The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 21, 2009, 08:27 PM   #1
RickE
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2009
Location: Kirkland Wa.
Posts: 516
Federal, all states carry license.

Has there ever been any serious talk about a national ccw permit? So what if it is rigorous? Very thorough back round check, a practical test, a legal knowledge exam? Yes, many may not pass, but what about the ones that can?
RickE is offline  
Old December 21, 2009, 09:03 PM   #2
SigP6Carry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Posts: 1,086
given that two cities and at least one town ship don't even allow handguns in general, I doubt it would work. Plus, two states and a district don't allow carry at all. Plus, some states have extremely strict gun criteria regarding what guns can enter the state..... I don't think it would work.... at all.... due to preemptive state laws regarding firearms in general.
__________________
-liberal gun nut = exception to the rule-
-1.24274238 miles, because Russians don't need scopes-
-Gun control was the Klan's favorite law, how can you advocate a set of laws designed to allow the denigration of a people?-
SigP6Carry is offline  
Old December 21, 2009, 09:09 PM   #3
Don H
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,705
There is no way that I will support a federal CCW that will be administered at the whim of federal politicians. Any such permit would be much more restrictive than the state permit I have now!
Don H is offline  
Old December 21, 2009, 09:24 PM   #4
Creeper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: Woooooshington
Posts: 1,797
You can go on-line to see reciprocity arrangements for your (our) state with other states... that's about as close as you'll get with a NCCW for now.

C
__________________
Shoulder Drive Nicholson Club
Creeper is offline  
Old December 21, 2009, 09:54 PM   #5
Ladyluv
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2009
Posts: 1
"There is no way that I will support a federal CCW that will be administered at the whim of federal politicians. Any such permit would be much more restrictive than the state permit I have now! "............................

I couldn't agree with Don more!!!!!
Ladyluv is offline  
Old December 21, 2009, 09:55 PM   #6
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,395
Quote:
There is no way that I will support a federal CCW that will be administered at the whim of federal politicians. Any such permit would be much more restrictive than the state permit I have now!
Absolutely right. What's more, even if it were quite permissive at first, it would be child's play to add onerous restrictions as time went on. There would be some element of federal registration, either of the gun or the owner.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old December 21, 2009, 11:22 PM   #7
stevelyn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell
Posts: 2,618
Quote:
There is no way that I will support a federal CCW that will be administered at the whim of federal politicians. Any such permit would be much more restrictive than the state permit I have now!
A federal CHL or oversite would be a very bad idea.

However, I would and do support legislation that forces states to recognize other states' CHLs by requiring they observe and enforce the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the Constitution just like they do with any other license or legal document.
__________________
Herman Cain '12

Squished bugs on a windshield is proof the slow/heavy bullet theory works.
stevelyn is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 04:20 AM   #8
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,491
Quote:
However, I would and do support legislation that forces states to recognize other states' CHLs by requiring they observe and enforce the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the Constitution just like they do with any other license or legal document.
States are not bound to recognize "any other" licenses issued by other states. For instance, insurance companies are licensed on a state-by-state basis. The only state license that I am aware of that is recognized by all states is a drivers license, and that recognition is by mutual agreement of the states.
gc70 is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 07:50 AM   #9
rwilson452
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,361
I would submit. If you want a glimpse of what a federal concealed weapons permit would look like, Look at the federal flight deck officer program. Sorry I'll pass.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81
rwilson452 is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 10:25 AM   #10
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,734
Better to have states do it with reciprocity. Watching Congress leads me to think we would have a 2000 page CCW bill that will cost a fortune.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 12:29 PM   #11
Uncle Buck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,561
I am in the group of "it is the States business, keep the Feds out of it."

Too few politicians in this case (federal level) would mean trouble.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.
Uncle Buck is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 12:48 PM   #12
javabum
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Californication
Posts: 264
I'm with the group of keeping the feds out of it.States are supposed to run their own business.Things are tough enough with state CCW.The feds would screw up a free lunch,keep em out of it.
__________________
Stupidity Should Hurt.....Immensely

NRA Life member
javabum is offline  
Old December 23, 2009, 03:09 AM   #13
Mattnuckolls
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2009
Posts: 10
I would have mixed feelings about this, I feel it is handled best at the state level, but it should also be recognized equivically to a drivers license. each state should respect the license your state has given to you.

Quote:
so if your a resident in another state and lets say your passing through a different state you cant have your side arm?
yes, provided that you have it either in your trunk, or not "immediately accessible" is the best approch to this, especially if you're traveling through a unfriendly gun state. many states recognize others CCP, I'm pretty sure that a new law was just passed regarding this issue too. I would say if you're traveling check out the recipricocity of the states you wish to pass through. ignorance of the law is not an exclusion to the penalties.
Mattnuckolls is offline  
Old December 23, 2009, 03:10 AM   #14
cbrgator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2009
Posts: 135
They just tried it a couple of months ago. It was a rider called the Thune Amendment. It was narrowly defeated. Didn't have any crazy restrictions. All it said was that if you are a state that offers CCW, you must recognize licenses from other states. Essentially, forced reciprocity for the 48 states that offer CCW, sans Illinois and Wisconsin. CCW licenses would have been given the same treatment as drivers licenses and marriage certificates.
cbrgator is offline  
Old December 23, 2009, 04:17 AM   #15
Stiofan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2006
Location: Panhandle, Idaho
Posts: 691
Quote:
They just tried it a couple of months ago. It was a rider called the Thune Amendment. It was narrowly defeated. Didn't have any crazy restrictions. All it said was that if you are a state that offers CCW, you must recognize licenses from other states. Essentially, forced reciprocity for the 48 states that offer CCW, sans Illinois and Wisconsin. CCW licenses would have been given the same treatment as drivers licenses and marriage certificates.
This is correct. It was defeated in the Senate by one or two votes short of a filibuster proof majority.

