Declaration of Intent to Carry Concealed Weapons
by Ricky Duncan (602)488-6210 Ricky Duncans concealed carry document. You have the right to carry concealed weapons in Arizona with out a permit per the Arizona Constitutional Convention. ![]() Ricky Duncan has found a lot of interesting Arizona laws for his friends at the Libertarian Party. According to Ricky because of these records at the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910 before Arizona became a state it is legal to carry a concealed weapon. Thats because the makers of the Arizona constitution voted that Arizona DID NOT have the right to regulate concealed weapons. While the Arizona Government has ignored the constition and passed ARS 13-3103 which makes concealed weapons illegal Ricky says this law is unconstitional. Ricky says that if you do carry concealed weapons filing this document may not prevent you from getting arrested, but it may get the charges dropped once you get to court.
Conceled Weapons Carry Document The Records of the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910 Pages 678 and 679. Edited by: John S. Goff (C) The Supreme Court of Arizona Mr. Chairman: Are there any objections or corrections to Section 32? Mr. Baker: Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out all of Section 32. I never in all my life found it necessary to carry a six-shooter and I have passed through nearly all the scencs (sic) and experiences of this wild and unsettled country. Carrying arms is dangerous. It is a very dangerous thing to oneself and to one's associates and should not be permitted under any circumstances. I have seen lives lost and innocent blood spilled just through the carrying of arms, concealed weapons under one's coat or shirt. It is most dangerous and vile; a practice that should never be permitted except in times of war and never in times of peace. Think of it; carrying a six shooter or a knife or some other terrible arm of defense, and then in a moment of heated passion using that weapon. I do not believe in it and I move to strike out that section. Mr. Webb: I second that motion for I agree with the gentleman from Maricopa that it is a pernicious thing and should not be included in this bill. I, too, in all my experiences, have never seen the time when it was necessary to carry concealed weapons except in times of Indian troubles, and have had many and varied experiences, in cow camps. I have been in many places where some might deem it necessary to come armed, but I did not, nor do I believe it necessary to do so now. We are no longer a frontier country, and if we did not need arms in the early days of pioneering in this country, we do not now, and I second the motion. Mr. Crutchfield: I move to amend by inserting after the word "impair" in line 9, page 7, the following words: "...but the legislature shall have the right to regulate the wearing of weapons to prevent crime." Mr. Baker: That is all right and I second the motion. Mr. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, I move to amend by striking out all of Section 32 and substituting the following in lieu thereof: "The people shall have the right to bear arms for their safety and defense, but the legislature shall regulate the exercise of this right by law." Mr. Feeney: I second that motion. Mr. Chairman: The question comes up on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Cochise, Mr. Parsons, to strike out Section 32, and insert in lieu thereof his amendment. Those in favor of this motion answer "aye", opposed "nay". The motion is lost. The question now comes up on the amendment offered by Mr. Crutchfield to insert after the word "impaired" in line 9, page 7, the following words: "...but the legislature shall have the right to regulate the wearing of weapons to prevent crime." Those in favor of this motion answer "aye", opposed "nay". The secretary will call the roll. Roll Call showed 22 "Ayes" 23 "Nays". Mr. Chairman: The motion is lost, and Section 32 will stand approved as read unless there are other amendments. Are there any objections to Section 33?
THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IS ONE OF OUR UNALIENABLE RIGHTS. We hold these rights not as citizens of the United States or citizens of the state of Arizona, but so to speak, in spite of the United States and the state of Arizona. We hold our UNALIENABLE RIGHTS against these Governments by as good a title as we bold them against the world.
