Concealed carry in the United States

See also: Open carry in the United States

Concealed carry, or carrying a concealed weapon (CCW), is the practice of carrying a weapon (such as a handgun) in public in a concealed manner, either on one's person or in close proximity. CCW is often practiced as a means of self-defense. It is illegal in many states to carry a concealed handgun without first obtaining a permit from a designated government authority at the state and/or local level. Permits may be difficult to obtain in some areas.

A comprehensive 2004 literature review by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that there was no evidence that concealed carry either increases or reduces violent crime. A 2020 review by the Rand Corporation concluded that there is evidence that concealed carry either has no impact or that it may increase violent crime, whereas there was no qualifying evidence that concealed carry decreased violent crime.

History

Main article: History of concealed carry in the U.S.

History of concealed carry laws

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to "keep and bear arms". Concealed weapons bans were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813. (In those days open carry of weapons for self-defense was considered acceptable; concealed carry was denounced as the practice of criminals.) By 1859, Indiana, Tennessee, Virginia, Alabama, and Ohio had followed suit. By the end of the nineteenth century, similar laws were passed in places such as Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma, which protected some gun rights in their state constitutions. Before the mid 1900s, most U.S. states had passed concealed carry laws rather than banning weapons completely. Until the late 1990s, many Southern states were either "No-Issue" or "Restrictive May-Issue". Since then, these states have largely enacted "Shall-Issue" licensing laws, with numerous states legalizing "Unrestricted concealed carry".

State laws

Issue of concealed carry permit by county (2021):

  Constitutional carry

  Shall-issue

  May-issue (Shall-issue in practice)

  May-issue

  May-issue (No-issue in practice)

  No-issue

State regulations relating to the issuance of concealed carry permits generally fall into four categories described as Unrestricted, Shall Issue, May Issue, and No Issue.

Permitting policies

• Unrestricted jurisdiction: one in which a permit is not required to carry a concealed handgun. Some Unrestricted states limit permitless concealed carry to residents of that state, while others allow any non-prohibited person to carry regardless of state of residency.
• Shall-issue jurisdiction: one that requires a license to carry a concealed handgun, where the granting of such licenses is subject to meeting determinate criteria laid out in the law.
• May-issue jurisdiction: one that requires a permit to carry a concealed handgun, where the granting of such licenses is subject to meeting criteria laid out in the law. For those applicants who meet the necessary criteria, a license may or may not be granted at the discretion of local authorities (frequently the sheriff's department or police)
• No-issue jurisdiction: one that – with very limited exceptions – does not allow any private citizen to carry a concealed handgun in public

Regulations differ widely by state, with most states currently maintaining a "Shall-Issue" policy.

There is currently a circuit split between several federal circuit courts regarding the standards for issuance of permits and the right to carry weapons outside the home. The 9th and 3rd circuits have ruled in favor of may-issue permitting policies, while the 7th and D.C. circuits have ruled that states are required to implement shall-issue policies, because the right to carry weapons extends outside the home.

The Federal Gun Free School Zones Act limits where an unlicensed person may carry; carry of a weapon, openly or concealed, within 1,000 feet (300 m) of a school zone is prohibited, with exceptions granted in the federal law to holders of valid State-issued weapons permits (State laws may reassert the illegality of school zone carry by license holders), and under LEOSA to current and honorably retired law enforcement officers (regardless of permit, usually trumping State law).

When in contact with an officer, some states require individuals to inform that officer that they are carrying a handgun. For detailed information on individual states' permitting policies, see Gun laws in the United States by state.

Not all weapons that fall under CCW laws are lethal. For example, in Florida, carrying pepper spray in more than a specified volume (2 oz.) of chemical requires a CCW permit, whereas everyone may legally carry a smaller, “self-defense chemical spray” device hidden on their person without a CCW permit. As of 2019 there have been 18.66 million concealed weapon permits issued in the United States.

Status of concealed carry, by jurisdiction Jurisdiction Unrestricted Shall-issue May-issue No-issue Non-Resident
Permits Available Permit Reciprocity Alabama Y

No

Yes Alaska Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Yes American Samoa Y

No

No Arizona Y Y For reciprocity purposes. Y Yes Arkansas Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Yes California In practice in 37 out of 58 counties as of early 2021; cities within those counties may be stricter. Y In practice in 6 of 58 counties as of early 2021; cities within those counties may be more lenient.

No

No Colorado Y

No

Partial (33 states);

Resident permits only

Connecticut In practice Y Y No Delaware Y Rarely issued Partial (21 states) District of Columbia Briefly from July 26, 2014 – July 29, 2014. See below for details. Y Y No Florida Y Y Partial (35 states);

Resident permits only

Georgia Y

No

Partial (32 states) Guam Y

No

No Hawaii Y In practice

No

No Idaho Y Y For reciprocity purposes. Y Yes Illinois Unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container Y Only for residents of Arkansas, Idaho, Mississippi, Nevada, Texas and Virginia. Vehicle carry only Indiana Y Y Yes Iowa **Effective July 1, 2021 Y For reciprocity purposes. Y (Rarely issued) Yes Kansas Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Yes Kentucky Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Yes Louisiana Y

No

Partial (36 states) Maine Y Duty to inform if carrying concealed without permit. Y For reciprocity purposes, carrying in state and national parks, regular archery hunting during deer season, and employees’ vehicles on work premises. Y Partial (27 states);

Resident permits only

Maryland Y In practice in some cities Rarely issued No Massachusetts Y In practice in some cities/counties Rarely issued No Michigan Y

No

Yes;

Resident permits only

Minnesota Y Y Partial (15 states) Mississippi YOnly if carried in a belt/shoulder holster, sheath, purse, handbag, satchel, other similar bag or briefcase or fully enclosed case. Y For reciprocity purposes, or to carry concealed without a holster, in an ankle holster, or using any other method not covered by the law's exception.

No

Yes Missouri Y Y For reciprocity purposes and open carry in localities where restricted.

No

Yes Montana Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Partial (43 states) Nebraska Y

No

Partial (37 states) Nevada Y Y Partial (30 states) New Hampshire Y Y For reciprocity purposes. Y Partial (28 states);

Resident permits only

New Jersey Y In practice Rarely issued No New Mexico Unloaded. Y

No

Partial (23 states) New York Y In practice in some cities/counties, e.g. NYC

No

No North Carolina Y

No

Yes North Dakota Y North Dakota residents only. Duty to inform if carrying concealed without permit. Y For reciprocity purposes and open carry. Y Partial (39 states) Northern Mariana Islands Y

No

No Ohio Y Y Yes Oklahoma Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Yes Oregon Y Y Only for residents of CA, ID, NV, and WA. No Pennsylvania Y Y Partial (29 states);

Resident permits only

Puerto Rico From June 20, 2015 to October 31, 2016. Y

No

Yes Rhode Island Y Local permits Y Attorney General issued permits In practice for permits issued by the Attorney General's office and some local authorities. Y Both the local authorities and Attorney General issue. Vehicle carry only South Carolina Y Y Partial (25 states); Resident permits only South Dakota Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Yes Tennessee **Effective July 1, 2021 for Tennessee residents age 21 and older Y For reciprocity purposes. Y Yes Texas Y Y Partial (43 states) United States Virgin Islands Y In practice

No

Has reciprocity law, but does not recognize any other state permits Utah **Effective May 5, 2021 for persons age 21 and older Y For reciprocity purposes. Y Yes Vermont Y

No

N/A Virginia Y Y Yes Washington Y Y Partial (10 states) West Virginia Y Y For reciprocity purposes. Y Partial (35 states) Wisconsin Y

No

Partial (47 states) Wyoming Y Y For reciprocity purposes.

No

Partial (35 states) U.S. Military installations Y

No

No Native American reservations Y Varies Varies

Unrestricted

Main article: Constitutional carry

An unrestricted jurisdiction is one in which a permit is not required to carry a concealed handgun. This is sometimes called constitutional carry. Within the unrestricted category, there exists states that are fully unrestricted, where no permit is required for lawful open or concealed carry, and partially unrestricted, where certain forms of concealed carry may be legal without a permit, while other forms of carry may require a permit.

In the United States, the term constitutional carry, also called permitless carry, unrestricted carry, or Vermont carry, refers to the legal public carrying of a handgun, either openly or concealed, without a license or permit. The phrase does not typically refer to the unrestricted carrying of a long gun, a knife, or other weapons. The scope and applicability of constitutional carry may vary by state.

The phrase "constitutional carry" reflects the fact that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not allow restrictions on gun rights, including the right to carry or bear arms.

The U.S. Supreme Court had never extensively interpreted the Second Amendment until the landmark case District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008. Prior to this, a tapestry of different and sometimes conflicting laws about carrying firearms developed across the nation. In deciding the case, the Court found that self-defense was a "...central component of the 2nd Amendment" and D.C.'s handgun ban was invalidated. The Court further stated that some state or local gun controls are allowed. The Heller case was extended by the Supreme Court in the 2010 decision McDonald v. Chicago, which held that the 2nd and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution were "fully incorporated" and thus the right to "...keep and bear arms applies to the states and not 'in a watered-down version' but 'fully applicable'...", and limits state and local governments in enacting laws that restrict this individual and fundamental right to "...keep and bear arms", for self-defense. In the 2022 decision New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen the Supreme Court went further, affirming a right to public carry of firearms and imposing a strict new standard of scrutiny on state-level firearms laws based on the text, history, and tradition of the second amendment.

U.S. jurisdictions that have constitutional carry

History of concealed carry laws (May-issue laws have been unenforceable since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen)

Requirement to obtain a concealed carry permit by state/territory (2024):

  Permit not required

  Permit required

As of March 7, 2024, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida (concealed carry only), Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota (concealed carry only), Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee (handguns only), Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming generally allow most law-abiding adults to carry a loaded concealed firearm without a permit. Certain states may impose additional restrictions on the legal ability to carry without a permit beyond those who are not prohibited from owning a firearm. Permitless concealed carry in Mississippi only covers certain manners of carrying. Permitless carry in Oklahoma applies to both residents and nonresidents 21+ as well as 18+ nonresidents who can carry without a permit in their home state. All aforementioned jurisdictions do not require a permit to openly carry either except for North Dakota and certain localities in Missouri, and open carry remains illegal in Florida with some exceptions. On January 9 Florida lawmaker Mike Beltran filed a bill HB 1619 Allowing Open Carry of Firearms without A License.

