I'm from NY.....and I only have 14 years to go before I can retire and move out! So what do I dislike about my states laws and regs.

1. Restrictive Magazines. 10 rounds only unless prior to 1994 ban. State has it's own law.

2. Can't carry in NYC. New York City is a seperate state. It should become it's own state in the union but I don't want another vote in congress for anti gun laws.

3. There is no standard for issuance of CCW Permits.

4. Takes up to six months to a year to get your permit.

5. No reciprocity. New York State does not recognize any other permits.


The only thing I like about our laws is I can carry anywhere in the state but NYC. I've even gone up to the border in Yonkers and looked at NYC while carrying.

 

Oregon

I badly dislike two things, generally, and it's not simply because Oregon has the problem as well:

• That a nation with a presumption of innocence can instead operate on the basis of a presumption of guilt in cases of self-defense or defense of others.
• That an "affirmative" defense requires proof by the defendant, where prosecution otherwise requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

It makes no sense to me. If charges are going to be pressed, then proof must be presented. It seems against all that we stand for to carve out a class of upstanding individuals for whom these protections don't apply.

Oregon also needs a clear and simple "Castle" statute that indicates people have every right to be where they're legally allowed to be; have every right to stand their ground; every right to defend themselves, others and their property with all force deemed necessary to halt someone's attempt to take those things; and that such defensive actions are presumed to be innocent of crime unless proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt just like any other claimed crime the state has a problem with. Barbaric communities allow the alternative to exist, IMO, positioning the most honorable of our citizens in a first, knee-jerk reaction as liars and criminals. Honorable communities do not. We need to fix this.

The Oregon Constitution seems crystal clear, and yet it's suborned daily:

Section 27. The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power​

On a daily basis, the People are often treated as criminals if they dare to carry arms, even to the point of other crap being concocted in order to dish up a heap of trouble for them. They're restricted from doing so in a huge number of places. They're required to have a permit/license in order to do so. They're treated like pariahs in some locations. They're regularly fired or expelled if daring to do so in accordance with the laws. And the courts often execute unconstitutional protection of illegal actions taken by employers, agencies, municipalities, counties and other organizations. I'd have this fixed, as well, but true fixes would require honorable people to adhere to what's written ... and, quite simply, it's already written down. There are simply no real teeth and anything inhibiting such illegal steps as are taken by "authorities." Death by hanging on the public square if these laws are violated, perhaps? That might do it. Perhaps not, though.

 

It seems ludicrous to me that so many of you are craving MORE state and federal gun laws. We should be working to eliminate them!

- Nex ut Novus Universitas Ordo! -

 

Alaska

There isn't anything that I strongly disagree with really as far as gun laws here are concerned... except maybe the K-12 schools remain "gun free zones" even in the parking lots. A few of the smaller towns here still have their own regulations in the books that are now illegal because they go against state law. The city of Anchorage where I live pretty much follows state law which is good. I've never been much of a bar person either but I believe people carry into them anyway and I believe responsible individuals should be allowed to legally carry into bars, as long as they don't drink alcoholic beverages.

We Alaskans love our firearms and we'll do what it takes to keep them, and more often than not having a firearm can mean the difference between life and death.

Overall Alaska has it right and I'm happy about that.

No permit required to carry concealed or open but it is still offered for reciprocity... that's probably the biggest one that makes Alaska stand out.

 

What do you dislike the most about your own state's handgun legislation, and how you would change it, and;

Well like some have said, that there is legislation in the first place. But even with that, I think Nevada has some of the free-est laws in the country. One thing I would change (if not the whole CCW app process itself) is that fact that you have to qualify and pay for every gun you want to carry. I just had to pay $15 to qualify with my Kahr, and then go to the CCW Bureau and pay $25 more to have it added to my CCW. I can't carry it until I get a new permit in the mail, and apparently they do another b/g check.

I also wish we could carry on school/college campuses.

What do you think your state does right on that same topic?

Six

Pretty much all else. Open carry state, Can conceal in a car w/o CCW. Signs carry no legal weight (unless fed/state buildings). You can go to a bar AND drink if you choose to, although I don't recommend being drunk. But it's nice to not have to leave it at home if the wife and I decide to meet a few friends at a lounge. Not much is forbidden..and yet you don't see CCW holders going around shooting people..go figure.

Nevada has some of the best "gun laws" (or lack there of) there is..even better than Texas, which everyone raves about.

Although I wouldn't go as far as to say that it should be federally controlled, but there is way to much difference between the states.

