Give me a Gun Law 101 for each end of the spectrum.

I moved from Texas to Washington a few years ago and I was pleasantly surprised to find that WA gun laws are generally better than TX.

WA has excellent concealed carry laws (and they've had shall-issue carry for longer than almost any other state); getting a permit is super-easy, doesn't cost too much, doesn't require a class, and is good for five years. You can't carry in any 21-and-over establishments, but you can go to a restaurant that has a bar as long as you don't go into the bar area (most bars have railings or other dividers). You can even drink while carrying as long as you don't exceed the legal .08% limit. I find this very convenient; I can go out to eat with my family and have a beer or two while still being allowed to carry.

Another nice thing is if a business displays a "no guns" sign it doesn't have the force of law like in some other states. If it turns out you're carrying, all they can do ask you to leave. If you don't leave you can get charged with trespassing, but that's not because you're carrying, it's because they asked you to leave and you didn't.

Also, this is an open carry state. I don't open carry, but I support the right to do so. More importantly, it's a convenience thing: If I'm wearing a jacket over my gun and it gets too hot, I always have the option of just taking off the jacket without worrying about getting arrested. I also don't have to worry so much about printing; in some other states you can get in a lot of trouble if you print or otherwise show your gun when carrying concealed. But here I can carry with just a T-Shirt covering my gun and I don't have to worry as much.

But, to me the best thing is the state preemption laws: No locality can restrict guns any further than what the state allows. They'd love to ban all sorts of things in Seattle, but they can't. A while back the Seattle mayor tried banning carry in city parks and the state attorney general put a stop to that real fast.

The only real downside to WA's gun laws is that machine guns, SBSs, and SBRs are banned. But I can't afford machine guns anyway, and it looks like the governor is going to sign a law legalizing SBRs any day now. Some people also complain about our state's waiting period on handguns, but you can skip that wait if you have a CPL. And a CPL is really easy to get, so I don't really see that as an issue.
 
Well, so far NY seems the most prohibitive by far: frankly it seems it is significantly harder to get a firearm than here!
Click to expand...
Well, there you have the real answer for all the European governments that wish to control civilian access to firearms.

All they have to do is add the "right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" to some official government document and voila', they can have NY USA style laws!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Honest to God though, I'm torn between pounding my keyboard into little plastic pieces - crying - holding my head so it won't explode - or - just being glad I'm 62 and don't have too many more years left above ground.
 
...but you can go to a restaurant that has a bar as long as you don't go into the bar area...
Click to expand...
Same deal in TX, unless the restaurant in question derives more 51% or more of its income from the sale of alcohol to be consumed on the premises. If that is the case, they are required to post a specific sign that warns patrons.
You can even drink while carrying as long as you don't exceed the legal .08% limit.
Click to expand...
The law in TX is a little vague. There is no prohibition on drinking while carrying. It's only an offense if the person is "intoxicated". However, there is no legal definition of "intoxicated" provided in the CHL laws. Therefore, the general consensus tends to be that due to the lack of specificity in the CHL laws as far as what constitutes being intoxicated it is wiser to avoid drinking while carrying.
Another nice thing is if a business displays a "no guns" sign it doesn't have the force of law like in some other states.
Click to expand...
A "No Guns" sign has no force of law in TX. A property owner can post a sign with the force of law, but its size and specific content are mandated by law. There aren't many of them because they have to be quite large to comply with the legal requirements.
...doesn't cost too much, doesn't require a class, and is good for five years.
Click to expand...
A TX CHL is also good for 5 years, but does require a class (the class length has been reduced to about 6hrs) and a fairly hefty fee paid to the state. Renewals no longer require a class but still require a fee paid to the state.
But, to me the best thing is the state preemption laws: No locality can restrict guns any further than what the state allows.
Click to expand...
TX also has a preemption law.
 
Texas is actually not one of the most permissive states. Their law enforcement may be, but their laws are not as permissive as others. Nor are they especially restrictive.

Vermont is obviously one end of the spectrum. I don't recall which ones exactly mimic them, but I believe it's Alaska and Arizona that have followed their lead into permitless concealed carry.

Generally speaking there are a few areas:

Concealed/Open Carry. As far as I know every area allows some version of one or the other technically. The last jurisdiction that didn't lost a court case and was forced to adopt a carry law and chose concealed carry. With that said there are two types of carry. Open, and Concealed. Most, but not all states allow anyone legally able to own a firearm to carry it openly. Those that allow concealed carry have two options as well. May Issue, and Shall Issue. Shall Issue generally means that the police must issue a permit unless they can prove the person is prohibited. May Issue means the issuing authority may issue if they feel like it. USUALLY this is used to severely curtail the issuing of permits. Some states require a training class, some do not.

