|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 15, 2014, 02:08 AM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
It doesn't have to be like Utah where the government approves instructors and sets minimums for the curriculum. |
|
February 15, 2014, 09:19 AM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2007
Location: Lago Vista TX
Posts: 2,425
|
State by state reciprocity isn't the answer ... as an example, my wife and I drove to Vegas for a vacation in October. Every state we passed through accepted my Texas CHL -- except for Nevada. Before we crossed the state line, I dutifully unloaded my PM9, padlocked it in its case and stashed it in the trunk. For a week, all I had for protection was a 3-inch folder, not ideal. I understand the issue of varying requirements for licensing among the states, but I would NOT be a fan of universal rules handed down from DC ... picturing a semester-long course and firing 500 rounds into a pie plate at 50 yards to pass the national test. We need a national law that allows carry in all states, but getting something like that passed, especially in the current atmosphere in Washington, seems like a pipe dream.
On the plus side, we saw some great shows and I gained 10 pounds via eating at every buffet in town.
__________________
"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants." Albert Camus |
February 15, 2014, 10:14 AM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Maybe after we strike down may issue, we can get states to offer permits to out of state residents. That would be a step.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=427710 |
February 15, 2014, 11:46 AM | #54 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. Last edited by noelf2; February 15, 2014 at 11:53 AM. |
|
February 15, 2014, 07:45 PM | #55 | |
Member
Join Date: February 11, 2014
Location: Where you can find REAL BBQ.
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
If you look at this map, you'll see (indicated by the dark blue) that there is a large area of the US where the states only issue CHLs to their own residents. http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_ca...city_maps.html One of the problems is that states change who they recognize. These websites help a lot, but ultimately it is our own responsibility to check with each state that we might be passing through on a trip to see if our CHL is recognized by that state. Or you can just take your chances and hope that you won't be stopped for "revenue enhancement" while you are passing through a state. As far as I know, every state recognizes the license plates and inspection stickers (or lack thereof) of every other state. As far as I'm concerned, CHLs should be the same way. Now, I can remember back in the old days when states had agreements amongst themselves that allowed the revenue enhancement to be enforced. If you got stopped in a state that did not have an agreement with your state, the revenue enhancement officer would arrest you for a simple speeding ticket, have your car towed, and you would have to make bail to get out of jail. Of course, this lead to some people who were stopped just asking the officer if they could "just pay the fine now in cash". Whether that cash made it back to the general coffers, is another issue entirely. I've used that technique when driving in Mexico over the years. Yeah, it's bribery, but it's CHEAP bribery, so it's OK. |
|
February 16, 2014, 11:36 AM | #56 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
Quote:
But if you live in HI, you can apply for a non resident permit. Texas is in a similar situation to FL. We both have about 35 states, which is about all you can get. You loosen your restrictions, you lose states. I understand for a lot of you, interstate carry is not an immediate issue. If you go on vacation a couple weeks out of the year, you choose where you travel, and if you do choose to go to a non carry state, you do without a couple of weeks. Not a big deal, I suppose. |
||
February 16, 2014, 02:59 PM | #57 |
Member
Join Date: February 11, 2014
Location: Where you can find REAL BBQ.
Posts: 19
|
You have to wonder about about WHY some of the states do not recognize another state though. Nevada does not recognize the Texas or Florida CHLs, but they do recognize the Alaska CHL. They don't even recognize a Utah CHL and Utah is right next door.
__________________
More info on me Last edited by WilliamDahl; February 20, 2014 at 06:39 AM. |
February 16, 2014, 03:16 PM | #58 | |
Member
Join Date: June 3, 2013
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 98
|
Quote:
|
|
February 17, 2014, 08:30 AM | #59 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
State's rights, US laws....
While I'm pro-gun & support the 2A, Id see a lot of legal issues with a federal law re; concealed carry.
This to me seems to complicate the states rights issues & give those powers over to the federal government. If you qualify & get a state issued CCW would that then become the federal requirement to carry a concealed weapon? As noted, some states or local jurisdictions are not as strict re: concealed carry standards. How would that be enforced or looked at in court? If I have a use of force event & go on trial, would a "jury of my peers" be fair to me if my state's CCW regulations were not as rigid as the state or place I'm being adjudicated in? Some are comparing it to LEOSA. The Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act. This isn't a bill, but a US law. Signed by President Bush & later modified by President Obama(to include military retirees who served in LE positions). I'm not sure if it's a valid comparison for a # of reasons but I do say the LEOSA is worth it to those retired cops or federal agents who choose to use it. I, for one, could live with the system that's in place now. Having the federal government get into the CCW business seems un-needed at this point. Clyde |
February 17, 2014, 06:04 PM | #60 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
Are you not aware that laws become laws by being introduced as bills in the House or the Senate, where they are discussed and voted on? Only if a bill is passed by both the House and the Senate and then signed by the President does it become a law. Bills are just pieces of paper. They have no force and effect. Not ever. The LEOSA began as a bill -- House bill HR 218, IIRC. It became a law only after it was voted in, passed, and signed by the President. It is now a law -- not a bill. |
|
February 17, 2014, 06:35 PM | #61 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
Right!
That's what I stated in my TFL post.
