National Concealed Carry Permit before U.S. Senate


JimPage

New member
It would be a symbolic fight with no chance of surviving. In the unlikely event it passes, Obama is sure to veto it. It might be better to pursue something productive. For example, remove the state residency and contiguous state provisions for buying a rifle or shotgun since we now have NICS. NICS cancels any need for such a provision in GCA68 (I think that's the law that does it)
 

JimPage

New member
Maine CWP Trng:

Yes, I do. He is so narcistic he can't believe any significant amount of people would oppose him on this. But I really don't think it would pass the Congress. On top of that, I think it's a bad idea. Imagine how complicated it would be. Registration would certainly be at risk in such a bill. How would you reconcile it with Vermont, Arizona, and Alaska law?
 

jg1967

New member
Maine CWP Trng:

Yes, I do. He is so narcistic he can't believe any significant amount of people would oppose him on this. But I really don't think it would pass the Congress. On top of that, I think it's a bad idea. Imagine how complicated it would be. Registration would certainly be at risk in such a bill. How would you reconcile it with Vermont, Arizona, and Alaska law?

There will inevitably be some posting that we should not need any permits at all etc etc et al. But, for the time being, it would be nice to not have to worry about your permit being valid any more than your driver's license. It is true, the few states that do not require any permits right now would have to introduce them but on the plus side their residents could then travel anyplace in the US.
 

TekGreg

New member
You realize, should this pass, that it will be given to BATFE to manage? I imagine they will then just keep making them harder and harder to get like they did for FFLs. There is nothing the fed gets involved in that they do not wind up complicating. If in doubt, just remember that Income Taxes were suppose to be temporary only to help fund World War II.
 

maybejim

Maybejim
I can never understand why anyone thinks this is a bad idea. It is only recognizing a Constitutional requirement anyway. It's not getting the Fed's more involved than they already (largely unconstitutionally) are.
 

FN1910

New member
I can never understand why anyone thinks this is a bad idea. It is only recognizing a Constitutional requirement anyway. It's not getting the Fed's more involved than they already (largely unconstitutionally) are.

Well, I can't understand why anyone thinks this is a good idea. For one thing it is a direct violation of the 10th amendment and just provides the Feds with the first step in taking over the permit process and some Washington idiot deciding who gets permits and who doesn't. Be very careful of what you wish for because you just may get it. How you can say that it isn't getting the Feds more involved is beyond me.
 

maybejim

Maybejim
Well, I can't understand why anyone thinks this is a good idea.

Because like a Driver's license states should recognize a license from other States under the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution.

For one thing it is a direct violation of the 10th amendment

Actually the whole law thing is a direct violation of both the full faith and credit clause and the 2nd Amendment.

just provides the Feds with the first step in taking over the permit process

Nonsense! It says nothing about the Fed's, just that the States need live up to the full faith and credit clause.

How you can say that it isn't getting the Feds more involved is beyond me.

The nonsense of saying it is getting the Fed's involved is beyond me.
 

FN1910

New member
Drivers license recognition has nothing to do with Federal laws or the full faith and credit clause. It is a voluntary agreement that the states have entered into. The acceptance of out-of-state DL is completely up to the states and the laws covering the license is not universal. The reporting of violations is voluntary and not all states are members of the agreement. To use drivers license as a comparision to CCW is completely wrong. As for the Feds getting involved you need to check out the CDL laws. That is completely controlled by the Feds and shortly after implementation they saw how screwed up it was and still is.
 

walt629

New member
Maybe I'm way off on this but I'm against the National carry. Everyone here that do have a carry permit are registered aat the state level. Do you really want to be registered at the Federal level? We're talking about nation wide ATF registration of every citizen that wants or does carry a weapon. Am I off on this? And why? Pesonally I think it's bad enough I'm registered at the Stte level.
 

maybejim

Maybejim
Drivers license recognition has nothing to do with Federal laws or the full faith and credit clause. It is a voluntary agreement that the states have entered into. The acceptance of out-of-state DL is completely up to the states

I don't believe that. All states recognize all other state driver's licenses.

and the laws covering the license is not universal.

The same is true of CCW's (you know that unconstitutional infringement on keeping and bearing arms).

