National Concealed Carry Permit

[Vaultman]

I wonder if I sued a state for not recognizing my home states concealed carry permit if I would have a snowballs chance in h*** to win.

Any thoughts?

Read More

 

[Fast Eddie]

Somebody has to try it, why not you?

 

[Netspirit]

The 2nd Amendment is your carry permit, dude.

Just carry. If you have to use your weapon to protect your life, nothing else matters.

 

[PiratePast40]

You've introduced two different concepts here. As far as a "national permit", I don't think that anyone in their right mind would advocate for that. The very term is an oxymoron since the constitution never mentions permits as requirements to enjoy any of your rights.

I believe that reciprocity is what you're asking about. Because of states autonomy, it's doubtful that there would be compelling reason for a lawsuit. However, if you're really up to it, see if you can get legislative support to introduce a bill for Oregon to accept permits from other states. Just be aware of the slippery slope here. You know that Prozanski would want to have his provisions for "Texas qualification" to be a part of any change.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

I cannot believe they ever agreed that each state has the power to regulate the second amendment.

 

[Dunerunner]

Imagine if Authors and Editorialists had to get a permit to write.

 

[Vaultman]

I understand all that y'all say. 2A is the permit. But for some dumb reason we get regulated beyond what is right.

I sat in a seminar (about something totally unrelated) put on by an attorney, and she said 'when has government not overstepped their bounds' or something to that effect. I think about that all the time.

With certain states right now being forced by a court to acknowledge other states same sex marriages, I think forcing say California to accept other states concealed carry permits may fly. But what do I know. This thread got me thinking about it....
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/le...ll-carry-through-anti-2nd-amendment-laws.html

 

[RicInOR]

Re Comment #5 -
No one approved this crap. These things creep in. One crisis at a time.
A movie in the 30s makes suppressors silent. Laws follow and we can't get one without a tax stamp.
Black Panthers stage a political protest in CA's capital. The NRA pushed for and Ronald Reagan (then governor) signed to remove loaded carry from the state - that leads to the '68 bubble gum on the national stage.


1934
National Firearms Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1967 CA
California State Capitol
A Huey P. Newton Story - Actions - State Capitol March | PBS

1968 Gun Control Act
Gun Control Act of 1968 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



How did we get reciprocity on Drivers Licenses? Why do we even have such things?
It's not like there are not significant differences between the states. Try and ride your motorcycle between lanes in OR - Yet, it is A-OK in CA.

 

[fd15k]

With certain states right now being forced by a court to acknowledge other states same sex marriages, I think forcing say California to accept other states concealed carry permits may fly. But what do I know. This thread got me thinking about it....
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/le...ll-carry-through-anti-2nd-amendment-laws.html

That is what the National Reciprocity bill intended to do - force states into recognizing each other's permits. It uses the power delegated
to Congress to achieve that. Now since it is in the jurisdiction of Congress to decide how that stuff is done, and Congress hasn't
acted on it, I suspect there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

Another angle is simply to force states into issuing permits to non-residents. That would be a more direct shot using 2A/EP as
the grounds, and will likely fly.

And by the way....

Until the Supreme Court struck down all laws banning interracial marriage in 1967, a number of states banned interracial marriage and did not recognize marriage certificates issued in other states for interracial couples. The full faith and credit clause was never used to force a state to recognize a marriage it did not wish to recognize.[17] However, the existence of a common-law marriage in a sister state (still available in nine states and the District of Columbia) has been recognized in divorce or dissolution of marriage cases.

The clause's application to state-sanctioned same-sex marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships is unresolved.

Full Faith and Credit Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

At one time I thought this was a good idea. Then one day I was speaking to a Highway Patrol Officer and mentioned it. His reply was that you should not need a permit in the first place as it is nothing but an illegal tax. On further consideration we cannot compromise our rights. As soon as we accept that they can be limited (I.E. Requiring licenses or permits for them) then they are no longer rights. Instead we have allowed them to become privileges. Permits and licenses by definition are "Exceptions to do something that otherwise would be illegal". An inherent right is not illegal unless we first surrender it.

 

[fd15k]

At one time I thought this was a good idea. Then one day I was speaking to a Highway Patrol Officer and mentioned it. His reply was that you should not need a permit in the first place as it is nothing but an illegal tax. On further consideration we cannot compromise our rights. As soon as we accept that they can be limited (I.E. Requiring licenses or permits for them) then they are no longer rights. Instead we have allowed them to become privileges. Permits and licenses by definition are "Exceptions to do something that otherwise would be illegal". An inherent right is not illegal unless we first surrender it.

