Quantcast

Iowa Becomes 19th State to Allow Residents to Carry Handguns Without Government Permission

Iowa just became the 19h state to allow law-abiding residents to carry handguns concealed without a permit. Residents in these “Constitutional Carry” states may purchase and carry handguns without prior government approval, effective on July 1.

“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,” Governor Kim Reynolds said in a statement.

An excerpt from Fox News:

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.

Iowa, a swing state, joined Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming in strengthening gun rights.

Most Americans take the Second Amendment seriously. Many believe the U.S. Constitution is the permit to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Gun-rights advocates also promote national reciprocity, which would require states that allow residents to carry concealed to recognize carry permits from other states.

State and local officials have attempted to infringe on citizens’ Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms regardless of who is in the White House. During the Trump administration, certain local governments cited the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to infringe on the Second Amendment. For example, a judge in one Georgia county suspended conceal-carry permit applications. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit said that the “natural right to armed self-defense does not cease to exist when a person steps over the threshold of their home and into the outside world.”

In Los Angeles County, Sheriff Alex Villanueva tried to shut down gun stores, claiming they were non-essential businesses. The only way law-abiding California residents can buy guns is through a federally licensed gun dealer. Shutting down gun stores impedes their ability to buy guns legally. After a backlash, Villanueva backtracked.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security added gun stores, gun manufacturers, and gun ranges to the list of essential businesses.

Photo credit: By Ashton B Crew – Own work, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5894350

Check Also

Leftists Don’t Like Gun-Rights Groups Urging Blacks and Latinos to Exercise Their Second Amendment Right

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms …

2 comments

  1. Without some form of background check, what person(s), private body or government entity will determine or define the term “law abiding citizen”? Can a former felon purchase a gun? Can a parolee purchase a gun? Can someone on probation purchase a gun? If they’ve “paid their debt to society,” how much access to the Second Amendment do they have?

    For those who have been diagnosed and/or “cured” of a mental illness (but have never demonstrated physical violence against another person), what is their standing within Second Amendment rights?

    As well, the inner city resident often afraid to walk the street at night. How can they be granted “concealed carry” rights when practically all law enforcement in those areas nationwide are profoundly against it?

    Finally, will “law abiding” be categorized by color, social standing or any arbitrary “value to society”?

    Just curious

  2. Since I am an old retired federal law enforcement officer who spent his whole life in the military and various types of law enforcement from local, to county, to state, to federal and after retirement to private security and a small municipal police department. I with tongue fully in cheek will tell my story In 1968 a law called the Omnibus Safe Streets and Crime Control Act of 1968 also known as The Gun Control Act of 1968, Public Law 90-618 purpose “Sec. 101. The Congress hereby declares that the purpose of this title is to provide support to Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials in their fight against crime and violence, and it is not the purpose of this title to place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity, and that this title is not intended to discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, or provide for the imposition by Federal regulations of any procedures or requirements other than those reasonably necessary to implement and effectuate the provisions of this title.” Section d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person — (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) is a fugitive from justice; (3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; (This was always my favorite section because I was always wondering I if it covered employment as a federal law enforcement officer in the Department of the Treasury.) (5) who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; (6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; ( That was because of Lee Harvey Oswald) or(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that –(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and (B)(unintended consequences ) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child. That would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury. What no one realizes is that in 1969 the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York sitting in Manhattan, New York County held that the law was unconstitutional because it was self- incriminatory for convicted felons and mental defectives because the American Civil Liberties Union appealed it. It has never been appealed to a higher court by the United States Government!!! Gentle readers remember that President Thomas Jefferson once opined that an efficient bureaucracy was the greatest threat to individual liberty and I was always a Jeffersonian bureaucrat!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *