The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: MikeBjerum on March 15, 2009, 09:40:22 PM
-
I know we have our permit written way back in the 18th Century. However, our modern do gooders can't seem to comprehend.
How about Federal Legislation that would #1 Require all fifty States and the District of Columbia to implement CCW; #2 All such legislation must be "Shall Issue;" and #3 All fifty States and the District of Columbia shall recognize all other permits.
Simple clean program that keeps the Feds out of the issuance, allows for individual States to address their own concerns, and puts in place a Nationwide CCW in a simple way.
-
Senator Family Values/Dc Madam client Vitter (R) La. brought this up. (I'm only slamming him because I'd rather have a better standard bearer). I think we've discussed this idea on another thread, and I'll say here what I said there. Its great in theory, BUT it centralizes ccw in the federal government rather than states. Probably a good thing if you are in NJ or California, not so good in Vermont or Indiana.It seems like you suggestion would require a degree of standarization that would make a lot of state laws more restrictive in terms of training, insurance etc. I don't think it would be prudent to revisit settled law in this political climate to give the antis a foot hold. For the next four years, I would concentrate on the state level, and not let Pelosi stick her nose in if we don't have too, because we know how passionately she opposes us. Likewise I wouldn't force Obama's hand. He's never seemed to give a damn about about the 2A one way or another, other than to say "yada yada yada" to his left wing base. It would be unwise to force him to take a stand publically, because as I really don't think he cares about this issue, he'll do whatever is expedient. Let sleeping dogs lie is a classic for a reason.
fightingquaker13
-
bad idea... Unless every state has the exact same DQ standards and all felonys are the same nation wide.
-
Fighting - I think my thought here is different from the previous, and your concern, in that it does not give the power to the Feds. It leaves it up to the States except to require them to offer a shall issue permit.
TAB - I'm not sure what differences there are between the States right now on DQing someone. My info is limited reading and mostly accepting other writers or "hear say." However, what I understand is that many States don't allow others strictly because they have some issue with them, except Iowa that just plain old won't get along with anyone >:( Then there is the ever stupid one of "We'll accept that State's permit from a resident, but not from a non-resident." WTF ??? It is either good or it isn't, what difference does it matter if you live in Utah or Minnesota and you have a Utah permit ???
-
Senator Family Values/Dc Madam client Vitter (R) La. brought this up. (I'm only slamming him because I'd rather have a better standard bearer). I think we've discussed this idea on another thread, and I'll say here what I said there. Its great in theory, BUT it centralizes ccw in the federal government rather than states. Probably a good thing if you are in NJ or California, not so good in Vermont or Indiana.It seems like you suggestion would require a degree of standarization that would make a lot of state laws more restrictive in terms of training, insurance etc. I don't think it would be prudent to revisit settled law in this political climate to give the antis a foot hold. For the next four years, I would concentrate on the state level, and not let Pelosi stick her nose in if we don't have too, because we know how passionately she opposes us. Likewise I wouldn't force Obama's hand. He's never seemed to give a damn about about the 2A one way or another, other than to say "yada yada yada" to his left wing base. It would be unwise to force him to take a stand publically, because as I really don't think he cares about this issue, he'll do whatever is expedient. Let sleeping dogs lie is a classic for a reason.
fightingquaker13
Compare pictures of the "DC Madame" and Monica Lewinsky, at least Vitter had good taste ;D
-
Fighting - I think my thought here is different from the previous, and your concern, in that it does not give the power to the Feds. It leaves it up to the States except to require them to offer a shall issue permit.
TAB - I'm not sure what differences there are between the States right now on DQing someone. My info is limited reading and mostly accepting other writers or "hear say." However, what I understand is that many States don't allow others strictly because they have some issue with them, except Iowa that just plain old won't get along with anyone >:( Then there is the ever stupid one of "We'll accept that State's permit from a resident, but not from a non-resident." WTF ??? It is either good or it isn't, what difference does it matter if you live in Utah or Minnesota and you have a Utah permit ???
