shall carry vs. may issue

E

EricReynolds

New member
I was recently embroiled in a debate with two people on opposite ends of the spectrum of who should be allowed to carry. The first was in favor of may issue policies that put who's allowed up to a judge or sheriff. I did not agree with her. The other stated that if an individual has no violent felony convictions, he should be given a ccw permit. I did not agree with him either, that just seemed a little too loose to me. There has to be a happy medium. My question is to those of you that live in shall carry states. What is the criteria that one must meet to be issued a ccw permit?
 
Michigan law

from Michigan State Police website. Michigan is shall issue

http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1591_3503_4654-10926--,00.html



Applicants for a Michigan Concealed Pistol License must:

1. Be at least 21 years of age

2. Be a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted into the United States

3. Be a resident of the State of Michigan for at least 6 months prior to application. An applicant is a state resident if one of the following applies:

*
The applicant possesses a valid, lawfully obtained Michigan driver's license or state identification card
*
The applicant is lawfully registered to vote in Michigan
*
The applicant is on active duty status with the United States Armed Forces and stationed outside of Michigan, but Michigan is the home of record
*
The applicant is on active duty status with the United States Armed Forces and is permanently stationed in Michigan, but the home of record is another state

Note: The 6-month residency requirement may be waived by the concealed pistol licensing board for new residents licensed by another state.

4. Have successfully completed a pistol safety training course

5. Not be subject to any of the following:

*
An order requiring involuntary hospitalization or alternative treatment
*
An order finding legal incapacitation
*
A finding of not guilty by reason of insanity

6. Not be subject to a conditional bond release prohibiting purchase or possession of a firearm

7. Not be subject to a personal protection order

8. Not be prohibited from possessing, using, transporting, selling, purchasing, carrying, shipping, receiving, or distributing a firearm under MCL 750.224f

9. Have never been convicted of a felony in Michigan or elsewhere

10. Have no felony charge pending in Michigan or elsewhere

11. Have not been dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces

12. Have not been convicted of one of the following misdemeanors in the 8 years immediately preceding the date of application:

*
Failing to stop when involved in a personal injury accident, MCL 257.617a
*
Operating while intoxicated, second offense, MCL 257.625(9)(b)
*
Drunk driving, commercial vehicle, MCL 257.625m(4)
*
Reckless driving, MCL 257.626
*
Driving while license suspended or revoked, second or subsequent offense, MCL 257.904
*
Operating aircraft while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance with prior conviction, MCL 259.185
*
Hindering or obstructing certain persons performing official weights and measures duties, MCL 290.629
*
Hindering, obstructing, assaulting, or committing bodily injury upon director or authorized representative, MCL 290.650
*
Operating an ORV under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, second or subsequent offense, MCL 324.81134(5)-(6)
*
Operating a snowmobile under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, second or subsequent offense, MCL 324.82127 punishable under section MCL 324.82128(1)(b) or (c)
*
Operating a vessel under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, second or subsequent offense, MCL 324.80176 punishable under MCL 324.80177(1)(b)
*
Possessing a controlled substance, controlled substance analogue, or prescription form, MCL 333.7403.
*
Operating a locomotive under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, or while visibly impaired, MCL 462.353(4)
*
Displaying sexually explicit matter to minors, MCL 722.677
*
Assault or domestic assault, MCL 750.81
*
Aggravated assault or aggravated domestic assault, MCL 750.81a
*
Breaking and entering or entering without breaking, MCL 750.115
*
Fourth-degree child abuse, MCL 750.136b
*
Accosting, enticing, or soliciting a child for immoral purposes, MCL 750.145a
*
Vulnerable adult abuse, MCL 750.145n
*
Solicitation to commit a felony, MCL 750.157b
*
Impersonating a peace officer or medical examiner, MCL 750.215
*
Illegal sale of a firearm or ammunition, MCL 750.223
*
Illegal use or sale of a self-defense spray, MCL 750.224d
*
Sale or possession of a switchblade, MCL 750.226a
*
Improper transportation of a loaded firearm, MCL 750.227c
*
Failure to have a pistol inspected, MCL 750.228
*
Accepting a pistol in pawn, MCL 750.229
*
Failure to register the purchase of a firearm or a firearm component, MCL 750.232
*
Improperly obtaining a pistol, making a false statement on an application to purchase a pistol, or using false identification to purchase a pistol, MCL 750.232a
*
Intentionally aiming a firearm without malice, MCL 750.233
*
Intentionally discharging a firearm aimed without malice, MCL 750.234
*
Possessing a firearm on prohibited premises, MCL 750.234d
*
Brandishing a firearm in public, MCL 750.234e
*
Possession of a firearm by an individual less than 18 years of age, MCL 750.234f
*
Intentionally discharging a firearm aimed without malice causing injury, MCL 750.235
*
Parent of a minor who possessed a firearm in a weapon-free school zone, MCL 750.235a
*
Setting a spring gun or other device, MCL 750.236
*
Possessing a firearm while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug, MCL 750.237
*
Weapon-free school zone violation, MCL 750.237a
*
Indecent exposure, MCL 750.335a
*
Stalking, MCL 750.411h
*
Fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520e
*
Reckless, careless, or negligent use of a firearm resulting in injury or death, MCL 752.861
*
Careless, reckless, or negligent use of a firearm resulting in property damage, MCL 752.862
*
Reckless discharge of a firearm, MCL 752.863a

