ND Invalidates Non-Resident Permits Issued to Residents of Some States!!!!!

[Gary Slider]

NON-RECIPROCAL STATES: The following states do not recognize North Dakota concealed weapons licenses. Therefore, reciprocity is not possible. ATTENTION: Effective August 1, 2013, ND concealed weapon licenses issued to residents of non-reciprocal states are invalid.
State Reason
California Does not recognize out of state licenses.
Connecticut Does not recognize out of state licenses.
Hawaii Does not permit either its own residents or any non-resident to carry a concealed weapon.
Illinois Does not permit either its own residents or any non-resident to carry a concealed weapon.
Maryland Does not recognize out of state licenses.
Massachusetts Does not recognize out of state licenses.
Minnesota North Dakota law not as stringent as MN law
New Jersey Does not recognize out of state licenses.
New York Does not recognize out of state licenses.
Oregon Does not recognize out of state licenses.
Rhode Island Does not recognize out of state licenses.

I would believe they would have contacted those who permits that invalidated and let them know but I have seen states do crazier tings. You can view the above listed information on those states and their permits no longer valid on the ND AG’s Page Here:
http://www.ag.state.nd.us/BCI/CW/reciprocity.htm

 

[N003k]

To make sure I'm understanding this...North Dakota decided that if a state doesn't recognize their permit...then residents of that state cannot get a ND permit, and those that already have one are having the permits invalidated?

If so...what's the logic behind this? Don't people usually get other states permits to be able to carry in that other state (And states that have reciprocity agreements with the state)?

 

[Gary Slider]

I don't know. I am just reporting what the ND AG Is stating!

 

[Twmaster]

Gosh. What a ridiculous stance to take. Way to go ND. Make the poor suffering peons in totalitarian states suffer more.

As always, Thank You Gary for keeping us up-to-date on the twists and turns regarding carry laws.

 

[Doc7]

PA is slowly doing the same thing. Hurts us NJ folks.

 

[Willie Sutton]

To play the speaking role of devils advocate..

Why would a state offer one-way recognition (not "reciprocity") to anyone in a state that refuses to offer reciprocal privileges?

A state reprents it's own citizens interests: They enter RECIPROCAL agreements because it benefits THEIR citizens when they travel.

In exchange, they offer other states citizens the privilege to carry there.

That's *reciprocol recognition*, and without *reciprocation* from the other party there is no benefit to the citizens of the state that recognizes but does not gain anything.


Bottom line is that they are telling the AG's of the other states to pound sand... can you blame them?

And bless states like Florida and Utah who don't feel that way.


Willie


.

 

[Fryerpower]

I think you are mis-reading the situation Willie.

If you are a resident of lets say Illinois and you are in North Dakota doing oil field work you could get a North Dakota non-resident permit. This is pretty much the only way that you could carry in North Dakota as an Illinois resident. It is not a reciprocity agreement. It is a non-resident permit issues by North Dakota to an Illinois resident, in this case.

-Jim

 

[Twmaster]

Willie, let me reverse the reversal.

Who is really getting hurt if ND just let things be? Seems to me nobody is losing anything or getting hurt by this.

There are other states that honor all other permits. I'm just not seeing how this helps the citizens of ND to dishonor other permits on a tit-for-tat sort of basis. Just seems petty and spiteful.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

Maybe they want you to become a ND resident and pay taxes to them for the right to carry rather than taking your money back to your home state?

I don't blame ND. Their state, their rules. It's a 10000x's better place to be than the states which they are now refusing to play ball with now.

 

[Fryerpower]

I do contract work and consulting, and do NOT change my residency every time I go work in a new location. I DO pay state income taxes in the States that I work in. They get their tax money.

Jim

 

[wildbilll]

I found the part the AG is referring to. I don't like what he is doing, but he is following the letter of the ND law.
What is wrong is that you paid for the license, now you have nothing to show for it.

b. The applicant can demonstrate that the applicant is a resident of this state by providing a copy of a valid driver's license or state-issued identification card from this state that establishes personal identification through photographic means and shows the applicant's name associated with a valid residential street address in this state or the applicant possesses a valid driver's license from the applicant's state of residence that establishes personal identification through photographic means and shows the applicant's name associated with a valid residential street address and a valid concealed weapons license from the applicant's state of residence, which state has reciprocity with this state under section 62.1-04-03.1;

 

[Zoogster]

The thing Willie is most of these locations don't care if thier own citizens can carry, and often times the legislator would rather most of thier own people could not.

As a result such a stance is not bargaining. It is not saying if you let our residents do this we will let your residents do that, and both sides are giving and taking.
Instead these very states would pat ND on the back and say thank you, we don't like them carrying anyways. It in no way punishes the states for being draconian or authoritarian. Rather it accomplishes thier agenda.


I do understand the concept, you don't acknowledge our license so we will treat yours the same way. But it holds no bargaining power because these are generally states that don't want thier own citizens to carry anyways, and more states helping them towards that end would be seen as a positive step in reducing gun rights. Not something that causes them to try and change to seek reciprocity.

 

[junglebob]

Illinois has passed a concealed carry law and once the State Police have training guidelines set up and applications available a North Dakota resident could get a non-resident LTC in Illinois. However since Illinois isn't recognizing any other states LTC the resident of Illinois couldn't get a Non-resident LTC from North Dakota.

The North Dakota resident can now transport a loaded handgun in their vehicle in Illinois if it is kept concealed. The North Dakota resident or any other states resident can transport if it is legal for them to carry in their state. (This is in response to post #7)

 

[Willie Sutton]

"I do understand the concept, you don't acknowledge our license so we will treat yours the same way. But it holds no bargaining power because these are generally states that don't want thier own citizens to carry anyways, and more states helping them towards that end would be seen as a positive step in reducing gun rights. Not something that causes them to try and change to seek reciprocity."

I understand, and happen to agree with you... playing devils advocate is just that.


"If you are a resident of lets say Illinois and you are in North Dakota doing oil field work you could get a North Dakota non-resident permit."

I understand that too. If it's important to the individual to carry there, the path is clear: Get a drivers license there and become a resident. It's not that hard to do.....



Willie

.