WY, just droped( then reinstated then droped again no one really knows what will happen at this point) several states from the valid list as they allowed misdeamor drug offeneders to have CCW. In WY thats a DQ. I dislike the out of state permit deal, using the example above at one point if you could live in WY, have an out of state Ut permit and carry in WY, but you would be DQed in WY. Thats complete crap. It goes against the whole concept of seperation of states.
-
It goes against the whole concept of seperation of states.
Is the separation of states effected by having to honor out of state driver's licenses? I'm sure that the cars are killing more people than guns.
It's unfortunate that our keepers don't see the Constitution the way that we do, because this really isn't a state's right thing, since it is spelled out pretty clearly in the Bill of Rights. Our individual rights come before the rights of the states. We can't stand for a patchwork quilt of gun laws, when the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
People who've kept their noses and records clean should be able to do whatever they want with their guns and convicts lose that right. Sounds pretty clear and simple to me.
-
My point is, its very messed up, that you would be DQed in your home state, but another state will let you get the OK out of state so that you can carry in your home state.
This would not be an issue with drivers lic, why is this an issue with CCW? its complete crap. I think its a good thing that UT will give you an out of state CCW, but it should ONLY be good in UT!!!!
-
My point is, its very messed up, that you would be DQed in your home state, but another state will let you get the OK out of state so that you can carry in your home state.
This would not be an issue with drivers lic, why is this an issue with CCW? its complete crap. I think its a good thing that UT will give you an out of state CCW, but it should ONLY be good in UT!!!!
I am not for a Federal Government permit at all. As soon as they give it out, they take it away. This goes to state's rights. If individual states want to sign agreements amongst themselves, then so be it. If other states agree, why not allow a UT permit to be valid in another state. It is stupid to not allow states to conduct their business as they do have that right!
-
I am not for a Federal Government permit at all. As soon as they give it out, they take it away. This goes to state's rights. If individual states want to sign agreements amongst themselves, then so be it. If other states agree, why not allow a UT permit to be valid in another state. It is stupid to not allow states to conduct their business as they do have that right!
With all due respect, D-Man, I think you're missing the point. This is NOT about a federal government permit. The states still issue the permits, but all the other states would honor them, just like driver's licenses today.
TAB, I'll assume that you're trying to play devil's advocate instead of just looking for a fight, but I fail to see the difference between driver's license reciprocity and CCW reciprosity, regardless of the outlandish conspiracy scenarios that you keep coming up with.
-
bad idea... Unless every state has the exact same DQ standards and all felonys are the same nation wide.
Agreed, but I want to move out of Ohio, due to the fact that the guns laws are too strict. Furthermore....the reading of the Ohio Revised Code concerning firearms has several issues of hamstringing and catch 22's. You can do this, but not that, etc...
I think that the 2nd Amendment was created by the Federal Government right? A right that cannot be impeded by the states, "or so it's supposed to be?". Isn't there a "Premption" of Federal Law concerning constitutional rights, that should not be over turned by that of the states then? Educate me fellas?
-
With all due respect, D-Man, I think you're missing the point. This is NOT about a federal government permit. The states still issue the permits, but all the other states would honor them, just like driver's licenses today.
TAB, I'll assume that you're trying to play devil's advocate instead of just looking for a fight, but I fail to see the difference between driver's license reciprocity and CCW reciprosity, regardless of the outlandish conspiracy scenarios that you keep coming up with.
It seems that every time this comes up the majority of people "miss the point". THE FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT WOULD ONLY BE TO INSURE RECIPROCITY BETWEEN ALL 50 STATES.
T, That's TAB, every time nation wide CCW is discussed he has SOME beef with the idea, he's from Ca. what can I say. (watch for his reply ;D )
There is one BIG difference between a drivers license and CCW, driving is not a Constitutionally guaranteed civil right.
