Universal Concealed Carry Permit

How about this:

Pass a universal background check and you get to carry in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

You hit the nail on the head bushmaster ! Good for all, or none!

Do you REALLY want the feds (ATF, FBI, Homeland Security... then accessible by HHS, CDC, and god only know what other agencies) to have all that info on who does/does not have a permit and the authority to grant or deny a constitutional right?

I would much rather have universal mandatory recognition of all state issued permits?

Sure. The requirements for universal concealed carry should be no more stringent than those for the state of Vermont.

I believe any form of licensing is a compromise on our part, and constitutional carry should be the goal in every state. That being said, if a license were an absolute must, I wouldn't have a problem with requiring fingerprints, photo, background check, and a safety class.

The only problem with requiring a level of training is one can only arbitrarily declare the point at which enough training is "enough to carry."

I absolutely do not want the Federal Government getting involved in issuing carry permits. It is bad enough that the States do it.

TN is one of the better states for reciprocity due to the fact that we have to take a firearms safety class (8 hr), shoot (with a score), demonstrate safe handling of a firearm, get finger printed and get the background check done prior to being issued a carry permit. Some states do not want to grant reciprocity to other states that have laws that are more lax than their own. That's why some states that seem to be pro-carry states do not honor or want to honor selected out of state permits.

Personally I thought the TN approach a bit much at the time, but I thought the class informative, the shooting a waste of time, and the wait time a bit excessive. But once your finished with it... the renewals are easy.

That would require that the federal government get involved in this and believe, that is the LAST thing we want happening with carry permits or carrying arms under any circumstances. They have already violated the Bill of Rights and the Constitution way beyond what they're allowed to do. You don't want them having anything to do with this.

while it seems like a nice thing to have universal carry, one must remember that right now, if some politicians in a state decide to restrict/ban conceal carry, one could always move to another state..

but if it is a federal carry license, what do you do if they decide to restrict/ban it? I really don't feel comfortable having all my eggs in one basket...

No keep it at the state level and let the chips fall where they will. The Feds should have no hand in CCW at all. Just MHO.

Another for keeping Uncle Sugar outta the CCW permit/license biz.

Better off without 'em...

Alaska444 said:

No keep it at the state level and let the chips fall where they will. The Feds should have no hand in CCW at all. Just MHO.

Click to expand...

I agree. It will be abused and used as a way for the Federal government to 'peek through the blinds' on American gun owners. For those of you that do a whole lot of interstate travel I understand that its a pain... but for the most part, states that don't recognize many other states' permits usually have non-resident permits or recognize another state that issues non-resident permits.

To my thinking, the limit of Federal involvement ought to be in the form of:

"The States shall endeavor to create as universal a set of regulations as the people of the several States see fit to be caused to be enacted."

Yes, nothing in there says word one about guns. Neither hardware stores, fruit plants, business licenses, wombat breeding, traffic regulation, the whole lot of if.

I also realize that making CFR about one page long, and getting USC into only 2-3 Volumes would kick over a whole bunch of fedgov rice bowls. I do not have a cure for that. Some could be set to patrolling US borders, and others set to collecting excise & customs (yeah, I'd repeal the 16th amendment, too).

But, your CHL ought to be like your DL--no need to go and look up if you can drive to Illinois, and then have to double check for within chicagoland, too. But, the agency issuing ought be no further than one's State capitol at the maximum. But, that's me an my clinger ways, too, I suspect.

Another for the background check.

I'm all for constitutional carry, but how many departments are actually going to allow that without hassling legal owners to make sure they're actually legal and not a threat? If they find out for whatever reason.

I'm not against requiring training, but it's tough to tell them where to quit. I think it's a great idea just to have a class to teach the legalities, make sure you can handle a gun without shooting anyone else, and then a background check gets you a card just so you can flash it and avoid the hassle of an officer running your info through a computer if they find out for some reason.

Overall: Hi, NICS? John Smith. Not restricted? Cool, here's a card and a holster.

Universal Carry vs Standardazed reguirements

Unfortunately many misinterpret Universal Carry with Standardized Carry Requirements.

I have a question for those of you who are have a paranoia about our government, What are you doing posting here and why are still on the grid. Each computer, laptop, ipad, web phone, has a mac address,an IP address and unless you actually remove the battery that GPS chip is always sending out a signal and each leads right back to you regardless of what name you may choose to use. Once that message hits the grid, it is there forever and for all to see.

To those of you who complain that they cannot use their non resident permit to carry in many other states, where is your resident permit.

To the residents of states that find that their resident permits are not nationally recognized. Take the time to look and see how much easier it is to acquire your permit than those in other states.

There are still three states that are unrestricted at all, Alaska, Arizona, and Vermont. I suppose you could always move there.

The fact is there is not a standardized set of requirements for a concealed carry permit and thus the restrictions on which states your permit may or may not be valid. Obviously there is a reason for this. It is because the requirements need to obtain that concealed carry permit vary so much.

Many of these requirements for a concealed carry permit have been challenged in the courts over the years, yet they still stand and therefor proven constitutional.

Instead of continually fighting a losing battle by trying to get states to abandon their concealed carry requirements, maybe it is time for you to fight for standardized set of requirements so once you get that resident concealed carry permit, it is reciprocal in all the other states. WELL MAYBE NOT ILLINOIS.

LemmyCaution said:

Sure. The requirements for universal concealed carry should be no more stringent than those for the state of Vermont.

Click to expand...

Ain't gonna happen.. The concealed carry requirements have been around in other states for a long while and most likely challenged in the courts over the years but since they still stand must have proven to be constitutional.

We've already got one...its called the 2nd Amendment. What needs to be done, is vote the politicians out of Washington who either can't read or won't follow it!!!

"Universal", huh? Does that mean I could carry on the moon?

I'm not for any federal regulation on concealed carry. It will always fall to the lowest common denominator.

My first choice is no licensing. My second choice is each state should be able to make its own laws. 10th amendment. I want federal oversight to be as minimal as possible.

Gregaw said:

"Universal", huh? Does that mean I could carry on the moon?

I'm not for any federal regulation on concealed carry. It will always fall to the lowest common denominator.

Click to expand...

Standardized requirements does not have to entail federal regulation.

Every state has a process and a set of requirements that must be met in order to acquire a concealed weapons permit already in play and have been that way for years. Some states have more requirements than others and the ones that do have more requirements also have more states that will accept that concealed permit in leu of their own for visitors.

Regardless of the way you may feel, those laws have passed the 2nd amendment constitutionality test otherwise they would have been tossed out years ago.

It is time to start using your energy to change your own states requirements for a concealed weapons permit so it is accepted by every other state.

If you chose not to take an effort to update your own states requirements then at least show others that you are indeed a responsible gun owner and either shy away from states that do not accept your concealed carry permit or abide by their state laws..

Universal Concealed Carry Permit


Amendment II


"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

"the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"...

All of the above except the last is an infringement.

Oh, rodinal got there before me.

AlbertH said:

Regardless of the way you may feel, those laws have passed the 2nd amendment constitutionality test otherwise they would have been tossed out years ago.

Click to expand...

Having passed muster with the activist SCOTUS doesn't make these laws truly "Constitutional." To say that would be to say that at any given moment, on any given topic, 5 unelected people in black robes can dictate to the rest of us how it will be, and we're ok with that. Though I grant that we have rolled over to that concept for decades, we need to roll back on it.

No, such a law would be unconstitutional, just like all the rest.