Note: The applicant must not have violated a law of the United States, another state, or a local unit of government of this state or another state substantially corresponding to a violation described above.

13. Have not been convicted of one of the following misdemeanors in the 3 years immediately preceding the date of application:

*
Operating under the influence, MCL 257.625
*
Refusal of commercial vehicle operator to submit to a chemical test, MCL 257.625a
*
Ignition interlock device reporting violation, MCL 257.625k
*
Circumventing an ignition interlocking device, MCL 257.625l
*
Operating a commercial vehicle with alcohol content, MCL 257.625m(3)
*
Operating an aircraft under the influence, MCL 259.185
*
Operating an ORV under the influence, MCL 324.81134
*
Operating an ORV while visibly impaired, MCL 324.81135
*
Operating a snowmobile under the influence, MCL 324.82127
*
Controlled substances, MCL 333.7401 to 333.7461
*
Operating a locomotive under the influence, MCL 462.353(3)
*
Disorderly person, MCL 750.167
*
Embezzlement, MCL 750.174
*
False pretenses with intent to defraud, MCL 750.218
*
Larceny, MCL 750.356
*
Second-degree retail fraud, MCL 750.356d
*
Larceny, vacant building, MCL 750.359
*
Larceny, by conversion, MCL 750.362
*
Larceny, defrauding lessor, MCL 750.362a
*
Malicious destruction of property, MCL 750.377a
*
Malicious destruction of real property, MCL 750.380
*
Receiving stolen property, MCL 750.535
*
Malicious use of telephones, MCL 750.540e

Note: The applicant must not have violated a law of the United States, another state, or a local unit of government of this state or another state substantially corresponding to a violation described above.

14. Have not been found guilty but mentally ill of any crime and has not offered a plea of not guilty of, or been acquitted of, any crime by reason of insanity

15. Have never been subject to an order of involuntary commitment in an inpatient or outpatient setting due to a mental illness

16. Not have a diagnosed mental illness at the time the application is made, regardless of whether he or she is receiving treatment

17. Not be under a court order of legal incapacity in this state or elsewhere

18. Not be detrimental to the safety of his or her self or any other person if issued a Concealed Pistol License
 
Thank you Flapjack. I think that Michigan has reasonable standards. Anyone out there have vastly different rules in their state?
 
I believe that Alaska and Vermont have the right idea; if you can legally own a gun you can carry it, no permit necessary. I see no reason to have any more restrictions other than not being a felon (and we know they carry anyway).
 
PA is a shall issue but in the end is is similar to a lot of other states. instead of listing all the disqualifying convictions it says if you have been convicted of a crime that can get you a year or more in the crossbar hotel, your disqualified from getting the PA license to carry a firearm (LTCF). PA is also an open carry state no license required. The LTCF does not allow for long guns.

The problem I have when you start making it even a little subjective is some A$$hat will take advantage of it to push their personal agenda.
 
North Carolina's requirements and disqualifications are listed here on pages #13 and #14. In addition to meeting the requirements to buy a gun under federal law, you have to complete an approved training course. Additional state disqualifications include mental incapacity and convictions for impaired driving in the prior three years, misdemeanor crimes of violence, and a hodge-podge of other offenses (some of which are a bit strange, such as throwing or dropping objects at sporting events - N.C.G.S. § 14-281.1).
 
The problem with "may issue" is that it puts too much power in the hands of individual cops. The temptation to sell the permits for campaign contributions, or issue only to major campaign contributors, or issue in a racially biased fashion or worse (yeah, we'll get to THAT) is just too high.

Examples:

* Former Sheriff Baxter Dunn of San Joaquin County Calif was jailed under Federal corruption charges. His partner in real estate fraud pulled his Dunn-issued CCW-permitted gun on Federal agents. Feds were SO not happy over that one.

* The current Federal corruption charges against former Sheriff Carona of Orange County Calif includes selling permits under the table for $1,000 a pop. (Carona also had a weird "fetish" over gangsters, dressing up like one for halloween(!) and hanging out with real ones. There's strong hints he issued permits to same...)