-
There is one BIG difference between a drivers license and CCW, driving is not a Constitutionally guaranteed civil right
As easy as That :o
-
I should be able to exercise my right to defend myself in any state of the Union.
As Tom said, driver's licenses are a 'privilege' CCW is a right.
State boundaries should not apply once qualified to CCW.
You can use the DL system as a 'guide' though:
1. You must be issued the CCW license in the STATE that you LIVE in.
2. Once issued, you may legally CCW in ANY state, as long as you adhere to that states rules.
3. The Federal gubmint will be involved in order to insure said reciprocity between states.
All that being said, just go back to the 1800's with national open carry. ;)
-
With all due respect, D-Man, I think you're missing the point. This is NOT about a federal government permit. The states still issue the permits, but all the other states would honor them, just like driver's licenses today.
TAB, I'll assume that you're trying to play devil's advocate instead of just looking for a fight, but I fail to see the difference between driver's license reciprocity and CCW reciprosity, regardless of the outlandish conspiracy scenarios that you keep coming up with.
My point is that I am for federal reciprocity, just not a FEDERAL issued permit. I was responding to TAB's point about a federal issued permit and not reciprocity. There is a big difference between the two.
-
Tom and Peg - THANK YOU !!!
You not only understand but nailed it!
This is not about Feds creating something new - The Bill of Rights already covered it. This is about the Feds telling the States to come up with a reasonable system of messing with our Rights, and then requiring all States to accept each other (just as some of you have said, like driver's license).
I should have looked at the time of the month before I threw this out in front of TAB ... Damn PMS ;)
On a more serious note, and I have said this on here before, this is what scares me about our Second Amendment Rights - we are supposedly all gun lovers, owners, users and pro-Second Ammendment on this fourum, and we can't even get along on a basic issue like this. Being involved on here gave me a lot more to think about in situations like Jim Zumbo and his evil black rifle rant.
-
Being involved on here gave me a lot more to think about in situations like Jim Zumbo and his evil black rifle rant.
Speeaking of which........didya get to Scheel's yet? ;D
-
Our individual rights come before the rights of the states.
Just have to pick on one thing Fuzdaddy.
People have rights. The states have power.
Yes I know, we talk about "states rights" and the states do have the "right to" do certain things, but it's not a great use of the word in this case. They have the power to do certain things. People have rights.
-
My point is, its very messed up, that you would be DQed in your home state, but another state will let you get the OK out of state so that you can carry in your home state.
This would not be an issue with drivers lic, why is this an issue with CCW? its complete crap. I think its a good thing that UT will give you an out of state CCW, but it should ONLY be good in UT!!!!
Regardless of what's messed up, I'll use a UT or FL permit in CA if this would ever pass. If California's legislature is going to act ridiculous, then use any and every loophole against them.
-
Just have to pick on one thing Fuzdaddy.
People have rights. The states have power.
Yes I know, we talk about "states rights" and the states do have the "right to" do certain things, but it's not a great use of the word in this case. They have the power to do certain things. People have rights.
Got it, Alf. My state sure uses its power against me and everyone else.
-
Fuzdaddy,
CONFESSION TIME. Not an original thought. (rights->people, power->states) I picked this up from reading The Founders' Second Admendment by Halbrook.
-
Well, suppose this were to happen. I happen to choose a carry gun that has a standard capacity above 10 rounds. Suppose I was driving in one of those tiny New England states. In one state it would be legal, but when I pass through a state with an AWB on my way to a third state, I'd be in violation of a state AWB even if I never left the federal interstate.
If you have federal carry, you'll need to get rid of state AWBs, or there will be fights over state laws on federal property.
-
Well, suppose this were to happen. I happen to choose a carry gun that has a standard capacity above 10 rounds. Suppose I was driving in one of those tiny New England states. In one state it would be legal, but when I pass through a state with an AWB on my way to a third state, I'd be in violation of a state AWB even if I never left the federal interstate.
If you have federal carry, you'll need to get rid of state AWBs, or there will be fights over state laws on federal property.
