What about a National CCW option? - Page 2

MinistrMalic · November 2nd, 2009, 10:24 AM

National reciprocity is probably a better idea, easier, and involves a LOT less federal oversight. When the feds start a bureaucracy, you can bet that it will get its hand in with a lot more legislation.

I prefer the idea that, like drivers licenses, the states simply recognize another state's license for all visitors to their state.

BlueNinjaGo · November 2nd, 2009, 10:51 AM

I think we're better off pressuring our state governments to reach agreements with other states, as long as it doesn't involve stricter requirements.

Agave · November 2nd, 2009, 12:01 PM

US Gov't policy: If it ain't broke, fix it til it is.

DKPRC · November 2nd, 2009, 12:16 PM

I was behind the bill too. It doesn't make any sense to me that my driver's license is honored in all fifty states, but not my concealed carry permit. Other states are also required to honor business contracts, marriage licenses, and a wide variety of other state issued documents.

If you were saying that there should ONLY be a federal concealed carry permit (less like a Driver's License, and more like a Passport) I would disagree, because as many people mentioned, the Feds never do anything right. But if the Feds were to require reciprocity among states, I could get down with that.

ibesarcasm · November 2nd, 2009, 12:57 PM

The scariest words in the english..... " I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Regan

The Federal Gov. place is to REGULATE interstate trade and commerece, not deny it, not grant it. A CCW is just that, an interstate agreement which should be fair across the board, equal in all aspects. The Feds should not be granting CCW permits.......but then neither should the state. This is a RIGHT granted by the US Constitution, and the Fed Gov should be insuring that the states guarentee us that right under the Constitution.
We though, as good followers (

), have at some point allowed the government to restict our constitutional rights granted by the fore fathers in the name of security, safety, protection, regulation, or whatever other word they want to throw out at the moment......
The Feds are not in the business of protecting OUR rights, they are in the business of protecting their butts!!
67% of the American public belives America would be better off if we threw MOST of congress out on their behinds.......... and I believe the majority is correct........... it's time WE regulated the government...not the other way around!!

hellhound94 · November 2nd, 2009, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoJoGunn

The concept sounds ok, but in reality, nothing the Fed does really works well with others.

If we had a state-wide receprocity agreement with all states participating, then we wouldn't need a National Concealed Permit Recognition thing from the Gov't.

How true!

BRTCP88 · November 2nd, 2009, 01:06 PM

<rant>I'm a supporter of states rights, even if they don't pass the laws I like they have a right to decide for themselves individually. Ever since the War Between the States the answer to ever little problem has been "get the Federal Government involved." That's not what our Founding Fathers wanted for this country to become.</rant>

sixsccw · November 2nd, 2009, 03:17 PM

First off, get the states all on the same page, and the feds can stay out of it. And getting all the states on the same page means breaking a few crybabies’ hearts -

The reciprocity bill was absurd, not in its intent but in its timing – until you get all the states even vaguely resembling one another in terms of gun laws, such a bill could never be made equitable. In NY, we’ve got some of the toughest gun laws anywhere – when one of us manages to obtain a CCW, it’s the gold standard. Why should I be OK with any old yahoo from Vermont waltzing into my state with a gun he bought in a hardware store, and no permit?

We need to make CCWs the weighty, valuable document they should be, and in all states.

First, all states become “Shall Issue”. HOWEVER – every applicant (even the yahoo from Vermont) must not only pass the NICS, but he must complete substantial training in concealed carry and deployment of the weapon as well as marksmanship. (How about the state police making some serious cash by offering that training at their facilities? Charge $500 bucks and watch the eager applicants line up from the state capital all the way to the border with their 5 Ben Franklins clutched in their fists, ready to rock.)
Further, all applicants must attend at least an 8 hour class covering the pertinent penal codes and specific articles of the code that deals with deadly force (the state codes, as I said, would have to be standardized). The applicants would have to demonstrate what they’ve learned by passing tests – written, dealing with the laws, and practical, dealing with real-time scenarios.

You pass, you deserve a CCW, and by God you earned it.

Just a side note - our Senator Schumer (whom I have no great love for, but anyway...) took major flack a short time ago for suggesting eye exams for permit holders. What the hell would be so bad about that? Why is it not OK to drive a car with impaired vision, but it’s OK for Mr. Magoo to have a CCW?
Tie it to your driver’s license – if you get spot checked by an officer while your carrying, he asks for TWO documents, your permit AND your driver’s license. If the driver’s license says “corrective lenses” you damn better have them on if your armed. Very easy.

Like I said, make all states Shall Issue, where everyone is eligible and has a reasonable shot at a CCW – but toughen the whole system up – make a CCW the gold standard it should be.

Six

retsupt99 · November 2nd, 2009, 03:18 PM

No fed intervention for me...what the government gives, the government can take away, overnight...but our present admin wouldn't do that, right?

OLDPUPPYMAX · November 2nd, 2009, 03:59 PM

We already HAVE a national CCW rule. It's called the 2nd amendment and our elitist, leftist elected officials have completely ignored it for a century. Attempting to enact another would be useless. It's up to the American people to force our imperial congress/White House to honor our existing constitutional rights along with the clearly expressed restraints on their own power.

