Constitutional Carry Legislation

Arizona444 said:
Why jeopardize my rights in these SHALL issue states for the pathetic liberal voting people that are the majority vote in CA? If I don't like control of CCW by CA, I am quite a bit more frightened by the thought of CCW control by the Feds. That could make the CCW carry issue disappear overnight by the stroke of a pen once it is out of the hands of the state.
Click to expand...
But the Feds would not be "controlling" CCW. Each state would still be issuing (or not) its own licenses. ALL this law would do is require that other states recognize the validity of what your home state has done. In short, it codifies the intent of the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution. Nothing is taken out of the hands of the states except the dubious "right" to deny visitors the rights granted both under the Constitution and by their home state.

The worst they could do is repeal the law and set things nack to the patchwork we have now. But to go beyond that and "take over control" of CCW is not something this proposed law would in any way pave the way for. That would be something entirely different, and the Feds either could or couldn't do that today. Passing this law would not in any way affect the possibility or probability of a Federal "takeover."
 
Well said Alaska444,

I actually found myself wavering on this point today . . . how nice it would be to walk through Manhattan with my concealed weapon, just as I can drive my car through Manhattan. Take some of that! Hoplophobes be damned.

But it would be a cheap victory, and one that would, inevitably, shred us in the end.

No. Leave it to the states. It seems the trend is favoring discretionary or constitutional carry anyway. But we cannot cede yet more power to that insatiable Leviathan.
 
I have been a supporter of this for a long time, and I have very good CCW laws in effect where I live and travel. I respect the naysayers, and most of them are pretty emphatic. I just personally feel it would be a victory for the 2nd Amendment(and not hurt most carryers).
 
there were many people back in the day against licenses - and by the way & obviously - your license is produced by your STATE yet gives you the right to drive anywhere in America. My state CCW will allow me to carry in the other 49states; make your laws and do whatever while I am in your state. My CCW will be legal though. the maze that some posters have referred to in this thread are good points. Just the fact that it is an abyss of misunderstanding, laws, miscommunications, opinions, etc cause it to be more difficult to CCW throughout legal states with the utmost confidence(not the mention the time, patience, & money it takes loyal aficianados who exercise their right to be "as legal as possible").

It won't be like this if the laws change(which it will in time in my opinion UNLESS gun rights go backwards). The CCW you carry will garner more respect and better understanding. People that are clueless will now understand that the permit is the rea deal. As I said, my CCW laws are well above average on the good side for CCWs. That doesn't change the fact that I believe this to be a good thing. Not everything new ends up a bad thing or something that can't be trusted. I don't for a second think that it will make CCWing more difficult in my area when it passes.
 
It would be nice if some pressures were applied to Cali or Illinois etc. But if cities like New York can still hold out, it's just more of the same....you can go here but not there.
"Shall not be infringed" seems to fly over thier heads, and any federal involvment in CCW ought to begin with those states with the most restrictive laws. A little pressure there, and a gov that isn't pulling Fast and Furious moves to take away our rights...maybe I'd have a little more faith...but as it is...I don't.
They show me they want to regulate more, time after time, and things seems to be turning positive around the country slowly in spite of them...not because of them.
 
They are takin' away my incandescent light bulbs for chrissakes. Stay out of the CCW business, and go make all the states change thier street signs or something impressive.
They just don't inspire confidence, regarding thier intentions or abilities.
 
Don P said:
IIRC either here or on another forum when this came up it was stated that we would still have to adhere to the states that have the restrictions, like NYC, DC and so on. It was stated that if a state said no to its residents with regards to CCW the national permit would be useless there.I know it makes sense and it makes no sense.
Click to expand...
New York State issues concealed carry permits (or licenses). In fact, on paper so does NYC -- the issue is that they only issue to big shots, not to the commoners. Therefore, under the law as proposed, anyone with a license from their home state would be allowed to carry anywhere in New York State. Including the Big Apple.
 
And the first time a Permitted Concealed Carrier does something dumb... Lets go drastic and say shoots a cop. What will happen when the Fed has control?


Beentown
 
Therefore, under the law as proposed, anyone with a license from their home state would be allowed to carry anywhere in New York State. Including the Big Apple.
Click to expand...
What worries me is that, upon realizing this, New York may simply stop issuing permits altogether to get out of compliance.
 
