You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Constitutional CCW Reciprcity
- Thread starter Don P
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
It all sounds good at first, but I'm absolutely against it. People in states that requires 40 hours of gun safety training and hands on range fire testing might get upset that outsiders aren't obliged to endure the same level of assessment. In time, pressure would come from the states and federal government to "standardize" the requirements for carry. Do we really want the federal government to take this control? Since 2A is a constitutional right (unlike driving, which is only a privilege), all states need to enact constitutional carry.
"allow individuals with the right to carry a concealed firearm in their home state to exercise that right in any other state that also allows that practice."
Dont we already get that thru state to state reciprocity???
I would think a better use of our political chips would be a Federal reciprocity bill. One that allow anyone with a concealed weapon permit to legally carry in any state they visit
As an example. I live in Co and have a ccw permit issued there. As i travel to Nv to visit family im good to go (Nv honors Co permits), but if i travel to Calif to visit family, do some diving or just go to Disneyland. I cant carry my pistol
Im thinking a civilian CCW bill like the LEO SB218. That allows LEOs to carry in any state
Dont we already get that thru state to state reciprocity???
I would think a better use of our political chips would be a Federal reciprocity bill. One that allow anyone with a concealed weapon permit to legally carry in any state they visit
As an example. I live in Co and have a ccw permit issued there. As i travel to Nv to visit family im good to go (Nv honors Co permits), but if i travel to Calif to visit family, do some diving or just go to Disneyland. I cant carry my pistol
Im thinking a civilian CCW bill like the LEO SB218. That allows LEOs to carry in any state
Dont we already get that thru state to state reciprocity???
We do, and what do we have to give up to get to Carry in NYC (with Federal Reciprocity)? Anybody here remember FOPA of 1986? That was supposed to protect travellers passing through- that hasn't stopped NYPD from arresting folks whose flights were cancelled and were forced to overnight in the Big Wormy Apple. We traded private ownership of newly manufactured full auto guns for that.
Give them a Law, and they'll find a way to screw you with it.
IMO, the Fed.gov is into too much stuff as it is. They are on the edge of financial collapse because they are doing so much more than the founders laid out for them ....... they can't manage the stuff they are doing now, let alone more ......
Let them into CCW, and they'll "standardize" your ability to get a permit anywhere right out of reasonable attainability.
NO.
2ndsojourn
New member
It's an improvement over what's in effect now. But good luck trying to get us in NJ signed on.
(Note: The article states that concealed carry is allowed in all fifty states. But in reality, NJ has a de facto ban. Only LE and armored car couriers are issued permits.)
(Note: The article states that concealed carry is allowed in all fifty states. But in reality, NJ has a de facto ban. Only LE and armored car couriers are issued permits.)
Dont we already get that thru state to state reciprocity???
Not in a ubiquitous way. Not all states have reciprocity with all states. Most only have reciprocity with states that have similar requirements.
I would think a better use of our political chips would be a Federal reciprocity bill. One that allow anyone with a concealed weapon permit to legally carry in any state they visit
You really want to give that control to the Federal Government? Besides, there are federal laws against marijuana, however, some states don't recognize those laws and the feds are unable to enforce them anyway. What makes you think states with very restrictive carry requirements will allow the federal law to be exercised? The state can still arrest you if you break their state law. The federal government is finding that it is getting harder for federal law to preempt state law.
Oh believe me... I dont want any more Federal interference either but this proposal doesn't get us ANYTHING
A version of SB218 for CCW holders would at least make it the same throughout all the states. I wouldnt have to stop at the "border" to unload and case my selfdefense handgun to enter certain states
Being legal as i stand on one side of an invisible line and a criminal if i step over is just ludicrous. I lived is a town in Nv that bordered Calif. Drive 10 min from my house in the wrong direction and im a criminal....really????
A version of SB218 for CCW holders would at least make it the same throughout all the states. I wouldnt have to stop at the "border" to unload and case my selfdefense handgun to enter certain states
Being legal as i stand on one side of an invisible line and a criminal if i step over is just ludicrous. I lived is a town in Nv that bordered Calif. Drive 10 min from my house in the wrong direction and im a criminal....really????
