Defensive Carry banner

Has the term "reciprocity" lost its meaning?

5K views 46 replies 30 participants last post by  64zebra 
#1 ·
I was perusing Handgunlaw.us to see what the reciprocity maps look like for Texas. Great to see that just about all of the southern half of the US is now covered by my permit!

However, I noticed a disturbing trend: Texas recognizes some states' permits even though they don't extend the same courtesy to Texans. For instance: NE, NY, HI.

What could possibly have been going through Gov. Perry's head with these unilateral agreements? How is such an agreement of benefit to Texans?
 
#4 ·
From what I've seen, the Texas license is harder to get than a couple of other states. We must at least take a shooting test and some states don't even require that. An easy shooting test for sure but at least you have to be able to take range directions and hit the target. :image035:
 
#3 ·
No, reciprocity still means the same thing. If it's a one side arrangement, it's not reciprocity. There are more than a few states that honor ALL state's permits regardless if the other state recognizes theirs. MI, TN, IN etc. honor the Iowa permit, however Iowa recognizes NO other state's permits.
How is such an agreement of benefit to Texans?
It's not, but it is a benefit to those visiting TX from another state without having to worry about a Non-res permit. etc.
 
#17 ·
No, reciprocity still means the same thing. If it's a one side arrangement, it's not reciprocity. There are more than a few states that honor ALL state's permits regardless if the other state recognizes theirs. MI, TN, IN etc. honor the Iowa permit, however Iowa recognizes NO other state's permits.


It's not, but it is a benefit to those visiting TX from another state without having to worry about a Non-res permit. etc.
JD as you currently live in a state that I used to live in, any idea on why Iowa does not honor other states permits? How hard is it to get a Non-Resident permit? Any info would be great. Thanks
 
#6 ·
It also is a situation of your states AG or whoever, contacting the state in question and asking them to honor the Tx CCL.

As for Nebraska. Look for that to change around the 1st of August. They just passed new legislation that will allow Ne. to accept other states with equal or greater training requirements.
 
#7 ·
What would make sense, is that a state with tougher laws should get a free carry pass in states with easier laws.

For instance, if you have a NY, or CA pistol permit, you should be able to carry anywhere in the country. Both require FBI background checks, prints, interviews etc..... so by that measure if you can get one in NY or CA you can get one anywhere. So reciprocity should work in that way.
 
#8 ·
Um, no. You are confusing reciprocity and recognition. It might make sense for less restrictive states to recognize more restrictive states, but reciprocity would require each state to recognize the other.

The handgunlaw reciprocity map uses color coding to distinguish between reciprocity agreements and unilateral recognition. I don't think reciprocity has lost its meaning. I do wonder why it takes so long for states to work out reciprocity agreements, though. It seems pretty straightforward, to me. Just do it.
 
#10 ·
What could possibly have been going through Gov. Perry's head with these unilateral agreements? How is such an agreement of benefit to Texans?
Tourism.

If I get some vacation time and have the $$, I have no reservations about heading down to TX and spending some money on useless junk I don't need and T-Shirts I won't ever wear again.

I could go on a vinyard tour of CA...but as I can't carry when I'm in that state...nah.

What benifit...the most tangible kind. Money in the pockets of it's citizens...
 
#11 ·
Recognition

The states you mention if the powers that be had their choice would not even recognize their own permit. Heck Hawaii is even trying to get pocket knives banned. In NY City a place that has a higher populatoin that many states there are only about 2,000 permit holders (a number of which I doubt even that many).
 
#15 · (Edited)
The states you mention if the powers that be had their choice would not even recognize their own permit. Heck Hawaii is even trying to get pocket knives banned. In NY City a place that has a higher populatoin that many states there are only about 2,000 permit holders (a number of which I doubt even that many).
Hello fellow Minnesotan,
Kinda makes ya wonder! If there are only about 2000 permit holders, I wonder how many are carrying without permits.
 
#12 ·
This actually ties directly in with another thread that sort of started to wander in another part of the forum. One member has posted their belief that agreements between states such as reciprocity agreements are subject to approval by congress under Article I section 10 of the Consititution.
By making unilateral declarations of acceptance of another states permit as Governor Perry does, it renders Article I section 10 and congress completely irrelevant to the situation.
 
#13 ·
Connecticut permits are relatively easy to get (depending upon the personal feelings of the local PD Chief) and generally takes 30-45 days or so - mine took three weeks. NRA Basic Pistol Course, Fingerprints, FBI background check, demonstration of proficiency, etc., are required.

That said, Connecticut permits are honored by 12 states but Connecticut honors NONE.

According to one source I spoke to this morning, Connecticut issued over 900 last month.
 
#20 ·
From what I have read, the only reasons other states do not honor a CPL from one state is due to age difference in issuing the permit, qualification requirements like handgun training and the personal preference of the local sheriff/police.
All of us who applied for a CPL have had our prints taken and have been verified by the FBI that we are clean. So I don't understand why there is no reciprocity when a Federal Government body has approved us already.
 
