enacted its permitless firearms concealed carry law a year ago, it was not without warnings from a broad spectrum, including anti-gun groups and Idaho chiefs of police.

The warnings are still in place, but so far, adverse results haven’t materialized.

“We believe dismantling the longstanding and effective permitting system without taking additional precautionary steps will weaken public safety,” Bill Bones, Jeff Lavey and Rick Allen, chiefs of police in Ada County, wrote in a letter to the Idaho Statesman last year. “Our concealed weapons licensing system is the only way to determine the person is not a felon or dangerous person prohibited from possessing firearms.”

Coeur d’Alene Police concur that the permitless carry law has disabled at least one tool police used to check felons for firearms, but Detective Jared Reneau said the state’s latest gun law seems to have had little effect on crime rates in Coeur d’Alene.

“It hasn’t been a topic of discussion,” he said. “We haven’t noticed a significant increase.”

So far, 12 states – the number has increased from eight a year ago – have adopted permitless concealed carry firearms laws. They include Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia. A permitless carry bill was passed in Michigan’s House this month and is on the way to its Senate.

In Nez Perce County, Idaho’s most gun-friendly county where an estimated 59 percent of residents own guns – the highest rate in the state – Sheriff Joe Rodriguez said his department did not anticipate an increase in gun crimes a year ago when permitless carry became law.

“The way we look at, we live in the Northwest. Everyone has a firearm,” Rodriguez said.

His officers are trained to be alert for weapons, and permitless carry didn’t change that. It didn’t affect crime rates either, he said.

“Nothing has changed,” Rodriguez said.

He anticipated the number of residents applying for concealed carry permits would fall off, but that didn’t happen, either.

“We’re still processing a lot of concealed weapons permits,” he said.

Concealed weapons permits are required in neighboring states and Idaho’s enhanced concealed weapons permit is honored in a majority of them. That makes it a popular choice among gun owners.

Ed Santos, who operates Center Target Sports in Post Falls, which has trained 24,000 firearm owners in 12 years to obtain a concealed permit, has noticed no downward trend in its business.

Santos said some thought the number of concealed carry permits would decrease because they would no longer be needed.

“That has not been the case,” he said. “We’ve actually seen an increase.”

He attributes that to firearms owners becoming accustomed to carrying without a permit, and wanting to travel to other states with a gun in their belt. In most states, they need a concealed permit to do that.

“We really haven’t seen a negative impact,” Santos said.

Post Falls Police Chief Scott Haug, president of the Idaho Chiefs of Police Association, said the permitless carry law has not resulted in an increase in crime. It may, however, have given a green light for people inexperienced with guns to carry firearms without proper training.

One of Haug’s officers found a handgun under a tree in a park, he said, and he has seen people in Walmart with pistols hanging out of their back pockets.

“People get complacent,” he said. “They don’t understand how quickly that gun can be used against them in a matter of seconds.”

This is an amazing article.  First of all, blood isn’t running in the streets.  Second, we learn that peaceable, law abiding citizens still want to be peaceable and law abiding, meaning that for states that still require permitting and with travel freedom being at stake, permits are still valued.  Constitutional carry needs to continue sweeping the nation for God-given rights to be fully realized.  Only peaceable men follow the law.

Third, read the LEO’s warnings again.  They preached their “blood will be running in the streets” sermon before passage of the bill, it didn’t happen, and yet that has had no effect on their sermon.  Facts don’t inform their hysteria.  They never have, anywhere this has ever come up.  I’ve documented this same sort of thing with open carry in Texas, only to see them react with shock when blood didn’t run in the streets.  They’ll preach it until they have no more breath to speak.

Finally, consider that gun sitting under the tree in the park.  It must be the fault of permitless carry, huh?  So what the hell does that have to do with the rest of the article?  Do they pay people money to write this crap?

Mark Chesnut:

Three states—Alabama, Texas and South Carolina—are currently vying to be the next state in the nation to do away with the requirement for law-abiding gun owners to be licensed by the government to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense.

This expansion of the “permitless,” or constitutional, carry movement represents a continuation of a march toward freedom occurring throughout the country.