Richard Lee Duncan (602)488-6210 Phoenix, Arizona
MAGRUDER'S AMERICAN GOVERNMENT ... Public opinion is supposed to serve as the principal guiding force behind public policy in the United States. But its power is tempered. Our system of constitutional government is not designed to give, unrestricted play to public opinion-and especially it is not designed to give such to majority opinion. The doctrines of separation 'of powers and of checks and balances, and the many guarantees of civil rights in our Constitution, are intended to protect minority interests against the possible excess of majority action. THIS DECLARATION OF INTENT WAS AUTHORED BY RICHARD LEE DUNCAN AND IS TO BE DISTRIBUTED FOR INDIVIDUAL USE. Courtesy of
Arizona Constitution Art. II §2. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent to the governed, and are established to protect arid maintain individual rights Check out this related court case jb_case.html They refused to file the document for Mike Renzulli |
This is the document you file with your county recorder
by Ricky Duncan
Pursuant to an Act of the United States Congress signed by President
Taft [21 August 1911] and a concurrent vote of the people of the Territory
of Arizona [12 December 1911] in accordance with the Enabling Act [10 June
1910] (authorizing Arizona statehood) which demands that the intent of
all articles and sections of the Arizona Constitution shall be in accordance
with the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration
of Independence;
I, ______________________________,
now domiciled in the County of ________________,
State of Arizona, hereby accept, without bias, the intent of Article II,
Section 26 of the Arizona Constitution,
determined by a vote of the Constitutional
Convention [25 November 1910],
granting the State of Arizona no power or
authority to regulate my right to bear arms (openly or concealed), I hereby
declare my intent to exercise this right in defense of self or the state,
without the impairment of a state-issued permit.
This declaration is made
public as a courtesy to all peace officers in recognition that ignorance
of these facts could jeopardize their bonds. The Records of the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910Pages 678 and 679. Edited by: John S. Goff (C) The Supreme Court of ArizonaMr. Chairman: Are there any objections or corrections to Section 32? Mr. Baker: Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out all of Section 32. I never in all my life found it necessary to carry a six-shooter and I have passed through nearly all the scencs (sic) and experiences of this wild and unsettled country. Carrying arms is dangerous. It is a very dangerous thing to oneself and to one's associates and should not be permitted under any circumstances. I have seen lives lost and innocent blood spilled just through the carrying of arms, concealed weapons under one's coat or shirt. It is most dangerous and vile; a practice that should never be permitted except in times of war and never in times of peace. Think of it; carrying a six shooter or a knife or some other terrible arm of defense, and then in a moment of heated passion using that weapon. I do not believe in it and I move to strike out that section. Mr. Webb: I second that motion for I agree with the gentleman from Maricopa that it is a pernicious thing and should not be included in this bill. I, too, in all my experiences, have never seen the time when it was necessary to carry concealed weapons except in times of Indian troubles, and have had many and varied experiences, in cow camps. I have been in many places where some might deem it necessary to come armed, but I did not, nor do I believe it necessary to do so now. We are no longer a frontier country, and if we did not need arms in the early days of pioneering in this country, we do not now, and I second the motion. Mr. Crutchfield: I move to amend by inserting after the word "impair" in line 9, page 7, the following words: "...but the legislature shall have the right to regulate the wearing of weapons to prevent crime." Mr. Baker: That is all right and I second the motion. Mr. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, I move to amend by striking out all of Section 32 and substituting the following in lieu thereof: "The people shall have the right to bear arms for their safety and defense, but the legislature shall regulate the exercise of this right by law." Mr. Feeney: I second that motion. Mr. Chairman: The question comes up on the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Cochise, Mr. Parsons, to strike out Section 32, and
insert in lieu thereof his amendment. Those in favor of this motion answer
"aye", opposed "nay". The motion is lost.
The question now comes up on the amendment offered by Mr. Crutchfield to
insert after the word "impaired" in line 9, page 7, the
following words: "...but the legislature shall have the right to
regulate the wearing of weapons to prevent crime." Those in favor
of this motion answer "aye", opposed "nay".
The secretary will call the roll. Mr. Chairman: The motion is lost, and Section 32 will stand approved as read unless there are other amendments. Are there any objections to Section 33? SECTION 32: The right of the individual citizens to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men. _____________________________________________________________ (Signature) ______________ (Date) State of Arizona, County of _________________________________ sworn and subscribed before me, this _______ day of _________ by __________________________________________________________ Notary Public |