State Constitutional Carry and its Effect on Reciprocity

[HoosierQ]

Indiana, a VERY gun and gun-owner friendly state, is considering Constitutional Carry. I believe we are doing it because we think it's the right thing to do and we also don't have a great deal of money to spend on the license program.

My question is this: If we get Constitutional and no longer need (or are issued) "License to Carry a Handgun" as we call it here, how will my reciprocity with my neighboring states be affected?

Currently I am sort of hemmed in, with no reciprocity in either Ohio or Illinois. However, I have said I am good North and South from border to border with reciprocity in Michigan, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida.

Will we loose that?

PS. For the record I am for Constitutional Carry at the national level. Barring that, I support nationwide reciprocity. I also would be perfectly willing, for the sake of the current reciprocity scheme, to see Indiana add a few more requirements for the License in order to pick up more states...namely Ohio and WV, with whom we do not today have reciprocity.

 

[Tirod]

It's the whole point of having a permit. Unless the state recognizes that any resident of another state can CCW without a permit, then there's no control over who can and can't.

 

[Dog Soldier]

We have had Constitutional Carry for some time. All of the states that have this freedom offer permits for travelers. As a matter of fact I visited Indiana last week. I have a Wyoming and Utah permit which is recognized there. Support this 2nd Amendment right.

 

[Salmoneye]

It's the whole point of having a permit. Unless the state recognizes that any resident of another state can CCW without a permit, then there's no control over who can and can't.

You mean just like here in Vermont...

Anyone otherwise not barred by law, may carry openly or concealed...That includes non-residents...

It's worked fine for over 200 years so far...

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Anyone otherwise not barred by law, may carry openly or concealed...That includes non-residents... It's worked fine for over 200 years so far...

The fact it has worked fine for 200 years in Vermont does not change the fact that legislatures across the country decided in the 19th and 20th centuries that they could surmise that allowing concealed carry hypothetically enabled cutthroats and blackguards and therefore lawful concealed carry had to be curtailed in the name of public safety. Vermont has defied the theoretical common sense of the 19th and 20th centuries, has allowed carry by anyone legally qualified to own a gun, and has reported in most years the lowest rate of homicide per 100,000 population per year in the U.S. How'd day do dat? How dast da do dat? You're making anti-gun theory look bad just by being .... Vermont.

 

[HoosierQ]

Like I said, I am for it all. However, as a nation, we aren't there yet and I have to deal state by state. Sad but true. Sounds like I might be able to get a License even if I didn't need it here in Indiana.

 

[Coyote3855]

In Wyoming, constitutional carry is limited to residents and is not reciprocated by other states. Nor does it exempt a Wyoming resident from a background check when purchasing a firearm. The exemption and reciprocity with 37 other states are the reason I intend to keep my permit active.

 

[Dog Soldier]

Only innocent people apply for a CCW. The criminals are not concerned about a permit to carry a firearm. The Criminals already have National Carry. Why would honest gun owners oppose Constitutional Carry in their home state?

 

[Sam1911]

My question is this: If we get Constitutional and no longer need (or are issued) "License to Carry a Handgun" as we call it here, how will my reciprocity with my neighboring states be affected?

This is a rather specific questions which I don't think we're actually answering properly.

The question isn't who will be allowed to carry in your state if you go to "Constitutional Carry", but rather if you no longer have a license to carry a firearm in your state, will any other states recognize you as eligible to carry in THAT OTHER state? The very most correct answer is that reciprocity is (almost?) always something worked out between the Attorneys General of those individual states. And that has traditionally always been something wherein the AG of State A looks at State B's licensing requirements and decides if a person licensed in State B is sufficiently vetted to be welcomed to carry in State A, too.

Any individual who doesn't go through the process to get a permit/license in their own state (or as a non-resident of some other, in some cases) doesn't have any vetting or background checking or training -- or whatever it is that a state requires to issue a permit or recognize them as eligible to carry. So, they're a bit stuck when it comes to "reciprocity." There really isn't anything to reciprocate if you don't hold a permit to begin with.

I believe some states which have gone to "Constitutional Carry" have maintained or instituted a voluntary carry permit system so that their citizens can have the benefit of recognition by other states, and sometimes so they can have expanded carry ability (i.e. fewer off limits places) in their own as well.

All that to say, if your state was to simply do away with all carry licensing, yes, you could definitely see other states say you have no lawful right to carry there anymore.

