Gun law allowing carry over state lines!

[bigezfosheez]

Maybe Washington will have to accept my OR chl now?!

Anyone else hear anything about this?

<broken link removed>

Read More

 

[TCOV]

This law is going nowhere. Washington will accept your CHL when Oregon accepts a Washington CPL. Lobby your own state.

 

[hermannr]

Maybe Washington will have to accept my OR chl now?!

Anyone else hear anything about this?

<broken link removed>

This is the same national law that was passed by the house last year. It has to pass by the end of the year or it dies. even if it does pass the senate I doubt very much Ob will sign it, now that he has already won re-election.

The states that don't like this bill are those states like OR, NY, NJ, and CN that do not recognize anyone's license to carry other than their own. has to do is recognize WA CLPs and WA will recognize OR's RCW 9.41.073

Work on your OR state legislators, or get a WA CPL, easier than obtaining a OR CHL.

 

[Member 3687]

As much as I would like to carry in all states I Personal hope it does not ever pass. I currently have permits in Washington and Idaho and between the two I am covered in most states.

To me this is a double edge sword and we lose both ways.

My fear is by allowing the federal government to force states to allow concealed permits from other states they might get the feeling they should be the ones regulating them maybe not at first but over time. This now takes away states rights and we have volunteered to give the federal government more control over firearms for a little convenience. Like the old saying goes give them an inch and they will take a mile even if it takes a few years to do it.

They will just tack it onto the health care bill and you will need a federal mental evaluation befor issue or a federal tax to get one and if I can think of this stuff you know they can as well. I would prefer to keep lobbying the states for permission than give the feds any more control over anything in my life..

 

[Stomper]

As if Obamacare won't do that eventually anyway... Plus the BATFE is all over 2A rights like ugly on an ape as well, right here and now.

 

[hermannr]

As much as I would like to carry in all states I Personal hope it does not ever pass. I currently have permits in Washington and Idaho and between the two I am covered in most states.

To me this is a double edge sword and we lose both ways.

My fear is by allowing the federal government to force states to allow concealed permits from other states they might get the feeling they should be the ones regulating them maybe not at first but over time. This now takes away states rights and we have volunteered to give the federal government more control over firearms for a little convenience. Like the old saying goes give them an inch and they will take a mile even if it takes a few years to do it.

They will just tack it onto the health care bill and you will need a federal mental evaluation befor issue or a federal tax to get one and if I can think of this stuff you know they can as well. I would prefer to keep lobbying the states for permission than give the feds any more control over anything in my life..

The States are supposed to recognize the lawful acts of the other states (article 4 section 1, us constitution)...think driver's licenses and marriage licenses. The states managed those on their own (at least up to now...we will see with the "gay marriage" split in state laws) This legislation just says, the states will recognice the lawful license of another state as if it was issued by them. So instead of collecting a bunch of different state's non-resident permits, you only need your own state's permit....unless you live in NJ, MD or WDC..IL does not issue, so they are not included.

 

[drew]

The States are supposed to recognize the lawful acts of the other states (article 4 section 1, us constitution)...think driver's licenses and marriage licenses. The states managed those on their own (at least up to now...we will see with the "gay marriage" split in state laws) This legislation just says, the states will recognice the lawful license of another state as if it was issued by them. So instead of collecting a bunch of different state's non-resident permits, you only need your own state's permit....unless you live in NJ, MD or WDC..IL does not issue, so they are not included.

Proof of residency in Alaska, Arizona, Vermont, or Wyoming should also be acceptable. Sucks for VT residents right now because they have Constitutional Carry but don't issue permits so their residents don't get the reciprocity they could.

 

[Member 3687]

Hermannr

I agree with you so please don’t get me wrong. I feel we should not need permission like requiring a permit at all for what I currently feel is a right but until we change the laws and the mind set of people I will follow them.

I guess I just do not trust the FEDERAL government to do the right thing so I do not want them to be involved in any of it.

I just prefer to keep it as it is and have the states come up with the plan and keep the FEDs out of it. I feel we will get there it will just take time.

Side note:

I have the same problem living in Idaho and going into Washington. Washington did not accept Idaho’s permit as it is a weapons permit and not a pistol only and Idaho will also issue to folks under 21 under certain circumstances. With a weapons permit we can carry shotguns, swords or anything else as long as we can legally own it. Yet Idaho accepts everyone else permits. So I have both to play it safe.

 

[hermannr]

Proof of residency in Alaska, Arizona, Vermont, or Wyoming should also be acceptable. Sucks for VT residents right now because they have Constitutional Carry but don't issue permits so their residents don't get the reciprocity they could.

OK at least fixed that for VT (and the others too). OK now recognizes everyone...if you live in a state that does not require a CPL, your DL is your CPL. OK now has OC too, but only with a CPL, execpt for those states that don't require a CPL...

If every state did that (that is, recognize every state's right to carry) there would be no need for the federal government to tell them to. If you look at the protest list, all of those states (except NV..and now the new AG in PA) are ALL from states that recognize no-one's permits other than their own. NY, NJ, and MD are the worst. Hopefully the court will fix that this year (or next) We now have conflicting circuit court of appeals judgments so that will help a lot.