Perhaps he can lead a revolution against the treasonous Supreme Court and the Congress which are allowing for (or enacting) illegal taxation and forcing
people to compromise on their rights

<broken link removed>

 

[freestoneangler]

This is a great thread and interesting question. I wonder how much national attention and big a statement it would be were the pro carry gun states to establish a uniform concealed carry license and reciprocity system free of all the legal-begal bull crap? I should think it would make a significant statement and the united front be a much stronger message.

 

[Vaultman]

This is a great thread and interesting question. I wonder how much national attention and big a statement it would be were the pro carry gun states to establish a uniform concealed carry license and reciprocity system free of all the legal-begal bull crap? I should think it would make a significant statement and the united front be a much stronger message.

This is what I am talking about!!!

 

[Norm0931]

How did we get reciprocity on Drivers Licenses? Why do we even have such things?
It's not like there are not significant differences between the states. Try and ride your motorcycle between lanes in OR - Yet, it is A-OK in CA.

At one time I thought this was a good idea. Then one day I was speaking to a Highway Patrol Officer and mentioned it. His reply was that you should not need a permit in the first place as it is nothing but an illegal tax. On further consideration we cannot compromise our rights. As soon as we accept that they can be limited (I.E. Requiring licenses or permits for them) then they are no longer rights. Instead we have allowed them to become privileges. Permits and licenses by definition are "Exceptions to do something that otherwise would be illegal". An inherent right is not illegal unless we first surrender it.

These 2 points illustrate the issue quite nicely. While it seems logical that all states should be forced to recognize concealed carry permits much like driver's licenses it is not fully supported by Pro-2A folks because of the point GRC pointed out. If we make Concealed Carry a federal issue then a Anti-gun House, Senate, and Pres majority could possibly kill concealed carry nationally.

The other issue I see is that while RicInOr is correct that driving laws can vary slightly, they are 95% the same. Carry laws on the other hand can vary greatly depending on what state you are in. Schools, State buildings, bars and restaurants, etc. You carry in to a restaurant in whereverville thinking you are good because in Oregon it's cool but, they have a law that because they serve beer you can't carry. There is no sign but, you get caught and now you lose your permit.

Honestly unless we went to either Federal Constitutional Carry I dunno how it could happen. I do forsee it becoming a bigger issue though in the next few years as more and more people get permits. My prediction/fear is that we go to a National Concealed Carry license and either A) we see cops busting people making honest mistakes because of the multitude of state laws or B) a Super Majority Democrat Government makes concealed carrying illegal nationwide.

 

[fd15k]

a Super Majority Democrat Government makes concealed carrying illegal nationwide.

You mean in favor of Open Carry ?

 

[Norm0931]

No, I mean they ban Concealed Carry in the United States.

 

[fd15k]

No, I mean they ban Concealed Carry in the United States.

Well, my point was... they can ban concealed carry, but they can't ban carry completely. This assessment is based on the decisions in the
various Federal courts. It is the consensus that anti-carry folks would rather prefer for people to carry concealed, than alarm the public.
What do you think about that ?

 

[Norm0931]

A good point FD but, it would require a court challenge all the way to the Supreme Court and that would probably take what, a year or two? And what happens if the court agrees with the law?

While they fear open carry for "seeing guns!" paranoid:OMG!) I think they fear concealed more because, "you never know who has it!" paranoid:OMG!!) Ironically enough, the exact reason criminals fear concealed carry.

I still hold hope that society can be reverted from Holder's Cigarette brainwashing on Guns. My sister was hardcore anti-gun until I asked her Why I shouldn't be able to own an "assault rifle" if I wasn't gonna go on a mass shooting. She had a "mind explode" moment. I'm taking her out to shoot the 10/22 with a can in a few weeks because she asked.

 

[fd15k]

A good point FD but, it would require a court challenge all the way to the Supreme Court and that would probably take what, a year or two? And what happens if the court agrees with the law?

Well, a challenge all the way to SCOTUS would be required to push for carry in a few states where we failed on the appellate level. But I agree
it would be quite interesting if SCOTUS rules that carry can be prohibited. I guess that would leave us with two options - push for carry on the state
level in the respective states, or push for a Constitutional Amendment. In many ways a Constitutional Amendment would be way more interesting,
I just don't think it's a big enough issue for people to support it.

 

[clearconscience]

I had a friend who worked for the DEA, state dept, and worked as a contractor in iraq. He has a national CWP. He said as long as he renews it every year he gets it for life.

If ex feds can get it why can't we