Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How close to a national CCW law?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Tman, May 30, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tman

    Tman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    402
    Location:
    Texas
    I went to packing.org to see how many states my Texas CHL will be honored. Including Texas, I can carry a weapon in 25 states, thats half the country. There are also a number of states which Texas will recognize but don't yet have reciprocity but that might? come soon. Some people have obtained an outstate/non-resident CCW license and could carry in even more states (ie. Florida and NH non-resident licenses). Would this be the closest we get to a national CCW law?
     
  2. Hypnogator

    Hypnogator Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,801
    Location:
    AZ, WA
    A federal "national CCW" law, while beneficial, would infringe on states rights.

    However, a federal mandate that states recognize each other's CC permits or lose all federal law enforcement assistance funds would not be. It wouldn't force the dwindling number of states that don't permit concealed weapons under any circumstances to change their laws, but it would mean that each state would be required to give full faith and credit to the actions of the other states in granting concealed weapons permits.

    I don't see either happening soon, but, unlike some here on THR, I view the Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act of 2004 as the camel's nose under the tent. As soon as it can be shown that all of the dire predictions about us out-of-state and retired cops causing mayhem and endangering the public are just not happening, the credibility of similar arguments against CCW reciprocity will be all but eliminated.

    Just my $.02 worth.
     
  3. RevDisk

    RevDisk Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,737
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    No offense, but I'm not really for a national CCW. PA's CCW laws are rather nice. Pay $19, fill out a form, you get a CCW. All burden of proof denying the permit is on the police, and after a certain length of time they must give it to you if they haven't found anything bad. It's good everywhere in the State, except in courtrooms, federal property and at schools.

    I don't want manditory training requires, couple hundred dollar fees, "officer's discretion", etc etc. I like PA's system the way it is. Vermont style is, of course, better but PA's system isn't bad. Our 'lax standards' limit the number of states we with which have reciprocity. Oh well.
     
  4. Bob

    Bob Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    132
    Boy, that would really be hard for our masters, er I mean officials, to swallow here in the beneificent PRK. I'm sure they'll honor it only if the perps, er I mean lawfully armed citizens have serialized ammo in those instruments of death, er I mean firearms.
    Bob
     
  5. nico

    nico Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,212
    Location:
    Baltimore/Laurel, MD
    I've heard that stated several times and just don't understand the logic behind it. How is the fed. gov. telling the states that they can't violate the Second Amendment a state's rights issue but the fed. gov. telling them they can't violate the full faith and credit clause isn't?

    I don't necessarily think a federal CCW law would be a good thing, as it could lead to the feds making laws more restrictive than they already are in a lot of states. But I don't see how the feds telling the states they have to abide by the Constitution is a violation of state's rights.
     
  6. HighVelocity

    HighVelocity Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,176
    Location:
    IDPA junkie in DFW, TX
    Anything that will kick Nevada into line would be good. The honor no states permits but their own. :mad:
     
  7. Steve in PA

    Steve in PA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,568
    Location:
    NE PA
    "Our 'lax standards' limit the number of states we with which have reciprocity. "

    Exactly. People complain abot how their drivers license is recognized in all 50 states. Well, thats because you don't just walk into your local DMV and walk out 15 minutes later with your DL. Every state has some kind of testing procedure in place. Plus most motor vehicle laws are the same no matter where you are.

    Sure it would be nice to have a CCW that is recognized like your DL, but until they can have some type of minimum level of ability, there is not going to be a National CCW.
     
  8. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    The last thing we need is federal involvement in the CCW movement. It needs to stay at the state level. If the Feds got involved, that means the BATF would be involved. And of course the supremacy clause would allow any federal laws or BATF regs to trump state law. Imagine all of a sudden that your state provisions were replaced with a mandatory ID system, gun registration and licensing courtesy of your friends at the BATF.

    I can do without that kind of "help."
     
  9. RevDisk

    RevDisk Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,737
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Yea well, I don't want there to be an arbitrary "minimum level of ability" for reasons Cosmoline just meantioned.

    I'm happy with PA level standards. The PA Constitution makes Cali style CCW flat out illegal. Fees/taxes are legal, even if somewhat annoying. Denying lawful citizens their right to bear arms is illegal in PA. Our state Constitution and our state laws say this over and over.

    PA Constitution (http://www.dgs.state.pa.us/dgs/lib/dgs/pa_manual/section2/article_i.pdf)

    Section 21. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
     
  10. Gray Peterson

    Gray Peterson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,548
    Location:
    Lynnwood, Washington

    I can do without that kind of "help."


    Well if it wasn't for that kind of "help", you'd be arrested for merely transporting your handgun across New York State to VT or CT, even if it's in the trunk, locked, seperate from ammo.
     
  11. Gray Peterson

    Gray Peterson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,548
    Location:
    Lynnwood, Washington
    National CCW...crappy.

    National CCW Reciprocity, I whole heartedly support.

    Go to Thomas and look up HR1243.
     