Guess who is heading down the trail that this type of thing could force. Would be a nice thing wouldn't it ;)
Remember that I go all the way back to the point that we need to find a way for our Constitution and Bill of Rights to have their full meaning again.
-
It would be your responsibility to know the laws of the states that you plan to travel in.
Each state has different traffic laws, even on federal highways. Same with gun laws. I can legally carry in Florida with my Georgia license now, but I must abide by their laws when in their state.
No one said it would be easy....but it can work.
Here is a good source of info..... http://handgunlaw.us/state-link.htm
-
I agree that the Constitution trumps ALL state laws. We either have the right or we don't, period. What then do we do about the restrictions on who, what, where, when and how much?
In MA, over 5 rounds is considered "High Capacity" and over 10 rounds is a "Felony"....regardless of the type/caliber of firearm...
My granddads 1903 Savage .22 has an 8 round detachable magazine and I MUST have a "High Capacity" LTC to even posess the rifle...
You will NEVER, EVER convince everyone, everywhere! I'm not trying to be a buzzkill here but it would be easier to put a fence around the state and never cross into MA...build a big bridge or another tunnel.....burn another 20 billion taxpayer dollars on another BIG F*@%king DIG.....It's a great dream but without another revolution, these things going to be tough to accomplish.
-
Regardless of what's messed up, I'll use a UT or FL permit in CA if this would ever pass. If California's legislature is going to act ridiculous, then use any and every loophole against them.
+1 to that!
-
Regardless of what's messed up, I'll use a UT or FL permit in CA if this would ever pass. If California's legislature is going to act ridiculous, then use any and every loophole against them.
Its not CA that was throw the stink.. it was WY... a very pro CCW state.
Not every state has CCW, you can bet that if they have to honor every one elses, they won't be creating a CCW system. I also know that CA would toss out CCW faster then you can say CCW. That is not a good thing.
Knowing the laws is one thing, fallowing them is another. Even if CA allowed every states CCW permits to be good in CA, CCW here would still be a felony, as the gun is not registered to you. The CA DOJ is the only registry that counts and you can not register a gun if your out of state. There is a lawsuit in the works right now about the federal law that allows LEOs to carry nation wide... if it went strait by the current inturpatation of the US cons, the law would be struck down, but since no judge wants to be known as " the guy that took LEOs guns away" it most likly be put at the bottum of the pile never to be seen...
-
Knowing the laws is one thing, fallowing them is another. Even if CA allowed every states CCW permits to be good in CA, CCW here would still be a felony, as the gun is not registered to you. The CA DOJ is the only registry that counts and you can not register a gun if your out of state. There is a lawsuit in the works right now about the federal law that allows LEOs to carry nation wide... if it went strait by the current inturpatation of the US cons, the law would be struck down, but since no judge wants to be known as " the guy that took LEOs guns away" it most likly be put at the bottum of the pile never to be seen...
The good thing is that living in CA, and having my non-resident permit in UT, OR, and NH I would be able to carry here if something like this passed as I am legal in CA. :)
-
I'm sure you know, when it comes to CCW in CA, what matters is the county you live in. Out of the 58 countys ~ 40 of the are basicly shall issue.
In the most northern states its not uncommon to have more adults with CCW permits then not. Granted there is only a few thousand in each of the countys.
-
TAB ... Take a Midol for that cramping and bloating ...
My proposal was for each State to be required to issue "shall issue" permits, and those permits would be honored Nationwide. I believe this would be a good thing out there in the land of quivering Jello and fuits & nuts.
-
TAB ... Take a Midol for that cramping and bloating ...
Damn it, now you made me spit Glock kool-aid all over my keyboard again.
-
Fuzdaddy,
CONFESSION TIME. Not an original thought. (rights->people, power->states) I picked this up from reading The Founders' Second Admendment by Halbrook.
I'm not holding that against you. It's admirable to be willing to learn. I've ordered my copy.