Alabama nears no-permit CCW, but LEOs say permit needed

Status
Not open for further replies.
My brother-in-law has lived in Mobile, AL for about 30 years. He had his permit/license revoked years ago. No reason or explanation given whatsoever. He's never been arrested or accused of any crime. He's a very successful businessman and a father of five, one of whom just graduated from the University of Alabama medical school. I was shocked when I heard this, as was he when it happened to him. I was under the mistaken impression that a southern state, especially one like Alabama, was a conservative red state that strongly valued 2nd Amendment rights for its citizenry. Surprised the local electorate votes in Sheriffs with such antagonistic views towards the 2nd Amendment.
 
CCW databases should not be available to local law enforcement for snooping, this exposes legal gun owners to (potential)misuse of the database.

The Constitutional right to carry has to be protected with privacy. Law enforcement officers on the streets will always adjust to the status quo; if everyone is expected to be carrying, then the number of pat-downs at the point of contact will increase. A database of who is carrying and who owns guns can just as easily be used as list to retrieve or confiscate guns; pure and simple.
 
I looked and looked but I cannot find one case of permit holders and crimes.


help?


BY PAUL GATTIS

[email protected]

Pistol permits are a financial boon to the Madison County sheriff's department but that's not why Sheriff Blake Dorning opposes a Senate bill that would eliminate them.

"We hear it's just a money thing," Dorning said Wednesday. "No, it's not. It's a life and death safety issue for our men and women because the equipment we're able to provide them with drastically makes them more efficient and more able to address the situations that they come into every day."




Senate bill attacks safety of police, sheriff says

"It is a threat to law abiding citizens like you and me and a threat to this great state and country."

Dorning and other top department officials held a press conference Wednesday to follow up on the open letter the sheriff posted online over the weekend.

Capt. Michael Salomonsky outlined a handful of cases where law enforcement tracked down criminals through their pistol permits as evidence for the need to oppose the bill introduced by Sen. Gerald Allen, R-Tuscaloosa.

The bill would repeal the requirement to have a permit to conceal carry a pistol. It would also allow conceal carry at events such as demonstrations and protest rallies. Without the criminal background checks required for a permit, applicants with a violent criminal past would be able to conceal carry, Dorning said.

Officials also met head-on the issue of money associated with the permit fees, saying that the permits yield about $700,000 annually to the department.



http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2017/02/its_not_just_a_money_thing_she.html
Funny, it's not some great threat to state and this great country in Vermont and Alaska. Perhaps he should start some campaign to save the poor folk in those states as well. I mean surely those people need to be protected from themselves as well.
 
Sheriffs are elected officials. They will go along party lines. Democrat or Republican. what party are they mostly represented by? I can also say from experience Police Chiefs of large city's will go along with the Mayor's leanings also, as they work at the pleasure of the Mayor. That is why you hear anti-gun stuff from most of them if the Mayor is anti-gun.

I was a Chief in a smaller department for a while before retirement. I was fortunate that the Mayor wasn't to pushy on things that didn't involve the law already on the books. But Sheriff's (at least here) tend to hire their deputies along party lines. Doesn't make the deputies bad, but it does happen for votes. Politics.
 
in 1960 $30 was a lot and not a cheap bike

It was a J.C. Higgins middleweight new circa 1958. I thought it was was a POS by 1962 but very pretty; lots of bling, fenders, saddlebags, giant seat. Poor tires and tubes barely kept 20# psi. Hard to pedal over ten miles. I'm now certain my Dad overpaid for it. Must have weighed 40 pounds.

I later bought used lightweight and put together a 2 speed bike that weighed 16 pounds. No fenders on it, it was only good for no-rain days or I had a skunk striped back from water spray. With aluminum ram horn handlebars, derailleur, second rear gear, skeleton pedals, investment of about $60 over the years.

Thinking it over, you are right. A neighbor moved away. He told his son to get whatever he could for his 20" heavyweight because the movers charged 40 cents per pound to ship item. Thirty pound bike ~$12. to move. I offered $2 and he took it. I bought wanted new rear fender for $3. from Del Lamb bikes, still painted on side of building wall. Now a store-front church on Center Street. I used it around the nearby blocks on rainy days.

