Another Reciprocity Approach

[Hypnogator]

Your driver's license allows you to drive in another state... it doesn't allow for you to bring your states speed limit laws, or your child-seat laws for that matter, with you.

It would be the same thing with concealed carry reciprocity. If the state you're carrying in has, say, a law against carrying in a bank, you would be expected to know and comply with that law, even if your home state allows carrying in banks.

 

[CoalTrain49]

It would be the same thing with concealed carry reciprocity. If the state you're carrying in has, say, a law against carrying in a bank, you would be expected to know and comply with that law, even if your home state allows carrying in banks.

What about CA's restricted firearms list. That would also be a law you would have to comply with. They change that almost every year. Do you know what is on the list and what isn't? I certainly don't and I'm not willing to try and keep up with their madness although I travel through CA every year.

No, the only way this works is if there is a nat'l standard. The only way to get a nat'l standard is get congress involved. When congress gets involved, you loose.

 

[Frank Ettin]

What about CA's restricted firearms list. That would also be a law you would have to comply with. ....

Certainly California law regarding prohibited assault weapons would be relevant to a travel, but not with respect to the carrying of handguns (although the ban on large capacity magazines would apply). The roster of handguns approved for sale would be irrelevant since that only applies to limit what can be sold by a dealer -- not what handguns one can lawfully possess.

 

[deadin]

My State does not require classes and a firing test. Would I be able to carry in a State that does require them??

 

[Hypnogator]

My State does not require classes and a firing test. Would I be able to carry in a State that does require them??

In a word, Yes! They would have to give full faith and credit to your state's decision that you are qualified to carry a concealed weapon.

This would most likely create a HUGE groundswell of support for eliminating these Unconstitutional requirements.

 

[deadin]

For what it's worth, I see reports that only 5% of the adult population has CCW permits.
I hardly think this is going to be a huge groundswell.........

 

[Old Dog]

For what it's worth, I see reports that only 5% of the adult population has CCW permits.
I hardly think this is going to be a huge groundswell.........

Does anyone actually read through a thread anymore? I noted in post #10 that those with concealed handgun licenses (licenses, not permits, to be accurate) average about .5% - 2% of an average state's populace. 5% would be an extreme exaggeration for even the most pro-gun states.

Reality is, even most gun-owners don't both to obtain concealed weapons licenses. "Huge groundswell?" I think not.

One of my fellow Evergreen-staters asks,
"My State does not require classes and a firing test. Would I be able to carry in a State that does require them??"
This is exactly why most states don't recognize Washington CPLs -- because we have no requirements other than paying the license fee and passing a background check. Have you guys been paying attention to the state ID requirements for using state driver's licenses as one's sole form of ID to board commercial aircraft or enter military bases? The states without the "enhanced" standards have been left out effective January 30th of this year. And this is a result of federal intervention. Why some of you have confidence that we'll ever work out 50-state (and presumably, territorial) reciprocity, with or without federal intervention, I'm starting to wonder ...

 

[deadin]

5% would be an extreme exaggeration for even the most pro-gun states.

5% of adults have carry permits according to the following:
http://crimeresearch.org/2015/07/ne...rgest-increase-ever-in-the-number-of-permits/

Some States have even approached 10%, but still not a "mandate".

 

[CoalTrain49]

Does anyone actually read through a thread anymore? I noted in post #10 that those with concealed handgun licenses (licenses, not permits, to be accurate) average about .5% - 2% of an average state's populace. 5% would be an extreme exaggeration for even the most pro-gun states.

Reality is, even most gun-owners don't both to obtain concealed weapons licenses. "Huge groundswell?" I think not.

One of my fellow Evergreen-staters asks,
"My State does not require classes and a firing test. Would I be able to carry in a State that does require them??"
This is exactly why most states don't recognize Washington CPLs -- because we have no requirements other than paying the license fee and passing a background check. Have you guys been paying attention to the state ID requirements for using state driver's licenses as one's sole form of ID to board commercial aircraft or enter military bases? The states without the "enhanced" standards have been left out effective January 30th of this year. And this is a result of federal intervention. Why some of you have confidence that we'll ever work out 50-state (and presumably, territorial) reciprocity, with or without federal intervention, I'm starting to wonder ...

My county has a 10% (per population) CPL rate. I live in what might be considered a rural county in WA.

My guess the reason WA hasn't complied with the Real ID mandate is they don't want to spend the money to check everyone's citizenship or immigration status to issue a license. Also they don't see it as a state's responsibility because immigration and homeland security is a federal responsibility. But WA and those seven other states will eventually comply because the inconvenience to those living there will be too great. The way this is going a drivers license will hold a lot more information than many will be comfortable with. In WA my vehicle registration, drivers license and CPL data is in the same database. A scan of my DL will tell you that I have a CPL.

This concept of a Real ID goes to one very important point. The fed wants the states to pay for a lot of the business of immigration, homeland security, and even purchasing weapons. The FBI would absolutely love it if every state was a POC state and ran their own back ground checks. The FBI doesn't have the resources nor the judicial records to do an adequate job. That's a proven fact. Also the reason the FBI won't agree to do the checks for NV being a POC state. The FBI would also love it if every small town cop, deputy sheriff and state trooper were checking you for state carry compliance. You don't want this information on your DL while traveling thru a socialist state like CA. When they scan it the enforcement process starts and where you end up will be anyone's guess.

As far as I know every state handles their own carry permits and enforcement. I'm trying to figure out why anyone would think the fed would want to have any more control (federal code) over that when only about 6%+/- of the US population has a carry permit to begin with. Some states don't even require them.

 

[Hypnogator]

In the FWIW file, here's a good read on the Constitutional authority for national reciprocity laws:

http://www.pagunblog.com/2017/01/16/the-constitutional-authority-for-national-reciprocity/

For those leery of the precedent of the Feds interfering with the states, Sebastian points out that that horse has pretty well left the barn!

 

[CoalTrain49]

This is where US HB-38 is going to get hung up.

‘‘(2) The term ‘handgun’ includes any magazine for use in a handgun and any ammunition loaded into the handgun or its magazine.

If it does get passed, states will take it through the federal courts.

It will be interesting to see how the SC views an individual's right regarding concealed carry while traveling.