We've been over this in prior threads when the legislation has come up in the past. Here's a quick summary of the problems with it.
First off, its chances at passage are dismal at best. Representatives from states like New York, California, Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, and Massachusetts have enough seats (and influential seats on committees) in the House to kill it. And kill it they will, because they don't want folks from more permissive states flaunting their laws.
The second problem arises when someone from out of state doesn't know every wrinkle of local law. Consider Illinois' ban on carry aboard public transit. Folks are going to get busted for things they don't know are illegal, and this law doesn't protect them.
The third problem is that restrictive states will realize that, and they're going to pass all sorts of onerous local regulations and restrictions to make carry harder. This causes more problems for local citizens and creates a chilling effect all around.
This issue is something that needs to be hashed out by state governments, or in the courts. A single feel-good piece of legislation isn't going to solve it.
First off, its chances at passage are dismal at best. Representatives from states like New York, California, Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, and Massachusetts have enough seats (and influential seats on committees) in the House to kill it. And kill it they will, because they don't want folks from more permissive states flaunting their laws.
The second problem arises when someone from out of state doesn't know every wrinkle of local law. Consider Illinois' ban on carry aboard public transit. Folks are going to get busted for things they don't know are illegal, and this law doesn't protect them.
The third problem is that restrictive states will realize that, and they're going to pass all sorts of onerous local regulations and restrictions to make carry harder. This causes more problems for local citizens and creates a chilling effect all around.
This issue is something that needs to be hashed out by state governments, or in the courts. A single feel-good piece of legislation isn't going to solve it.
Spats McGee
Administrator
IMHO, any sort of federally-created concealed carry reciprocity is the camel's nose in the tent. As I see it, once the federal government mandates CCW reciprocity, the more restrictive states (most of which have lots of votes in the HoR) will start screaming for federal standards for all CCLs. I have absolutely no interest in allowing Feinstein or her ilk any vote whatsoever in what standards my state uses for determining who gets a CHCL, especially since I have no say inw whether or not such folks get re-elected.
Fishing_Cabin
New member
Agreed that this would be better off being dealt with at the state level and in the courts. Also, even if the feds mandate something such as national CCW there would have to be some serious teeth in the bill to ensure it is followed to keep some states from basically not complying in some for or fashion.
I would much prefer the states handle it, and the feds stay out of it, which is why I would contact my elected reps to voice that same opinion if this proceeds any farther. May not do any good, but there is a reason why I have made a choice not to live in a more restrictive state.
I would much prefer the states handle it, and the feds stay out of it, which is why I would contact my elected reps to voice that same opinion if this proceeds any farther. May not do any good, but there is a reason why I have made a choice not to live in a more restrictive state.
Last edited:
Aguila Blanca
Staff
No ... not even close.sharkbite said:Dont we already get that thru state to state reciprocity???
My home state has no reciprocity with any other state. A (very) few states unilaterally recognize my home state permit, but my state recognizes no others. I currently hold licenses/permits from four different states, and that allows me to carry (legally) in approximately 33 states.
I see zero downside to this proposal. It's way overdue. The notion that the states with stricter laws will somehow "force" the states with less strict laws to become more strict doesn't compute. It's probably more likely that it would go the other way, as people who live in the strict states whine to their state legislators about how unfair it is that visitors don't have to do 'X' and 'Y' and 'Z' to carry, but they (the residents) do.
Do you really think that the Pennsylvania legislature is going to require mandatory training for carry permits if they start getting letters from Chicago?
But they already make those complaints in a way, and the legislatures of those states haven't budged. Politicians in restrictive states aren't going to see out-of-towners with guns as examples; they're going to see them as problems.It's probably more likely that it would go the other way, as people who live in the strict states whine to their state legislators about how unfair it is that visitors don't have to do 'X' and 'Y' and 'Z' to carry, but they (the residents) do.
No, but will Pennsylvania help defend one of their citizens who made the mistake of boarding a bus in Chicago with a gun on? Doubtful. That's one of the problems that worries me.Do you really think that the Pennsylvania legislature is going to require mandatory training for carry permits if they start getting letters from Chicago?