Thank you for the post. It prompted me to look again for Del Lamb. I drove by his store in 2009, the last year I was in Milwaukee. I never found out what Del did to be famous until today. Once we honored our heroes.

Lamb was two-time Olympic skater
By Bill Glauber of the Journal Sentinel
Published on: 9/25/2010
Delbert Lamb, a two-time Winter Olympian and member of the National Speedskating Hall of Fame, died Saturday at his home in Franklin.

He was 95 and had Alzheimer's disease.

"Our Del just passed away," said his wife of 43 years, Joanne Lamb. "The Lord was good to him."

In February, in the midst of the 2010 Winter Olympics, the Journal Sentinel wrote about the life and times of Lamb, who rose from races on the frozen lagoon at Washington Park to representing the United States at the 1936 and 1948 Winter Olympics.

"The Olympics meant everything to him," Joanne Lamb said. "That was the holy grail of skating."

His specialty was the 500 meters - he finished fifth in the event in 1936 at Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany and sixth in 1948 at St. Moritz, Switzerland. In those days, teams traveled to Europe by ship, and Lamb was taken ill before his big races.

His second Olympic berth also cost him his job with the Milwaukee Fire Department. He had arranged time off to compete in the Olympic trials in late 1947 in St. Paul, Minn. But before the trials began, a big snowstorm was nearing Milwaukee. Lamb was warned not to leave his post. He went to the trials and was later fired. His appeal was turned down by the Fire and Police Commission.

Lamb told the commission: "Olympic winners receive no rich awards; they compete for love of the sport and the glory of their countries. I set the Olympics as my goal 14 years ago. I made the team in 1936 and qualified in 1939 but the (1940) games were canceled because of the war (World War II).

"I have been training for eight years: riding a bicycle, running and skating in bad weather and good. Skating is in my blood. My heart is on skates. If I can make the Olympic team I want to go."

After his competitive career ended, Lamb served for many years as a skating official. He also owned and operated Del Lamb's Sport and Cycle shop in Milwaukee.




Sponsor says bill to repeal Alabama pistol permit requirement dead.

Posted on May 17, 2017 at 6:01 PM

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/sponsor_says_bill_to_repeal_al.html
 
Without the criminal background checks required for a permit, applicants with a violent criminal past would be able to conceal carry, Dorning said.

How violent a criminal can we be talking about that can legally own, much less carry, a gun in the first place? After all, anyone convicted of a felony is a prohibited person under Federal law.
 
Funny, it's not some great threat to state and this great country in Vermont and Alaska. Perhaps he should start some campaign to save the poor folk in those states as well. I mean surely those people need to be protected from themselves as well.
& Wyomin :D
iu
 
Thank you one and all. Looks like same 'ol BS. Donate and you get, no donation and do not get. It the combination of "if you have the power, you can demand the money."

Old stories below. Not about guns, just power.

In 1960 my cheap $30 bike is stolen. Milwaukee police finds it, calls. Dad takes me to get it and puts a bill of some denomination into jar. I get bike.

In 1985, a man's quality $3000. bike stolen in Hartland, WI. Weeks later the adult man sees a boy riding his bike stopped at stop sign. Man grabs boy and walks him to nearby police station. Boy is policeman's son. Very lucky there are many citizens in station doing business that witness this. Theft victim not prosecuted for threatened "Kidnapping, unlawful detainment, non-felony citizens arrest, more. Police tried to prosecute man who is victim, but Felony level is $2500. DA argues the bike has depreciated to < $2500. Man needs to hire attorney that victim would need $3000 to replace bike. As SHTF, DA drops case. No charges to policeman who "borrowed" unclaimed bike and gave to son.

As I looked up more, it is coming more clear that "may issue" is the same as Sec. State HRC visitation rights. If you do not donate to her fund she may see you but if you do donate you have a 55% chance she shall see you.

A not too dissimilar thing happened to me growing up. First motorcycle, crossing a foot bridge, mugged, bike stolen. Escaped only because fear for his life can make a young man run real fast.

Went to police to report assault and theft of said motorcycle. First question from cop: "were you there to buy drugs?".

It took me about 10 seconds to see this wasn't going my way.
 
