The whole thing is pretty disorganized, repetitive, verbose, and contradicting, in my opinion. But there are a number of specific places that are particularly troubling to me.
Certainly one could not be in violation of § 5-73-120 for carrying a concealed handgun without a license, sans unlawful intent, else she would be contradicting herself, as she states that unlawful intent is necessary to be in violation of § 5-73-120. She states toward the end of the rag, however, that carrying a concealed handgun without a license may well magically establish unlawful intent all by itself, but offers zero reference as to what statute one would be intending to violate; she only vaguely murmurs on about how someone might be "flouting" the almighty authority of the state by deciding they'd rather not pay the “regime” as part of the “scheme” (her words) for a license in order to exercise a right.
See poppycock below:
"Finally, from what I have already said, it should be clear that someone who possesses a concealed handgun (without a concealed-carry permit) may well, by that fact alone, be found to have violated § 5-73-120(a). The laws requiring a license to carry a concealed handgun still have full force and effect. Nothing in Act 746, § 5-73-120(a), or this opinion is intended to suggest a person may carry a concealed handgun without a properly issued concealed-carry license. 27 In fact, it is likely that the Arkansas Supreme Court would allow the presumption that a person who has flouted the concealed-carry regime in Arkansas law by possessing a concealed handgun without a concealed-carry license has the requisite unlawful intent for a violation of§ 5-73-120(a). At the very least, except in the most unusual of circumstances, possessing a concealed handgun without a concealed-carry license would on its own provide an officer with reasonable suspicion and probable cause that a person has the unlawful intent necessary to be (and thus is) in violation of § 5-73-120(a)."
"The laws requiring a license to carry a concealed handgun still have full force and effect." But what law, though, requires a license to carry a concealed handgun? Previously, § 5-73-120 could be said to have constructed this requirement with its various subcomponents and in combination with other laws, but no longer, since unlawful intent is now necessary to be in violation.
"a person who has flouted the concealed-carry regime in Arkansas law by possessing a concealed handgun without a concealed-carry license has the requisite unlawful intent" But what statute, though, is the concealed carrier intending to violate? The writer references none, as there is none, but instead of providing an actual law gives “flouting” the “regime” as the grand offense. Without another law creating an offense which one would be in violation of for carrying a concealed handgun without a license, one cannot be said to have unlawful intent by carrying a concealed handgun without a license. My conclusion here is obviously the logical one.
Edit: was going to bold certain portions, and add a few other comments, but the bolding just made things harder to read, and the additional comments were not important.
very poor law. I'd also agree that LEO's can ask what your intent is... actually they can ask whatever they want until you clam up and state you want your lawyer present. That's why they always start with "Do you know why I pulled you over?" Who knows what you'll confess to before they say your blinker was turned on just a tad too late