A Good Start

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Today, we join 27 other states in passing Constitutional Carry. I promised the folks of Louisiana that I would champion Constitutional Carry into law, and within two months, I have honored that commitment.

Jeff Landry
Governor of Louisiana
March 5, 2024
NRA-ILA | Louisiana Becomes Nation’s 28th State with NRA-Backed Constitutional Carry (nraila.org)

Twenty seven states out of 50. That is a good start.

Another 23 then we can start working on Canada, Mexico, and other human rights abusing nations. I think some economic sanctions would be a good start. If not, there are more “persuasive” options available.

Share

12 thoughts on “A Good Start”

  1. Good on em! There going have a much safer state.
    Next up, suppressors!

    • Eh? What? Yes, supressors should be next.
      I am not in favor of actually carrying an automatic weapon as my primary defensive carry weapon, because, as the late, great, and sorely missed Colonel Jeff Cooper once wrote, “May all your enemies be on full auto. Let them send their rounds into the stratosphere. I want my rounds to count as hits.

      • And besides who can afford the ammo to get sufficient training on full auto.

        Actually next up should be severe restrictions on who can decree gun-free zones and why. That is the immediate threat to liberty and safety. I am good with jails as gun-free zones but anything else is a tough sell with me.

        Another priority is reform of the laws and precedents concerning the use of deadly force. This goes beyond guns as the recent NYC subway case shows. It is said that Jefferson wanted to put “life, liberty and property” into the Declaration but was persuaded to substitute pursuit of happiness. It is interesting to speculate how this would have affected the body of law about deadly force. Texas has begun this reform but I don’t know how restricted the new law is.

  2. Correction: Louisiana is joining 27 other states in passing Constitutional/permit-less carry.

    They are #28. 28 out of 50.

    There’s only 23 left if you count D.C. (which we should, even though it’s not really a state).

    • How about the Territories? Northern Marianas, Guam, etc. Do we count them? Who makes the laws for the territories, anyway? Certainly not anybody in favor of liberty.

      • Guam went shall-issue some years ago via a court case, as I recall.
        DC is interesting because Congress could give them Constitutional Carry.

      • Re “who makes the laws for the territories” — well, that’s a really good question. I looked at what the Constitution has to say about territories. The answer is: nothing, other than Article IV section 3 which speaks of “territory or other property belonging to the United States” in a way that makes it sound like it’s speaking of real estate, like the land on which a fort is built.
        The obvious conclusion, given “enumerated powers”, is that there is no authority for the US to have territories. Hm.

        • So a bit of googling turns up legal commentary saying that yes indeed, “territory” does mean US territories in the sense of places like Guam or Puerto Rico. The odd thing, of course, is that the Constitution contains no provisions authorizing the US to acquire such “territories”. Jefferson once admitted that his Louisiana Purchase was on rather shaky Constitutional grounds.

          So given that, the answer would be that the US Congress has plenary power over territories, though (as it does with DC) it can delegate powers to local bodies if it chooses. Among other things, that means Congress could enact Constitutional Carry not just in DC but in all US territories as well.

  3. Vermont never had to “pass” constitutional carry… since they never passed unconstitutional prohibitions on carry.

    A state can’t really pass constitutional carry, but a state can be the 27th to repeal unconstitutional prohibitions on carry.

    • I thought VT got that way via a state court ruling, way back around 1920 or so.

Comments are closed.