NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
|
SPONSOR: |
Park |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
HJR 32 |
||
|
SHORT TITLE: |
Permit Carrying of Concealed Weapons |
SB |
|
||||
|
|
ANALYST: |
Chavez |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
|
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
NFI |
NFI |
|
$32.0 |
Non-Recurring |
General
Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Relates to SB 23, HB 916
Attorney
General’s Office (AG)
Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC)
LFC
Files
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
House Joint Resolution
32 proposes to amend Article 2, Section 6 of the Constitution of New Mexico
which states: “No law shall abridge the right of the citizens to keep and bear
arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for
other lawful purposes . . .” House Joint Resolution 32 removes the language
which states, “but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed
weapons.”
Significant
Issues
It is indicated by the Attorney General’s Office
that all bills pertaining to concealed weapons raise the question of how to
interpret Article 2, Section 6 of the New Mexico Constitution. The deletion of this language would be open
to interpretation among the opponents and proponents of concealed weapons. Opponents of concealed weapons legislation
generally claim this language prohibits such legislation. Proponents of such legislation generally
claim this language does not prohibit legislation, but instead informs the
public that it does not have a constitutional right to a
concealed weapon. Thus, the legislature
can take away this right.
The current concealed weapons law, § 29-18-1 to
29-18-12 NMSA, 1978 was recently challenged by the case of Baca v. NM Dept.
of Public Safety, 132 NM 282, 47 P.3d 441 (2002). The court ruled on the narrower ground of
local regulation and refrained from deciding the broader issue addressed in the
petition. The broader issue presented
the question of whether Article 2, Section 6 of the New Mexico Constitution
prohibits the carrying of concealed weapons and restricts the Legislature’s
ability to enact laws permitting the carrying of concealed handguns.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The bill does not
contain an appropriation. However, the AOC indicates that any court challenge
to any new concealed carry legislation would require the expenditure of
judicial and administrative resources.
An estimated
non-recurring cost to the general fund of $32.0 is expected because of the cost
to the Secretary of State for advertising and printing to place an item on the
ballot. This non-recurring cost will
likely be realized in FY05 since the next general election is in November 2004
unless a special election is called for this purpose.
RELATIONSHIP
HJR 32 relates to SB 23 and HB 916 identical legislation introducing the Concealed Handgun Carry Act.
The New Mexico Supreme Court in
the case of Baca v. NM Dept. of Public Safety, 132 NM 282, 47 P.3d 441
(2002) issued a court order that “ the
Legislature’s delegation of authority to local governments to prohibit the
carrying of concealed weapons in Section 29-18-11 (D) violates the
constitutional proscription against municipal and county regulation of an incident
of the right to bear arms in Article II, Section 6 of the New Mexico
Constitution.”
FC/njw