That’s what I read in one of the articles. Have to double check, though.
Typically, new legislation takes effect July 1st. So, it could’ve been a typo.
I have heard 1 January as well and wonder too if it is correct.
All sorts of stuff kicks in on 1 July so not sure why this wouldn’t.
Sounds like we will recognize all valid permits to carry from any state.
So…,
Basically, in one fell swoop, we went from one of the bad systems to one of the best going.
Damn.
According to the good people at IowaCarry.org, this law won’t go into effect until 01-01-2011.
http://www.iowacarry.org/forums1/index.php?showtopic=18926&st=60
That sucks for those living in counties where the sheriff opposes CCW.
And that means anyone waiting on reciprocity, will have to wait a little longer.
Yea. the last time I was there a tweeker groundhog ran out and tried to jack my car!
Buckaroo (who likes to be ready for “wild” life!)
What was the vote count in the House?
It passed 81-16 in the house.
The press is not happy with the bill. The Sheriff’s Assoc. is also not happy.
http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/89567542.html
Hopefully, we can convince Gov. Culver to sign this bill.
eta; In reading the bill that passed, it specifically sets the date that this will take effect as 01-01-2011. Apparently this was a compromise between some who wanted it to take effect 07-01-2010 and those who wanted it to take effect 07-01-2011. July 1st is typically when newly passed legislation takes effect.
And the NRA is not happy either. Yet again another story about the NRA and their bullshit agenda. http://www.opposingviews.com/i/is-iowa-lawmaker-kent-sorenson-too-pro-gun-for-nra
The NRA is reportedly threatening to campaign against a pro-gun Iowa legislator because he is pushing a bill that is too pro-gun.
Rep. Kent Sorenson is an outspoken gun advocate and one of the leading voices for 2nd Amendment rights in the Iowa legislature. He introduced and pushed for a right-to-carry bill that would have given people the right to carry a gun, concealed or otherwise, without having to obtain a permit. The bill did not pass because of a tie vote. Other compromise bills have also been introduced. Sorenson is against these “watered down” bills, saying they don’t provide true gun rights.
The NRA is involved in crafting one of these compromise bills that was introduced last week by two traditionally anti-gun politicians. The bill was written in such a way that moderates could support it, giving it a better chance of passing.
Sorenson came out against the NRA bill. So according to a report on Ammoland.com, a lobbyist working for the NRA went to Sorenson and told him if he didn’t support the bill, the NRA would work to get his opponent elected in an upcoming election – an anti-gun candidate at that.
The NRA has not commented on the accusation.
Over the weekend the Iowa Senate approved a bill that overhauls the system for issuing permits to carry concealed weapons. It requires that sheriffs give a reason if they deny a permit and make such decisions based on consistent state guidelines.
Very strange:
I thought that Sorensen voted for the "Shall Issue " bill that just passed . We are talking 81-16 in the House , and 44-4 in the Senate. Anyway the bill looks decent and I can not think that any state legislature that ever voted to go direct from "May Issue " to " Vermont Carry ".
Something just ain’t right here.
I never knew who Kent Sorenson was until now. But, what little I have read about him, I like.
http://kentsorenson.com/about-kent/
As for his stance on the Second Amendment, he may have saw how everything was going to play out in the end, and thought this would be a good time for him to make a statement on what he believes. Or, he could be a man of strong conviction.
Hopefully, if it came down to it, he wasn’t prepared to throw the baby out with the bathwater in order to make that statement.
Either way, I would be proud to have him representing my district.
Looks like Iowa Carry released a statement saying that Sorensen voted for the " Shall Issue " bill.
The bill had lots of support , including the Izaak Walton League , so even fisherman & fuds were supporting the bill…
So what’s up with this " report " ( at the link above ) that charges the evil NRA with bullying Mr. Sorensen to advance " their bullshit agenda "?
Not that the NRA is perfect – I like SAF more.
I don’t understand your question. I read it, understood it and posted it. The NRA has never supported the most important part of the 2nd Amendment, Shall not be infringed. I like SAF too 
Interesting.
What I heard about the “threat” is that people from the Iowa Gun Owners blew it WAY out of proportion.
The guy from Iowa Carry that supposedly made the threat spoke to Sorensen and Sorensen in no way felt anything untoward was done.
IGO wanted Vermont style carry and simply were not willing to even consider anything else.
They were more than willing to “throw the baby out with the dishwater”.
They were more than willing to do whatever was necessary to discredit Iowa Carry.
The article at the link confirms 11Bravo’s post and provides additional details.
" Contrived Iowa Shall-Issue Gun Controversy Distracts from Common Goal"
www.opposingviews.com/i/contrived-iowa-shall-issue-gun-controversy-distracts-from-common-goals
Based on the info that’s available so far : Iowa Carry looks like an LMT and Gun Owners of Iowa looks like a DPMS - or maybe a Hesse/Blackthorne.
Discussions like this aren’t about ego - hopefully , anyway. Seems like the discussion would be more useful if it was about what’s accurate and what works. So far the available evidence does not seem to be favorable or flattering to Gun Owners of Iowa.
Anybody want to provide more evidence ?
Just in case , nothing personal.
That’s the 2nd time you felt the need to quote what I posted, what’s your point? Just in case of what?
Good news… Think Maryland will ever follow suit? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
I hope it goes well for you guys/gals in Iowa. You can use Missouri’s CCW law as a template.
Is it the second time ever on m4carbine? I haven’t been keeping count.