 

[jim97701]

I love the way that linked story states that the New York Attorney General says that 68% of guns used in NY crimes last year were traced to other states. This may be correct but it doesnt take into consideration that those weapons were either stolen or gotten illegally by the gang bangers, drug dealers and crooks and NOT by legal carrying citizens from other states. This just further proves that states with so called strict laws to protect the citizens actually do the opposite. Law abiding honest citizens follow the rules imposed on them but the crooks dont and never will and they will continue to carry and use stolen and illegal weapons anywhere they want. This in turn puts the honest people that live there and visitors at greater risk and a great disadvantage to protect themselves from the criminal elements. The garbage that the gun grabbers put out just piddles me off to no end!! Ok rant over, just my .02

 

[fd15k]

Proof of residency in Alaska, Arizona, Vermont, or Wyoming should also be acceptable. Sucks for VT residents right now because they have Constitutional Carry but don't issue permits so their residents don't get the reciprocity they could.

Actually it is more of a problem for NJ, CA, MA, etc - this law allows carry in 49 states with a valid permit from any state, other than your state of residence. Basically VT guys can get a UT permit or something, and carry anywhere.

 

[kengrubb]

The States are supposed to recognize the lawful acts of the other states (article 4 section 1, us constitution)...think driver's licenses and marriage licenses.

Yes on marriage licenses, no on driver's licenses.

To my knowledge, no court has ever held that FF&C applied to driver's licenses. In fact, the only reason states honor one another's DLs are AAMVA, DLC, NRVC, and soon the DLA.

American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Driver License Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Non-Resident Violator Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Driver License Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[hermannr]

Yes on marriage licenses, no on driver's licenses.

To my knowledge, no court has ever held that FF&C applied to driver's licenses. In fact, the only reason states honor one another's DLs are AAMVA, DLC, NRVC, and soon the DLA.

American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Driver License Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Non-Resident Violator Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Driver License Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tese agreement do not preclude the fact that if the states had not gotten together on some agreement on DL and driving, that the Feds could not have used Article 4 section 1 to force them too.

 

[Flyingswords]

I think that why those states wont recognize any other states concealed license other than their own has to do with some sort of financial standpoint mainly.

 

[Misterbill]

When are you guys going to get it?

Right to CARRY, as opposed to RIGHT TO POSSESS, is NOT, NOT, NOT a federally recognized right.

Until and unless the Supreme Court of the US recognizes a right to individual carry, the case for FEDERAL or state-to-state carry is DEAD. Full faith and credit doesn't BEGIN to cover. It's significantly WEAKER than right to Marry, for instance,

Th constitution means what the SC SAYS it means. That's been our compact since the 1700s. If you're saying something else, you're saying something OTHER than what THE FOUNDERS MEANT. Because they were THERE AND HAD EVERY OPPORTUNITY IN THE WORLD to over-ride the court. They DID NOT. Which ought to say a lot to a lot of people on this forum.

 

[hermannr]

I think that why those states wont recognize any other states concealed license other than their own has to do with some sort of financial standpoint mainly.

How is a state going to gain financially when you will not recognize, or issue non-resident permits...NY, you need a permit to possess, you can't ever touch a pistol without a permit, you need a permit to have in your home, you need a permit to transport to the range, and you need a permit to carry, and they are only availeable to NYS Residents.

No, NYS gun control is all about control...basically a Jim Crow law, written by a crook (Sullivan) for his crooked benifit...it was so his thugs would not be shot when the victims were defending themselves. NY, CN, MA and MD are only sightly better.

 

[kengrubb]

Concealed carry, in the states where one needs a license to carry concealed, is a criminal matter. The criminal statutes of state X are not honored by state Y. A licensed prostitute in Nevada cannot practice her craft in another state in accordance with FF&C.

 

[Modly]

I agree with you so please don't get me wrong. I feel we should not need permission like requiring a permit at all for what I currently feel is a right but until we change the laws and the mind set of people I will follow them.

I guess I just do not trust the FEDERAL government to do the right thing so I do not want them to be involved in any of it.

I just prefer to keep it as it is and have the states come up with the plan and keep the FEDs out of it. I feel we will get there it will just take time.

Side note:

I have the same problem living in Idaho and going into Washington. Washington did not accept Idaho's permit as it is a weapons permit and not a pistol only and Idaho will also issue to folks under 21 under certain circumstances. With a weapons permit we can carry shotguns, swords or anything else as long as we can legally own it. Yet Idaho accepts everyone else permits. So I have both to play it safe.

You sound as if you don't travel much, which might be hindering your desire for a change in laws.

The bill, if passed by the Federal government, would not grant the Feds anything. They get no oversight into the process, they don't hand out the permits, and they won't tell states (ok, just Illinois) that do not permit carry that they have to. It just creates a system in which states that do allow people to carry must allow non residents the same privilege when they visit.

Yes, this might create precedence in which other state laws carry over (ie; gay marriage or medical marijuana), but who cares? Those are civil rights issues as well, and we can't just stop at a point when they no longer reflect gun owner interests.

 

[hermannr]

Concealed carry, in the states where one needs a license to carry concealed, is a criminal matter. The criminal statutes of state X are not honored by state Y. A licensed prostitute in Nevada cannot practice her craft in another state in accordance with FF&C.

I cannot believe you are compairing a constitutionally protected RIGHT to licensed prostitution. Do you have a clue what WA state Constitution, Article 1 Section 24 even says? Oh, that right, you live in Olympia...

 

[hermannr]

(ok, just Illinois).

Actually, they don't tell IL anything either. IL does not have a permit system for their residents, so no states permits would be good.

What te Federal Law states is, if you allow this licensed activity for your residents, you need to allow this activity, on a equivilent basis, to citizens of other states.

The one state that would have an ambigous law is WY. WY allows unlicensed concealed carry, but for WY citizens only...WY also has a license available, so those from out-of-state that have a license would be covered, but what about those that do not have a license? I think WY's position, should this bill become law, would be that if you have a license fine, if not, you still need to be a WY resident.