FWIW, In Arizona, no permit to carry has been required since July 29, 2010. I can't see anything has changed as far as crime, public and officer safety, etc. I suspect Alabama's experience would be similar if Constitutional Carry were allowed. It has been my experience that bad guys who choose to carry a firearm do so, without any concern for law, the latest court ruling, permits,etc.....ymmv
 
FWIW, In Arizona, no permit to carry has been required since July 29, 2010. I can't see anything has changed as far as crime, public and officer safety, etc. I suspect Alabama's experience would be similar if Constitutional Carry were allowed. It has been my experience that bad guys who choose to carry a firearm do so, without any concern for law, the latest court ruling, permits,etc.....ymmv

You'd have to know Alabama. We have the most corrupt political leaders driven to extort the last red cent from common folk.

We had a governor once that said he was going to take from the coffers for the good of himself and cronies. He won the election on the very principal just decribed. Someone noted it as being a gesture of honesty while anyone in proper sanity could see theft as theft regardless of warning
 
Ya think?

I'm pretty sure of it. I spent 2 years in AL. and judging from that experience it was pretty obvious to me. But again, they can do what they like there, it's no skin off of my back side. They run things there the way they want, people can vote it up or down. That's the beauty of the fed not being able to dictate to the states regarding the matter of concealed carry. It's what you decide to make it. Your vote for a local politician carries more weight than your vote for a congressman or president, especially with the gridlock we have in congress now.
 
How violent a criminal can we be talking about that can legally own, much less carry, a gun in the first place? After all, anyone convicted of a felony is a prohibited person under Federal law.
Even someone that is not a convicted felon but has criminal intent is "breaking the law" in many jurisdictions. EDIT due to unfinished content before posting. (I hate Androids)
I'm pretty sure of it. I spent 2 years in AL. and judging from that experience it was pretty obvious to me. But again, they can do what they like there, it's no skin off of my back side. They run things there the way they want, people can vote it up or down. That's the beauty of the fed not being able to dictate to the states regarding the matter of concealed carry. It's what you decide to make it. Your vote for a local politician carries more weight than your vote for a congressman or president, especially with the gridlock we have in congress now.
In this case I have to disagree. Since it is a 2nd Amendment issue that transcends State sovereignty. Those pesky three words, " .... and bear arms ... ". That is why it is referred to by many as "constitutional carry".
 
Last edited:
Even someone that is not a convicted

In this case I have to disagree. Since it is a 2nd Amendment issue that transcends State sovereignty. Those pesky three words, " .... and bear arms ... ". That is why it is referred to by many as "constitutional carry".

There is the federal constitution and the state constitution. You won't be changing the federal constitution and the odds are pretty slim that you will get the SC to rule against a state to favor CC based on 2A. That's just a reality, not how I think it should be. If AZ can go to permit less carry than any other state can do the same thing. There are no federal restrictions against permit less carry (CC) unless you are a prohibited person, so in that regard the fed gov't is silent on that issue. Your CC is being restricted by the state, not the fed. All the fed is doing is upholding states rights here, which do exist even tho you don't think they should. Put the blame where it needs to be, at the state level. What ever happened to people being responsible for their own situations. This is a republic, not a democracy.

It's really too bad that most think this country was founded on the concept democracy.

If people want to keep their RKBA and their AR's, they better learn the difference pretty soon because the majority is out take them both.
 
There is the federal constitution and the state constitution. You won't be changing the federal constitution and the odds are pretty slim that you will get the SC to rule against a state to favor CC based on 2A. That's just a reality, not how I think it should be. If AZ can go to permit less carry than any other state can do the same thing. There are no federal restrictions against permit less carry (CC) unless you are a prohibited person, so in that regard the fed gov't is silent on that issue. Your CC is being restricted by the state, not the fed. All the fed is doing is upholding states rights here, which do exist even tho you don't think they should. Put the blame where it needs to be, at the state level. What ever happened to people being responsible for their own situations. This is a republic, not a democracy.

It's really too bad that most think this country was founded on the concept democracy.

If people want to keep their RKBA and their AR's, they better learn the difference pretty soon because the majority is out take them both.
It does of course hinge on the SCOTUS. So far, the last half century, we've have had SCOTUS dominated by Judges that do not share the ideology of those who penned, and those who signed, the Constitution. That must change, or the progression of dismantlement will continue.