Why is everyone referring to the example of the drivers license. In fact, that is exactly the issue to be feared. How soon everyone has forgotten about the National ID system through the states driver's licenses.

http://www.dojgov.net/national_license-01.htm

Yes, the drivers license is a great example but not in the way that folks have nonchalantly posted. The Federal control over the states driver's license could easily sometime in the near future end up with the National ID program.

The ONLY reason it is not yet a reality is because of the power of states opposing these Federal regulations.

So, go for it if you want the temporal privileges that this bill will give you, but do remember that the Feds never give you something without strings attached.
 
I think that the "full faith and credit" clause means that if I have a permit to CCW in Virginia, then other States have to respect that I have a permit to CCW in Virginia, but they do not have to treat it as a permit to CCW in their State ... this new interpretation of the "full faith and credit" clause, where State permits have to be treated as interstate permits, seems like another giant leap towards consolidation.
 
Here's what would happen if this bill passes and is signed into law (as improbable as it may be), the way the bill currently reads:

If you are a resident of MD; CA; NJ; NYC; and to a greater or lessor extent, NY; MA and CT, your not having a resident permit, you will not be able to carry in your resident State. Yet, everyone else who has a permit (resident or non resident) will be allowed to CC in your State.

That is the bulk of US citizens that will not be able to exercise a fundamental right, in their own State.
 
Al Norris said:
Here's what would happen if this bill passes and is signed into law (as improbable as it may be), the way the bill currently reads:

If you are a resident of MD; CA; NJ; NYC; and to a greater or lessor extent, NY; MA and CT, your not having a resident permit, you will not be able to carry in your resident State. Yet, everyone else who has a permit (resident or non resident) will be allowed to CC in your State.

That is the bulk of US citizens that will not be able to exercise a fundamental right, in their own State.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. And it is my hope and expectation that after a year or three of such nonsense, once there is a record that the invading hordes of armed outsiders didn't cause rivers of blood to run in the streets and the locals wake up to the fact that Uncle Joe from Billings can carry a gun when he visits me but I can't -- that the pressure will be on the restrictive states to become a lot less restrictive.
 
Illinois for instance requires a FOID to purchase a handgun or ammunition if I remember reading correctly. Are they going to let me carry the handgun I bought at a Virginia yard sale and let me have a box of spare ammo in the glove box with no FOID? Or is all this going to work itself out?
Sounds like something lawyers may get a wonky kick out of observing....as the nuances and loopholes get ironed out nationwide, but some of us maybe not so much as Random Officer Upset locks us in the pokey.

I'll just watch this one with a bit of skepticism as I keep to the states I trust.;)
 
Eghad said:
Quote:
don't see Obama signing it

I didn't see him signing a bill to allow carry in parks either but he did.....
__________________
Click to expand...
If it had been a stand-alone bill rather than an amendment to the credit card bill, I am positive that he wouldn't have signed it.
 
If it had been a stand-alone bill rather than an amendment to the credit card bill, I am positive that he wouldn't have signed it.
Click to expand...
I think you're right. The Credit Card Bill of Rights was a hot-button, must-have piece of legislation, and we were able to keep the national park initiative attached to it. The administration didn't like it one bit, but they were stuck. H.R. 822 doesn't have the same status.

Incidentally, Dave Kopel spoke to Congress regarding the bill, and the transcript is up at Volokh.
 
I think you're right. The Credit Card Bill of Rights was a hot-button, must-have piece of legislation, and we were able to keep the national park initiative attached to it. The administration didn't like it one bit, but they were stuck. H.R. 822 doesn't have the same status.
Click to expand...

True, but you never know what elected officials will do to gain any and all possible votes before an election. Let's hope for the best.
 
True, but you never know what elected officials will do to gain any and all possible votes before an election.
Click to expand...
Actually, the 2nd Amendment is pretty much a non-issue in this election. I don't think one vote for or against a piece of 2A legislation is going to be noticed outside the gun culture, and we'll already have made up our minds anyway.
 
Hugh Damright said:
I think that the "full faith and credit" clause means that if I have a permit to CCW in Virginia, then other States have to respect that I have a permit to CCW in Virginia, but they do not have to treat it as a permit to CCW in their State ... this new interpretation of the "full faith and credit" clause, where State permits have to be treated as interstate permits, seems like another giant leap towards consolidation.
Click to expand...
Nope.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Full+Faith+and+Credit+Clause
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top