Louisiana Constitutional Carry Dead After 3 Republicans Agree with Veto
There have been new developments in Senate Bill 118, which would bring constitutional carry to Louisiana. The legislature just held a veto override session to see if they could muster enough votes to negate the governor’s veto.
On June 3rd, lawmakers in Louisiana passed SB 118. The bill removed the requirement that residents first obtain a permit before carrying a concealed handgun. The bill passed both House and Senate with substantial majorities, then went to Governor Edwards for signature.
On June 28th, Gov. Edwards vetoed the bill. Even though it was a long shot, the bill could still become law if lawmakers held a veto override session and then pulled enough votes to override Edwards’ veto.
Here is a recent photo of three Republicans who changed their votes and sided with Governor Edwards’ veto of SB 118.
On Monday, July 19th, legislators held a veto override session. To keep the bill alive required 26 votes in favor of the override. Unfortunately, three Republicans and one Democrat who initially voted for the bill switched sides. As a result, the vote total was 23-15, three votes short of the two-thirds needed to overcome the veto.
Republican Sen. Patrick Connick was one of those who changed their vote. He said:
Since that time, I’ve talked to my law enforcement agencies at home, Plaquemines Parish Sheriff, Gretna Sheriff, Westwego Chief of Police. Those law officers said please don’t override this bill.
When it’s time to vote, Louisiana gun owners in the state should remember the three flip-flopping Republicans who voted against your gun rights. They are:
- Patrick Connick
- Louie Bernard
- Franklin Foil
We will continue to advocate for gun rights and encourage you to hold anti-gun politicians accountable when it comes time to vote for who will represent you.
Those law enforcement officers are not a majority of their constituency. A fraction of them at best. RECALL!
It just proves Republicans are not united, that many of those in office are RINO, in office for the money. Same as the two RINO representatives in PA. Both believe in Socialism for all but themselves.
RINO must be voted out office or forced to resign.
Republicans must unite or The USA will fall to Socialism.
American People must unite or The USA will fall.
Those that do not believe and or support The USA must be removed from Office.
Absolutely. We have to get rid of backstabbing lawmakers– from the parish dog catcher to the governor…all must go. We better unite as people. They’re screwing us over, while they get richer. Born and raised in Louisiana, but I liked Mississippi better. Low taxes, nicer people. Felt safer too.
Remember
All I can say is that it’s too bad that RINO’s can carry the day without having any *****. You people in their districts need to fix this problem.
Jim Stinson
Lake Charles
What a fantastic measure these Americans did for the common good of common sense, since it OBVIOUSLY is not common itself! Not requiring citizens to be properly trained and licensed to carry is more than dangerous and it is a rally cry of the weak and afraid to want that Bill to have passed.
No one is saying that citizens cannot carry, just that they should be required to be trained and licensed like all other responsible gun ownwer. WTF is wrong with you nut jobs?!?
Mr. Beasley, no one is against firearm training. As a company, we sell firearm training, so of course, we encourage training and think it is important. Where us “nut jobs” disagree is with it being a prerequisite to a Constitutionally protected right. If you do the research, you will find that there is no correlation between the rate of gun negligence incidents and states that do not require firearm training before carrying concealed. The public has been duped by politicians. They sell required firearms training requirements as a public safety measure, when it is actually a regulatory mechanism.
It’s also a money making machine!
*owners ^^^^
So we are to accept that Senator Connick previously went through the entire legislative process – which usually consists of multiple readings, multiple votes, and multiple amendments to align with the other chamber – and had no idea his local LEO management was opposed?
No, that’s not how this works. It is highly unlikely he just “discovered” this. It is far more likely someone changed the economics for him. The people of LA deserve to know who was behind that change.
It shouldn’t even be a matter of Louisiana passing a constitutional carry law. The fact is it’s “Constitutional Carry”. The Supreme Court should make a ruling based on the “Constitution “ that it is legal nationwide.
Exactly! Everyone has read the US Constitution, right? “…shall not be infringed.” The 2A is the only Constitutionally guaranteed right that ends that way. Most politicians fail us, especially liberals, based on those 4 words.
