Usually it's the State Attorney General, I don't know for sure who takes care of that in OR.
This is a discussion on Who decides reciprocity? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I live in Portland. Washington is across the river, about a 20 minute drive for me. Obviously I have an Oregon CHL. Washington does not ...
I live in Portland. Washington is across the river, about a 20 minute drive for me. Obviously I have an Oregon CHL. Washington does not recognize it. So I also got my non-resident Utah permit which Washington does recognize.
I know guns are more an emotional issue than a logical one, but just who decides which other states' reciprocity a state will honor? And how? There does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to any of the laws.
Preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse or Rapture....whichever comes first.
It is the AG's call in PA.
"The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization." Sigmund Freud
Oregon recognizes no one elses permit, which is why Washington will not recognize theirs. To carry in Oregon, you need either a resident or nonresident Oregon permit.
As stated above, usually it's the AG of the states, they compare notes, things like who honors what and the states requirements for issuing CCW permits, states like FL and UT have wide reciprocity arrangements because of the higher training requirements than say PA, which has no training requirement.
Obviously as Oregon doesn't recognize any other state's permits, they have zero reciprocity agreements.
You have three types of arrangements:
- Reciprocity=states working together (you honor mine, I'll honor yours)
- I'll recognize your's even if you don't recognize ours.
- And my all time favorite, we don't need no stinkin' permit.
In Oregon, it starts with our legislature. Oregon law states that our legislature is the highest authority (save federal government), and its laws cannot be circumvented by lower authorities (townships, counties, etc.). Our legislature here would have to first provide for reciprocity in our statutes, then I assume our AG would have to be directed to begin reviewing reciprocity agreements with other states.
Oregon is kind of a confused state. While we have some very good gun laws here ( shall issue permits, good class 3 weapon process, etc.), we still have a core group of staunch anti-gun folks here who are involved in the political process and try to roadblock as much as possible. If it wasn't for the fact that so much of Oregon was rural and conservative, we probably would have some strong anti-gun laws here in Oregon. But as it is, probably around 70+% or our state legislators would be impeached or put out in the cold the next election if they were to start becoming as restrictive as California.
I will support gun control when you can guarantee all guns are removed from this planet. That includes military and law enforcement. When you can accomplish that, then I will be the last person to lay down my gun. Then I will carry the weapon that replaces the gun.
The only real problem with living in Vermont is that because we don't have a permit, there is nothing for other states to recognize. I'm going to SC next month, and I can't get a non-resident SC permit because I don't own land there, and they only recognize out of state permits, if you're a resident of that state, so I can't get a non-resident permit from another state. Arghhh!!!
Thats a bizarre situation morintp. Don't know what can be done about that.
Here in SC, as the legislation reads, its up to our State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) to negotiate and signed letters of reciprocity with other states. And the law reads that they must be states with similar requirements for obtaining a CWP.
Problem with that is that there is no incentive for them to do so and any little difference between ours and yours can give them a reason to just not agree to it. They don't seem to be in any hurry to add any nor do I think they make a good faith effort to obtain them. They dribble in one every year or so. Probably in order to claim they are doing their job. But its far from enough.
There are efforts in the legislature now to remove that from SLED and make it automatic. If you recognize ours we will recognize yours. It did not make it through last year and it was introduced rather late in session. It did have some good steam though. And should be brought up again this year. Legislative session starts next week. I hope it moves through.
I don't believe though, that there is any effort to change the residency portion of it.
Just buy you a condo at Myrtle Beach and apply for your SC permit. (I have one to sell if you are interested).
The bill presently in the SC Senate is to recognize a permit from any state but that still leaves out VT. I can't seem to get an actual interpretation of the bill as to the non-resident requirement so I don't know about that. There is also some saying that in its present form will allow those under 21 with a permit from another state to be recognized. In SC SLED negotiates reciprocity and they do drag their feet. With this bill waiting to be voted on I don't see any additions until it either passes or fails.
It depends on state law.
Les Baer 45
N.R.A. Patron Life Member
depends on state law. in NV it's the Department of Public Safety along with the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association who decide which states' permits get honored.
Sometimes I wish Vermont was more like Alaska WRT licensing.
LOL... I recently sold some property up in the upstate that I had thought about carving up into 10 foot square lots and selling them to out of staters for CWP. Shoulda done it. Might still!
I dunno. You might be right about VT. The way I read the thing it said "if they recognized ours". Could VT recognize SC without even issuing themselves? Might be a loop hole there. I was told that SLED was very much done with adding Florida and had signed the papers. But then they now have just delayed announcing it after the introduction of the bill. At one point SLED told all the CWP certified trainers at their annual meeting that it was a done deal. And yet, so far, no announcement or listing of it. I am also told that the SLED agents responsible are, in general, rather anti CWP. That would have been one more state though. But nothing heard from it since.
I will relate another SC related amusement. My kid is up at SC LE Academy. And he came home last week and told me that the trainers were telling them not to enforce the no carry in a Establishment that Serves Alcohol for consumption on the premise" clause. Apparently they are under the impression that the AG has told them its unenforcible. And they told them that all CCP holders would know they are not supposed to but even if they did, not to enforce it. It won't hold up. Now... CAUTION... that is about as fifth party comment as you can get. The law still reads that its a no carry zone. And until that changes don't do anything but wonder about this. I don't know why they would be relaying that and they cannot be held account for that information being a legal opinion any more than I can for telling you that totally unofficial fourth party conversation.