On Tuesday, the Alabama Senate passed that state’s version of an NRA-backed permitless carry measure—Senate Bill 24—by a 25-6 vote. The bill now heads to the House, where it will likely be assigned to the House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee.

Put simply, SB 24 would eliminate the requirement to obtain a permit to lawfully carry in the state.

[ … ]

In Texas, the House Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety on Tuesday also passed a permitless carry measure. HB 1911, which passed in the committee by a 6-2 vote, eliminates the requirement for obtaining a license to carry for law-abiding citizens who would otherwise meet the eligibility requirements to qualify for that license.

[ … ]

Meanwhile in South Carolina, efforts to pass permitless carry legislation are also moving forward. Like the House version, the Senate bill—SC Constitutional Carry Act of 2017—allows those who are legally permitted to own, carry or purchase a firearm to do so without having to obtain a permit. Open carry, which allows for a person to carry a firearm exposed on their person, also would be permitted.

Since the last time we discussed the status of constitutional (and open) carry in South Carolina, it’s been difficult to get a read on the status of things.  The House has passed a bill, while the senate is currently debating one, it seems.

But Martin requested the panel suspend discussion on his bill, and instead pick up the House bill to increase the proposal’s chances of becoming law by the end of session the first week of May.

“I just want to give people their constitutional rights to carry,” Martin said.

You see where this is headed, don’t you?  The house was able to get something done.  The senate, not so much.  They have their own version, and if they pass something different than the house, it will have to be “worked out in committee,” likely not getting done before they leave.

And it will all have been done by design.  It appears that Shane Martin wants to move things along, but he has run square into the blocking schemes of the collectivists.  Dean Weingarten points to a potential score in our column, though.

There are 27 Republicans in the Senate, and 18 Democrats. Mere numbers are not the entire story when it comes to passing legislation.  In 2016, the Constitutional Carry bill was bottled up and killed in a Senate subcommittee. Senator Katrina Frye Shealy (R) Lexington was one of the primary opponents. She is still on the Judiciary Committee, which is a likely place for the bill to be sent in the senate.

This year she is listed as a sponsor of SC S0449, which is a senate bill quite similar to H. 3930.  If she actually supports Constitutional Carry in 2017, it would be a significant change.

Contact your senators yet again and let them know where you stand.  This is easy, and we all know it.  Use Robert’s Rules of Order, make a motion, second the motion, “call the question” (or stop debate), and vote on the motion.  It’s easy.  I’ve done this many times in church government.  It can be done in two minutes or less.

You know it can be done, state senators, I know it can be done, and my readers all know it can be done.  We’re privy to the games you play, and “we tried ever so hard but couldn’t reconcile the house and senate bills” just won’t do.  That isn’t good enough.  That will never be good enough again.  That excuse has run dry.

So who wants to be the laughingstock?  Who wants to stop constitutional carry, folks?  South Carolina, Alabama or Texas?  Who among the three of you wants to look the most like communist China?  Who wants to prove themselves the most corrupt?  Who wants to paint that target on their backs?  Speak up.  We’re waiting and watching.

Rapid City Journal:

The Senate approved the measure 34-13 on Tuesday and the House passed it last month. It would allow people 18 and older to forgo background checks and classes that are now required.

Supporters say the bill promotes constitutional rights and allows protection from criminals. Critics worry it could lead to more shootings as people with less training would be carrying weapons.

Approval of the bill in both the Senate and House generally fell along party lines in the Republican-led Legislature. GOP Gov. Doug Burgum hasn’t said whether he would support the measure and sign it into law.

“He hasn’t seen the bill and won’t make a decision until he receives it,” said Mike Nowatzki, a Burgum spokesman.

It’s time for North Dakota readers to get busy with letters to the governor.  Let him know that he’s a target for replacement if he doesn’t comply with God-given rights to bear arms.

Say, there’s a bill that will soon be debated in the South Carolina legislature on constitutional carry, which also happens to include provisions for de-criminalizing open carry.  This bill needs to pass with no opposition from the GOP.  Why is South Carolina so late to the game?  What are you doing, South Carolinians, to make this a reality?