On July 26, 2014, Washington, D.C., became a permitless carry jurisdiction for a few days when its ban on carrying a handgun was ruled unconstitutional, and the ruling was not stayed. The ruling stated that any resident who had a legally registered handgun could carry it without a permit, and nonresidents without felony convictions could carry as well. The ruling was then stayed on July 29, 2014.

In June 2015, following victory in a class-action suit brought by "Damas de la Segunda Enmienda" Ladies of the Second Amendment (an affiliate of the Second Amendment Foundation) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's carry and licensing regulations were struck down, eliminating the requirement to obtain a permit. On October 31, 2016, The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico denied a motion for reconsideration of a previous Court of Appeals decision that had found the Weapons Act to be constitutional.

Vermont does not have any provision for issue of concealed-carry licenses, as none has ever been necessary nor constitutionally allowed. As such, Vermont residents wishing to carry handguns in other states must acquire a license from a state which is valid in their destination. All other constitutional carry states previously had concealed-carry license requirements prior to adoption of unrestricted carry laws, and continue to issue licenses on a shall-issue basis for the purposes of inter-state reciprocity (allowing residents of the state to travel to other states with a concealed weapon, abiding by that state's law).

Alabama

On March 10, 2022, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed House Bill 272 into law (effective January 1, 2023) eliminating the requirement to obtain a permit in order to carry a concealed pistol in the state, as well as carrying a loaded pistol in a vehicle. Open carry without a permit was already legal for residents and non-residents 18+ before this legislation was enacted.

Alaska

On June 11, 2003, Alaska governor Frank Murkowski signed House Bill 102 into law (effective September 9, 2003), making Alaska the first state to rescind its requirement for a concealed carry permit. The bill eliminated the crime of simply carrying a concealed weapon by changing the definition of the crime. The section of law that describes the first instance of "misconduct involving weapons in the 5th degree" now requires that a person must either fail to inform a law enforcement officer of the weapon upon contact, fail to allow the law enforcement officer to secure the weapon (or to properly secure the weapon him/herself) upon contact, or if at another person's home, fail to obtain permission from a resident to have a concealed weapon on the premises. No permit is required to open carry or conceal carry for both residents and nonresidents. Open carry is 16+ and concealed carry is 21+.

Arizona

On April 16, 2010, Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed Senate Bill 1108 into law (effective July 29, 2010). The law eliminated the requirement to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona for those 21 and older who accurately answer a law enforcement officer if asked if carrying a concealed deadly weapon. The process to obtain a permit was left in place so that Arizona residents could still obtain permits in order to carry concealed in other states or to carry in a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol. The open carrying of firearms was already legal before the passage of the bill.

Arkansas

Prior to August 16, 2013, Arkansas law (§ 5-73-120) prohibited "...carrying a weapon...with a purpose to employ the handgun, knife, or club as a weapon against a person." Among other exceptions, Arkansas law allowed a defense to the charge of carrying of a weapon if "[t]he person is on a journey..." but did not define what constituted a "journey". Another defense permitted an individual to carry a concealed weapon if the person had a valid concealed weapons license. This provision was generally interpreted to prohibit open carry.

On August 16, 2013, Arkansas enacted Act 746. This act made two major changes. First, it statutorily defined a "journey" as "...travel beyond the county in which a person lives..." Because traveling on a journey is one of the defenses to § 5-73-120, a plain reading of the statute would indicate that the prohibition against carrying a weapon would now apply only to a person traveling within their home county. Second, it modified § 5-73-120 to prohibit "...carrying a weapon...with a purpose to attempt to unlawfully employ the handgun, knife, or club as a weapon against a person." Various firearms groups interpreted this provision to require that the state must now prove that a person actually intends to use a weapon to commit a crime; and without proving this intent, possession of weapons, whether openly or concealed, is now legal.

However, some confusion still existed. On July 8, 2013, Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel issued an opinion stating that Act 746 did not authorize open carry. On August 18, 2015, Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge issued a different opinion, saying that open carry of a weapon following Act 746's passage is now generally legal, provided that the person has no intent to unlawfully employ said weapon. Rutledge also opined that, while mere possession of a loaded handgun was formerly sufficient to establish "intent to employ" it as a weapon, such possession is now no longer sufficient to convict someone under § 5-73-120. Rather, the state must now additionally prove intent to unlawfully use the weapon. However, Rutledge also opined that concealed carry generally remains illegal without a permit. Because Act 746 did not remove or modify the other sections of Arkansas law pertaining to issuing concealed weapons permits, she concluded that possession of a concealed weapon without a permit could be construed as meeting the "unlawful purpose" requirement. However, various firearms groups disputed this opinion and argued that, because § 5-73-120 (and specifically subsection (a)) permits unlicensed open carry, the same legal logic would dictate that concealed carry without a permit would also be legal. Further adding to the confusion was the fact that Act 746 changed the list of § 5-73-120 exceptions, including possession while on a journey and possession of a concealed handgun with a concealed handgun permit, from a list of "affirmative defenses" to a list of "permissible circumstances". Rutledge noted in her opinion that such change could be construed as creating a "non-exhaustive list of circumstances under which it is permissible to carry a handgun," thereby permitting a person to assert additional circumstances not spelled out in the statute. She also noted that future legislation would be the best solution to clear up the confusion that Act 746 has caused.

On October 17, 2018, the Arkansas Court of Appeals issued a ruling that clarified that the mere carrying of a handgun is not a crime by itself absent a purpose to attempt to unlawfully employ the handgun as a weapon against a person, and any ambiguity would be found in favor of the defendant per the rule of lenity. This effectively ends the dispute on the legality of permitless carry in Arkansas and allows for the unlicensed open carry and concealed carry of a weapon for both residents and non-residents.

On April 12, 2023, Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed SB480 into law. The purpose of SB480 is "to clarify that a license to carry a concealed handgun is not required to carry a concealed handgun in" Arkansas.

Florida (concealed carry only)

On April 3, 2023, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed HB543 into law (effective July 1, 2023). Florida is the 26th state to pass a permitless concealed carry bill, allowing for people to carry handguns concealed without a permit. This law allows for both residents and non-residents 21 years of age or older to carry handguns, and other weapons including knives concealed, without a concealed carry permit. People may only conceal carry, as open carry of firearms is still illegal except for hunting, fishing, and camping, and going to and from these activities. Knives as weapons are legal to open carry. Lack of an open carry provision was a point of contention among gun rights supporters and groups, like Gun Owners of America, though open carry legalization is possible with future legislation.

Georgia

On April 12, 2022, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed SB319 into law which took effect immediately. While Georgia was the 25th state to pass a constitutional carry bill, Georgia is the 22nd state for constitutional permitless carry legislation to take effect. This law allows both residents and non-residents 21 years of age and older to carry handguns, long guns, and other weapons including knives, openly or concealed, in public, without a permit. The legislation also removed the residency requirement for out-of-state permit holders, allowing for both residents and non-residents alike to carry between the ages of 18 and 20 with any out-of-state carry permit.

Idaho

On March 28, 2016, Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed Senate Bill 1389 into law (effective July 1, 2016). This legislation created an exception for Idaho residents and non-resident active U.S. military members 21+ to carry concealed weapons within city limits without a concealed weapons license as long as they were eligible for such license. Concealed carry outside of city limits was already legal for those eligible for a weapons license 18+ along with open carry within city limits.

On April 2, 2019, Idaho Governor Bradley Little signed House Bill 206 into law (effective July 1, 2019) lowering the exception age to carry concealed weapons within city limits from 21 to 18.

On March 26, 2020, Idaho Governor Bradley Little signed House Bill 516 into law (effective July 1,2020) which expanded the exception to carry concealed weapons to any U.S. citizen or non-citizen active U.S. military members.

Indiana

On March 21, 2022, Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb signed HEA 1296 into law (effective July 1, 2022), making Indiana the 24th state to institute constitutional carry. HEA 1296 legalized both open and concealed carry without a permit for residents and non-residents 18+.

Iowa

On April 2, 2021, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed HF 756, 60–37 into law (effective July 1, 2021). Along with removing the requirement to obtain a carry permit for both residents and non-residents, this legislation also removed the requirement for a permit to carry a firearm openly within city limits, as previously one was allowed to carry openly without a permit outside of city limits. Allowing both open and concealed carry without a permit statewide.

Kansas

SB45 was introduced in the Kansas Senate in early 2015. The bill initially passed the Senate 31–7 on February 26. The bill was sent to the House, amended, and passed 85–39 on March 25. The Senate then concurred, passing the amended bill 31–8 (also on March 25). On April 2, the bill was signed by Governor Sam Brownback (effective July 1, 2015), establishing constitutional carry in Kansas. Can carry concealed at 21 years old or older and open carry at 18 years or older without a permit for both residents and nonresidents. Non-residents 18 to 20 may carry concealed but are still required to hold a valid concealed carry permit.

Kansas issues licenses to carry concealed handguns on a shall-issue basis. As of April 2015, over 87,000 current permits are issued. Kansas will continue to issue permits so that Kansas residents may carry in other states that accept Kansas concealed carry permits.

Kentucky

On February 14, 2019, the Kentucky Senate passed SB150 by a vote of 29–8. It then passed the Kentucky House of Representatives on March 1, 2019, by a vote of 60–37. On March 11, 2019, Governor Matt Bevin signed the bill into law (effective June 27, 2019). It allows residents and non-residents who are 21 years old or older who are otherwise able to lawfully possess a firearm, to carry concealed firearms (or any other weapon) without a permit. Residents and non-residents under 21 may open carry without a permit, or conceal carry if they are a non-resident and hold a valid out-of-state concealed carry permit. Open carry without a permit was already legal for residents and non-residents before passage of the bill and is guaranteed by the State Constitution.

Louisiana

On March 5, 2024, Louisiana governor Jeff Landry signed Senate Bill 1 into law which has been effective since July 4, 2024, making Louisiana the 28th state to pass legislation to allow permitless concealed carry. Specifically, this law allows adults 18+ to carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Open carry without a permit was already allowed for residents and non-residents 18+.

Maine

On July 8, 2015, Maine Governor Paul LePage signed LD 652 into law (effective October 15, 2015), creating an exception for those over the age of 21 who are not prohibited from possessing firearms to carry a handgun concealed without a permit. The open carry of handguns was legal without a permit before the passage of this act for those 18+.

