Kansas Reciprocity announcement timing

[MountainPacker]

I spoke with someone (don't know who they transferred me to) in the KS Attorney General's office today. He said they were currently compiling their list of states with substantially similar criteria. They were still waiting on a number of states to respond to their letters and didn't want to dole out the reciprocity piece meal. He said they hope to make an announcement by the end of January 2007.

He said the announcement would appear here:
http://www.ksag.org/Concealed_Weapon...rry_Update.htm

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Anubis]

Good news. I am hopeful that Colorado will be included.

[MountainPacker]

Good news. I am hopeful that Colorado will be included.

One of the things the guy said they were looking for was parity in disqualifications. His example was domestic violence convictions. I don't think Colorado disqualifies you for misdomeanor violence, so we'll see. I would think there would be additional desire to get a neighboring state.

Utah looks good to my untrained eye. We'll see.

[tanksoldier]

CO disqualifies you for any domestic violence conviction. They have to, it's federal law... a person convicted of any sort of domestic violence cannot posess firearms or ammunition.

[P95Carry]

Guess we'll see but - glad they are addressing the issue.

I fear PA may not be included as we have near zero training mandated. OTOH if they accept FL - I am good to go

[Echo_Four]

Unless they don't accept non-res from Florida.

[raytracer]

No license issued by another state will be recognized in Kansas until January 1, 2007. On and after January 1, 2007, the Attorney General will publish a list of states whose CCH licenses will be recognized in Kansas,

On and after. Not on or after. The AG was obligated to publish a list of states on January 1. Even if the only state listed was "Kansas", he dropped the ball by failing to make it available.

This whole business of "waiting to hear back from all the states" is nothing but a way of letting Morrison deal with the whole issue, and I would be surprised if he didn't find some little nit that disqualified every state.

This whole thing vexes me greatly.

Joe

[BlueMerle]

...<snip>...

This whole business of "waiting to hear back from all the states" is nothing but a way of letting Morrison deal with the whole issue, and I would be surprised if he didn't find some little nit that disqualified every state.

This whole thing vexes me greatly.

Joe

I agree! There is no plausible reason for them to withhold those states that have already met their reciprocity conditions or to report that as of now none have. This is certainly politically motivated and it stinks!

I hope that some group or individual will challenge this and force their hand.

[JayHawker45]

CO disqualifies you for any domestic violence conviction. They have to, it's federal law... a person convicted of any sort of domestic violence cannot posess firearms or ammunition.

That's correct TankSoldier, the Lautenberg Amendment makes it a felony for anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime of “domestic violence” (e.g., assault or attempted assault on a family member) to ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms or ammunition. There is not even an exception for military personnel engaged in official duties. (It's the retired military coming out in me.) The Amendment also makes it a felony for anyone to sell or issue a firearm or ammunition to a person with such a conviction. So, it would be logical to assume, that every state would disqualify a person based on a domestic violence conviction.(It's the retired military coming out in me.)

I personally think that the whole business of "we've got to study the other states' laws and see how they compare" is just a cover. I can't imagine they didn't start looking at this even prior to the law going into effect in July, now, it's just a way to let the new AG get his hands on the issue and see which way he's going to go. This is much more an issue for residents of other states than it is for residents of Kansas.

[lowflyer]

I personally think it is too early to speculate on all the reasons why the list has not yet been published.

[randytulsa2]

At this point I wouldn't attribute the nonexistence of the list to nefarious reasons. But I am waiting with baited breath....

I have intentionally foregone recreational (i.e., $-spending) opportunities in my neighbor to the north just because of its (until now) stupid policy on the legality of me being prepared to effectively defend myself.

I hope I don't have to wait much longer (I love to hunt pheasant) and I have to go up there on business in March.

[Andy]

I think the issue may be restraining orders rather than actual convictions for domestic violence. The posters who cited federal law on convictions are correct, but the states vary enormously in how they handle exchange of information on restraining orders.

[Anubis]

http://www.ksag.org/Concealed_Weapon...her_states.htm

[lowflyer]

So why did they wait to send out the list again?

[SIGguy229]

Looks like most states without a live fire portion were DQ'd--leaving VA out...but FL is in...