* A member of the NYPD brass in charge of gun licenses was fired after he was found to have scored backstage passes, limo rides and general "hangout rights" with the band Aerosmith - the two frontmen for which he had issued permits to despite their WELL known history with drugs (pretty much everything imaginable and many that aren't).

I could go ON and ON and ON with this crap but this actual police report will summarize nicely:

http://www.ninehundred.net/~equalccw/colafrancescopapers.pdf

It gets worse. Inevitably, this kind of "policy" becomes known in the department. In the Colafrancesco case above, a disgusted deputy leaked the report...and the officer that had taken the statements in there suffered horrible retaliation (even though he wasn't the one that leaked it). This crap has a corrosive effect on ALL aspects of law enforcement.

Issuing to anybody who can pass objective standards has a strong track record in at least 38 states. There's no need to get more restrictive and no sane way to do so without running into the problem of "laws by men, not laws by law".
 
I'm in WI, so nobody can carry here (except for those exempt by federal laws).

That said, I think that giving too much power to any one person is a bad idea. If my local sherif was anti-gun he could deny everybody in the county the right to carry. Like others have said this could also open the door to corruption opportunities and giving special attention to the rich/famous.

I support Vermont's approach to ccw. You don't have to have a permit to carry. As long as you are able to legally own a firearm, you can carry it with you. Vermont also has a pretty low crime rate. When it comes to rights vs privileges I think that once you have to ask permission to exercise a right, that right becomes a privilege.

I'm also opposed to the government having a list of ccw holders. If we had to register our first amendment rights by registering our choice of religion with our sherif there would be a massive outcry of public disapproval. I feel the same way about people having to register their right to exercise the 2nd.

There are absolutely people who lose the right to carry a firearm due to mental incompetence or proving that they are unable to exercise their rights in a way that doesn't violate somebody else's rights. But, I don't think the fact that there are criminals should keep me from exercising my rights.
 
Last edited:
I am in full agreement with Jim March and chemgirlie.

Tennessee used to be a "May Issue" state when I grew up here and if you wanted a CCW you gave a "donation" to the Sheriff's Re-Election fund and you got the permit but it was only good in the county and if you wanted to carry in another county then you got out your wallet again. Two Davidson County Sheriffs when to the Federal Pen for corruption who were in power when that was going on.

I like to call "May Issue" permits "Robert DeNiro CCW" in honor of NY City's policy of "May Issue".

Joining the Trumps in the celebrity gun club are tough-guy actors - and longtime gun licensees - Robert De Niro and Harvey Keitel; film producer Martin Bregman; cosmetics heir Ronald Lauder, music czar Tommy Mottola and Marvel Comics CEO Isaac Perlmutter. Shock jocks Howard Stern and the disgraced Don Imus are also members of the gun club, as are lawyers Barry Slotnick and Raoul Felder. Wealthy publisher Robert Forbes, Republican Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno and cabby activist Fernando Mateo have also retained their gun licenses.
Click to expand...
Full story: http://www.nypost.com/seven/08292007/news/regionalnews/trump_junior_packin.htm

May Issue is a bust and an invitation to government abuse.
 
Last edited:
Virginia had the same problem for many years when it was a conditional issue state. The rural sheriffs would generally issue to anyone, but the suburban sheriffs issued to virtually no one other than their friends, family, and business associates. It was also used by many sheriffs as a political plum to "reward" those who did nice things for the sheriff, like push for his election...

Back in the mid 1990s when Virginia was debating adopting shall issue the sheriffs who were most adamantly opposed to it were, surprisingly enough, the suburban sheriffs. Lots of "I'm better qualified to judge a candidate's suitability to carry a gun" crap. I didn't know that being elected sheriff also got the winner a degree in psychology.
 
I vote in favor of the must issue

30+ years ago I got a NYS permit (not CCW, just ownership), and at that time it was up to the local judge. Judge in my county would issue for "hunting and sporting" purposes only. If you listed self protection on the application, no permit.

The Judge in the next county to the south would only issue a permit for self protection. Everything else was denied.

I believe that any person who is not prohibited by the existing law should be issued a permit. Period. If they misuse the privelege, then the law should come down on them like the hammer of the gods. Period. NO exceptions, no plea bargin.
 
That's pretty much how it is in NY today. A permit isn't that hard, but a ccw is almost impossible. And yes, if you mention for protection you can forget about even getting a sportsman permit. In the next county over, it's a little easier as it's more of a rural area.
 
I am shall issue. In TN one has to take a safety class which must be 8 hours long. The legalities of usage of deadly force and when it is appropriate as well as safe firearm practices are discussed. As well, there is a standard course of live fire/ proficiency in which 50 rounds are fired at ranges of 3, 7, and 25 yards with a minimum score of 80 out of 100 required to pass.

