Interesting argument to expedite concealed carry permits

[bradsteen]

For those that don't watch YouTube videos, there have been numerous cases of state governments intentionally slow-walking what is supposed to be a shall-issue system in our post-Bruen world. To eliminate the incentive for state governments to do that (and to incentivize them to move quickly on background checks), the guy argues that the application for a permit should serve as a permit itself until the state completes it's background checks and validates the person is not restricted from doing so. The logic here is a right delayed is a right denied, so there should be a presumption that the person can carry a concealed weapon unless the state is able to demonstrate that they should not. This is not getting into purchasing requirements or anything like that, just the carry permit process. Interesting concept, and makes sense to me at first glance.

Read More

 

[GrayGoose]

I was born with my permit. Don't need to apply for one.

 

[CamoDeafie]

For those that don't watch YouTube videos, there have been numerous cases of state governments intentionally slow-walking what is supposed to be a shall-issue system in our post-Bruen world. To eliminate the incentive for state governments to do that (and to incentivize them to move quickly on background checks), the guy argues that the application for a permit should serve as a permit itself until the state completes it's background checks and validates the person is not restricted from doing so. The logic here is a right delayed is a right denied, so there should be a presumption that the person can carry a concealed weapon unless the state is able to demonstrate that they should not. This is not getting into purchasing requirements or anything like that, just the carry permit process. Interesting concept, and makes sense to me at first glance.

I can sort of see the idea.. when you look at what the ATF said, the fact anyone who applied during amnesty period to register their pistol braces firearm = lawful and duly complied with Final Rule, and not going to get enforcement sent to them... and those who got approved are now validated registered as NFA owners...


On the other hand... there is the 2A, and those words "shall not be infringed". 27(I think now? ) States have permitless/Constitutional Carry.... whose "permit" is the 2A.

 

[bradsteen]

I was born with my permit. Don't need to apply for one.

View attachment 1770227

Yeah, "shall not be infringed", good stuff. Well, when you get charged with a crime for carrying in a state that requires a permit, just explain to the judge really nicely that the bill of rights says you don't need one. I'm sure that will work out great.

 

[The Heretic]

I was born with my permit. Don't need to apply for one.

View attachment 1770227

 

[Koda]

all the more reason we should have constitutional carry.

that said, Ive never understood with todays technology why the BGC system can take so long.


Bradsteen gets bonus points for providing dialog to posting a video.

 

[The Heretic]

that said, Ive never understood with todays technology why the BGC system can take so long.

With the right software and a network of criminal record sharing/etc., it should be instantaneous - and for some people, it mostly is. With a concealed carry permit with a scannable chip, it should be instantaneous; if someone gets charged/flagged/etc., then a flag should go into their record and the system rejects the check.

The problem is that such systems pretty much do not exist because:

1) Anti-gunners do not want them to exist, they want gun purchases to be as painful and to take as long as possible (part of the pain).

2) Governments are incompetent.

 

[Koda]

The problem is that such systems pretty much do not exist because:

1) Anti-gunners do not want them to exist, they want gun purchases to be as painful and to take as long as possible (part of the pain).

the technology is there if we fixed the BGC system it would reduce "gun violence" but the anti gunners wont fix whats existing they just add more gun laws making it harder to lawfully get and carry a gun.

 

[ma96782]

Of course, this is from California.

In a nut shell, the argument(s) against "permits" is plainly evident (start at 02:33).....

Aloha, Mark

 

[Diamondback]

With the right software and a network of criminal record sharing/etc., it should be instantaneous - and for some people, it mostly is. With a concealed carry permit with a scannable chip, it should be instantaneous; if someone gets charged/flagged/etc., then a flag should go into their record and the system rejects the check.

The problem is that such systems pretty much do not exist because:

1) Anti-gunners do not want them to exist, they want gun purchases to be as painful and to take as long as possible (part of the pain).

2) Governments are incompetent.

It also assumes that those who are supposed to enter records into the system comply with their responsibilities to do so rather than jus saying "eff it, I'm not being paid what I feel entitled to so I'm just gonna sit here and turn O2 into CO2 all day."