Not that it is unusual for those aimed at tearing down our constitutional rights to implement laws that do that very thing. And, it’s not that unusual these days when you have a governmental official who claims to be a pro gun person, deny the citizens their right to bear arms. It’s the ignorance that drives those decisions that is inexcusable in my opinion.

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer vetoed HB 271, a bill that would have allowed Montana citizens to carry concealed weapons without a permit within city limits. It is my understanding, that Montanans are granted permission to practice this kind of carry outside the city limits. So what makes urban dwellers such second rate citizens?

Consider also that the bill passed the House 68-29 and the Senate 30-20. Schweitzer vetoed the bill.

I’m not here to debate whether the bill was a good bill or a bad bill, that’s up to the citizens of Montana but according to Gov. Schweitzer’s statement on his veto, I’m not so sure he considers the people in his decision making at all. Nor am I convinced he even understands the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

Schweitzer claims that the passage of HB271 would allow anyone eligible to possess a handgun in Montana to carry it concealed without a permit, which is the intent of the bill passed. But read the Governor’s reasoning behind this.

This allows the individual to make his or her own eligibility determination and deprives law enforcement of the opportunity to consider whether the person is a threat to the community.

I’m not sure I found in the Second Amendment the part that says the local police department will decide whether I can possess a gun. However, I do acknowledge that state and federal laws make certain determinations for eligibility purposes and those laws should be adequate. Further restrictions on gun ownership will do nothing to prevent a determined person from breaking the law. I find it very disturbing that any government official believes they are better able to make decisions for the people than the people themselves. Does the Governor actually believe it is up to the police department to determine who is a threat as it pertains to gun possession? Isn’t there due process to consider here?

If the Governor is asserting that police will no longer be able to make a determination of a threat in a crowd of people because a lawful citizen is carrying concealed without a permit, how is that determination made now with people carrying concealed with a permit? Surely, according to the Governor’s method of reasoning, his police department cannot make such a determination of a threat now. Time to find trained officers who can I would guess.

He further states:

HB 271 would entirely remove the Sheriff’s authority and discretion to issue or deny concealed weapons permits.

Is the issuing or denying of a concealed weapons permit in Montana left up to the “discretion” of the Sheriff? Either the person applying for a permit meets the requirements or they don’t and in my opinion a bill that would remove that police “discretion” from our guaranteed Second Amendment rights, the better.

The Governor’s closing paragraph is about as ignorant a statement as I have read from a person in such a high level of government service.

Finally, I would like the sponsors of this bill to consider the absurdity of the standard set forth in HB 271. If this standard were applied to the issuance of other permits and licenses in our society, then nobody could be prosecuted for failure to produce a driver’s license, a commercial driver’s license, a pilot’s license, a building permit, a hunting license, or any other type of permit. These documents would not be necessary. People would simply have to produce evidence that they were “eligible” to possess them.

I think the governor needs to consider the absurdity of his statement in regards to this bill. Once again making sure I didn’t miss something in the hundreds of times I read over the Bill of Rights, I still fail to find where driving a car or truck, flying a plane, building a house, hunting, etc. is guaranteed to us in the Constitution. Schweitzer states, “These documents [licenses] would not be necessary.” Amen to that!

Mr. Governor – There is a distinct difference between the consideration of laws restricting liberties recognized in the United States Constitution as guaranteed and those we consider privileges. To make the above statement shows us that you fail miserably in understanding that concept. And I ask you, Governor, how many of our other Bill of Rights do we require people obtain a permit in order to enjoy only parts thereof?

At least if you are going to veto a bill, make a better attempt at explaining it with the use of citing legal precedent, while at the same time recognizing the wishes of the people of Montana over those people and organizations that you control. Is Montana now a police state?

Tom Remington

Related Posts