Mississippi

In 2013, the Unlicensed Open Carry Bill was passed to clarify that no permit was needed to open carry at the age of 18+ for residents and non-residents, it was clarified by the Mississippi Supreme Court that the Right to Open Carry was guaranteed by the Mississippi State Constitution. As of July 1, 2015, the concealed carry law was amended to say "no license shall be required under this section for a loaded or unloaded pistol or revolver carried in a purse, handbag, satchel, other similar bag or briefcase or fully enclosed case." On April 15, 2016, the law was further expanded to include belt and shoulder holsters and sheaths. This effectively allows for constitutional carry in Mississippi for residents and nonresidents age 18+. However, some forms of concealed carrying would still require a permit (e.g. Mexican carry or concealed in an ankle holster).

Missouri

SB 656 allows for permitless concealed carry for anyone who may lawfully own a gun. The bill was passed by the legislature in 2016, but Governor Nixon vetoed it on June 27, 2016. The legislature reconvened for the veto-override session on September 14, 2016. The Senate voted to override the veto with a 24–6 vote (23 required) and the House followed through shortly thereafter with a 112–41 vote (109 required). No permit is needed for open carry or concealed carry and applies to both residents and nonresidents. While no permit is required for either form of carrying, only concealed carry falls fully under state-preemption. Therefore, unlicensed open carry can still be restricted by local city ordinances unless one possesses a concealed carry permit, thus exempting them from local open carry restrictions. The law went into effect on January 1, 2017.

Montana

On February 18, 2021, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte signed HB 102 into law, which allows residents and nonresidents 18 or older to concealed carry a firearm throughout the state without a permit. Open carry without a permit was already legal for residents and non-residents. HB 102 also removed a number of Montana's "gun-free" zones, which previously prohibited carrying a firearm in select locations throughout the state. HB 102 takes effect immediately, save one provision altering the law on carrying a handgun on college and university grounds, which will go into effect June 1, 2021. This law makes Montana the 18th state to allow permitless carry of a firearm for anyone 18+. Previously, permitless concealed carry was allowed if a person was outside the official boundaries of a city or town or the confines of a logging, lumbering, mining, or railroad camp or who is lawfully engaged in hunting, fishing, trapping, camping, hiking, backpacking, farming, ranching, or other outdoor activity in which weapons are often carried for recreation or protection.

Previously, HB 271 was introduced in 2011 to allow constitutional carry. The bill passed the House with a vote of 55–45 and passed the Senate with a vote of 29–21. It was vetoed by then-Governor Brian Schweitzer on May 10, 2011, and was unable to gather the necessary two-thirds majority to overturn the veto.

HB 298 was introduced in the 2015 legislative session, which would have legalized firearms carry statewide for all persons who are not prohibited from possessing a firearm. The bill passed the House 56-43 and the Senate 28-21 but was later vetoed by Governor Steve Bullock.

Nebraska

On April 25, 2023, Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen signed LB77 into law which took effect on September 2, 2023, 90 days after the June 9, 2023, last legislative session day. Nebraska is the 27th state to pass a constitutional carry bill, allowing for people to carry handguns without a permit both openly or concealed. This bill also gives Nebraska complete firearm preemption so cities like Omaha and Lincoln can no longer have local ordinances against open carry or anything else relating to firearms.

LB77 did not remove the requirement under Nebraska law that a person generally may not acquire (purchase, lease, rent, or receive transfer of) a handgun from anyone other than their close relatives (spouse, sibling, parent, child, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or grandparent) without first obtaining either (1) a certificate from their chief of police or sheriff of their place of residence, or (2) a Nebraska concealed handgun permit. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 69-2403.

New Hampshire

In early 2017, several senators and representatives introduced New Hampshire Senate Bill 12, which proposed removing the requirement for a license to carry a loaded concealed handgun. The bill also proposed extending the minimum license period from four years to five years, removing the discretionary "suitable person" language from the Pistol/Revolver License law, and directing the state police to pursue reciprocity agreements. On January 19, it was passed by the New Hampshire Senate by a vote of 13–10. Governor Chris Sununu, who took office in January 2017, expressed support for this bill after the Senate vote, stating, "I am pleased that the State Senate today voted to advance common-sense legislation in support of a citizen’s fundamental right to carry a firearm, joining neighboring states throughout the region and across the country." On February 9, it was passed by the New Hampshire House by a vote of 200–97. Governor Sununu signed the bill into law on February 22, 2017, and it became effective immediately. Thus, no permit is required for open carry or concealed carry of handguns; and this applies to both residents and nonresidents 18+.

Previously, carrying a concealed handgun unloaded was legal without a license. A New Hampshire Supreme Court decision in 2013 clarified that the law did not prohibit carrying a concealed handgun if it is unloaded (no round is chambered).

North Dakota (concealed carry only)

On March 23, 2017, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum signed House Bill 1169 (effective August 1, 2017). Under its provisions, people carrying concealed without a concealed weapons license will need to carry a form of state-issued photo ID, must inform police about their handgun upon contact, and must not otherwise be prohibited from possessing a firearm by law. Minimum age is 18. Carrying in a vehicle was originally thought of as requiring a permit, but Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem issued an opinion interpreting the law as allowing for constitutional carry within vehicles. This was codified in 2019. Both residents and non-residents still need a permit to open carry. On April 12, 2023, Governor Burgum signed HB 1339, which will take effect August 1, 2023, to extend permitless carry to residents of other states.

Ohio

On March 14, 2022, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed Senate Bill 215 (effective June 13, 2022). Under its provisions, any person 21+ (both residents and nonresidents) who meets the definition of a "qualifying adult" under O.R.C. 2923.111, may carry a concealed handgun, as well as carry a loaded handgun in a motor vehicle openly or concealed without a permit. Residents and non-residents under 21 may still open carry, but require a valid concealed handgun license issued by another U.S. jurisdiction to conceal carry. Open carry without a permit was already legal for residents and non-residents.

Oklahoma

On February 27, 2019, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed House Bill 2597 (effective November 1, 2019), which will allow both residents and non-residents 21+ (or 18+ and in the military) to open or concealed carry without a permit. Oklahoma's existing reciprocity also recognizes any concealed carry license issued both as resident and non-resident as well as the permitless carry of other states, so if one is a non-resident and 18+ and their state allows open carry or concealed carry without a permit, they may carry in that fashion so long as they have valid ID proving they are a resident of that state.

South Carolina

On March 7, 2024, Governor Henry McMaster signed House Bill 3594 into law allowing both open and concealed carry of weapons without a permit for resident and non-resident adults 18+. This law immediately takes effect, making South Carolina the 29th state to enact constitutional carry.

South Dakota

On January 22, 2019, the South Dakota Senate passed SB 47 by a vote of 23–11. It then passed the House of Representatives on January 29, 2019, by a vote of 47–23. Governor Kristi Noem signed SB 47 on January 31, 2019 (effective July 1, 2019). This change in the law removes the requirement of a permit to concealed carry a handgun for residents and nonresidents 18+. Open carry was already legal without a permit for residents and non-residents.

Tennessee (handguns only)

On April 8, 2021, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed Senate Bill 765 (effective July 1, 2021), making Tennessee the 20th state to institute constitutional carry, eliminating the requirement to obtain a carry permit for both open and concealed carrying of handguns by any unprohibited person, resident or non-resident. It does not apply to long guns, a point of contention among gun rights activists. A carry permit is still required to carry a handgun in buildings posted with "concealed firearms by permit only", state/national parks, campgrounds, greenways and nature trails.

On March 23, 2023, a federal judge approved an agreed upon settlement in the case of Beeler v. Long lowering the legal age to carry a handgun and apply for a carry permit from 21 to 18. Making 18 the effective age to carry in Tennessee under constitutional carry.

Texas

On June 16, 2021, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the Firearm Carry Act of 2021 into law. The bill took effect on September 1, 2021. The law decriminalized the carrying of a handgun generally in public without a license, openly or concealed, for both residents and non-residents who are legally able to possess a handgun and have not been convicted in the last five years of misdemeanor bodily assault causing injury, deadly conduct, terroristic threat, or disorderly conduct (display or discharge) of a firearm. Open carry requires a holster. Carrying long guns without a license was already legal. The law originally only allowed those 21 or older to qualify, but the case of Andrews v. McCraw, 623 F.Supp.3d 740 (N.D. Tex. 2022) effectively lowered the age to 18.

Utah

On February 12, 2021, 2021 Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed HB60 into law (effective May 5, 2021) making Utah the 18th state to institute constitutional carry. It allows for permitless carry, both openly and concealed, for adults over the age of 21. Those ages 18–20 can carry concealed with a provisional permit, any out-of-state permit or open carry if carrying unloaded – two actions away from firing.

Previously, in 2013, HB76 was passed by a two-thirds majority in both the state House and the state Senate, but Governor Gary Herbert subsequently vetoed the bill, stating that the existing gun laws did not restrict one's ability to acquire a concealed carry permit, and "we're not the wild and woolly west." Other attempts had been made to renew the efforts, but had failed because then-Governor Herbert had stated he would veto the effort.

Vermont

For many decades, the only state to allow "constitutional carry" of a handgun (i.e., without any government permit) was Vermont. From the formation of the 13 original states, "constitutional carry" was the law in all states until the 19th century. By the 20th century, all states except Vermont had enacted concealed carry bans, with the exemption in most states for those citizens with a permit. Due to wording in its state constitution and decisions made by the state courts, Vermont has never been able to have a restriction on the method of how one could carry a firearm, and thus, in this regard, Vermont stood entirely separate from the rest of the United States for quite some time. No permit is required (or offered) for open carry and concealed carry, and this applies to both residents and nonresidents 16+ who can legally own a firearm. Because of this, constitutional carry is still sometimes referred to as "Vermont carry".

West Virginia

HB 4145 was passed by the West Virginia House on February 8, 2016, and Senate on February 22, 2016, but vetoed by Governor Earl Ray Tomblin on March 3, 2016. The House then voted to override the veto on March 4, 2016, and the Senate voted to override on March 5, 2016. The law took effect on May 24, 2016, making West Virginia the 9th state to implement constitutional carry. The law allows law-abiding citizens and legal residents 21+ to carry concealed without a license. No license was required to open carry for residents and nonresidents 18+. Residents and nonresidents may carry concealed if between 18 and 21 with a recognized or provisional license.

