Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Montana's Constitutional Carry bill, HB 271, passed the state House in February and is now in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT REVISING THE LAW RELATED TO THE OFFENSE OF CARRYING A CONCEALED WEAPON; PROVIDING THAT THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO A PERSON WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO [s:1h7abu9e]APPLY FOR[/s:1h7abu9e] OBTAIN A PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON; AND AMENDING SECTION 45-8-317, MCA."

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Section 45-8-317, MCA, is amended to read:

"45-8-317. Exceptions. (1) Section 45-8-316 does not apply to:

(g) a person eligible to [s:1h7abu9e]apply for[/s:1h7abu9e] OBTAIN or issued a permit under 45-8-321 or a person with a permit recognized under 45-8-329;
What a simple change.

http://laws.leg.mt.gov/laws11/LAW0203W$ ... TY_ID_SEQ=
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
The Montana Senate passed an amended version of this bill on March 26 and returned it to the House. The amendment, as I read it, still allows unlicensed concealed carry, but only if the carrier has completed an approved training course and is carrying proof of that training on his/her person.

A conference committee has been appointed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,944 Posts
RecoveringYankee said:
The Montana Senate passed an amended version of this bill on March 26 and returned it to the House. The amendment, as I read it, still allows unlicensed concealed carry, but only if the carrier has completed an approved training course and is carrying proof of that training on his/her person.

A conference committee has been appointed.
:sly:
Privatize permitting?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,984 Posts
RecoveringYankee said:
The Montana Senate passed an amended version of this bill on March 26 and returned it to the House. The amendment, as I read it, still allows unlicensed concealed carry, but only if the carrier has completed an approved training course and is carrying proof of that training on his/her person.

A conference committee has been appointed.
Still sounds like a license to me. You've got to have mandatory training and carry around a piece of paper as proof. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,944 Posts
On further contemplation and after a little research, I do not think that Montana requires training for a permit today.

I also didn't realize they lacked preemption and had alcohol regs...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
GAGunOwner said:
RecoveringYankee said:
The Montana Senate passed an amended version of this bill on March 26 and returned it to the House. The amendment, as I read it, still allows unlicensed concealed carry, but only if the carrier has completed an approved training course and is carrying proof of that training on his/her person.

A conference committee has been appointed.
Still sounds like a license to me. You've got to have mandatory training and carry around a piece of paper as proof. :roll:
yep. you dont need a permit, but you need a training certificate you must carry around... lulz. same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
The Montana Constitutional Carry bill is on the final stretch. The conference committee released its version of the bill, and according to Ammoland, the Senate's amendment to require training and carrying the training certificate was stripped out. NRAILA is reporting the language simply refers to “a person who is eligible to possess a handgun under state or federal law.â€

The final version passed the House on a 69-29 vote. That's 15 more votes than it received the first time through. Goes to the Senate now.

Current law allows anyone legally able to possess to carry openly anywhere in the state, and to carry concealed outside of cities. So this has the effect of allowing unlicensed concealed carry in the cities. So less of a change than in other states. By my count, that's five!!!

http://www.ammoland.com/2011/04/07/mont ... -for-vote/

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=6600
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
The Montana Senate voted yesterday to accept the conference report. For some reason, they vote twice. First vote 30-20, the second vote 29-21. Not sure which is the official tally, but either way, it passed. This opens the last 0.6% of the state where it had been illegal to carry concealed without a license. The governor is expected to sign.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,771 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Vetoed by Governor.

This bill did not receive a 2/3 vote majority of the members voting on the final vote of the bill. Therefore, as specified by MCA 5-4-306(2), members will not be polled to override the veto.
Governor's veto letter -

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

STATE OF MONTANA

BRIAN SCHWEITZER
GOVERNOR

JOHN BOHLINGER
LT. GOVERNOR

May 10, 2011

The Honorable Linda McCulloch
Secretary of State
State Capitol
Helena, MT 59620

Dear Secretary McCulloch:

In accordance with the power vested in me as Governor by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Montana, I hereby veto House Bill No. 271 (HB 271), "AN ACT REVISING THE LAW RELATED TO THE OFFENSE OF CARRYING A CONCEALED WEAPON; PROVIDING THAT THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO A PERSON WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO POSSESS A HANDGUN UNDER STATE OR FEDERAL LAW; AND AMENDING SECTION 45-8-317, MCA."

House Bill 271 would allow anyone "eligible to possess a handgun under state or federal law" to carry a concealed weapon, without a permit. This allows the individual to make his or her own eligibility determination and deprives law enforcement of the opportunity to consider whether the person is a threat to the community.

Obviously, this bill would greatly imperil the work and safety of Montana's lawmen, including sheriffs and highway patrolmen. Under current law, Montana's sheriffs are responsible for issuing concealed weapon permits. This is as it should be. Sheriffs are dedicated, locally-elected, boots-on-the-ground officials who have the best sense of their community when it comes to law enforcement and public safety. In this regard, I would note that HB 271 is opposed by the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, and also the Montana Department of Justice, the Montana County Attorneys Association, the Montana Association of Chiefs of Police, and the Montana Police Protective Association.

HB 271 would entirely remove the Sheriff's authority and discretion to issue or deny concealed weapons permits. It would also, paradoxically, dismantle many reasonable Montana laws and regulations which ensure that permit-holders are not unduly burdened. For example, HB 271 would void our state's reciprocity agreements with more than 30 states that recognize concealed weapon permits; and it would void our laws that allow Montana permit-holders to forgo the background check required for a firearm purchase.

Finally, I would like the sponsors of this bill to consider the absurdity of the standard set forth in HB 271. If this standard were applied to the issuance of other permits and licenses in our society, then nobody could be prosecuted for failure to produce a driver's license, a commercial driver's license, a pilot's license, a building permit, a hunting license, or any other type of permit. These documents would not be necessary. People would simply have to produce evidence that they were "eligible" to possess them.

Sincerely,

{signed}

BRIAN SCHWEITZER
GOVERNOR

cc: Legislative Services Division
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2011/AmdHt ... ovVeto.pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
The people speak, the powers that be say no.

Time for the people to remove the powers that be.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
69,854 Posts
Obviously, this bill would greatly imperil the work and safety of Montana's lawmen, including sheriffs and highway patrolmen.
The only thing that is obvious is that this is utter :bsflag: This is not the case in Vermont, Alaska, or Arizona.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,984 Posts
LE did not want this and the governor caved, or so it appears. :(
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top