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

National CCW reciprocity

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by goon, Jan 10, 2012.

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

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,251
    What's the story on National CCW reciprocity? Last I heard it had passed the House. Is there anything going on with it in the Senate?

    Personally, I don't like the idea of any CCW permit being needed at all. I'm generally for states' rights, but we all accept each other's driver's licenses and national reciprocity would make things easier on those who travel.
     
  2. OARNGESI

    OARNGESI Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    803
    If you live in a state were you dont need one and go to another state will your dl act as your ccw
     
  3. GWARGHOUL

    GWARGHOUL Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2011
    Messages:
    719
    Location:
    Missouri
    No it will not.
    In fact, it may land you in jail depending on the state and the circumstances.
     
  4. Curator

    Curator Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,216
    Location:
    Bonita Springs, Florida
    The background concern among the gun community folks is giving the Federal govenment authority over carrying guns. If Congress gets to make the laws concerning CCW what's to stop some future anti-gun majority from banning it alltogether? At least now we can move to a gun-friendly state.
     
  5. youngda9

    youngda9 member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Messages:
    877
    ^^ What's to stop them from doing it now? You're putting off progress due to fear. The brady bunch loves it.
     
  6. xfyrfiter

    xfyrfiter Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2010
    Messages:
    726
    Location:
    NW New Mexico
    I for one, do not like the fact that the fed has any say so in whether or not I carry, I would like it if the laws were abolished on any carry, and we went back to constitutional carry, and anyone who is legal to own ,could carry without any kind of permit. I know ,,the world is not perfect,, LOL.
     
  7. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,064
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    Also, states you need a resident permit to carry in your state of residency.
     
  8. CoRoMo

    CoRoMo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Location:
    Californicated Colorado
    It's not a looming future federal ban that is anyone's concern.

    The concern is the predictable reaction from those less-than-free jurisdictions, and the federal standard that would be attached to national reciprocity.

    Jurisdictions like Washington DC, New York City, and Illinois would conceivably challenge a standard-lacking national reciprocity law in court. They would under no circumstances honor a resident of Vermont to carry un-permitted within their state/district. So they would challenge the law, demanding some form of standard that they could stomach, and I can't imagine that they wouldn't move the line back in their favor.

    This would mean that residents of Wyoming, Arizona, etc. would now have to go well beyond their current requirements if they are going to be given the privilege to carry.

    These standards would be sold as 'reasonable'.

    Where a resident of Arizona didn't previously have to pay money, take a course, qualify before a safety authority, they might have to, after several other states make a demand for it.
     
  9. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,651
    If there is regulating and taxing to do the Federal Government will do it. Leave it like it is and fight to fix that last handful of states.
    If it was a full faith and credit issue we would be doing it already.
     
  10. pbearperry

    pbearperry Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    873
    Location:
    The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts
    I read somewhere that the problems of the 4 states that don't require a permit could be rectified if folks in those states applied for an out of state permit somewhere else.They then would be covered.
    What tees me off is that as far as I know the drivers license issue never had these problems.Why can't we just model the gun carry issue like the drivers license and not even involve the Federal Govt.?
     
  11. tyeo098

    tyeo098 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    The Old Dominion
    So what?

    If they do make a "federal standard" to travel across all states, you would have to meet that standard to travel places without current reciprocity.

    For instance, I can get my VA permit which is recognised in Florida. All of a sudden HR822 is passed and my VA permit is now good at my summer home in NYS.

    Yay!

    Well Dinkleburg (the NYC Mayor) doesn't like it and somehow by the magic of lawmaking we get some "national standard" to be covered under the provisions of the HR822 law.

    So what? That just means to go to NY i have to meet a standard higher than that VA offers, but still lower than that of NY offers. But here the kicker:

    Due to Virginia's reciprocity wirth Florida, if I didn't want to travel to NY I wouldnt have to meet that standard.

    And I'm back to where I started! Nothing lost, but if I felt like it, now I can actually carry in NYS without their silly laws.
     
  12. 230therapy

    230therapy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    764
    Location:
    Virginia
    Once the Feds get authority over something, it's only a matter of time before it is heavily regulated and taxed. Even though the Second Amendment tells them they have no power in this area, they have gotten SCOTUS to rule that using the commerce clause to override other provisions in the Constitution is constitutional.
     
  13. goon

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,251
    Sorry, but the Federal government has had authority over firearms for quite some time. I don't like it and I don't think it's constitutional, but it's true.
    I am also concerned about how this might affect standards within states just a little. But I've been checking around about this a little and apparently some states (I'm thinking of North Dakota) have a two-tiered system. First tier is shall issue with no strange requirements and you can carry legally in your state. Second tier is you go through a training process and have reciprocity with other states. So I think a national standard for reciprocity might be a good idea, but not a national standard for the issuing of CCW permits within your home state.
     
  14. oneounceload

    oneounceload member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,710
    Location:
    Hot and Humid FL
    The Federal response to ANY issue concerning the states is a "one-size-fits-all" mentality in which the solution doesn't work well for anyone. All one has to do is look at ANY social issue to see that - education, welfare, health care, etc. You can bet that any national CCW is going to be determined by those from NY, CA, IL, DC, etc. and the restrictions will be such that you won't be able to carry anywhere.
    Do not let this camel's nose under the tent!
     