Wyoming

On March 2, 2011, Wyoming Governor Matt Mead signed SF0047 into law (effective July 1, 2011) making Wyoming the 3rd state to institute constitutional carry, eliminating the requirement that Wyoming residents obtain a permit in order to carry a concealed pistol in the state. On April 6, 2021, Governor Mark Gordon signed a bill allowing constitutional carry for residents of other states, effective July 1, 2021. Under the latter law, United States citizens and lawful permanent residents age 21 or older may carry concealed without a permit. Those under 21 must have a valid concealed carry permit from a jurisdiction that Wyoming recognizes if they wish to carry concealed in the state. Open carry has always been legal for residents and non-residents without a permit in Wyoming.

U.S. states with only permitless open carry

Main article: Open carry in the United States

Open carry of handguns in the United States

Open carry of long guns in the United States

  Legal with no permit/license required

  Legal with no permit/license required; possible local restrictions

  Legal with permit/license

  Anomalous

  Illegal

Most U.S. states have historically only regulated the concealed carrying of weapons while leaving the open carrying of legal weapons largely unregulated. The states of Colorado, Delaware, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin allow for the unlicensed carrying of handguns openly while still requiring a permit for concealed carry. Since these states do not allow for permitless concealed carry they are not considered full constitutional carry states.

Colorado

Colorado does not regulate the unlicensed open carry of firearms at a state level for those 18+. In 2021, the Colorado General Assembly removed the state's preemption of firearm laws, allowing local jurisdictions to regulate the open carrying of firearms. Colorado also considers one's vehicle an extension of their home, and therefore does not require a permit to carry concealed in a private automobile or some other private means of conveyance.

Delaware

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in Delaware for those 18+. In 2014, the Delaware Supreme Court made a ruling that recognized open carry as a long standing fundamental right, and could only be prohibited by local ordinances in effect prior to July 4, 1985. The city of Dover formerly required a permit from the police chief for a state concealed permit to open carry, but this was repealed in October 2015 in accordance with the ruling.

Louisiana

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in Louisiana for those 17+, except in local jurisdictions with ordinances regulating open carry passed before July 15, 1985.

As of August 1, 2022, constitutional carry is legal for active duty military and veterans only.

Michigan

Open carry of a handgun registered to its owner without a permit is generally permitted in Michigan for Michigan residents 18+. A permit is still required to carry in a vehicle.

Nevada

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in Nevada for those 18+. For open carry in a vehicle, the firearm may be anywhere except concealed upon the person without a permit.

New Mexico

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in New Mexico anyone 19+.

North Carolina

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in North Carolina for those 18+. The preemption laws do not fully encompass open carry, and some municipalities have banned it on town property.

Oregon

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted under Oregon state law for 18+. However, Oregon law allows a city or county to regulate open carry of loaded firearms in public places, with holders of concealed carry permits being exempt. (ORS 166.173) The cities of Portland, Beaverton, Tigard, Oregon City, Salem, and Independence, as well as Multnomah County, have statutes that do not allow open carry of loaded firearms (unless one has a concealed carry permit).

Pennsylvania

Open carry is generally legal under Pennsylvania state law for those 18+. However, exceptions are made for Philadelphia as a “City of the First Class”, in a vehicle, or during a declared state of emergency unless one has a carry permit. On May 31, 2019, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ruled that carrying a firearm is not reasonable suspicion to detain someone.

Virginia

Open carry is generally allowed in Virginia without a permit for people 18 years of age and older. The following cities and counties have exceptions that disallow the open carry of a loaded semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by the action of an explosion of a combustible material and is equipped at the time of the offense with a magazine that will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition or designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock or shotguns equipped with a magazine that holds more than 7 rounds: the Cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Fairfax, Falls Church, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, and Virginia Beach and in the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Henrico, Loudoun, and Prince William. These restrictions do not apply to valid concealed carry permit holders.

Washington

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in Washington without a permit for those 18+. Open carry of a loaded handgun in a vehicle is legal only with a concealed pistol license.

Wisconsin

Open carry without a permit is generally permitted in Wisconsin for those 18+. A permit is required while open carrying a loaded handgun in a vehicle since the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that carrying a loaded handgun "within reach" constitutes carrying as per the Concealed Carry Act.

U.S. states that have a limited form of permitless concealed carry

Certain states may have a limited form of permitless carry, restricted based on one or more of the following: a person's location, the loaded/unloaded state of the firearm, or the specific persons who may carry without a permit. As of July 3, 2021, three of these states are Illinois, New Mexico, and Washington.

Illinois (Non-resident, Unloaded and fully enclosed weapon)

In 1996, the Fourth District Illinois Appellate Court ruled that an unloaded handgun carried in a purse did not meet the definition of unlawful use of a weapon per se due to being fully enclosed and possessed in conjunction with a FOID card of an Illinois resident. Following this ruling, a movement started in the early 2000s dubbed Fanny Pack Carry, where proponents carried unloaded handguns in fanny packs to protest the state's outright ban on carrying loaded firearms. This resulted in several arrests, but ultimately every criminal prosecution failed and resulted in one successful wrongful arrest lawsuit.

In 2009 the Supreme Court of Illinois ruled that any object that fully encloses a handgun and fastens closed in any form or manner legally constitutes a "case" per se under Illinois Law.

Following this in 2011 before the passage of Conceal Carry in Illinois, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources published a brochure which stated that to transport a firearm on one's person, one only has to meet three conditions:

1. Unloaded
2. Enclosed in a case
3. Possessed in conjunction with an Illinois FOID.

The Illinois State Police reaffirmed this in a 2012 brochure that states that a person may have a firearm upon their person as long as it's unloaded and enclosed in a case.

Non-residents of Illinois are specifically exempted from the requirement to have a FOID Card while carrying an unloaded firearm enclosed in a case.

New Mexico (unloaded weapon)

Under New Mexico law, no permit is required for concealed carry when the handgun is both unloaded and concealed. It is also legal to carry a loaded handgun while in a private vehicle.

Washington (outdoor recreational activities)

Washington allows for concealed carry without a permit when a person is hiking, hunting, fishing, camping, horseback riding, or performing some other lawful outdoor recreational activity, so long as it is reasonable to assume that they are performing that activity or traveling to or from the activity.

Ages to carry without a permit

State	Open	Concealed
Alabama	18	18
Alaska	16	21
Arizona	18	21
Arkansas	18	18
Florida	N/A	21**
Georgia	21**	21**
Idaho	18	18
Iowa	18	21
Indiana	18	18
Kansas	18	21**
Kentucky	18	21
Louisiana	17	18
Maine	18*	21**
Mississippi	18	18
Missouri	18	18
Montana	18	18
Nebraska	18	21
New Hampshire	18*	18*
North Dakota	N/A	18
Ohio	18*	21
Oklahoma	21****	21****
South Carolina	18	18
South Dakota	18	18
Tennessee	18***	18***
Texas	18***	18***
Utah	18*	21
Vermont	16	16
West Virginia	18	21**
Wyoming	18*	21

* Jurisdiction gives no minimum age to carry. Age set at 18 by federal law.

** May carry at age 18 if active or honorably discharged member of the U.S. military.

*** Age to carry set at 18 by federal court order.

**** Non-residents of Oklahoma from states that allow permitless carry under the age of 21 are allowed to carry without a permit in Oklahoma at the age permitted by their state of residence for permitless carry.

See also

• Concealed carry in the United States
• Gun laws in the United States (federal)
• Gun laws in the United States (by state)
• Open carry in the United States

References

Some states have a limited form of permitless carry, restricted based on one or more of the following: a person's location, the loaded/unloaded state of the firearm, or the specific persons who may carry without a permit. As of February 18, 2021, these states are Illinois, New Mexico, and Washington.

Shall-issue

A shall-issue jurisdiction is one that requires a license to carry a concealed handgun, but where the granting of such licenses is subject only to meeting determinate criteria laid out in the law; the granting authority has no discretion in the awarding of the licenses, and there is no requirement of the applicant to demonstrate "good cause". The laws in a Shall-Issue jurisdiction typically state that a granting authority shall issue a license if the criteria are met, as opposed to laws in which the authority may issue a license at their discretion.

Typical license requirements include residency, minimum age, submitting fingerprints, passing a computerized instant background check (or a more comprehensive manual background check), attending a certified handgun/firearm safety class, passing a practical qualification demonstrating handgun proficiency, and paying a required fee. These requirements vary widely by jurisdiction, with some having few or none of these and others having most or all.

The following are shall-issue states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island (for permits issued by local authorities), South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. The territory of Guam is also shall-issue with the passage of Bill 296 and Puerto Rico as of 2020.

Certain states and jurisdictions, while "may-issue" by law, direct their issuing authorities to issue licenses to all or nearly all qualified applicants, and as such they are considered "shall-issue" in practice. Connecticut, Delaware, and certain cities and counties in California, Massachusetts, and New York are examples.

Connecticut law specifies that CCW licenses be granted on a may-issue basis, but the state's courts have established that issuing authorities must grant CCW licenses on a shall-issue basis for applicants who meet all statutory qualifications, as unlike other may-issue states Connecticut law does not contain a requirement for the applicant to show "necessary and proper reason" for obtaining a license.

Shall-issue with limited discretion is a subset of shall-issue licensing that borders between pure shall-issue and may-issue policy, where an issuing authority has a limited degree of discretion to deny applicants a concealed carry permit based either on the applicant's suitability or reason for requesting a permit, even after the applicant has completed any required training and passed a background check. In states with such licensing practices, the issuing authority would be required to demonstrate with substantiating evidence, that the applicant is either not suitable or lacks appropriate need for the permit. Most denials in such states are typically reversed upon appeal provided the applicant has passed a background check and fulfilled any training requirements for the permit. States with shall-issue laws that allow a limited degree of discretion include Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. Although may-issue by statute, Connecticut also falls into this subset, in practice.

Some shall-issue jurisdictions allow for automatic renewal of concealed carry permits, as long as the permit-holder files the renewal application before the permit expires (or in some states, a short grace period following expiration of the original permit). Other jurisdictions require a permit-holder to complete refresher training in firearms safety and undergo a criminal background check before applying for renewal. Some jurisdictions periodically run permit holders' IDs through the NICS background check system. Other jurisdictions require a judge to suspend a permit if the holder is arrested for certain offenses (return/revocation of the permit depending on later disposition of the case).