 

[PowerG]

In Mississippi we have Constitutional Carry, however none of the surrounding states do. I travel to these states frequently, so I intend to keep my permit renewed simply for when I do travel. Amazing how far we have come in the last few years.

 

[Dog Soldier]

The Constitutional Carry is expanding. When this started no thought it would progress as it has. I think there is now 33 states enlisted or getting close to the CC Freedom. This can be used in the argument for other possible 2nd Freedoms. If you don't have this in your state work on it.

 

[danez71]

The Constitutional Carry is expanding. When this started no thought it would progress as it has. I think there is now 33 states enlisted or getting close to the CC Freedom. This can be used in the argument for other possible 2nd Freedoms. If you don't have this in your state work on it.

I'm not sure but I think you're about right in terms of state that have carrying a gun in their constitution.

But I think we're talking about constitution concealed carry. If that's the case, I think it's around 10, 12 states.

Maybe the OP can clarify?

 

[JohnBiltz]

It would make sense for all the states who have constitutional carry to work out agreements among themselves to allow carry but they have not yet. I renewed my CCW from Arizona so that I can carry in other states.

 

[Twiki357]

As far as I know, every state now issues a CCW even though a few like CA, DC and IL did it as a result of legal actions. So, even if a state passes Constitutional carry, I would imagine that they will still issue CCW permits.


I’ll carry it a little further. If National reciprocity does pass, how will it be enforced? Also, will it require recognition of all permits or just those issued by the individual’s home state? The last bill that died in the legislature included (If I recall correctly) the requirement that if a state issues permits, they must accept other states permits So, will that mean that Constitutional carry would only be recognized in other states with Constitutional carry? Then there are the states with “May Issue” policies and/or require a “Good Reason” for the permit. Would another states permit meet that requirement? Or states that leave it up to the local city or county to issue permits. How would it work in those cities or counties like Los Angeles, that refuse to issue any permits to anyone other than the political and Hollywood elites.


In other words, no one will know until there is actual legislation passed.

 

[rtroha]

Currently I am sort of hemmed in, with no reciprocity in either Ohio or Illinois.

Incorrect. Ohio recognizes all states' licenses/permits. I'm not sure what Ohio does if the licensee were under 21 years old (if there are states that issue to 18-21 yrs).

 

[Sam1911]

As far as I know, every state now issues a CCW ... So, even if a state passes Constitutional carry, I would imagine that they will still issue CCW permits.

But that isn't the case. VT issues NO permits or licenses to carry firearms at all. They don't require one, so they don't issue one.

From Handgunlaw.us:

Vermont does not issue Permit/Licenses to Carry a Concealed firearm. Vermont does allow anyone who can legally possess a firearm to carry it concealed without a permit of any kind.

However, it goes on to say:

Vermont Residents can carry in the states of Arizona, Alaska, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi and Oklahoma and West Virginia with just their state Issued Drivers License or State issued ID if they are 21 Years of age and can legally own a firearm.

Which is the sort of deal that has to be worked out between the AGs of each state. And, as a result of this, VT residents (who are among the very least restricted in their own state) can only carry in 7 other states which have agreed to make such a deal.

Now, I believe that most of the others permitless carry states do still issue a permit if you want one, and that can indeed alleviate the problem with reciprocity -- at least to the degree that that states old permit was honored by other states.

EDIT:
Alaska issues a permit.
Arizona does.
Arkansas is de facto going to permitless carry but still issues a permit right now.
Idaho is permitless for residents, but still issues permits.
Kansas still issues.
Maine still issues.
Mississippi still issues.
Missouri (permitless 1/1/17 !) does.
Vermont does not.
Wyoming does.
West Virginia does.

VT seems to be the odd man out and that's most likely because they've never had a permit required to carry a firearm so they didn't "go to" Constitutional carry, from a different system. Every other state has had some kind of permitting or licensing which they're starting to back away from, but it is easy enough to keep the mechanism in place for the convenience of their citizens.

But the law has to be written to do so. If it simply says "no more permits required" and removes the entire bureaucracy of permits or licensing (which is a good thing for small government and reducing costs and government waste!) then that benefit would disappear.

 

[Dog Soldier]

Constitutional Carry is not based in state statutes. CC is a result of citizens questioning the power of the individual state. How are the individual states empowered to regulate a right guaranteed by the U.S. Bill Of Rights?
The CC right has been approved or in process in 33 states. The state of Utah passed this and it was vetoed by their governor. I expect it will be signed this year.
The state governments have abused and withheld the rights of the people. They are actually violating the rights of the citizens. Allowing elected officials to decide who may have a permit. The elected officials dictating training and fees before applying the 2nd Amendment rights.
There are many citizens who want their government to set rules. They want mandatory training BG checks etc. We must however remember this is not a parameter inclusive in the 2nd. Just my thoughts.

