National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill - Page 6

National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill

This is a discussion on National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by sdprof I think what that second highlighted portion is saying is that this law will not interfere with a state's right to ...

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6
Results 76 to 80 of 80
Like Tree53Likes

Thread: National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill

  1. #76
    VIP Member Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Quote Originally Posted by sdprof View Post
    I think what that second highlighted portion is saying is that this law will not interfere with a state's right to deal with its own residents. Thus, this law will not allow a resident of one state to carry, within his home state, based on a permit issued by another, unless the home state allows that.. Thus, a resident of my state, SD, would not be able to carry within SD using a UT permit. SD recognizes all permits now, but requires a resident to have an SD permit.

    If that^^^^^^^^^^^

    Is what it means, than that makes sense.
    I would rather die with good men than hide with cowards
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans
    Don't ever think that the reason I'm peaceful is because I don't know how to be violent

    M&Pc .357SIG, 2340Sigpro .357SIG

  2. #77
    Member Array Beachbumcook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Kansas City Metro
    Quote Originally Posted by TheGreatGonzo View Post
    You sure about that one?
    OK... yes... "Marriage between a man and a women"... (was my thinking when I made my original post).
    Springfield XDM 40cal
    Safariland Double Magazine Duty Pouch
    High Noon "Slide Guard" Holster - Leather (OWB)
    BladeTech "Eclipse" Holster - Kydex (OWB)
    Aker Reinforced Gun Belt (Leather & Polymer)
    Wilderness Tactical/Operator Belt (Kydex Reinforced)

  3. #78
    Ex Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by mastercapt View Post
    As far as training is concerned, I agree that taking an 8 hr course does not make one an "expert", however, he is trained more than someone who has taken no course.
    A friend who was employed at a gun shop tells of a man who carried in a smith 38 revolver, which was loaded and cocked. After all the store personnel drew their weapons, the man said " I cocked this gun and don't know how to uncock it without shooting it." They took him aside and gave him a quickie course in safe gun handling.
    In some states, the man mentioned above, could have a carry permit. Would you feel safe near him?
    Todays courses should also cover revolvers and autos.

    As for the recip bill, I know that when Uncle Sam gets into something, it gets F.U.B.A.R.. The states need to decide uniform requirements-- background check, fingerprints, photo, additional ID, training and/or qualifications, etc; where you can and cannot carry; and make them standards for all the states involved.
    Then, let the 2 holdout states know they are infringing my constitutional rights to have my gun in their states................
    So who decides how much training is 'enough' for our 'right?' Is it 3 hrs? 8 hrs? What if someone barely passes? What if someone doesnt pass...they are denied their right?

    As I said, there is no difference in crimes/accident rates in states WITH requirements and those with none.

    Please see my signature: "Freedom doesnt mean safe, it means free." It's about encouraging people to be responsible for themselves, letting them suffer the consequences if they arent, and rewarding those that are. Not bring us all down to the lowest common denominator.
    Simms65 likes this.

  4. Remove Advertisements

  5. #79
    Senior Member Array TheGreatGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Beachbumcook View Post
    OK... yes... "Marriage between a man and a women"... (was my thinking when I made my original post).
    I figured as much, but that was kind of my point. If another state grants legality to a type of marriage that you vehemently disagree with (not saying you do, just using it as an example), do you want the federal government to be able to tell your state "You are required to recognize this marriage from State X and provide them with all of the same state benefits and protections that you do any other marriage!"?

    I believe constitutional carry should be be recognized in every single state as a matter of principle. I don't, however, want the federal government imposing furhter mandates on states. Although the resulting outcome would be nice, I am opposed to the process it would take to get there.

    Just my opinion,
    "Skin that smokewagon!".

  6. #80
    Senior Member Array wjh2657's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Lafayette, Tennessee
    Marriage Licenses = All states recognizes other states licenses

    No. Marriage can only be performed on that state's license. (i.e. TN requires TN Marriage license for TN Marriage.) Not all states even recognize each other's marriages (same sex, first cousins and underage are usually suspect.)
    Driver's Licenses = All states recognizes other states licenses

    No. There was not Federal enactments nor is there a Federal driver's License law. The Driver License Compact (DLC) was signed between 45 states of their own accord, recognizing each others drivers licenses. The other five states recognize the drivers license for a "drive through" or visit but not for an extended stay (period of limitation depends on states.)
    CDL (Commercial Driver's License) = Recognized nationwide and tracked nationwide and by all states.

    Yes. The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 did place Federal standards on the state issued CDL. It is still not a Federal CDL but a state CDL must meet the Federal standards.

    Vaccination/Health Records: Recognized by all states and universities to ensure public health & safety

    These are medical records kept at State level, not a "license" so they are not germane to this issue. The only federal format used for this is the Immunization Record to be carried with your passport outside the U.S. but this is still filled out by your doctor or a state health agency.

    So, the only true "precedent" above is the CDL. As this is tied to Interstate Commerce and the Highway Acts, it means it could be "selectively enforced"by numerous government agencies according to their own interpretations of their enforcement authority. If you haven't already noticed, anything tied to "Interstate Commerce" is not protected by the Constitution so far as the U.S. Supreme Court is concerned. Once you state "IC" every government agency out there ( including FBI, Treasury department and BATF) has a free shot at the regulations and how they are to be enforced.

    Do you really want an open season on HCP/CWPs? I don't, so I still say: leave it to the states.
    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search tags for this page

2011 ccw reciprocity

ccw reciprocity bill

concealed carry reciprocity bill

iowa ccw laws

national carry bill
national ccw bill
national ccw reciprocity bill
national ccw reciprocity bill 2011
national reciprocity bill

oregon ccw reciprocity


oregon ccw reciprocity 2011

oregon ccw reciprocity bill

oregon concealed carry reciprocity bill


oregon cwp reciprocity


oregon reciprocity bill

Click on a term to search for related topics.