States are bound by the Constitution under specific clauses, and the Bill of Rights. The idea that State sovereignty is an override on any of those clauses specifically assigning Federal jurisdiction, or any of the Bill of Rights is absurd. That includes the 2nd Amendment, and that is why it is placed where it is.
 
Last edited:
In sharp contrast, I WISH a full carry permit in NYS was as simple as walking into the sheriff's office and say "How much money is it going to cost me this year?"
 
That must change, or the progression of dismantlement will continue.

Nobel idea. You keep fighting that battle. Meanwhile those that really want constitutional carry will change it at the state level. 12 states have changed it since 2003. I keep hearing about how the supreme court is going to rescue 2A but I haven't seen any evidence that they even want to consider it. Mostly they just leave the decisions up to the district courts which keep stepping on your 2A.
 
In sharp contrast, I WISH a full carry permit in NYS was as simple as walking into the sheriff's office and say "How much money is it going to cost me this year?"
I'm sorry. When the government gets an inch they take a Mile or constitutional rights, which ever comes first.

Sometimes you have to vote with your feet. I couldn't live in a state like NY. I know you're probably vested In a career and family so it would be impossible.

Some may see this as a petty squabble, however, this is the inch we need not surrender.
 
They got use to the money....

Some good points brought up in this thread....look at MO and their issues with the database a few years ago.

I know our CCW permits went through the floor after const. carry went into effect. Our office charged the minimum as both sheriff's felt it was the right of the people to carry. We did have to add a new person to take care of the load, and it does cost the office each time we run someone....so those costs got passed but nothing else....we did not "make money" on CCW.

IMHO this sheriff is getting his just deserts....you are going to have to find an extra area for those funds to come from....try a tax, if the people support what you are doing it will be no issue. We had a tax pass easy here just this year....we can now staff up, and our pay freeze that we have lived with for the past 9 years has been lifted....But getting the new people on the road and in the jail is going to be a very good thing.
 
My brother-in-law has lived in Mobile, AL for about 30 years. He had his permit/license revoked years ago. No reason or explanation given whatsoever. He's never been arrested or accused of any crime. He's a very successful businessman and a father of five, one of whom just graduated from the University of Alabama medical school. I was shocked when I heard this, as was he when it happened to him. I was under the mistaken impression that a southern state, especially one like Alabama, was a conservative red state that strongly valued 2nd Amendment rights for its citizenry. Surprised the local electorate votes in Sheriffs with such antagonistic views towards the 2nd Amendment.
Until 2013, Alabama was a "May" issue state. We became a "Shall" issue state with the passage of SB 286 which removed the "sheriff's discretion" clause in the State Code. He may be able to get a permit now but the application does ask if the applicant has ever had a CCW license revoked. Supposedly, if one passes the background check a permit "shall" be issued.
 
States are bound by the Constitution under specific clauses, and the Bill of Rights. The idea that State sovereignty is an override on any of those clauses specifically assigning Federal jurisdiction, or any of the Bill of Rights is absurd. That includes the 2nd Amendment, and that is why it is placed where it is.
Not exactly.

The Second Amendment dis not apply to the states until SCOTUS ruled in 1010 that was incorporated via the Fourteenth Amendment.
 
Gee, I'll bet THAT was never used for any nefarious purpose...
Beats me. I've had an Alabama pistol permit since I was 20 years old. Got my first one in 1973 at a cost of $5.00. It was "unrestricted" allowing me to conceal carry/vehicle carry any handgun I owned (not handgun specific). We had a one term sheriff (E.E.Sosebee 1987-1991) in my county (Blount) who doubled the price of a permit to $10.00 and made them firearm specific. You had to have a separate permit for every gun you wanted to carry. As I said, he was one term.
 
One thing worth pointing out is that law enforcement in other States have made every claim in the book about how bad Constitutional Carry would be if passed and in every situation there has not been evidence to support those statements after Constitutional Carry is passed.

While a high percentage of law enforcement was in support of Constitutional Carry in Maine, several spoke out against it but after almost two years we haven't had any problems. Just like the other States that have passed it. It comes down to money and control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top