Spats McGee
Administrator
No. I think that the federal government will mandate a national standard for any state to issue CCLs. I think that representatives from stricter states will push for federal standards in line with what they have at home. (Remember when the federal gov't withheld road money until states raised their drinking ages to 21?) Louisiana had awful roads for years after that, because it refused to raise its drinking age, IIRC.Aguila Blanca said:Do you really think that the Pennsylvania legislature is going to require mandatory training for carry permits if they start getting letters from Chicago?
Let's look at just a few of the more restrictive states in the House of Representatives:
California: 53 votes
New York: 27 votes
New Jersey: 12
Total: 92
Looking at a sampling of the less restrictive states:
Texas: 36
Arizona: 9
Pennsylvania: 18
Florida: 27
Total: 90
So, that comes pretty close to (but not quite) even. It took "us" an extra state to get there, though, and we haven't even considered the Senate.
So, let's take a look at who has the most HoR votes:
California: 53
Texas: 36
New York: 27
Florida: 27
Illinois: 18
Pennsylvania: 18
Ohio: 16
Michigan: 14
Source: http://www.ehdp.com/vitalnet/reps.htm
So far, that looks pretty evenly split, but there are lots of states that have only 5-8 votes. My state has a whopping 4 Reps. Arkansas would have to find alliances with a LOT of other states to block passage of federal standards.
The second problem arises when someone from out of state doesn't know every wrinkle of local law. Consider Illinois' ban on carry aboard public transit. Folks are going to get busted for things they don't know are illegal, and this law doesn't protect them.
That will always be an issue, whether we have national or state-by-state reciprocity.
The main problem I can see with a federal reciprocity bill is that there will be a push for national standards in training or or vetting applicants. Thew only workaround I could see is possibly a separate set of standards. For example, there are different types of driver's licenses. Why not set up a separate plan for a nationwide license, yet allow states to license their own residents under a lesser standard?
The LEO sb218 standard aint that tough folks. Id happily qual to those standards and could live with people that could not being declined a permit.
Before you go all 2nd ammendment on me. We are talking about a level of skill with a deadly instrument. Not unlike a driving test. Jeeez i can hear it now. Driving is a privilige. Carrying is a RIGHT. Ok... I get it
What im saying is if you cant qual on a fairly BASIC shooting test. Maybe i dont want you banging off rounds in a parking lot cause you were getting mugged and hitting one of my loved ones
I work HARD to keep up my skill sets. Not just with firearms but emptyhands, blades AND driving
Ive seen the results of some of the CCW training out there and quite frankly some of those folks scare me
Before you go all 2nd ammendment on me. We are talking about a level of skill with a deadly instrument. Not unlike a driving test. Jeeez i can hear it now. Driving is a privilige. Carrying is a RIGHT. Ok... I get it
What im saying is if you cant qual on a fairly BASIC shooting test. Maybe i dont want you banging off rounds in a parking lot cause you were getting mugged and hitting one of my loved ones
I work HARD to keep up my skill sets. Not just with firearms but emptyhands, blades AND driving
Ive seen the results of some of the CCW training out there and quite frankly some of those folks scare me
it all sounds good
but so did the Constitution. And those who wrote it were thorough, thoughtful and brilliant. Yet Our last generation of politicians have managed to tear it apart piece by piece.
No matter cleverly written, this will take a turn for the worse. It will end up being a nation wide cc restriction to match the most restrictive law so that no one will have to worry about accidently becoming unlawful.
Right off the bat, people will start buying Ma or Ca legal weapons just to be safe and off we go down the slippery slope.
but so did the Constitution. And those who wrote it were thorough, thoughtful and brilliant. Yet Our last generation of politicians have managed to tear it apart piece by piece.
No matter cleverly written, this will take a turn for the worse. It will end up being a nation wide cc restriction to match the most restrictive law so that no one will have to worry about accidently becoming unlawful.
Right off the bat, people will start buying Ma or Ca legal weapons just to be safe and off we go down the slippery slope.