It didn't allow any new powers to the Feds, it simply would have recognized our RKBA doesn't stop at our own state lines.
Stiofan is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 04:32 PM   #16
RickE
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2009
Location: Kirkland Wa.
Posts: 516
As I read these, I agree about the Fed's involvement. However, if administered the way it was intended, the 2nd ammendment (FED) would force the non compliant states to offer CCP's. Then mandate all states honor the CCP's. Just a thought.

Thanks everyone.
RickE is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 05:43 PM   #17
Bluesfan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2009
Posts: 102
A uniform law. such as the UCC,may not be a bd idea. It would keep the federal govt out of this issue and would allow a ccw holder to know what the law is in each state that participates in the compact rathe than having to keep track if the specific requirements of each state.
For example,in Missouri certian aspects of concealed carry and open carry are permissible however I cannot assume that is the case in a state that offers reciprocity.If I go to another state I have to follow that states laws and I am charged with knowledge of same. It would be very easy for a ccw holder to unwittingly get in serious trouble because that person did not know that they were breaking the law. A uniform law would help to aviod this problem. Getting 48 states to agree to this,well..........
Bluesfan is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 06:23 PM   #18
azredhawk44
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,465
Quote:
There is no way that I will support a federal CCW that will be administered at the whim of federal politicians. Any such permit would be much more restrictive than the state permit I have now!
Agreed.

Quote:
A uniform law. such as the UCC,may not be a bd idea. It would keep the federal govt out of this issue ...
The second you have another law, you have the Federal Government in the issue.

The last thing we need is more laws. Laws always restrict natural rights. Right now, the FedGov has no say over concealed weapons, yea or nay. Keep it that way.
azredhawk44 is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 06:50 PM   #19
Bluesfan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2009
Posts: 102
I agree. We don't need more laws. The problem with the current ccw laws is that there are too many of them making it easy for someone to violate with out knowing it. A uniform law is not a federal law. It is a body of law that addresses a certian subject in the same manner with the same language in the states that choose to participate.
Bluesfan is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 07:11 PM   #20
joehorner
Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2009
Location: WNC
Posts: 66
Federal involement

Case in point. Years ago the federal goverment (DOT) mandated that all states pass a motorcycle helmet law or lose federal highway funds. Delaware being small and such,said OK. You got to have a helmet in full sight. Did not say you had to wear it. It is still in effect today.. In other words keep the feds out of so called regulations. Joe
joehorner is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 07:23 PM   #21
Don H
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,705
Right now, in Utah, I can legally carry in churches, bars, all public schools, all state, county and city government buildings (except specific secure areas), intrastate public transportation, sporting events, polling places, public gatherings, city, county and state parks, etc. Why on earth would I want to support a "uniform law" that would undoubtedly make many of these places "no-carry zones"? Certainly not to make it 'convenient' for those who don't want to expend the effort to research the laws of the state(s) in which they might carry!
Don H is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 07:58 PM   #22
knight0334
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 1, 2006
Location: Brookville, PA
Posts: 442
Nowhere in the US Constitution Article I, or any of the Amendments, does it authorize the Federal Government to issue a federal license. The power of the Federal Government is strictly confined to certain actions detailed in Article I Section 8 and Amendments as to the types of laws it may create.

ALL other rights and powers are reserved to the States, and the People, in the 10th Amendment.
knight0334 is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 08:21 PM   #23
Bluesfan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2009
Posts: 102
Thanks for the comment DonH. How about useing Utah as the model for the uniform law? No reason why a uniform law has to be more restrictive than what is in place. Not sure why you jumped to that conclusion.
Bluesfan is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 08:40 PM   #24
wally626
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 635
The least restrictive would be no permit required for open or concealed carry, I could get behind that.

When the Supremes finally get to a bear Arms case, i hope we still have enough conservatives to get a shall issue ruling for all states out of them.
wally626 is offline  
Old January 12, 2010, 09:26 PM   #25
Don H
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluesfan
Thanks for the comment DonH. How about useing Utah as the model for the uniform law? No reason why a uniform law has to be more restrictive than what is in place. Not sure why you jumped to that conclusion.
Simply because most states are more restrictive and feel the need to be more controlling of their populace. Since most states forbid carry in many of the places I listed, and seem quite contented with those restrictions, it seems logical that those same restrictions would be included in a "uniform law". I have no reason to believe that the politicians in a great many states would embrace the idea of citizens carrying in schools, bars or, especially, in the government buildings that the politicians work in or frequent. If they did, it would already be legal in most states, wouldn't it?

Last but not least, many of those who carry are , for the most part, reasonably happy with the restrictions and see no need to carry in schools or to allow carry in bars, for example. So, where's the push for change? Of the 9,500 active members of this board, how many have bothered to get a CCW permit? Probably a whole lot more than have actively lobbied their lawmakers to loosen the carry restrictions. That just seems to be human nature.

Sorry, but the way I see it, the more-restrictive states are in the majority and any "uniform law" would, of necessity, be more restrictive than what I enjoy now.
Don H is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13089 seconds with 9 queries