May-issue

A may-issue jurisdiction is one that requires a permit to carry a concealed handgun, and where the granting of such permits is partially at the discretion of local authorities (frequently the sheriff's department or police), with a few states consolidating this discretionary power under state-level law enforcement. Moreover, issuing authorities in most may-issue jurisdictions are not required to provide a substantive reason for the denial of a concealed carry permit. Some may-issue jurisdictions may provide administrative and legal avenues for an applicant to appeal a permit denial, while others do not.

The law typically states that a granting authority "may issue" a permit if various criteria are met, or that the permit applicant must have "good cause" (or similar) to carry a concealed weapon. In most such situations, self-defense in and of itself often does not satisfy the "good cause" requirement, and issuing authorities in some may-issue jurisdictions have been known to arbitrarily deny applications for CCW permits without providing the applicant with any substantive reason for the denial. Some may-issue jurisdictions require a permit-holder to provide justification for continued need for a concealed carry permit upon renewal, and may deny the renewal of an expiring permit without sufficient showing of "good cause." Some of these jurisdictions may revoke a permit after it has been issued when the issuing authority in its discretion has determined that the "good cause" used in approving the permit application no longer exists. Other may-issue jurisdictions allow for automatic renewal of the permit, as long as the permit-holder completes any required firearms safety training and files the renewal application before the permit expires. Some may-issue jurisdictions give issuing authorities discretion in granting concealed carry permits based on an applicant's suitability (e.g., moral character) by requiring the applicant to submit evidence (resume/curriculum vitae, letters of reference, credit history, mental health evaluation, etc.) showing the applicant is of suitable character to be issued a permit.

When distinguishing between shall-issue and may-issue, that distinction may not necessarily be explicitly apparent in the exact letter of the law. Rather, a more accurate determinant as to whether a state is shall-issue versus may-issue is whether or not the applicant is required to show "good cause" when applying for a permit. Court precedent also plays an important role in determining whether a state is may-issue or shall-issue without regard to the verbiage in state law. For example, New York is a may-issue state, even though its concealed carry licensing laws includes the words "shall issue," because New York law requires applicants to show "good cause" when applying for a concealed carry permit. Since "good cause" is highly subjective, issuing authorities in New York have wide discretion in determining what constitutes "good cause," and the ability for an ordinary citizen to obtain a concealed carry permit varies widely throughout the state. In contrast, the pistol permit law in neighboring Connecticut contains the words "may issue," despite Connecticut effectively being a shall-issue state. This is because Connecticut's pistol permit law does not require the applicant to show "good cause" to the issuing authority when applying for a pistol permit. Because Connecticut's permitting law lacks a subjective "good cause" standard, that state's courts have repeatedly and consistently ruled that issuing authorities must issue pistol permits to applicants who meet the state's statutory qualifications for a pistol permit.

May-issue can be compared to shall-issue where in a may-issue jurisdiction, the burden of proof for justifying the need for a permit rests with the applicant, whereas in a shall-issue jurisdiction the burden of proof to justify denying a permit rests with the issuing authority.

The following states are may-issue by law: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island.

A state that is de jure a may-issue jurisdiction may range anywhere from shall-issue to no-issue in practice, i.e., permissive may-issue to restrictive may-issue, based on each licensing authority's willingness to issue permits to applicants:

• Connecticut and Delaware are regarded as permissive may-issue states, where either governmental policy or court precedence direct issuing authorities to approve applications that meet all non-discretionary criteria.
• Hawaii and New Jersey are considered restrictive may-issue jurisdictions, where issuing authorities are directed to deny most or all applications, either based on hard-to-meet "good cause" requirements or agency policies specifically prohibiting issue. Both states require the applicant provide substantive evidence of a clear and immediate threat on their lives that exists outside of their home that cannot be mitigated by any other means beside the issuance of a concealed carry permit at the time the permit application is filed. Given this standard, one would have to demonstrate extraordinary measures (e.g., moving to a different location within the state, or moving out of the state) have been exhausted and the threat still exists before a permit would be granted. In practice, only individuals with political connections are issued permits.
• Maryland is moderately restrictive, where applicants have to demonstrate a threat to their life and safety that is above the general threat of victimization faced by the general populace, or for those engaged in lawful business involving large sums of money or valuables. A police report documenting for example, a recent assault, carjacking, robbery, or burglary (particularly when the suspect remains at-large) have generally been accepted as "good cause" for the issuance of a carry permit.
• California, Massachusetts, and New York vary within state, as the criteria for what constitutes "good cause" is defined at the local level. Issuing authorities in inland California, rural portions of Massachusetts, and Upstate New York generally accept self-defense without evidence of a specific threat as "good cause" and will grant permits to the vast majority of applicants who pass a background check and complete the required firearms safety training. Meanwhile, concealed carry permits are virtually impossible to obtain by ordinary citizens in urban areas, such as New York City, Long Island, Boston, and San Francisco metropolitan areas. In these locations, the definition of "good cause" is generally limited to specific and immediate threats on an applicant's life that cannot be mitigated by any other means. There are also "moderately restrictive" local jurisdictions in these states where the local "good cause" definitions may be more restrictive than locales that practice shall-issue licensing, but less restrictive than those counties or municipalities that rarely or never issue permits.
• Rhode Island state law is two-tier; local authorities are directed by state law and court precedent (Archer v McGarry) to practice shall-issue permitting policy, but the Attorney General's office has discretionary authority over permits issued by its office. The permits issued by both the local authorities and the Attorney General are valid statewide, but the Attorney General issued permit is the only one that specifically allows for open carry. Some local jurisdictions, at the recommendation of the Attorney General, still refer all applicants to the Attorney General's office and the "may-issue" state-level system in violation of Archer. The Attorney General and some local authorities further require applicants for the Rhode Island permit to submit to a mental health records check at the applicant's expense.

In some may-issue jurisdictions, permits are only issued to individuals with celebrity status, have political connections, or have a high degree of wealth, resulting in accusations of systematic corruption in how CCW permit applications are adjudicated in some such jurisdictions. Additionally, issuing authorities charge arbitrarily defined fees that go well beyond the basic processing fee for a CCW permit, thereby making the CCW permit unaffordable to most applicants. For example, applying for a New York City concealed carry permit typically costs around $5,000 when the filing fee and other administrative fees are combined. Most May-Issue states also have a burdensome bureaucratic application process that would be difficult for the ordinary applicant to navigate, leading to many applicants having to hire "expediters" at exorbitant expense to push the permit application through the bureaucratic process, often through bribery and other "favors." In many cases these "expediters" are individuals who formerly worked in the offices that processed permit applications and issued permits, leading to systemic corruption in the issuance of permits.

In recent cases challenging restrictive discretionary issue laws, federal district and appeals courts have generally applied intermediate scrutiny to these and other Second Amendment related cases, where the courts recognize that restrictive concealed carry laws "infringe on an individual's right to keep and bear arms," but also recognizes that such infringement is permitted to further "an important government interest in public safety." Any and all other Rights that are described as "individual" and "fundamental" by the SCOTUS require a "strict scrutiny" standard as shown in prior decisions involving fully applicable incorporation cases. In Maryland, Woollard v. Sheridan, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland decided in favor of a Maryland resident who was denied a permit renewal due to lack of "good cause" in accordance with Maryland law. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed, holding the "good cause" requirement met the standard of intermediate scrutiny applicable to restrictions on the right to carry arms outside the home, and reinstated the "good cause" requirement on March 21, 2013. The plaintiffs in the case filed a petition for certiorari in the United States Supreme Court; the court denied certiorari without comment on October 15. New York's similar "good cause" requirement was also under challenge in Kachalsky v. Cacase. However, certiorari before SCOTUS was denied on April 15, 2013. Drake v. Filko, involving several plaintiffs (including one kidnap victim) denied permits under New Jersey's permitting system; the suit challenged New Jersey's "justifiable need" requirement for obtaining a carry permit. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the lower court's judgment holding the requirement constitutional, holding (much like the 4th Circuit in Woollard and the 2nd Circuit in Kachalsky) that the New Jersey statute survived intermediate scrutiny. The common theme from Courts of Appeals rulings upholding may-issue laws is that state or local policies in limiting who is granted permits to carry firearms in public "furthers an important government interest in public safety," by which state legislatures enact laws making licensed concealed carry available but establish criteria to limit the number of concealed carry permit-holders to as few as practicable to pass constitutional muster. The courts have opined that these laws survive intermediate scrutiny on that basis. However, all other "fundamental" and "individual" Rights are subjected to a "strict scrutiny" standard, see, Duncan, 391 U.S. at 149, and n. 15, supra., "A right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States."

No-issue

A no-issue jurisdiction is one that – with very limited exceptions – does not allow any private citizen to carry a concealed handgun in public. The term refers to the fact that no concealed carry permits will be issued (or recognized). Since July 2013, with the legalization of concealed carry in Illinois, there are presently no no-issue states per se; with the territories of American Samoa and Northern Mariana Islands being the only U.S. jurisdictions that completely prohibit concealed carry.

While technically may-issue under state law, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, and certain cities and counties within California, Massachusetts, and New York are no-issue jurisdictions in practice, with governmental policy directing officials with discretionary power to rarely or never issue licenses. Additionally, the United States insular territory U.S. Virgin Islands is no-issue jurisdictions in practice. Most no-issue jurisdictions have exceptions to their laws that permit open or concealed carry by active and retired law enforcement officials, armed security personnel while on duty and in uniform, and for members of the Armed Forces.

Concealed carry on U.S. military installations

While members of the Armed Services may receive extensive small arms training, United States Military installations have some of the most restrictive rules for the possession, transport, and carrying of personally-owned firearms in the country.

Overall authority for carrying a personally-owned firearm on a military installation rests with the installation commander, although the authority to permit individuals to carry firearms on an installation is usually delegated to the Provost Marshal. Military installations do not recognize state-issued concealed carry permits, and state firearms laws generally do not apply to military bases, regardless of the state in which the installation is located. Federal law (18 USC, Section 930) generally forbids the possession, transport, and carrying of firearms on military installations without approval from the installation commander. Federal law gives installation commanders wide discretion in establishing firearms policies for their respective installations. In practice, local discretion is often constrained by policies and directives from the headquarters of each military branch and major commands.