#22 ·
as for the unilateral agreements.......
The Texas AG is the one responsible for looking at other state's requirements and negotiating with other states in order for a reciprocity agreement to be put in place. This proposal from the AG then goes to the Governor to sign.
Now, as for how a unilateral agreements is a benefit to Texas CHLs....well there really isnt a direct benefit, however the unilateral can be a stepping stone for reciprocity, thats about it.
 
#23 ·
OP is correct, it is not true "reciprocity" as it is not mutual. I think it is really more a state's tolerance in recognizing the rights of visitors. Texas and Tennessee I know are very tolerant. But to answer the original question, yes they are misusing the word "reciprocity".
 
#24 ·
actually the DPS website shows lists of reciprocity and lists of unilateral agreements, there really isn't any misuse or misconceptions involved
 
#27 ·
Texas does. Most other states just list everything under "reciprocity" and you are correct many of them are unilateral agreements. I think the poster was referring to state lists in general. It's nit-picking but to call a unilateral agreement a reciprocal agreement is incorrect. Only one party involved. Many of the states I can carry in with a TN HCP do not have an actual reciprocity agreement with TN, but those states recognize my HCP as valid within their borders. It really doesn't matter which legal term is used as long as the state shows recognition of HCP. Let the legal beagles fight over the words, they say I can carry and I do.
 
#25 ·
Many people here have given part of the answer but also it must be considered that the Attorney Generals office is often the one who makes the determination and frequently this is not done on a year to year basis. Laws in each of the states changes from year to year regarding CCW but the review may not take place each year so there could be a great deal of apparent inconsistency in the way that reciprocity is applied.
 
#29 ·
There's a whole host of reasons for having or not having reciprocity:
timeframes for minor offenses(some states it can't be within a certain amount of time,exc.), training requirements, age limits,exc.
The true "may-issues" won't accept any but their own permit, by design because they want to say who and who can't carry in their state.
Some other states, like WV, will NOT recognize a permit from a state that doesn't recognize theirs.
But ideally, all states should recognize each other's unilaterally,just like driver's licenses. It's a major pain to have to string together a bunch of permits when traveling through a large number of states.
 
#34 ·
Based on the extremely low number of concealed carry holders nation wide, and the very extremely low number of those who actually carry on a regular basis, I have to say that tourism isn't one of the reasons that Texas has some unilateral agreements.

I would tend to think that it is simply out of the simple fact that has been demonstrated in post after post on this forum, and reflected in the laws of our state, that Texas has a history giving people the ability to protect themselves and their property from harm or loss. Just because your from another state visiting doesn't mean that you shouldn't have the same advantages as our residents have.

If your state meets the standards that Texas has set forth in giving you your CHL, or whatever they call it in your state, your welcome to carry here in our state, regardless of what your state allows us to do.

Again, I don't think it is for the tourism dollars nearly as much as it is the standards that our laws set.
 
#35 ·
OK, I think I've finally nailed the problem I'm having with unilateral agreements. I think they do a disservice for the CHL holders of both states, and here's why:

The states we're talking about are either "may issue" states (such as NY), or states where you have to know someone, jump through a lot of red tape to get a CHL, or live with some onerous registration requirements (such as NV's idea of combining their CHL with gun registration).

With Texas (and other states) recognizing these states' CHLs, what incentive is there for those CHL residents to fight for shall issue, or less onerous restrictions, or a more streamlined CHL process? Think about it: those who already have their CHLs in these states, and who are shown the red carpet to carry in other states, have nothing more to ask for. Meanwhile, the state offering the unilateral arrangement is basically telling their own CHLs that instead of negotiating for reciprocity, we're content to just give away CHL access.

So, both sides lose. There's really not an upside for either party.
 
#37 ·
Meanwhile, the state offering the unilateral arrangement is basically telling their own CHLs that instead of negotiating for reciprocity, we're content to just give away CHL access.
Just curious, but since most of us think that the right to keep and bear arms should be respected in every state, why do you think a state 'loses' by acknowledging that right to visitors?
 
#44 ·
Any one who is not a BG can carry a gun as far as I'm concerned. The more the better. I don't care what state they are from. The states that don't recognize my rights probably don't like to recognize those of their own citizens either. And won't care whether my state infringes or not. But I care. I don't like the politicians where I live getting in the habit of infringing on other people's rights, soon they'll be infringing on mine.
 
#45 ·
I really doubt that the governor actually negotiated with the other governors over this. I do believe it is because those states have stricter issuance laws that Texas accepts them, but I could be wrong.

I do believe the DPS of your state decides the reciprocity and not the governor or other high ranking sate government officials. So complain to them.

It benefits Texans with tourist dollars. The gunowners of those states will visit Texas while Texan CCWers will not visit their state. ;)
 
#47 ·
actually its the AG that works on behalf of the Gov in negotiating agreements
 
#46 ·
How about this being allowed so that folks moving into Texas from another right to carry state, can continue to carry until they can get a Texas CHL? Texas is a place that many aspire to come to, for work or for whatever other reason. Sounds perfectly "Texan" for us to allow those new residents to continue to carry until they can get a Texas CHL. Probably nothing to do with tourism and maybe not even with what I'm proposing. Trying to get into the head of a politician will drive you batty.:aargh4:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top