  15. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,651
    Do you really think that the final product will be like the rights the people in AZ, Ak, VT, WY enjoy or what those in NYS/NYC, MA, NJ, CA consider privileges?
    The states that are prohibitive or may issue now are not going to embrace any of the rights that "cowboy" "wild west" states have. If you live in one of these states we will happily join you in fixing the problem or embrace you moving to Free America but the government that governs least governs the best.
     
  16. tyeo098

    tyeo098 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    The Old Dominion
    But do you think a National Carry Reciprocity bill will result in laws like England?
     
  17. 230therapy

    230therapy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    764
    Location:
    Virginia
    No, the Feds TOOK authority over them using the perversions of the commerce clause authorized by the Supreme Court. They then passed gun laws such as NFA and GCA 1968.
     
  18. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,651
    I don't know but I like things the way they are going with the states in charge.
    A Utah permit will give you around 35 states and some others will add a few more. That is not perfect but considering what things looked like 20 yrs ago it is night and day.
    I want the central gov. to assume a role closer to what it had in 1800 than it does today and strongly believe that the one size fits all view from DC is not the same one size fits all that 2A supporters and residents fly over country believe in.
     
  19. CoRoMo

    CoRoMo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Location:
    Californicated Colorado
    Dang. Freedom is for sale!! We so easily exchange our liberty for...

    "Big deal! I have to register my firearms, pay monthly taxes, I can't buy more than one per year, I have to pass quarterly qualifications, I'm limited to the amount of ammo I can keep on hand, I have to submit to having my home searched every other year... so what? I get to own a handgun!!! Me's happy!!"

    Someday, I swear it, those words may be posted here by someone who is serious.
     
  20. RedTag

    RedTag Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    San Diego
    The National CCW Reciprocity is only going to be valid in the states that CCW's are issued, there will not be a reciprocity for Illinois, NY, or DC because they are "No-Issue" communities. There will not be a "cookie-cutter" qualification that goes along with it according to the bill. It states that if you meet the requirements of your state of residence then your permit will be recognized in all other states that is an issue state, this includes people that already have CCWs. No need to apply for a new one or meet different standards just because 822 has passed. Now we all know that this is subject to change at a moments notice, im just letting you know what the bill said when i read it.
     
  21. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,651
    The Devil is in the details and reconciliations! In a government where most members don't even understand or read much ofthe legislation they vote I only wish it would be written as clear as you stated it.
     
  22. CoRoMo

    CoRoMo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    8,953
    Location:
    Californicated Colorado
    This is of course true.

    My point is that 'we' took a few jurisdictions to court and challenged their ways, and those same locales would be expected to take 'us' to court on this one. IF it could ever pass, it MIGHT pass as written, but once it is in stone, those local governments should be expected to band together to implement something additional to the already passed legislation. It will be 'reasonable', and it will change the face of concealed carry for everyone. That will be their goal.

    The only way to prevent them from forever requiring me to do something that I don't currently have to do, is to never give them the venue to bring the issue in the first place. This legislation gives them that chance.
     
  23. tyeo098

    tyeo098 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    The Old Dominion
    Doom & gloom eh?

    I made the "so what" statement mean that I was back to where I started. Nothing lost. However, now I have a method of carrying in NY that is less stringent that what they already offer.
    To me, that sounds like a win, dare I say, something gained?

    To others, its either Constitutional Carry for all, or its obviously a trap.
    Why dont we start telling our reps top vote for anti-gun bills? Theyre obviously a trap set up by pro-gun representatives.

    Your signature expresses how you think, and mine, me.
    Too bad thats not how the government works a-now-a-days.
     
  24. RedTag

    RedTag Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    San Diego
    It is an issue though, an issue that needs to be addressed. I completely agree and understand with people's uncertainty about this bill and i definitely have my reservations about it as well but those reservations are primarily with the federal gov't and not with the bill. HR 822 as written is a perfect example of what needs to happen in this country as far as second ammendment goes, notice that i said as written there! If the federal gov't gets their hands on it and decided to go the complete opposite way with it then they could eventually find a way to do so through some red tape somewhere. I believe that if the bill couldnt be ammended in any way then there would be no hesitation on pro-gun side of the house.

    Take a look at San Diego and Mercer counties in California, the sheriffs there are requiring "good cause" for you to be eligable in those counties to CCW. The California state constitution says that personal protection is good cause, however, the sheriffs in these counties in particular will not issue with a good cause statement of personal protection. You have to have documentation as to why you consider yourself to be more important than everyone else.

    Thats why i believe that HR 822 is a good thing, to stop the "tyranny" (if you will) of people's opinion and get it written and firm. I do believe in states rights and limiting the fed but just like a drivers license i think i should be able to carry whever i am and not have to worry about wether the state that i am in accepts my permit.
     
  25. oneounceload

    oneounceload member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,710
    Location:
    Hot and Humid FL
    Sorry, misguided thinking - that particular instance needs to be addressed by the folks of California, not the Federal government - it is strictly a California issue and , as such, belongs in their elected reps hands or those of their courts. If the people of SD and Mercer counties felt the issue to be important enough, then the majority would vote for it to be enforced - no Fed intervention necessary there
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page