How can we then be permitted a CHL?

[NMGunIt]

New Mexico Constitution
Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying
of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

I researched this site (USACarry/Location Specific Forums/New Mexico) to find out if this subject has been brought up before and didn't find anything, so here goes.....How can we be given the ability to apply for and receive a Concealed Handgun License? It seems to me that the NM Constitution very explicitly says that we, as citizens of the state, have the right to keep and bear arms, but that specifically we don't have the right to carry them concealed. Seems that the only way to KABA is open carry.

[vegasgun]

Originally Posted by NMGunIt

New Mexico Constitution
Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying
of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

I researched this site (USACarry/Location Specific Forums/New Mexico) to find out if this subject has been brought up before and didn't find anything, so here goes.....How can we be given the ability to apply for and receive a Concealed Handgun License? It seems to me that the NM Constitution very explicitly says that we, as citizens of the state, have the right to keep and bear arms, but that specifically we don't have the right to carry them concealed. Seems that the only way to KABA is open carry.

I'm not a lawyer and may be wrong but I have an opinion. It seems to me that this guarantees the right to bear arms for all purposes listed - BUT - nothing in this statement is to be used to guarantee the right of concealed carry. But it does not strike down the right of concealed carry either. The right to concealed carry could be granted under another statute but not this one.

[RJT CCW]

It sounds like what we have here in Missouri, where concealed carry is prohibited in our statutes with the new exemption for those who are qualified to conceal carry.

[sailor]

Pretty well put - yes, the State Constitution says no concealed carry, meaning no blanket "anyone, anywhere can carry concealed", as does the open carry provision. The concealed carry provision had to be formulated by the legislature into law, with provisions to make it "acceptable" - registering, fingerprints, BATFE & FBI checks, fee and training. None of that is needed to open carry, and that is the difference, at least IMHO.
sailor

[NMGunIt]

Many thanks to all for their input

[johnsonabq]

I went over this when I was lobbying for the CCW law before we had one. Lots of folks felt the same way but it was determined that the statement "but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons" doesn't say you can't carry concealed, it just doesn't say you can.

[tattedupboy]

The wording says, "nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons." What that means is that in order for concealed weapons to be considered legal, it would have to be by an act of the legislature, and not because of the Constitution.