The legal requirements are:
Qualifications That Must Be Met Before Applying for a Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit

* Effective July 1, 2005, all handgun permit applicants seeking a new, renewal or replacement permit must provide proof of U.S. Citizenship or Lawful Permanent Residency.
* Effective July 1, 2005, Tennessee handgun carry permit law will now allow certain applicants already exempt from complying with firing range provisions of the current statute to also be exempt from any classroom requirements. Those current exceptions are applicants who prove to the department that within five (5) years from the date of application for handgun permit, the applicant has:
1. Been certified by the police officer's standards and training commission, or
2. successfully completed training at the law enforcement training academy; or
3. successfully completed the firearms training course required for armed security guards; or
4. successfully completed all handgun training of not less than four (4) hours as required by any branch of the military.
* Applicants are required to be a resident of the State of Tennessee;
* Be at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
* Applicants shall not have been convicted of any felony offense punishable for a term exceeding one (1) year;
* Applicants shall not currently be under indictment or information for any criminal offense punishable by a term exceeding one (1) year;
* Shall not be currently the subject of any order of protection;
* Shall not be a fugitive from justice;
* Shall not be an unlawful user of or addicted to alcohol or any controlled substance and the applicant has not been a patient in a rehabilitation program or hospitalized for alcohol or controlled substance abuse or addiction within ten (10) years from the date of application;
* The applicant has not been convicted of the offense of driving under the influence of an intoxicant in this or any other State two (2) or more times within ten (10) years from the date of application and that none of such convictions has occurred within five (5) years from the date of application or renewal.
* Shall not have been adjudicated as mental defective; has not been committed to or hospitalized in a mental institution; has not had a court appoint a conservator for the applicant by reason of a mental defect; has not been judicially determined to be disabled by reason of a mental illness, development disability or other mental incapacity; and has not, within seven (7) years from the date of application, been found by a court to pose an immediate substantial likelihood of serious harm, as defined in Title 33, Chapter 6, Part 5, because of mental illness;
* Shall not be an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States;
* Shall not have been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions (dishonorable discharge, bad conduct discharge or other than honorable discharge Chapter 1340-2-5-.02 (5);
* Having been a citizen of the United States, applicants shall not have renounced their citizenship;
* Shall not have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in 18 U.S.C.A. 921 (33);
* Shall not be receiving social security disability benefits by reason of alcohol dependence, drug dependence or mental disability;
* Shall not have been convicted of the offense of stalking;
Click to expand...

I will go so far as to say that the extra requirements are somewhat reassuring to the extent that most people will have to be absolutely determined to be legal to follow all the steps and pay the costs ($115 to the state with the permit application in addition to $50-100 for the class around here).

That being said, I would have no problem if Tennessee went to a more open system like Vermont. The overwhelming majority of criminal uses of a firearm do not involve a permit-holder. I believe that in any state there are a number of citizens who, while they may be otherwise law-abiding, choose to carry a concealed firearm regardless of the legality. These people may have various reasons for not getting a permit, but ultimately they carry a firearm for self defense. They are not using them to commit violent crimes any more than the permit holders.

I am not condoning the act of breaking the law by carrying a weapon for which a permit is required. I just haven't seen proof that additional restrictions on who can legally carry a gun does anything to significantly reduce violent gun crime. These requirements just make it easier to get shall-issue laws passed.
 
Let me add that "may issue" and "shall issue" aren't really clear terms for what's going on here. Terminology matters.

Try "subjective standards" versus "objective standards".
 
I'm with CPhillip. If you can legally own the gun then you can legally carry it open or concealed. Of course, as with all, you lose your right to a gun, you lose your right to legally carry. But your a criminal so why do you care about the law?
 
I'm a shall issue guy with a reasonably easy to do class - some lecture and a mild exam. VT and Alaska have the benefit of demographics for their programs.
 
Ideally I would vote for a AK/VT style law being another Wisconsinite I can open carry or as one person said conceal and be quiet.
 
I agree with everyone who states "if can own, you should be allowed to carry." In NY a hangun safety course is required, plus a very thorough background check along with your fingerprinting. You fill out the application and are required to have 4 personal references. You pay the processing fees, fingerprinting and background check. Between state and county, it's around $200. I don't think it's a big deal but I'm just talking a sportsman permit. To ammend that permit to allow carry, you need simply to write a letter to the county court judge who is in charge of that. Your letter should state why you need to carry, and likely it will be denied. The person with the clean background check, good refernces and took the class probably will be allowed to own but not to carry. What do you think about that?
 
What do you think about that?
Click to expand...

In order to keep it polite in the company of others, I cannot state in detail what I think candidly. Col. Sherman T. Potter coined the term "Horse hockey!" and "Monkey muffins!". That about sums it up for me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top