Interesting question RE: Colorado's Constitutional Carry amendment

[RSillsbee]

The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons. Art. II, § 13 (enacted 1876, art. II, § 13).

As discussed in another thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=373579&mesg_id=373731 Colorado is considering a Constitutional Carry law.

However the State Constitution states the the right of a Colorado citizen to keep and bear arms doesn't apply to concealed weapons. so,of course, a permit is required to carry a concealed wepon in Colorado. So how would that work if HB11-1205 is passed?

http://statebillinfo.com/SBI/index.cfm?fuseaction=Bills...

[TheWraith]

1. I don't see how it's at all relevant.

All it says is that the state constitution shouldn't be construed to extend full protection to concealed carry. Doesn't mean that the legislature can't make concealed carry legal without a permit if they so choose.

[TPaine7]

2. Bingo

Simply put, "nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons" means that "nothing HEREIN contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons." It doesn't mean that nothing NOT HEREIN can be so construed.

[RSillsbee]

3. OK, when you put it that way .....

Let's hope it passes