(NM) Lawyer May Fight Concealed-Gun Law

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Albuquerque Journal (New Mexico)

April 8, 2003 Tuesday

SECTION: FINAL; Pg. A1

LENGTH: 1310 words

HEADLINE: Lawyer May Fight Concealed-Gun Law

BYLINE: Kate Nash Journal Capitol Bureau

BODY:
Estancia rancher Cyle Sharp wants to be among the first New Mexicans with a permit to carry a concealed firearm following Gov. Bill Richardson's approval of the new gun law Monday.

Sharp for years wanted to carry a hidden gun but said he didn't want to break the law.

"There were law-abiding citizens that wanted to do it but wouldn't," said Sharp, a member of the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association, who attended the governor's concealed-carry signing ceremony in Albuquerque.

The new law, which takes effect Jan. 1, will allow New Mexico residents over 25 to apply for permits to keep guns in their purses or pockets.

Applications for the permits will be available later this year through State Police offices after rules for the required firearms training are developed by the Department of Public Safety.

New Mexico is the 34th state to enact a concealed-carry law, said Sen. Shannon Robinson, D-Albuquerque, the legislation's sponsor.

But a legal battle might take place before Sharp and others can pack hidden heat with the state's blessing.

"I think it's constitutionally suspect," Albuquerque lawyer David Campbell said last week.

Campbell in 2001 successfully represented former Albuquerque Mayor Jim Baca in a fight against a similar law enacted that year by the Legislature.

He said he's considering suing the state again over the new law.

The state Supreme Court in 2001 struck down that year's law, saying it unconstitutionally allowed cities to choose whether to enact the measure. The new law doesn't include such a provision.

But the so-called opt-out clause was just one of Campbell's beefs with the statute. He said the concealed-carry law violates another provision of the same section of the state Constitution.

Part of the provision says "nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons." Campbell said he believes "the language could not be clearer."

New Mexico lawmakers have said the provision stems from the ethics of earlier times, when it was considered cowardly to hide a weapon.

Under current state law, a person can have concealed weapons in their car or home.

Robinson said he is sure the new law, aimed at personal protection in different times, will hold up should it be challenged.

"I'm very confident the New Mexico Constitution allows (concealed weapons,)" he said. "It's just how you read it."

Under the new law, a resident will pay up to $100 to apply for a two-year permit. The exact fee amount will be determined by the state.

The application requires a background check and training for a license holder with the caliber and type of gun he or she wants to carry.

The applicant must submit fingerprints, show proof of New Mexico residency and proof of training from a certified firearms instructor.

The state Department of Public Safety would deny a license to a felon or someone convicted of a misdemeanor offense involving assault or battery of a household member or possession of a controlled substance.

The state also would deny a license to someone who has been convicted of a misdemeanor DWI in the five years preceding the application.

People committed to a mental institution or adjudicated mentally incompetent wouldn't qualify for a permit.

Officials from the Department of Public Safety will outline the specific details on the training needed for the licenses, said department spokesman Peter Olson.

"Since we've done this once, we have the system in place, but we have to make the rules fit," he said.

After the 2001 law was approved, many people paid and applied for the license. But those residents who were refunded their application money will have to train again for the license, Olson said.

The concealed-weapons debate in New Mexico for years has drawn vociferous support and opposition.

Opponents say allowing concealed weapons will mean more crime and gun accidents.

Richardson said the measure comes down to a person being able to protect him- or herself.

"This is a crime-reduction measure," he said.

Keys to carrying

Gov. Bill Richardson on Monday signed a bill allowing qualified New Mexico residents to apply for a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Residents will be able to apply later this year, and licenses will be issued starting Jan. 1.

To apply:

* You must be 25 years or older.

* You will pay up to $100 in application fees and submit a set of fingerprints.

* You must be trained for the caliber and type of weapon you plan to carry.

* You can't be a felon, convicted of a misdemeanor assault or battery on a household member or have had a misdemeanor DWI offense in the five years prior to applying. You also can't have been convicted of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance.

* You can't be committed to a mental institution or adjudicated mentally incompetent.
 
Oh GOD, this guy's back?

Lordy. He's persistent, I'll give him that much.

He's also gonna get his butt so thoroughly kicked it's not funny.

Consider: if his blatherings were real, he'd have won last year on THAT basis, as it's the first claim he made.

As is, we'd have to assume that the NM state supremes would have been so twisted as to allow a new bill to pass fixing the minor flaw in the last attempt, only to get shot down on THIS basis.

Naw. They're not that sadistic.
 
Ya, that's a bigger issue.

What the court SHOULD do about that is problematic. They could either drop the age requirement altogether, re-write it to 21, or junk the whole law.

What they're *supposed* to do is to recognize there's an equal protection problem (and there is, in spades!) and then fix it while maintaining the MAXIMUM "will of the legislature".

See, the court is supposed to realize that the legislature has declared that CCW is a good idea, and realize that the court is NOT supposed to be a lawmaking body. So that means leaving it in, but fixing the bad bits.

BUT hell, that's what they should have done last time - stripped out the ability of cities to opt out but leave CCW in. They didn't. So if any 21-25yr-olds sue under equal protection, they'll probably end up junking it :rolleyes:.

So if I was that age, what would *I* do?

Hmmm. Talk to the leaders of the state RKBA org, and tell them that unless a cleanup bill is introduced and passed in the next legislative session, I'll sue knowing what the likely outcome is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top