Installation policies can vary from no-issue for most bases to shall-issue in rare circumstances. Installations that do allow the carrying of firearms typically restrict carrying to designated areas and for specific purposes (i.e., hunting or officially sanctioned shooting competitions in approved locations on the installation). Installation commanders may require the applicant complete extensive firearms safety training, undergo a mental health evaluation, and obtain a letter of recommendation from his or her unit commander (or employer) before such authorization is granted. Personnel that reside on a military installation are typically required to store their personally-owned firearms in the installation armory, although the installation commander or provost marshal may permit a servicemember to store his or her personal firearms in their on-base dwelling if he or she has a gun safe or similarly designed cabinet where the firearms can be secured.

Prior to 2011, military commanders could impose firearms restrictions to servicemembers residing off-base, such as mandatory registration of firearms with the base Provost Marshal, restricting or banning the carrying of firearms by servicemembers either on or off the installation regardless of whether the member had a state permit to carry, and requiring servicemembers to have a gun safe or similar container to secure firearms when not in use. A provision was included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 that limited commanders' authority to impose restrictions on the possession and use of personally-owned firearms by servicemembers who reside off-base.

Concealed carry on Native American Reservations

Concealed carry policies on Native American reservations are covered by the tribal laws for each reservation, which vary widely from "No-Issue" to "Shall-Issue" and "Unrestricted" either in law or in practice. Some Native American tribes recognize concealed carry permits for the state(s) in which the reservation is located, while others do not. For reservations that do not recognize state-issued concealed carry permits, some completely ban concealed carry, while others offer a tribal permit for concealed carry issued by the tribal police or tribal council. Tribal concealed carry permits may be available to the general populace or limited to tribal members, depending on tribal policies. Tribal law typically pre-empts state law on the reservation. The only exception is while traversing the reservation on a state-owned highway (including interstate, U.S. routes, and in some instances county roads), in which case state law and the federal Firearm Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) apply.

Limitations on concealed carry

Prohibitions of the concealed carry of firearms and other weapons by local governments predate the establishment of the United States. In 1686, New Jersey law stated “no person or persons … shall presume privately to wear any pocket pistol … or other unusual or unlawful weapons within this Province.” After the federal government was established, states and localities continued to restrict people from carrying hidden weapons. Tennessee law prohibited this as early as 1821. By 1837, Georgia passed into effect “An Act to guard and protect the citizens of this State, against the unwarrantable and too prevalent use of deadly weapons.” Two years later, Alabama followed suit with “An Act to Suppress the Evil Practice of Carrying Weapons Secretly.” Delaware prohibited the practice in 1852. Ohio did the same in 1859, a policy that remained in effect until 1974. Cities also regulated weapons within their boundaries. In 1881, Tombstone, Arizona enacted Ordinance No. 9 "To Provide against Carrying of Deadly Weapons," a regulation that sparked the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral later that year.

Most may-issue jurisdictions, and some shall-issue jurisdictions allow issuing authorities to impose limitations on CCW permits, such as the type and caliber of handguns that may be carried (Massachusetts, New Mexico), restrictions on places where the permit is valid (New York, Rhode Island, Illinois), restricting concealed carry to purposes or activities specified on the approved permit application (California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York), limitations on magazine size (Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York), or limitations on the number of firearms that may be carried concealed by a permit-holder at any given time (some states). Permits issued by all but two states (New York and Hawaii) are valid statewide. New York State pistol licenses, which are generally issued by counties, are valid statewide with one exception. A permit not issued by New York City is invalid in that city, unless validated by its police commissioner. Permits issued by Hawaii are valid only in the county of issuance.

Training requirements

Some states require concealed carry applicants to certify their proficiency with a firearm through some type of training or instruction. Certain training courses developed by the National Rifle Association that combine classroom and live-fire instruction typically meet most state training requirements. Some states recognize prior military or police service as meeting training requirements.

Classroom instruction would typically include firearm mechanics and terminology, cleaning and maintenance of a firearm, concealed carry legislation and limitations, liability issues, carry methods and safety, home defense, methods for managing and defusing confrontational situations, and practice of gun handling techniques without firing the weapon. Most required CCW training courses devote a considerable amount of time to liability issues.

Depending on the state, a practical component during which the attendee shoots the weapon for the purpose of demonstrating safety and proficiency, may be required. During range instruction, applicants would typically learn and demonstrate safe handling and operation of a firearm and accurate shooting from common self-defense distances. Some states require a certain proficiency to receive a passing grade, whereas other states (e.g., Florida) technically require only a single-shot be fired to demonstrate handgun handling proficiency.

CCW training courses are typically completed in a single day and are good for a set period, the exact duration varying by state. Some states require re-training, sometimes in a shorter, simpler format, for each renewal.

A few states, e.g., South Carolina, recognize the safety and use-of-force training given to military personnel as acceptable in lieu of formal civilian training certification. Such states will ask for a military ID (South Carolina) for active persons or DD214 for honorably discharged persons. These few states will commonly request a copy of the applicant's BTR (Basic Training Record) proving an up-to-date pistol qualification. Active and retired law enforcement officers are generally exempt from qualification requirements, due to a federal statute permitting qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons in the United States.

Virginia recognizes eight specific training options to prove competency in handgun handling, ranging from DD214 for honorably discharged military veterans, to certification from law enforcement training, to firearms training conducted by a state or NRA certified firearms instructor including electronic, video, or on-line courses. While any one of the eight listed options will be considered adequate proof, individual circuit courts may recognize other training options. A small number of states, such as Alabama and Georgia, have no training requirements to obtain a permit—only a requirement that the applicant successfully pass the required background check before issuance.

Reciprocity

Level of permit reciprocity (recognition of out-of-state permits)

  Full reciprocity

  Full reciprocity for resident permits

  Vehicle carry only

  Partial reciprocity

  No reciprocity

CCW Reciprocity

Many jurisdictions recognize (honor) a permit or license issued by other jurisdictions. Recognition may be granted to all jurisdictions or some subset which meets a set of permit-issuing criteria, such as training comparable to the honoring jurisdiction or certain background checks. Several states have entered into formal agreements to mutually recognize permits. This arrangement is commonly called reciprocity or mutual recognition. A few states do not recognize permits issued by any other jurisdiction, but offer non-resident permits for out-of-state individuals (who possess a valid concealed carry permit from their home state) who wish to carry while visiting such states. There are also states that neither recognize out-of-state concealed carry permits nor issue permits to non-residents, resulting in a complete ban on concealed carry by non-residents in such states. There are also states that do not recognize out-of-state permits for carry on-foot, but do permit individuals with out-of-state concealed carry permits to carry while traveling in their vehicle (normally in accordance with the rules of the state of issuance).

Recognition and reciprocity of concealed carry privileges varies. Some states (e.g. Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio) unilaterally recognize all permits. Others such as Michigan, limit such universal recognition to residents of the permit-issuing state. While 37 states have reciprocity agreements with at least one other state and several states honor all out-of-state concealed carry permits, some states have special requirements like training courses or safety exams, and therefore do not honor permits from states that do not have such requirements for issue. Some states make exceptions for persons under the minimum age (usually 21) if they are active or honorably-discharged members of the military or a police force (the second of these two is subject additionally to federal law). States that do not have this exemption generally do not recognize any license from states that do. An example of this is the state of Washington's refusal to honor any Texas LTC as Texas has the military exception to age. Idaho, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Tennessee have standard and enhanced permits that have different requirements to obtain and also have unique reciprocity with different states; Utah and West Virginia have provisional permits for 18-20 year olds with more limited recognition by other states.

Permits from Idaho (enhanced), Kansas, Michigan, and North Dakota (class 1) have the highest number of recognition by other states (39 states). One can obtain multiple state permits in an effort to increase the number of states where that user can carry a legally concealed weapon. It is common practice to use a CCW Reciprocity Map to gain clarity on which states will honor the person's combination of resident and non-resident permits given the variety of standards and legal policies from state to state. There are also various mobile applications that guide users in researching state concealed carry permit reciprocity.

Although carry may be legal under State law in accordance with reciprocity agreements, the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act subjects an out-of-state permit holder to federal felony prosecution if they carry a firearm within 1000 feet of any K–12 school's property line; however, the enforcement of this statute is rare given several states' nullification statutes prohibiting state law enforcement officers from enforcing federal firearms laws. However, states may have their own similar statutes that such officers will enforce, and potentially expose the carrier to later prosecution under the Act.

Restricted premises

While generally a concealed carry permit allows the permit holder to carry a concealed weapon in public, a state may restrict carry of a firearm including a permitted concealed weapon while in or on certain properties, facilities or types of businesses that are otherwise open to the public. These areas vary by state (except for the first item below; federal offices are subject to superseding federal law) and can include:

• Federal government facilities, including post offices, IRS offices, federal court buildings, military/VA facilities and/or correctional facilities, Amtrak trains and facilities, and Corps of Engineers-controlled property (carry in these places is prohibited by federal law and preempts any existing state law). Carry on land controlled by the Bureau of Land Management (federal parks and wildlife preserves) is allowed by federal law as of the 2009 CARD Act, but is still subject to state law. However, carry into restrooms or any other buildings or structures located within federal parks is illegal in the United States, despite concealed carry being otherwise legal in federal parks with a permit recognized by the state in which the federal park is located. Similarly, concealed carry into caves located within federal parks is illegal.
• State and local government facilities, including courthouses, DMV/DoT offices, police stations, correctional facilities, and/or meeting places of government entities (exceptions may be made for certain persons working in these facilities such as judges, lawyers, and certain government officials both elected and appointed)
• Venues for political events, including rallies, parades, debates, and/or polling places
• Educational institutions including elementary/secondary schools and colleges. Some states have "drop-off exceptions" which only prohibit carry inside school buildings, or permit carry while inside a personal vehicle on school property. Campus carry laws vary by state.
• Public interscholastic and/or professional sporting events and/or venues (sometimes only during a time window surrounding such an event)
• Amusement parks, fairs, parades and/or carnivals
• Businesses that sell alcohol (sometimes only "by-the-drink" sellers like restaurants, sometimes only establishments defined as a "bar" or "nightclub", or establishments where the percentage of total sales from alcoholic beverages exceeds a specified threshold)
• Hospitals (even if hospitals themselves are not restricted, "teaching hospitals" partnered with a medical school are sometimes considered "educational institutions"; exceptions are sometimes made for medical professionals working in these facilities)
• Churches, mosques and other "Houses of worship," usually at the discretion of the church clergy (Ohio allows with specific permission of house of worship)
• Municipal mass transit vehicles or facilities
• Sterile areas of airports (sections of the airport located beyond security screening checkpoints, unless explicitly authorized)
• Non-government facilities with heightened security measures (Nuclear facilities, power plants, dams, oil and gas production facilities, banks, factories, unless explicitly authorized)
• Aboard aircraft or ships unless specifically authorized by the pilot in command or ship captain
• Private property where the lawful owner or lessee has posted a sign or verbally stated that firearms are not permitted
• Any public place, while under the influence of alcohol or drugs (including certain prescription or over-the-counter medications, depending on jurisdiction)

"Opt-out" statutes ("gun-free zones")

Some states allow private businesses to post a specific sign prohibiting concealed carry within their premises. The exact language and format of such a sign varies by state. By posting the signs, businesses create areas where it is illegal to carry a concealed handgun; similar to regulations concerning schools, hospitals, and public gatherings.