  12. Igloodude

    Igloodude Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    735
    Location:
    southern NH
    I think the states with extremely lenient CCW laws would end up getting rogered in the process of negotiating the national version - let's face it, most of them (Alaska, Vermont, New Hampshire, Idaho, and which ones am I missing?) don't have much in the way of US House representation and I don't know that Texas and Florida could balance up against Cali, NY, NJ, and Mass.

    Also, I would oppose it on state's rights grounds. The use of Federal tax revenue bribery/extortion on states to "encourage" the states to follow federally-pushed standards annoys me. :fire: Though if they're going to do it anyway, I'd of course prefer they do it for something I'm in favor of instead of something I oppose.
     
  13. Gray Peterson

    Gray Peterson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,548
    Location:
    Lynnwood, Washington
    What about just CCW reciprocity between states being required under Article 4?
     
  14. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    I beleive we fought a war over this one already, and your side of the argument lost. Although there was much chaos from the temporary freeing of the slaves, we did get some nifty amendments to the constitution.

    Thanks to the post-war-of-northern-agression 14th amendment, states cannot infringe on the rights of their citizens.

    The 2nd amendment enumerates a right to keep and bear arms. So, even though common sense tells us we have this right, the fact that it was placed in the Bill of Rights places it beyond doubt.

    The more logical minded among you have no doubt guessed that this gives the federal government the authority to protect the rights of citizens from the infringement of the states.

    A state has no more right to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms than it has the ability to legalize slavery, outlaw political speech or quarter soldiers in my home.
     
  15. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    Let them go. The states are moving towards that anyways, with the exception of the few that won't budge. I wouldn't be suprised if in the next few years, the states had it worked out that pretty much any permit worked in any states.

    Don't start forcing laws on something that is working just to make it move faster. Chances are, you'll only make it worse.
     
  16. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    I actually agree with this, and favor letting the states make up their own mind.

    It would help if the MSM wasnt working against us though.
     
  17. P95Carry

    P95Carry Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    16,341
    Location:
    South PA, and a bit West of center!
    jefnvk - count me in too on that thought. If the guys in MD - Spot77, Girlwithagun, and so many others fighting the cause - can eventually get it thru there too then there really is hope, so that over time (however frustratingly slow) things can gel into a national reciprocity.

    Won't be easy - as much as anything due to different state's training requirements but - there is hope, as long as pressure is maintained by the good folks fighting.
     
  18. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,285
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    The biggest problem with national CCW reciprocity is that it would force those states that allow concealed carry with no permit (Vermont, Alaska, and possibly in the near future, Wyoming) to toe the line with regard to what would most likely be federally mandated training, cost, and renewal requirements.

    National CCW reciprocity is at odds with the goals of those states that see no need to either issue permits nor hamper those citizens who wish to exercise their right to carry a defensive firearm.
     
  19. mercedesrules

    mercedesrules Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,010
    Did you notice that sometimes the reason that a state doesn't reciprocate is because they have open carry?
     
  20. Hawkmoon

    Hawkmoon Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2004
    Messages:
    3,454
    Location:
    Terra
    Gotta disagree on this one, Steve. First, it's not an analagous argument. There is no mention in the Bill of Rights regarding the "right" to operate a motor vehicle. Secondly, drive around the country enough and you'll find that the laws really are not so uniform from one state to another. Probably no more so, in fact, than the laws pertaining to use of deadly force (once you get past or set aside the question of "can I legally carry in this state or not?").

    In addition, the 2nd Amendment makes no metion of any mandatory training as a prerequisite to exercising the RIGHT to keep and bear arms.

    The full faith and credit provision is also in the Constitution. It continues to baffle me how the federal gummint can say it applies to some laws, but not to that pesky 2nd Amendment.
     
  21. Clean97GTI

    Clean97GTI Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,377
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    HighVelocity, I wholeheartedly agree.

    While other states honor NV's permit, I think that others won't because NV won't.
    It's kinda stupid.
     
  22. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    I don't want the federal government within five miles of my holster.
     
  23. Vitamin G

    Vitamin G Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    934
    Location:
    Monroeville, PA (Home of the Zombies)
    What the government giveth, the government can taketh away...
    (Prohibition anyone?)

    The point of the bill of rights is that those rights were bestowed by "the creator" and do NOT come from the government. When they become bestowed by the government, the government can take them back...

    Yes, I know if everyone went by that logic, we'd have had revolutions by now...
     
  24. nico

    nico Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,212
    Location:
    Baltimore/Laurel, MD
    I agree. If the gunnies in the state can all get on the same page I think we may be able to get some progress done.

    On a side note (since we're talking about national politics), I found out the other day that Stenny Hoyer is an old friend of my grandmother :eek: :barf:
     
  25. 38SnubFan

    38SnubFan Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Messages:
    451
    Location:
    Harrisburg, PA
    That would be key, but I have another idea.

    Allow each state to allow their own laws/processes for Concealed Carry. For a federal permit, the Federal government can make up their own laws and processes.

    That way, somelike like me, who may not want to go through all the trouble to apply for and procure a Federal permit, can still go down to his local sheriff, fill out the form, pay the $19, and have his PA License To Carry Firearms. He just won't be able to carry it outside of PA or those states that honor PA's permit.

    Seems simple enough to me.

    -38SnubFan
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page