Thank you. United States citizens have the “right to bear arms”. It doesn’t talk about permits, licenses, Or any other intrusive limitations from the government. We better unite soon.
Money talks. It wasn’t the Sheriff who persuaded them, it was cash under the table. Vote out those RINO’s.
dirty, dirty commies / rinos
Constitutional Carry is a right given to all American citizens by the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. We should not have to have a law passed by the state telling us that we have a right to carry when it is already nationally legal. These 4 people that voted against this bill should be voted out of office. If police are worried about someone carrying a weapon concealed legally, then now they have a bigger problem; the crooks are still carrying concealed ILLEGALLY and someone carrying concealed LEGALLY is not there to cover his ass when he gets in a bind. Yeah the veto override could have included a training clause for everyone but how is anyone to know who has taken the training unless there is a roster somewhere that can be checked. Then there might as well be the same thing we have in Louisiana now for concealed carry. We need a new governing body with some good old common sense, starting with the Governor, who is a narcissist and needs to be removed from office.
Totally agree!
I am a gunowner many times over. I am a Hunter Instructor in NH and have been in ME and MA, for over 45 yeas. I am a the co-instructor of our safety program at our Rod and Gun Club. I am a proud member of the NRA and other affiliates. I am concealed carry in all but 14 states. I advocate for the second amendment and for our rights to carry. I advocate for a nationwide reciprocity law. What I do not advocate for is “cowboys” out there carrying firearms and getting into road-rage incidents and killing innocent people which have lately hit the national news and give us all a bad name. I do not advocate for “cowboys” carrying firearms and pulling them out or brandishing them because they feel slighted, which again happens and makes the news all too often and before you retort, yes the news can take them out of context some times and exaggerate them but be honest they do happen because there are a lot of “cowboys” out there that have not been trained and should not be carrying firearms. the right to carry is not absolute. Not one of you would argue that. A mentally impaired person at certain points should not have firearms. An impaired person that can’t drive shouldn’t be carrying. Training helps with that. You would want to be on the road driving with that person why do you think it is ok to say that he should be able to carry in that condition.
People, please, read the sophomoric arguments above. Calling people names and ad homonym attacks work on the fifth grade playground but we are in a real fight here against real adversaries. Yes we can and should vote people out office that consistently show a disregard for our rights but, we will lose our right to carry, we lose our second amendment rights, we will lose our guns unless we start the conversation within our own firearm communities about training, training, training. I do it all the time, I belong to the organizations that stress and teach training. I train, we all train and we need to continue to train but that training is more than holding a firearm and squeezing the trigger. Look how much time and print USCC spends on what if scenarios. Now a simple question: Do you really want an untrained “cowboy” pulling out a fire arm, just because they can, on your 17 year old daughter because she accidently cut him off. Looks like she need a little more training behind the wheel. Just saying.
Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to be using the word ‘cowboy’ as an adjective describing someone as being prone to violence for little or no reason. Here is what I’m wondering. How is forcing a cowboy to take formal firearms training going to change his basic personality?
I’ve lived in Arizona for the last 6 years. Before that I was born and raised in California. Shot handguns competitively there. NRA life member. I have a CCW here in AZ. The main reason is so that I can be armed in states that reciprocate.
In talking to local residents, carrying a firearm seems take the ‘cowboy’ out of most people. People instinctively seem to get that if you go cowboy on someone and showing a gun you yourself just might get shot by someone who does know how to shoot. My experience here is I don’t know anybody who carries and isn’t at least somewhat experienced with firearms. Much more than you get in an eight hour class with part of it actual shooting. Even the average 17 year old daughter has more than 8 hours of driving under her belt.
Bumpa2347,
You say for “…a lot of “cowboys” out there…,the right to carry is not absolute. Not one of you would argue that.”
I’ll argue that. It is constitutionally protected so, yes, it is absolute.
Just curious, have you received at least 8 hours of government sanctioned “freedom of speech training”? If not then I consider your 1st amendment rights to free speech and the right to post here “not absolute”.
The constitution is absolute, even if one’s chosen occupation happens to involve equine locomotive cattle herd management.