Purchasing. Some states require you get a background check to get a permission slip to get another background check to buy a firearm. These permission slips are usually called Firearm Owner ID (FOID) or the like cards. Most if not all of the states that require these cards will also create a state level registry of who owns what, and require a background check through a gun store's background check system for second hand (also called private) sales.

Finally prohibitions and restricted approval lists of allowed firearms. Assault Weapons Bans, Approved Firearms Lists, and the like. For example in California only some firearms submitted to the state for testing get approved for sale in the state. And some will never be approved because of magazine size, or other features built in. Some manufacturers go so far as to create a special "California Compliant" version with smaller magazine, missing functions and features, and so on.

And surprisingly most states are more permissive than restrictive. At least, the last I checked.
 
JohnKSa: I guess my post was unclear. I wasn't comparing WA's gun laws directly to TX gun laws; I'm aware that most of the things I mentioned are similar in both states. I was simply remarking on my surprise that -- aside from some bans on NFA firearms -- WA laws are generally better than TX laws.

When I first told my friends in TX that I was moving to WA, many of them said, "Oh man, I'll bet their gun laws are terrible! That sucks!" But I was pleasantly surprised when I started researching WA guns laws and found they were better than TX laws for the most part. The thing that annoyed me the most about TX was that it doesn't have open carry; before I moved there I just assumed it was an open carry state.

But I will say that TX does have a better gun culture than WA does. And there is a large percentage of the population who would love to make WA's gun laws a lot more restrictive; I'm fairly sure it's a larger percentage than in TX. I'd be willing to bet that WA is more likely to pass restrictive gun laws in the future than TX is.
 
What's funny is that once you get a permit in NY, the state is suddenly one of the least restrictive. There are virtually no carry restrictions beyond schools and government buildings, no law whatsoever regarding bars/restaurants/alcohol and "No Guns" signs carry no force of law.
 
I'd be willing to bet that WA is more likely to pass restrictive gun laws in the future than TX is.
Click to expand...

I would neither make nor take that bet. WA is completely schizophrenic on guns. Remember we have two competing and all but mutually exclusive ballot initiatives going to the legislature right now.

Also while, nationally Washington is turned blue by the three county sized tail wagging the Statewide dog, in the state legislature WA is far less polarized. Even without that, I live in that three county area, and can drive to probably a dozen gun stores, and a half dozen public shooting ranges in an hour or less. I can think of four gun stores, and two ranges that are merely 10ish minutes and a neighborhood or two away.
 
Vermont

No permit to purchase.

No permit required to carry concealed or openly.

No loaded long guns in or on a vehicle on or within 25 feet of a public highway.

Machine guns with tax stamp are legal.

No silencers ($25 fine).
Click to expand...

And no reciprocity with other states.

Vermont is obviously one end of the spectrum. I don't recall which ones exactly mimic them, but I believe it's Alaska and Arizona that have followed their lead into permitless concealed carry.
Click to expand...

Wyoming has constituional carry, open and concealed, and is a shall issue state. The main difference between Wyoming and Vermont is that Wyoming will issue a CCW permit with a background check and $80 (in my county, varies) fee. No training required if you can demonstrate any form of previous training, ie. military, hunter safety, etc. As a Wyoming CCW permit holder I can carry in 36 other states. A Vermont resident can carry in only three other states: Oklahoma, Arizona and Alaska.

Best source for all of this info is still http://www.handgunlaw.us/
 
I wasn't comparing WA's gun laws directly to TX gun laws.
Click to expand...
I understand, however the implication was that the examples you listed were where WA law was different from TX and I was clarifying to avoid misunderstandings.
The thing that annoyed me the most about TX was that it doesn't have open carry; before I moved there I just assumed it was an open carry state.
Click to expand...
After the civil war, when TX banned the carry of handguns, the legislature banned ALL the carry of handguns. Of course, in the beginning, that law was only enforced against freedmen--the purpose of the law was to insure that the freed slaves wouldn't be carrying handguns.

When selective enforcement became impossible, it left TX with unusually strict prohibitions against carrying handguns when originally there was no intent to disarm anyone but the freed slaves. Ugly and ironic all at once.

At any rate, a lot of that mess has been remedied now--one remaining remnant is that open carry still isn't legal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top