It started as a bill, got passed then signed into law. As noted, should this national CCW bill come up, I don't think it will pass. I highly doubt POTUS Obama will sign it. He supports LEOSA but not citizen concealed carry. |
February 17, 2014, 06:57 PM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2011
Posts: 356
|
Clyde, think of it this way. Your driver's license is valid in every other state, irrespective of your particular state's requirements for obtaining one, and irrespective of the minimum insurance requirements imposed as a condition of licensure. I don't recall hearing any "state's rights" complaints about required reciprocity. A car is just as deadly a weapon as a firearm; there is no reason that rules of reciprocity should be any different between them.
|
February 17, 2014, 07:21 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 720
|
There is, and has been debate over states participating fully, or less than fully in the DLC (Driver License Compact), DLA (Driver License Agreement), and the NRVC (Non-Resident Violator Compact). If the states work together as to CCW, it will never be complete reciprocity in every respect, as drivers licenses are not either.
This is why some states may not report certain charges to your home state, but others do, or is why you must post bond for minor offenses. Yes, you can drive in other states, but the various agreements come in to play when there is an issue or conflict, and it would be reasonable to expect the same with any CCW agreements. |
February 17, 2014, 07:51 PM | #64 |
Member
Join Date: October 6, 2012
Posts: 39
|
And for the DL's its significant that there is ONLY the compact between the States and not a Law or Regulation that forces it.
|
February 17, 2014, 08:27 PM | #65 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
Cars & transpo....
I understand the point about DLs & vehicles but it's not quite the same.
The US auto industry pushed the "car culture" on society in the 1940s/1950s/1960s. They lobbied for federal highways, roads, bridges, etc. They wanted to see as many people as possible in a vehicle spending $$$ on gas, tires, oil, parts, etc. Transportation are a vital part of US commerce. Firearms & concealed firearms are not. The CCW issue is hotly debated & not everyone "needs" a gun the way they "need" a car. Clyde |
February 17, 2014, 09:12 PM | #66 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
Believe me, I didn't pay the extra $25 to check a carry-on sized bag with a pistol in it, (4 times in the last month) because it's fun to carry. There is a need behind it. Quote:
|
||
February 17, 2014, 09:57 PM | #67 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
But there IS a constitutionally guaranteed right (supposedly) to keep and bear arms. When you have to request and pay for a license to exercise a right, it is no longer a right. And THAT is the fundamental difference between drivers' licenses and sidearms. |
|
February 18, 2014, 11:03 AM | #68 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
That's true but....
I agree with the last post remarks but the problem comes up with standards & training requirements.
Would it be 0? Would every gun owner/license holder need a federal test? Who would administer the exam(s)? How long would "federal mandate or approved" licenses last? 2 years? 4 years? 6 years? What if new elected officials wanted to "opt out" of the federal program? As I said, a nationwide CCW seems nice but I don't see how it would be managed or enforced w/o errors or problems. See the recent www.Healthcare.gov mess. Clyde |
February 18, 2014, 10:22 PM | #69 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
The bill being proposed does NOT in any way establish any federal license, federal program, federal exam, federal training requirements, or federal anything. ALL it does is require each state to recognize a carry license or permit issued by any other state. |
|
February 19, 2014, 09:24 AM | #70 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
For the moment. I guess I just don't believe that any such bill would survive the enactment process without being amended to include federal standards. Even if it did, I don't think it would be long before the Schumers/Feinsteins/etc. started screaming for federal standards.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
February 19, 2014, 11:00 AM | #71 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
This is why I've argued for a separate tier of federal licenses. This would give the restrictive states impetus to focus their energy on the federal standards rather than attacking carry in general. However, the more I've thought about this issue, the more I've come to believe that we should just let sleeping dogs lie until the SCOTUS definitively rules on carry outside the home.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak Last edited by carguychris; February 19, 2014 at 01:54 PM. |
|
February 19, 2014, 12:40 PM | #72 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
February 19, 2014, 02:27 PM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
Other states have constitutional carry, but still offer licenses for people who need to carry in other states. I like the idea of a low cost/no cost option for people who don't need reciprocity, and a higher cost option for people who do. It's not as good as nationwide constitutional carry- it's a stopgap measure- but it'[s a better stopgap measure than what we have now. |
|
February 19, 2014, 03:37 PM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Would you be opposed to a two tier system for freedom of speech? Or religion? Or any other constitutional right? How about you can only call a politician a liar if you pay a bit more money? Or perhaps you have the right to remain silent, but not if questioned by police unless you can show them your "I paid for this" card? How about praying at home, but you have to pay a fee to pray in public? Not sure how you can "like the idea of a low cost/no cost option for people who don't need reciprocity". Who claims that anyone has to have a "need" for their rights? Constitutional rights are there because the need has already been recognized, for everyone!
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
February 19, 2014, 03:57 PM | #75 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
I agree. Although that brings us to the point of having to remember that, in the strictest terms, ANY license or permit to carry could be argued to be unconstitutional. Subject to the proviso that, as the state courts decided in Ohio, and many years previously in Utah (I think), if the state wants to ban or license concealed carry they may do so, BUT only if they freely allow unlicensed open carry. However, it could also go the other way. It's unlikely to happen, but a state theoretically could decide that unlicensed concealed carry is okay, but you need a license to carry openly. It could make for an interesting situation if some states ended up licensing concealed carry while others chose to license open carry -- think what a mess THAT would make for reciprocity. |
|
|
|