CBS:

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said Monday he was uncertain whether support exists in the Legislature for so-called “constitutional carry,” which would give all Texans the right to openly carry a firearm — with or without a permit.

In a radio interview, Patrick noted that last session lawmakers passed legislation allowing the open carry of handguns, a proposal whose support he had also questioned at the start of the session.

“On constitutional carry, I’ll say the same thing: I don’t know if the votes are there,” Patrick told San Antonio host Trey Ware.

Patrick did express some wariness about constitutional carry, citing law enforcement concerns. Patrick has made championing police a priority, especially after a shooting last year in Dallas that killed five officers and wounded seven others.

Let’s deal with the second issue first.  I would lay good money down that Dan Patrick has been listening to communist Art Acevedo, who is leaving Austin and going to Houston, who opposed open carry, and who enabled the federal government to come into his county and take forced blood draws during random traffic stops in violation of the constitution.

Or he has been talking to someone equally as communist as Art.  So the strategy he has chosen is a common one and is designed to protect his boys in the Texas Senate and House from exposure.

He simply says that he doesn’t know if there are enough votes.  That way, it gets killed in committee and the anti-gun politicians never out themselves with a formal vote on a bill.

I hate the idea of committees anyway because they are a good way to formulate compromise legislation that ends up bilking people for money, sending that money to constituents and then ultimately doing no good with meaningless legislation.

The solution for this is to call out his strategy as the ruse and lie that it is, bring a bill to a vote, and then use that information to destroy the political careers of the gun controllers.  It’s what Dan doesn’t want to happen, but it must happen.

News10:

AMARILLO, TX (KFDA) – Owning a handgun in Texas may soon become more affordable.

Currently, the application fee for a standard condition handgun license is $140 and renewing it cost $70; however, under the new legislation these fees would be eliminated.

People would still need to go through a background check and training before becoming fully certified.

“SB 16 [proposed bill] will make lawful carry more affordable for law abiding citizens across the state,” Lt. Governor Dan Patrick said. “No Texan should be deprived of their right to self protection because of onerous licensing fees imposed by the state.”

Ayvrie Dixon, owner of Dixon Firearms Training, was skeptical about whether or not the bill will pass.

While this makes the process more affordable, the state loses a consistent source of revenue.

Uh huh.  And thus we’re to the crux of the matter, aren’t we, just like when this came up in Oklahoma.

… opponents said it would have serious financial consequences for the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, which administers firearms licenses issued under the Oklahoma Self Defense Act.

A fiscal analysis performed for the House indicates the measure would reduce OSBI’s revenue by at least $6 million and would lead to the loss of jobs and reduced operating expenses at the agency.

The reduction in revenue would be because firearms owners would no longer seek concealed carry licenses – which cost $100 for initial 5-year license and $200 for 10 years – if they could carry a gun openly without a license. There are now more than 238,300 Oklahomans with active licenses to carry handguns, according to state figures.

That’s seldom brought up in this context, yes?  But it’s the major issue associated with Jim Crow laws such as this one.  The State behemoth would have to become leaner, and no monster wants to go on a diet.

NBC:

Beginning July 1, Idaho residents age 21 or older will be allowed to carry a concealed firearm without a permit inside city limits.

Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter has signed Senate Bill 1389 into law. It will relax the state’s gun policy and remove permitting requirements for concealed carry. Prior to SB 1389, residents age 18 or older could carry concealed firearms without a permit outside of city limits. Open carry is already legal within city limits.

Beginning July 1, Idaho residents age 21 or older will be allowed to carry a concealed firearm without a permit inside city limits.

Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter has signed Senate Bill 1389 into law. It will relax the state’s gun policy and remove permitting requirements for concealed carry. Prior to SB 1389, residents age 18 or older could carry concealed firearms without a permit outside of city limits. Open carry is already legal within city limits.

“While S1389 is consistent with the U.S. Constitution, Idaho values and our commitment to upholding our constitutional protections from government overreach, I am concerned about its lack of any provision for education and training of individuals who choose to exercise the right to concealed carry,” the Republican lawmaker wrote.