November 2nd, 2009, 10:24 AM	#11
MinistrMalic Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 492	National reciprocity is probably a better idea, easier, and involves a LOT less federal oversight. When the feds start a bureaucracy, you can bet that it will get its hand in with a lot more legislation. I prefer the idea that, like drivers licenses, the states simply recognize another state's license for all visitors to their state. __________________ "...whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one." (Luke 22:36) Here is my blog if you're interested :)

November 2nd, 2009, 10:51 AM	#12
BlueNinjaGo Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 264	I think we're better off pressuring our state governments to reach agreements with other states, as long as it doesn't involve stricter requirements. __________________ Bersa Thunder .380 cc Springfield XD 9mm sc

November 2nd, 2009, 12:01 PM	#13
Agave Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: West Tennessee Posts: 930	US Gov't policy: If it ain't broke, fix it til it is. __________________ The preceding post may contain sarcasm; it's just better that way. However, it is still intended with construction and with the Love of my L-rd Y'shua. What He is doing with me KEEP YOUR LAWS OFF MY GUNS Facebook Group

November 2nd, 2009, 12:57 PM	#15
ibesarcasm Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Colorado Posts: 204	The scariest words in the english..... " I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Regan The Federal Gov. place is to REGULATE interstate trade and commerece, not deny it, not grant it. A CCW is just that, an interstate agreement which should be fair across the board, equal in all aspects. The Feds should not be granting CCW permits.......but then neither should the state. This is a RIGHT granted by the US Constitution, and the Fed Gov should be insuring that the states guarentee us that right under the Constitution. We though, as good followers (), have at some point allowed the government to restict our constitutional rights granted by the fore fathers in the name of security, safety, protection, regulation, or whatever other word they want to throw out at the moment...... The Feds are not in the business of protecting OUR rights, they are in the business of protecting their butts!! 67% of the American public belives America would be better off if we threw MOST of congress out on their behinds.......... and I believe the majority is correct........... it's time WE regulated the government...not the other way around!! __________________ Sarcasm - Just one of the many services I provide! Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Last edited by ibesarcasm; November 2nd, 2009 at 12:58 PM.. Reason: grammer... :)

November 2nd, 2009, 01:06 PM	#17
BRTCP88 Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: USA Posts: 125	<rant>I'm a supporter of states rights, even if they don't pass the laws I like they have a right to decide for themselves individually. Ever since the War Between the States the answer to ever little problem has been "get the Federal Government involved." That's not what our Founding Fathers wanted for this country to become.</rant> __________________ The point people miss is, WE ARE THE MILITIA!!! There was no standing Federal Army until the 1800s

November 2nd, 2009, 12:16 PM	#14
DKPRC New Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Virginia Posts: 9	I was behind the bill too. It doesn't make any sense to me that my driver's license is honored in all fifty states, but not my concealed carry permit. Other states are also required to honor business contracts, marriage licenses, and a wide variety of other state issued documents. If you were saying that there should ONLY be a federal concealed carry permit (less like a Driver's License, and more like a Passport) I would disagree, because as many people mentioned, the Feds never do anything right. But if the Feds were to require reciprocity among states, I could get down with that.

November 2nd, 2009, 03:17 PM	#18
sixsccw Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: New York Posts: 28	First off, get the states all on the same page, and the feds can stay out of it. And getting all the states on the same page means breaking a few crybabies’ hearts - The reciprocity bill was absurd, not in its intent but in its timing – until you get all the states even vaguely resembling one another in terms of gun laws, such a bill could never be made equitable. In NY, we’ve got some of the toughest gun laws anywhere – when one of us manages to obtain a CCW, it’s the gold standard. Why should I be OK with any old yahoo from Vermont waltzing into my state with a gun he bought in a hardware store, and no permit? We need to make CCWs the weighty, valuable document they should be, and in all states. First, all states become “Shall Issue”. HOWEVER – every applicant (even the yahoo from Vermont) must not only pass the NICS, but he must complete substantial training in concealed carry and deployment of the weapon as well as marksmanship. (How about the state police making some serious cash by offering that training at their facilities? Charge $500 bucks and watch the eager applicants line up from the state capital all the way to the border with their 5 Ben Franklins clutched in their fists, ready to rock.) Further, all applicants must attend at least an 8 hour class covering the pertinent penal codes and specific articles of the code that deals with deadly force (the state codes, as I said, would have to be standardized). The applicants would have to demonstrate what they’ve learned by passing tests – written, dealing with the laws, and practical, dealing with real-time scenarios. You pass, you deserve a CCW, and by God you earned it. Just a side note - our Senator Schumer (whom I have no great love for, but anyway...) took major flack a short time ago for suggesting eye exams for permit holders. What the hell would be so bad about that? Why is it not OK to drive a car with impaired vision, but it’s OK for Mr. Magoo to have a CCW? Tie it to your driver’s license – if you get spot checked by an officer while your carrying, he asks for TWO documents, your permit AND your driver’s license. If the driver’s license says “corrective lenses” you damn better have them on if your armed. Very easy. Like I said, make all states Shall Issue, where everyone is eligible and has a reasonable shot at a CCW – but toughen the whole system up – make a CCW the gold standard it should be. Six __________________ "I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you ---- with me, I'll kill you all." Marine Corps General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders

November 2nd, 2009, 03:18 PM	#19
retsupt99 VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Central Florida Posts: 22,827	No fed intervention for me...what the government gives, the government can take away, overnight...but our present admin wouldn't do that, right? __________________ "That I cannot do." "Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all we're not murderers in spite of what this undertaker thinks." *********************************** NRA Life Member Last edited by retsupt99; November 2nd, 2009 at 08:58 PM..

November 2nd, 2009, 03:59 PM	#20
OLDPUPPYMAX Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Kentucky Posts: 75	We already HAVE a national CCW rule. It's called the 2nd amendment and our elitist, leftist elected officials have completely ignored it for a century. Attempting to enact another would be useless. It's up to the American people to force our imperial congress/White House to honor our existing constitutional rights along with the clearly expressed restraints on their own power.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode