Iowa governor signs 'constitutional carry' bill that removes permit requirements for handguns

[Reptile]

Federally licensed distributors will still need permits and background checks​

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed into law Friday a law that loosens regulations on gun ownership by eliminating the need for a permit to buy or carry handguns in the state.

The new law takes effect July 1, with many calling it a "constitutional carry" bill.

"Today I signed legislation protecting the Second Amendment rights of Iowa’s law-abiding citizens while still preventing the sale of firearms to criminals and other dangerous individuals," Reynolds said in a statement Friday afternoon.

The Republican acknowledged that the bill will not stop "bad actors" from acquiring handguns, but that it will protect her citizens’ rights.

The bill does not provide blanket freedom to purchase guns without some hurdles.

Under previous law, a citizen would need to pass a background check to obtain a permit, which was required to buy or carry handguns. The new law still requires background checks or permits for federally-licensed dealers, but it does not require them anymore for individual vendors.

Supporters of the bill claim that Iowans would still obtain permits in order to carry their handguns in other states that have reciprocal agreements with Iowa, the Iowa State Daily reported.

Democrats and gun violence prevention groups had called on Reynolds to veto the legislation.

Iowa governor signs 'constitutional carry' bill that removes permit requirements for handguns

The new law mainly removes the need for permits in the case of sales between private individuals.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Palladin]

Nice

 

[Toytowninc]

None of us care about bump stocks and we don’t live in Iowa but each small step like this helps counter the small errosions our lifestyle freedoms going all the way back to the gca and prior nfa.

 

[PL-52]

Tennessee is right behind Iowa ... www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tennessee-legislature-passes-bill-to-allow-most-adults-to-carry-handguns-without-a-permit/ar-BB1f8d0r?ocid=uxbndlbing.

Constitutional carry - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

1U.S. jurisdictions that have constitutional carry

• 1.1Alaska
• 1.2Arizona
• 1.3Arkansas
• 1.4Idaho
• 1.5Iowa
• 1.6Kansas
• 1.7Kentucky
• 1.8Maine
• 1.9Mississippi
• 1.10Missouri
• 1.11Montana
• 1.12New Hampshire
• 1.13North Dakota (residents only; concealed carry only)
• 1.14Oklahoma
• 1.15South Dakota
• 1.16Tennessee
• 1.17Utah
• 1.18Vermont
• 1.19West Virginia
• 1.20Wyoming (residents only)

 

[Mesatchornug]

Dupe:

Constitutional Carry tracker.

I don't think we have a thread to track the progress nationwide, and I wanted to share this somewhere. COLUMBIA — If a House panel has its way, gun owners would be allowed to carry their weapons — concealed or openly — in South Carolina, whether they have a concealed weapons permit or not...

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[FisherTech]

Isn't amazing how the cop associations are against these bills, but most of all the Police Chief whore associations.

 

[headednorth]

None of us care about bump stocks and we don’t live in Iowa but each small step like this helps counter the small errosions our lifestyle freedoms going all the way back to the gca and prior nfa.

Its one more baby step in the direction of normalizing gun ownership

 

[PL-52]

More good news, this time some from W.Va.... West Virginia governor signs law eliminating sales tax on guns and giving tax break to gun manufacturers

 

[JenkkiMike]

I can't wrap my head around why so many states require a license to carry but give them out on a "shall issue" basis. In "may issue" or "better know someone" issue jurisdictions it makes sense as a way to infringe on the 2nd amendment rights of citizens and keep people disarmed through a frustrating bureaucratic process. What is the logic of requiring it in places that are going to end up issuing it to anybody who is eligible anyway? Is it just to create some minor red tape and to collect some revenue with fees?

If I live in a constitutional carry state I can just walk around with a concealed handgun. If for some reason I am involved in an incident with the police, they are going to check if I am federally prohibited from carrying and arrest me if it turns out I am. In a "Shall issue" state they are going to do the same check anyway if there's a reason to so why require a license in the first place? It also doesn't make sense that someone who is not federally prohibited but also doesn't have the license could be charged for carrying. Shame on you for not paying the state a fee and applying for a license you would have been issued anyway, you're under arrest!

 

[MagGus1820]

fees

You guessed it

 

[FisherTech]

I can't wrap my head around why so many states require a license to carry but give them out on a "shall issue" basis. In "may issue" or "better know someone" issue jurisdictions it makes sense as a way to infringe on the 2nd amendment rights of citizens and keep people disarmed through a frustrating bureaucratic process. What is the logic of requiring it in places that are going to end up issuing it to anybody who is eligible anyway? Is it just to create some minor red tape and to collect some revenue with fees?

If I live in a constitutional carry state I can just walk around with a concealed handgun. If for some reason I am involved in an incident with the police, they are going to check if I am federally prohibited from carrying and arrest me if it turns out I am. In a "Shall issue" state they are going to do the same check anyway if there's a reason to so why require a license in the first place? It also doesn't make sense that someone who is not federally prohibited but also doesn't have the license could be charged for carrying. Shame on you for not paying the state a fee and applying for a license you would have been issued anyway, you're under arrest!

Here is your answer: The Racist Roots of New Hampshire's Concealed Carry License Law

You may very well find that this the same or similar in most, if not all states.