“Such a safeguard would seem to be part of the Second Amendment’s ‘well-regulated’ standard. What’s more, the addition of a simple training requirement in this bill could have addressed the concerns of our valued law enforcement leaders and others who cherish both the shooting culture and the safety of shooters and non-shooters alike.”

Trying to play both ends against the middle, huh Governor?  This is just rich.  He admits that the new law is consistent with the provisions of the second amendment, but then essentially says that he doesn’t think the second amendment goes far enough because of the need for education and training.

Then he switches back and reverses his position, saying that a requirement to get training and education is consistent with the notion of “well regulated.”

“Well regulated” has nothing to do with governmental control via regulations, it has to do with accurate and effective fire control.  Furthermore, I’ve warned about the dangers of seeing the second amendment as a political treatise on the foundation of liberty.

The governor is just frightened.  He’ll be better once this has time to soak in and become the standard.  It works in other constitutional carry states, and it’ll work in Idaho too.

Herald-Tribune:

In testimony Monday before a Senate committee in Tallahassee, Electra Bustle, lobbyist for the Florida Sheriff’s Association, clarified earlier remarks she made on behalf of her client, stating that the sheriffs realize Floridians have both a right to keep and to bear arms.

“The sheriffs in Florida support the Second Amendment, and we encourage law abiding citizens to take full advantage of their right to keep and bear arms.  I wanna take just a few minutes to clarify some remarks I made in the House committee,” Bustle said. “I tried to make a distinction between the right to own and bear firearms, and distinguish that from a concealed weapons permit, and unfortunately I used words that created a sound byte that now has muddied up the water.”

Bustle’s comments were made before the Senate Military Affairs, Space and Domestic Security Committee, which debated and then passed SB 296, a bill that allows Floridians to carry firearms during a declared emergency and mandatory evacuation.

In previous testimony before the House committee, Bustle told the lawmakers that “there is a difference between owning a firearm and carrying one concealed on your person. Owning a firearm is a right. Carrying concealed is a privilege, and it is a privilege that is earned by showing a higher degree of training and proficiency with a firearm.”

Bustle’s previous comments set off a firestorm of controversy, especially amongst the state’s 7 million gun owners.

“The only thing I was trying to say in the House committee, was there is a distinction in Florida,” Bustle said Monday. “We absolutely have the right, and the sheriff’s support the right, to own and carry firearms, but in Florida, we are a concealed weapons licensed state, and as a result there are certain eligibility requirements required of people who want to carry concealed.”

This is rich.  So she said that there is a distinction between the right to bear arms and the privilege to carry them with you based on approval by the CLEO.  Then in order to “clarify” her wording, she said, there is a distinction between the right to bear arms and the privilege to carry them with you based on approval by the CLEO.  There’s nothing like muddying the waters and then repeating yourself thus muddying the waters.

Here’s the deal.  The waters aren’t muddied.  She said what the CLEOs think, and they think what she said.  She didn’t make a mistake either time.  The CLEOs continue to believe that they are “the only ones,” that special fraternity approved to be in charge of others.  But it goes beyond that.

When I took my concealed handgun permit class, I was already an experienced shooter, and was appalled at the horrible mismanagement of firearms by attendees.  Muzzle flagging and lack of trigger discipline were the order of the day.

It wasn’t like that in Colonial days, where men were required to bring their weapons to church and practice with them along with their families.  But do folks learn the lessons fairly well in lieu of the classes, or does weapons mismanagement cause untold deaths?

Well, let’s turn to Arizona where a law passed in 2010 recognized constitutional carry.  If these concealed handgun courses were so damned valuable, one would expect that the murder and negligent homicide rates would have skyrocketed after passage of the law.

They didn’t.  Turning to Arizona’s statistics (they included negligent and accidental homicide in murder), the numbers run like this: 2006 (462), 2007 (464), 2008 (404), 2009 (317), 2010 (343), 2011 (339), and 2012 (345).

Now let me explain in just a few words what this is really all about.  Revenue.  That’s right.  Money for the permits, financing expensive military toys and bloated salaries for LEOs.