Violation of such a sign, in some of these states, is grounds for revocation of the offender's concealed carry permit and criminal prosecution. Other states, such as Virginia, enforce only trespassing laws when a person violates a "Gun Free Zone" sign. In some jurisdictions trespass by a person carrying a firearm may have more severe penalties than "simple" trespass, while in other jurisdictions, penalties are lower than for trespass.

Such states include: Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

There is considerable dispute over the effectiveness of such "gun-free zones". Opponents of such measures, such as OpenCarry.org, state that, much like other malum prohibitum laws banning gun-related practices, only law-abiding individuals will heed the signage and disarm. Individuals or groups intent on committing far more serious crimes, such as armed robbery or murder, will not be deterred by signage prohibiting weapons. Further, the reasoning follows that those wishing to commit mass murder might intentionally choose gun-free venues like shopping malls, schools and churches (where weapons carry is generally prohibited by statute or signage) because the population inside is disarmed and thus less able to stop them.

In some states, business owners have been documented posting signs that appear to prohibit guns, but legally do not because the signs do not meet local or state laws defining required appearance, placement, or wording of signage. Such signage can be posted out of ignorance to the law, or intent to pacify gun control advocates while not actually prohibiting the practice. The force of law behind a non-compliant sign varies based on state statutes and case law. Some states interpret their statutes' high level of specification of signage as evidence that the signage must meet the specification exactly, and any quantifiable deviation from the statute makes the sign non-binding. Other states have decided in case law that if efforts were made in good faith to conform to the statutes, the sign carries the force of law even if it fails to meet current specification. Still others have such lax descriptions of what is a valid sign that virtually any sign that can be interpreted as "no guns allowed" is binding on the license holder.

Note that virtually all jurisdictions allow some form of oral communication by the lawful owner or controller of the property that a person is not welcome and should leave. This notice can be given to anyone for any reason (except for statuses that are protected by the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other CRAs, such as race), including due to the carrying of firearms by that person, and refusal to heed such a request to leave may constitute trespassing.

Brandishing and printing

Printing refers to a circumstance where the shape or outline of a firearm is visible through a garment while the gun is still fully covered, and is generally not desired when carrying a concealed weapon. Brandishing can refer to different actions depending on jurisdiction. These actions can include printing through a garment, pulling back clothing to expose a gun, or unholstering a gun and exhibiting it in the hand. The intent to intimidate or threaten someone may or may not be required legally for it to be considered brandishing.

Brandishing is a crime in most jurisdictions, but the definition of brandishing varies widely.

Under California law, the following conditions have to be present to prove brandishing:

[1] A person, in the presence of another person, drew or exhibited a [deadly weapon, other than a firearm] [firearm, whether loaded or unloaded]; [and] [2] That person did so in a rude, angry, or threatening manner [or] [2] That person, in any manner, unlawfully used the [deadly weapon] [firearm] in a fight or quarrel] [.] [; and [3] The person was not acting in lawful self-defense.]

In Virginia law:

It shall be unlawful for any person to point, hold or brandish any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another or hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public place in such a manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another of being shot or injured. However, this section shall not apply to any person engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense.

— Code of Virginia 18.2-282

Federal law

Gun Control Act of 1968

The Gun Control Act passed by Congress in 1968 lists felons, illegal aliens, and other codified persons as prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms. During the application process for concealed carry states carry out thorough background checks to prevent these individuals from obtaining permits. Additionally the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act created an FBI maintained system in 1994 for instantly checking the backgrounds of potential firearms buyers in an effort to prevent these individuals from obtaining weapons.

Firearm Owners Protection Act

The Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986 allows a gun owner to travel through states in which their firearm possession is illegal as long as it is legal in the states of origination and destination, the owner is in transit and does not remain in the state in which firearm possession is illegal, and the firearm is transported unloaded and in a locked container. The FOPA addresses the issue of transport of private firearms from origin to destination for purposes lawful in state of origin and destination; FOPA does not authorize concealed carry as a weapon of defense during transit. New York State Police arrested those carrying firearms in violation of state law, and then required them to use FOPA as an affirmative defense to the charges of illegal possession.

Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act

In 2004, the United States Congress enacted the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, 18 U.S. Code 926B and 926C. This federal law allows two classes of persons – the "qualified law enforcement officer" and the "qualified retired law enforcement officer" – to carry a concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States, regardless of any state or local law to the contrary, with the exception of areas where all firearms are prohibited without permission, and certain Title II weapons.

Federal Gun Free School Zones Act

The Federal Gun Free School Zone Act limits where a person may legally carry a firearm. It does this by making it generally unlawful for an armed citizen to be within 1,000 feet (extending out from the property lines) of a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a K–12 school. Although a state-issued carry permit may exempt a person from this restriction in the state that physically issued their permit, it does not exempt them in other states which recognize their permit under reciprocity agreements made with the issuing state.

Federal property

Some federal statutes restrict the carrying of firearms on the premises of certain federal properties such as military installations or land controlled by the USACE.

National park carry

On May 22, 2009, President Barack Obama signed H.R. 627, the "Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009," into law. The bill contained a rider introduced by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) that prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from enacting or enforcing any regulations that restrict possession of firearms in National Parks or Wildlife Refuges, as long as the person complies with laws of the state in which the unit is found. This provision was supported by the National Rifle Association and opposed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, among other organizations. As of February 2010 concealed handguns are for the first time legal in all but 3 of the nation's 391 national parks and wildlife refuges so long as all applicable federal, state, and local regulations are adhered to. Hawaii is a notable exception. Concealed and open carry are both illegal in Hawaii for all except retired military or law enforcement personnel. Previously firearms were allowed into parks if cased and unloaded.

Full faith and credit (CCW permits)

Attempts were made in the 110th Congress, United States House of Representatives (H.R. 226) and the United States Senate (S. 388), to enact legislation to compel complete reciprocity for concealed carry licenses. Opponents of national reciprocity have pointed out that this legislation would effectively require states with more restrictive standards of permit issuance (e.g., training courses, safety exams, "good cause" requirements, et al.) to honor permits from states with more liberal issuance policies. Supporters have pointed out that the same situation already occurs with marriage certificates, adoption decrees and other state documents under the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution. Some states have already adopted a "full faith and credit" policy treating out-of-state carry permits the same as out-of-state driver's license or marriage certificates without federal legislation mandating such a policy. In the 115th Congress, another universal reciprocity bill, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, was introduced by Richard Hudson. The bill passed the House but did not get a vote in the Senate.

Legal issues

Court rulings

Prior to the 1897 Supreme Court case Robertson v. Baldwin, the federal courts had been silent on the issue of concealed carry. In the dicta from a maritime law case, the Supreme Court commented that state laws restricting concealed weapons do not infringe upon the right to bear arms protected by the federal Second Amendment. However, in the context of such rulings, open carry of firearms was generally unrestricted in the jurisdictions in question, which provided an alternative means of "bearing" arms.

In the majority decision in the 2008 Supreme Court case of District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote;

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues ... The majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.

Heller was a landmark case because for the first time in United States history a Supreme Court decision defined the right to bear arms as constitutionally guaranteed to private citizens rather than a right restricted to "well regulated militia[s]". The Justices asserted that sensible restrictions on the right to bear arms are constitutional, however, an outright ban on a specific type of firearm, in this case handguns, was in fact unconstitutional. The Heller decision is limited because it only applies to federal enclaves such as the District of Columbia. In 2010, the SCOTUS expanded Heller in McDonald v. Chicago incorporating the 2nd Amendment through the 14th Amendment as applying to local and state laws. Various Circuit Courts have upheld their local and state laws using intermediate scrutiny. The correct standard is strict scrutiny review for all "fundamental" and "individual" rights. On June 28, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the handgun ban enacted by the city of Chicago, Illinois, in McDonald v. Chicago, effectively extending the Heller decision to states and local governments nationwide. Banning handguns in any jurisdiction has the effect of rendering invalid any licensed individual's right to carry concealed in that area except for federally exempted retired and current law enforcement officers and other government employees acting in the discharge of their official duties.

Legal liability

Even when self-defense is justified, there can be serious civil or criminal liabilities related to self-defense when a concealed carry permit holder brandishes or fires his/her weapon. For example, if innocent bystanders are hurt or killed, there could be both civil and criminal liabilities even if the use of deadly force was completely justified. Some states technically allow an assailant who is shot by a gun owner to bring civil action. In some states, liability is present when a resident brandishes the weapon, threatens use, or exacerbates a volatile situation, or when the resident is carrying while intoxicated. It is important to note that simply pointing a firearm at any person constitutes felony assault with a deadly weapon unless circumstances validate a demonstration of force. A majority of states who allow concealed carry, however, forbid suits being brought in such cases, either by barring lawsuits for damages resulting from a criminal act on the part of the plaintiff, or by granting the gun owner immunity from such a civil suit if it is found that he or she was justified in shooting.

