Arizona Firearms History: From Territorial Law to Constitutional Carry

[admin]

Spent some time this week going down a rabbit hole on Arizona firearms history — turns out there's a lot more going on there than the Tombstone mythology most people carry around.

What the O.K. Corral story actually illustrates is more nuanced than either gun-rights advocates or gun-control advocates typically acknowledge. UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, in his book Gunfight, notes that Tombstone's ordinance was stricter than anything currently on Arizona's books — you cannot be required to disarm upon entering a town in Arizona today. But historian Joyce Lee Malcolm and the California Rifle and Pistol Association have pushed back on the "Old West gun control" narrative, arguing that enforcement of Tombstone's ordinance was selective and politically motivated.

Both sides of the modern carry debate have been dragging Tombstone into their arguments for years, and it turns out neither camp is being fully honest about it. The ordinance was real, it was enforced — and it was also a tool in a political and financial turf war. That's a messier story than either narrative wants to admit, but it's the accurate one.

Arizona's first state constitution included a right to bear arms provision in Article II, Section 26: "The right of the individual citizen 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 to carry concealed weapons."

That's worth sitting with — the guys who wrote the Arizona constitution in 1912 explicitly carved out concealed carry for regulation from day one. The same state that went constitutional carry in 2010 started with language that drew a hard line between open and concealed. Nearly a century of shift in how Arizonans thought about that distinction is the actual story of modern carry law, and it didn't happen overnight.

The practical effect was that civilian settlers in what is now southern Arizona had to be armed and competent with those arms as a basic condition of survival — not as ideology, but as fact.

This is the part that gets lost when gun culture gets reduced to bumper stickers in either direction. The armed civilian in territorial Arizona wasn't making a philosophical statement — he was dealing with a real threat in a place where federal protection was unreliable at best. That context shaped a regional culture that persists today, and it came from necessity before it became identity.

For those of you who've crossed into Arizona to shoot or carry — how different did it feel compared to Idaho's laws, and did you find yourself adjusting your habits at all?

---

Read the full article in The Handbook → | By The Boise Gun Club Team