 

[jdc1244]

If National reciprocity does pass, how will it be enforced?

It wouldn’t be a matter of enforcement, but a matter of compliance.

All 50 states issue a driver’s license, for example, where each states’ license is valid in every other state.

States with no provisions for obtaining a concealed carry license would need to enact measures allowing residents to do so if they wish to carry a concealed weapon in other states.

Would another states permit meet that requirement?

Yes, just as one state’s driver’s license is valid in another, even if the visiting driver isn’t qualified to obtain a license in the state being visited.

 

[jdc1244]

How are the individual states empowered to regulate a right guaranteed by the U.S. Bill Of Rights?

Because no right is ‘unlimited,’ including the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment, and are subject to reasonable regulation by state governments (see DC v. Heller, McDonald v Chicago).

Indeed, the courts have consistently held that laws requiring a permit or license to carry a concealed weapon are perfectly Constitutional.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

A few years ago, a bill was introduced to allow constitutional carry here in KY. It died in committee as I recall, because it was introduced (ironically) by a very liberal state rep, and part of the conditions put forth was to dramatically restrict the number of places where a person could carry and do away with open carry and CCDW permits. When it was first made public, it was the general consensus where I live that most of the permit holders at the time we're going to pick up the Virginia out-of-state permit to maintain the ability to travel out of state with concealed weapons. Thankfully the bill didn't go anywhere.

 

[Dog Soldier]

Well JDC,I am not a Lawyer and I don't play one on TV. So I have to deffer to your legal training. I only know we have won the argument regarding state intrusion in more than half the states.

 

[Dog Soldier]

There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding CC freedoms. No state has dropped their CCW Permits after adopting Intra-State CC privileges. If you want a carry permit for travel or any other reason they remain available.
This is a privilege granted to the citizens of a particular state. This allows citizens to possess a handgun without unnecessary arrest during traffic stops etc.

 

[Sam1911]

All 50 states issue a driver’s license, for example, where each states’ license is valid in every other state.

As a matter of clarity: That isn't due to any factor of federal law, but rather a general agreement the states all arrived at. There is nothing binding that says it must be so.

So therefore, comparing it to a national reciprocity law which requires compliance by all the states, and even could be seen to require them to amend their procedures to "enact measures" of any sort, is on shaky ground.

No state is required to honor any other state's drivers license, though most do.
No state is required to honor any other state's license to practice law or medicine, or work as an engineer (etc.), and most do not.

 

[Sam1911]

I only know we have won the argument regarding state intrusion in more than half the states.

I applaud your enthusiasm, but there are only 10 states now where one may carry without a permit, with an eleventh due to start January 1st. And one of those states is a bit questionable because it's permitless carry relies on nothing but the opinion of the AG, which isn't law.

The other 23-ish states where this is "won" are a little suspect to include in the counting. The eggs haven't hatched. The chickens haven't come home to roost. The battles aren't over. There's amazing -- unbelievable to many of us -- progress on this but we haven't "won" anything like a majority of states yet.

 

[danez71]

As a matter of clarity: That isn't due to any factor of federal law, but rather a general agreement the states all arrived at. There is nothing binding that says it must be so.

So therefore, comparing it to a national reciprocity law which requires compliance by all the states, and even could be seen to require them to amend their procedures to "enact measures" of any sort, is on shaky ground.

No state is required to honor any other state's drivers license, though most do.
No state is required to honor any other state's license to practice law or medicine, or work as an engineer (etc.), and most do not.

While all true......

Couldn't the Feds say 'In order to continue receiving Fed funds for crime/police, the state must have an agreement to honor all other states CC permit and all states must go shall issue (no 'good cause' requirement)'?

It seems they could just as they have done with the highway funds a few times but I'm not 1000% sure. Albeit, it was done under the perception of public safety and also didn't always achieve the life saving results stated.

It would be even better if the Feds just said that all states must go Constitutional Carry in order to maximize their 1st line of defense as a state and for their citizens to protect themselves in order to receive Fed crime/police funds and not unduly burden the Feds.

.
While I like the idea of National Reciprocity, I don't want the Fed regulating the requirements to get a CCP. But lets not forget that National Reciprocity doesn't mean the Feds have to regulate the permit process and impose minimum requirements.