Simultaneously, increased passage of "Castle Doctrine" laws allow persons who own firearms and/or carry them concealed to use them without first attempting to retreat. The "Castle Doctrine" typically applies to situations within the confines of one's own home. Nevertheless, many states have adopted escalation of force laws along with provisions for concealed carry. These include the necessity to first verbally warn a trespasser or lay hands on a trespasser before a shooting is justified (unless the trespasser is armed or assumed to be so). This escalation of force does not apply if the shooter reasonably believes a violent felony has been or is about to be committed on the property by the trespasser. Additionally some states have a duty to retreat provision which requires a permit holder, especially in public places, to vacate him or herself from a potentially dangerous situation before resorting to deadly force. The duty to retreat does not restrictively apply in a person's home or business though escalation of force may be required. In 1895 the Supreme Court ruled in Beard v. United States that if an individual does not provoke an assault and is residing in a place they have a right to be, then they may use considerable force against someone they reasonably believe may do them serious harm without being charged with murder or manslaughter should that person be killed. Further, in Texas and California homicide is justifiable solely in defense of property. In other states, lethal force is authorized only when serious harm is presumed to be imminent.

Even given these relaxed restrictions on use of force, using a handgun must still be a last resort in some jurisdictions; meaning the user must reasonably believe that nothing short of deadly force will protect the life or property at stake in a situation. Additionally, civil liabilities for errors that cause harm to others still exist, although civil immunity is provided in the Castle Doctrine laws of some states (e.g., Texas).

Penalties for carrying illegally

Main article: Criminal possession of a weapon

Criminal possession of a weapon is the unlawful possession of a weapon by a citizen. Many societies both past and present have placed restrictions on what forms of weaponry private citizens (and to a lesser extent police) are allowed to purchase, own, and carry in public. Such crimes are public order crimes and are considered mala prohibita, in that the possession of a weapon in and of itself is not evil. Rather, the potential for use in acts of unlawful violence creates a possible need to control them. Some restrictions are strict liability, whereas others require some element of intent to use the weapon for an illegal purpose. Some regulations allow a citizen to obtain a permit or other authorization to possess the weapon under certain circumstances. Lawful uses of weapons by civilians commonly include hunting, sport, collection and self-preservation.

The penalties for carrying a firearm in an unlawful manner varies widely from state-to-state, and may range from a simple infraction punishable by a fine to a felony conviction and mandatory incarceration. An individual may also be charged and convicted of criminal charges other than unlawful possession of a firearm, such as assault, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, or trespassing. In the case of an individual with no prior criminal convictions, the state of Tennessee classifies the unlawful concealed carry of a loaded handgun as a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of 30 days imprisonment and/or a $500 fine. While in New York State, a similar crime committed by an individual with no criminal convictions is classified as a Class D felony, punishable by a mandatory minimum of 3.5 years imprisonment, to a maximum of 7 years. As New York State does not recognize any pistol permits issued in other states, the statute would apply to any individual who does not have a valid New York State issued concealed carry permit, even if such individual has a valid permit issued in another jurisdiction. In addition, the New York State statutory definition of a "loaded firearm" differs significantly from what may be commonly understood, as simply possessing any ammunition along with a weapon capable of firing such ammunition satisfies the legal definition of a loaded firearm in New York. The large variability of state carry laws has resulted in confusing circumstances where a person in Vermont (which requires no license of any kind to carry a concealed weapon by anyone who is not prohibited by law), could unwittingly travel into the adjacent state of New York, where such individual, despite acting entirely within the law of Vermont, would then face a mandatory 3.5 year prison sentence simply for accidentally crossing the state's border into New York. These circumstances are aggravated by the fact that many NYS police departments as well as the New York State Police do not recognize the protections granted federally under the Firearm Owners Protection Act, which was intended to prevent such prosecutions.

Effect on crime and deaths

Research has had mixed results, indicating variously that right-to-carry laws have no impact on violent crime, that they increase violent crime, and that they decrease violent crime.

A comprehensive 2004 review of the existing literature by the National Academy of Sciences found that the results of existing studies were sensitive to the specification and time period examined, and concluded that a causal link between right-to-carry laws and crime rates cannot be shown. Quinnipiac University economist Mark Gius summarized literature published between 1993 and 2005, and found that ten papers suggested that permissive CCW laws reduce crime, one paper suggested they increase crime, and nine papers showed no definitive results. A 2017 review of the existing literature concluded, "Given the most recent evidence, we conclude with considerable confidence that deregulation of gun carrying over the last four decades has undermined public safety—which is to say that restricting concealed carry is one gun regulation that appears to be effective." A 2016 study in the European Economic Review which examined the conflicting claims in the existing literature concluded that the evidence CCW either increases or decreases crime on average "seems weak"; the study's model found "some support to the law having a negative (but with a positive trend) effect on property crimes, and a small but positive (and increasing) effect on violent crimes". The Washington Post fact-checker concluded that it could not state that CCW laws reduced crime, as the evidence was murky and in dispute. In a 2017 article in the journal Science, Stanford University law professor John Donohue and Duke University economist Philip J. Cook write that "there is an emerging consensus that, on balance, the causal effect of deregulating concealed carry (by replacing a restrictive law with an RTC law) has been to increase violent crime". Donohue and Cook argue that the crack epidemic made it difficult to determine the causal effects of CCW laws and that this made earlier results inconclusive; recent research does not suffer the same challenges with causality. A 2018 RAND review of the literature concluded that concealed carry either has no impact on crime or that it may increase violent crime. The review said, "We found no qualifying studies showing that concealed-carry laws decreased [violent crime]."

A 2020 study in PNAS found that right-to-carry laws were associated with higher firearm deaths. A 2019 panel study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine by medical researchers including Michael Siegel of the Boston University School of Public Health and David Hemenway of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health found that “shall issue" concealed carry laws were associated with a 9% increase in homicides. A 2019 study in the American Journal of Public Health found that greater restrictions on concealed carry laws were associated with decreases in workplace homicide rates. Another 2019 study in the American Journal of Public Health found that states with right-to-carry laws were associated with a 29% higher rate of firearm workplace homicides. A 2019 study in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies found that right-to-carry laws led to an increase in overall violent crime. A 2017 study in the American Journal of Public Health found that "shall-issue laws" (where concealed carry permits must be given if criteria are met) "are associated with significantly higher rates of total, firearm-related, and handgun-related homicide" than "may-issue laws" (where local law enforcement have discretion over who can get a concealed carry permit). A 2011 study found that aggravated assaults increase when concealed carry laws are adopted.

A 2019 study in Journal of American College of Surgeons found "no statistically significant association between the liberalization of state level firearm carry legislation over the last 30 years and the rates of homicides or other violent crime." This is also in line with a 1997 study researching county level data from 1977 to 1992 concluding that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. A 2018 study in The Review of Economics and Statistics found that the impact of right-to-carry laws was mixed and changed over time. RTC laws increased some crimes over some periods while decreasing other crimes over other periods. The study suggested that conclusions drawn in other studies are highly dependent on the time periods that are studied, the types of models that are adopted and the assumptions that are made. A 2015 study that looked at issuance rates of concealed-carry permits and changes in violent crime by county-level in four shall-issue states found no increases or decreases in violent crime rates with changes in permit issuances. A 2019 study in the International Review of Law and Economics found that with one method, right-to-carry laws had no impact on violent crime, but with another method led to an increase in violent crime; neither method showed that right-to-carry laws led to a reduction in crime. A 2003 study found no significant changes in violent crime rates amongst 58 Florida counties with increases of concealed-carry permits. A 2004 study found no significant association between homicide rates and shall-issue concealed carry laws.

A 2013 study of eight years of Texas data found that concealed handgun licensees were much less likely to be convicted of crimes than were nonlicensees. The same study found that licensees' convictions were more likely to be for less common crimes, "such as sexual offenses, gun offenses, or offenses involving a death." A 2020 study in Applied Economics Letters examining concealed-carry permits per capita by state found a significant negative effect on violent crime rates. A 2016 study found a significant negative effect on violent crime rates with passage of shall-issue laws. A 2017 study in Applied Economics Letters found that property crime decreased in Chicago after the implementation of the shall issue concealed carry law. A 2014 Applied Economics Letters study found states with more permissive conceal carry laws had lower murder rates than states with restrictive laws. Another 2014 study found that RTC laws by state significantly reduce homicide rates.

In 1996, economists John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard analyzed crime data in all 3,054 counties in the United States from 1977 to 1992, finding counties that had shall-issue licensing laws overall saw murders decrease by 7.65 percent, rapes decrease by 5.2 percent, aggravated assaults decrease by 7 percent and robberies decrease by 2.2 percent. The study was widely disputed by numerous economists. The 2004 National Academy of Sciences panel reviewing the research on the subject concluded, with one dissenting panelist, that the Lott and Mustard study was unreliable. Georgetown University Professor Jens Ludwig, Daniel Nagin of Carnegie Mellon University and Dan A. Black of the University of Chicago in The Journal of Legal Studies, said of the Lott-Mustard study, "once Florida is removed from the sample, there is no longer any detectable impact of right-to-carry laws on the rates of murder and rape".

Firearms permit holders in active shooter incidents

In 2016 FBI analyzed 40 "active shooter incidents" in 2014 and 2015 where bystanders were put in peril in on-going incidents that could be affected by police or citizen response. Six incidents were successfully ended when citizens intervened. In two stops citizens restrained the shooters, one unarmed, one with pepper spray. In two stops at schools, the shooters were confronted by teachers: one shooter disarmed, one committed suicide. In two stops citizens with firearms permits exchanged gunfire with the shooter. In a failed stop attempt, a citizen with a firearms permit was killed by the shooter. In 2018 the FBI analyzed 50 active shooter incidents in 2016 and 2017. This report focused on policies to neutralize active shooters to save lives. In 10 incidents citizens confronted an active shooter. In eight incidents the citizens stopped the shooter. Four stops involved unarmed citizens who confronted and restrained or blocked the shooter or talked the shooter into surrender. Four stops involved citizens with firearms permits: two exchanged gunfire with a shooter and two detained the shooter at gunpoint for arrest by responding police. Of the two failed stops, one involved a permit holder who exchanged gunfire with the shooter but the shooter fled and continued shooting and the other involved a permit holder who was wounded by the shooter. "Armed and unarmed citizens engaged the shooter in 10 incidents. They safely and successfully ended the shootings in eight of those incidents. Their selfless actions likely saved many lives."

See also

• American gun ownership
• Concealed carry
• Defensive gun use
• Gun control
• Gun politics in the United States
• Overview of gun laws by nation
• Self-defense

External links

• NRA-ILA guide to gun laws
• A very comprehensive guide to gun laws and reciprocity
• Concealed Carry Reciprocity Maps
• U.S. Concealed Carry Association