So have I. However, I've watched folks qualified to carry via LEOSA shoot, and some of them give me pause as well.Ive seen the results of some of the CCW training out there and quite frankly some of those folks scare me
Exactly what level of training would qualify? Who decides the criteria? How long does it take, how easy is it to acquire, and how much does it cost?
I know of no other right burdened with such provisions. Claiming that we need hurdles because a few folks might abuse it is the kind of argument our opponents make. We don't need to do their job for them.
There are a few reasons why I say NO!
1- Feds = more regulation
2- States rights
3- We have the right to open carry in those states that prohibit concealed carry.
For the gentleman from CO. If you travel through Clark Co. NV you are prohibited from CCW. They do not recognize any other CCW than NV.
For the standardization, I say no! I live in Utah and don't require a CCW as a LEO retired, but the wife does. Utah has one of, if not the easiest CCW permit to get. For this reason the states that are very strict in who they give them to and the training they make them get, (which IMHO is a good idea. More training is a good thing and if some are not told to do it they have the right granted them by their citizens to require this sort of thing in order to feel like they are keeping their citizens safe.
Do I agree with states with these beliefs? Yes and no.
No, as I believe in less government involvement in our rights.
Yes, because of what I said above, some people will carry because they want to be cool and not train so they can be affective. Those sort of people get others hurt.
Once you draw down on a person it is for some very easy to pull the trigger and for others very hard. Having been there done that, I know for me it is a hard thing to do and I want to give that person every opportunity to stop and not get shot, however I will and I repeat I will pull the trigger when I feel it is needed!
Sorry for the rant, but any more laws regulating anything else majes me just want to toss my cookies!
Mel
1- Feds = more regulation
2- States rights
3- We have the right to open carry in those states that prohibit concealed carry.
For the gentleman from CO. If you travel through Clark Co. NV you are prohibited from CCW. They do not recognize any other CCW than NV.
For the standardization, I say no! I live in Utah and don't require a CCW as a LEO retired, but the wife does. Utah has one of, if not the easiest CCW permit to get. For this reason the states that are very strict in who they give them to and the training they make them get, (which IMHO is a good idea. More training is a good thing and if some are not told to do it they have the right granted them by their citizens to require this sort of thing in order to feel like they are keeping their citizens safe.
Do I agree with states with these beliefs? Yes and no.
No, as I believe in less government involvement in our rights.
Yes, because of what I said above, some people will carry because they want to be cool and not train so they can be affective. Those sort of people get others hurt.
Once you draw down on a person it is for some very easy to pull the trigger and for others very hard. Having been there done that, I know for me it is a hard thing to do and I want to give that person every opportunity to stop and not get shot, however I will and I repeat I will pull the trigger when I feel it is needed!
Sorry for the rant, but any more laws regulating anything else majes me just want to toss my cookies!
Mel
Buzzard Bait
New member
whats the difference?
This may result in me getting a spanking but,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, What's the difference between a CCL and a drivers license? I can drive coast to coast with my drivers license I only need to change it if I change my state of residence. Doesn't the constitution require the states to recognize the laws of other states? I can see if I move I need a new license for that state but passing threw? Seems like they should have to honor my home state license whether it's a drivers license or a CCL, I know it's not but sure seems like it should be.
Also does this line just not count in all this?
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States"
Well several states offer CCL? What about the rest of them?
bb
one more thing In reality I HAVE A CONSTTUTIONAL RIGHT TO THE FIREARM no such right to the car or drivers license its a privilege.
This may result in me getting a spanking but,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, What's the difference between a CCL and a drivers license? I can drive coast to coast with my drivers license I only need to change it if I change my state of residence. Doesn't the constitution require the states to recognize the laws of other states? I can see if I move I need a new license for that state but passing threw? Seems like they should have to honor my home state license whether it's a drivers license or a CCL, I know it's not but sure seems like it should be.
Also does this line just not count in all this?
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States"
Well several states offer CCL? What about the rest of them?
bb
one more thing In reality I HAVE A CONSTTUTIONAL RIGHT TO THE FIREARM no such right to the car or drivers license its a privilege.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.