 

North Carolina has a long way to go. We do have some good things:

-Shall issue CHP with a set maximum amount of time to issue the permit
-Open carry without any sort of permit or government approval necessary
-CHP possession means no NCIS check or purchase permit necessary
-Broad Reciprocity
-No waiting periods
-No Magazine or "assault weapon" restrictions
-Partial statutory castle doctrine related to "forcible entry"
-Castle doctrine still applies under common law in the absence of a statute

The Bad, what we need changed:

-Handgun purchase permit required for non-CHP holders
-Too many off-limits carry locations, anywhere that serves alcohol, any state government property except highway rest areas, places where admission is charged, any school or college campus. At a minimum we need to allow carry by non-drinkers in restaurants that serve alcohol (perhaps a percentage rule with a posted sign required for places carry is off limits due to the percentage of alcohol sales if wide open carry for non-drinkers can't get through). The limitations need to be removed from places that charge admission, and carry should, at a minimum, be legal inside vehicles on school property (K-12) and completely legal on college campuses. All of that would be at least a good start.
-There needs to be state standard for posted no-carry signs (like the Texas 30-06 sign) and signs that don't meet the standard should have no force of law.
-Permits should be good for life.

I don't have a problem with the training class and permit required for concealed carry. Open carry without any sort of training is perfectly legal in NC, and those who want to exercise their rights without paying for a class or registering with the government can open carry anywhere a person with a CHP can legally carry concealed.

 

9 pages and no one posting from GA? I guess I'll do it.

GA law isn't too bad, just recently changed the laws to allow carry in places that serve alcohol as long as it's not a bar. I really wish they would allow carry in church. The whole "public gathering" is pretty stupid since it is not difined at all. Oh yeah, and military is pretty much exempt from all carry restrictions, including needing a license to begin with. Kind of nice being active duty :wink:.

 

It's my position that all of the states laws regarding CC sux, some just sux less.

IMO, if you have been cleared by the BG check and have no priors why should you be restricted to self defense by some idiots idea of the kill free zones. If you were a BG and wanted to go into one of the kill free zones, would the signage restricting the law abiding citizens stop you? I think not. If you knew that the chances are high that if you pulled your illegally carried pistol and started shooting the place up, that a CC cat might just cancel you ticket on the spot. Would you think twice? I know I would..:yup: JMO

 

It's my position that all of the states laws regarding CC sux, some just sux less.

I'm not saying this just because I live here but VT and AK don't suck at all. No permits, no waiting period, the only restriction is schools and courthouses, that's it. anybody can CC as long as your not a felon.

I'm not a native Vermonter either, I moved here for many reasons that makes it a great place to live, no gun laws is just an extra plus.

 

Utah is a very gun-friendly state. There are no legal signs like the 30-06 signs in Texas. School carry with CCW is ok, few restrictions.

Things I would like to see changed:

1. Be able to prevent theft of property with firearm without being charged with a crime.

2. True castle doctrine

3. Laws against civil suit for justified shootings

 

Your right about AK sorry should have checked that, VT you can carry anywhere except school grounds and courthouses. Though it's not advised by most carrying in a bar or restaurant where liquor is served is perfectly legal.

 

^ that's quite alright :smile:

I'm just proud to be a resident of one of the last remaining "live free or die" states.

 

GEORGIA:

The great things about the Peach State:

1) Open Carry permissive
2) Restaurant Carry
3) State/Municipal Parks + Public Transportation
4) State Preemption
5) No Required Training for GFL
6) Castle Doctrine + Protection from civil suits after a justified shoot
7) Title II friendly
8) Grassroots Activity is strong to protect IIA rights

What sucks about the Peach State:

1) Public Gathering Statute. No one even knows what it is. The little that it does specifically prohibit includes sporting events, churches, rallies, parades, bars, and the usual assortment of court houses, jails, etc.

I would like to see the airport controversy ended once and for all. Although Georgia Carry had the language amended last year to specifically permit airport carry outside of the secured areas, the feds have refused to issue an injunction against the city for arresting permitted folks. :aargh4: That, and I would love to see the PG language removed from Georgia Code. The first public hearing on the latter is in less than forty-eight hours at the capital building! I'll be there wearing my empty holster as usual.

Open carry without a license, AZ style, would be nice too.

 

The first public hearing on the latter is in less than forty-eight hours at the capital building! I'll be there wearing my empty holster as usual.

Gun Bill Advances to Subcommittee After First House Hearing

I wish that I could say that the bill will come out of subcommittee looking the way that it went in, but I would be being less than honest if I did. I'm still psyched and encouraged about how quickly the bill moved into committee, however. We had a very good turnout and the committee was very much aware of our presence.

 

MI isn't too bad.

We need to get rid of pistol registration.
We need to get rid of the pistol free zones. HOWEVER, the "pistol free" zones refer to a concealed pistol. You can carry in pistol free zones if you carry openly and have a CPL. Go figure.
We need to be more NFA friendly. Enough said there.

I like the shall issue CPL, state preemption (better than most other states), and the castle doctrine and self defense package.