To use drivers license as a comparision to CCW is completely wrong.

Only because the CCW is a license on a Constitutional right and the driver's license covers something that is not a Constitutional right.

As for the Feds getting involved you need to check out the CDL laws. That is completely controlled by the Feds and shortly after implementation they saw how screwed up it was and still is.


I don't have a clue what you are talking about. If you are saying "CDL" as a concealed carry license, the Fed's have nothing to do with them now and the proposal is only to require all states to recognize all other state's licenses as is true for Drivers Licenses.
 

maybejim

Maybejim
Maybe I'm way off on this but I'm against the National carry. Everyone here that do have a carry permit are registered aat the state level. Do you really want to be registered at the Federal level? We're talking about nation wide ATF registration of every citizen that wants or does carry a weapon

Not in any proposal that I've seen. The proposal's I've seen have only required each state to recognize every other state's license. There should be no requirement for a license infringing on the Right to keep and bear arms but until we get there, absolutely every license should be recognized everywhere else.
 

jg1967

New member
I'd be willing to go along with it, as long as it would mean I could finally go anyplace in this great nation without having to worry about what local yokels have cooked up in respects to crazy gun laws and reciprocity or lack thereof.
 

FN1910

New member
Drivers license recognition has nothing to do with Federal laws or the full faith and credit clause. It is a voluntary agreement that the states have entered into. The acceptance of out-of-state DL is completely up to the states

I don't believe that. All states recognize all other state driver's licenses.

Nope. States for the most part will recognize license as long as they meet the same requirements such as age from another state but not 100%. Also there are many people who are banned from driving in one state but perfectly fine to drive in others. I have know this to happen plenty of times to some friends of mine.

and the laws covering the license is not universal.

The same is true of CCW's (you know that unconstitutional infringement on keeping and bearing arms).

To use drivers license as a comparision to CCW is completely wrong.

Only because the CCW is a license on a Constitutional right and the driver's license covers something that is not a Constitutional right.

There are many people who will argue that point with you including the requirement of a DL is unconstitutional. The right to travel is not stated that I can recall right off hand but it is considered a right.

As for the Feds getting involved you need to check out the CDL laws. That is completely controlled by the Feds and shortly after implementation they saw how screwed up it was and still is.


I don't have a clue what you are talking about. If you are saying "CDL" as a concealed carry license, the Fed's have nothing to do with them now and the proposal is only to require all states to recognize all other state's licenses as is true for Drivers Licenses.

Check into Commercial Drivers License which is controlled by the Feds. Also when you do note the term commercial is a misnomer but rather a type of vehicle whether or not it is commercial or private. A friend of mine had a van to transport his family of 12 children. It took him a while, several hoops and some changes on the law before he could drive it without a CDL.
 

FN1910

New member
I'd be willing to go along with it, as long as it would mean I could finally go anyplace in this great nation without having to worry about what local yokels have cooked up in respects to crazy gun laws and reciprocity or lack thereof.

There in lies the problem. The bill doesn't change a single one of the local yokel crazy laws except that now your permit would be valid is states that issue permits. Still no good in DC or IL. Still no hollow points for defense in NJ. Best of all no requirement that they can't pass more local yokel laws to trip you up even more. I think they did get rid of the public gathering law in GA where a public gathering was two or more people meeting in public such as a shopping mall or store.
 

maybejim

Maybejim
Check into Commercial Drivers License which is controlled by the Feds.

Gee, that's interstate commerce is it not? Not simply a "drivers license". And of course it has noting to do with a carry permit.

I'm yet to see any evidence that forcing all states to honor all carry permits puts the Fed's more into the firearms business than they already are. They already control handgun purchase.
 

maybejim

Maybejim
The bill doesn't change a single one of the local yokel crazy laws except that now your permit would be valid is states that issue permits

So we've got some people whining that the Fed's will get more involved and others whining they won't get more involved. Sounds like a great way to keep the insanity we have. We lost the 2nd Amendment a little piece at a time. We need to take it back the same way. And yes, I'd prefer a mandate that we actually follow the 2nd Amendment everywhere, but that's not going to happen especially when we have gun owners fighting over improvements.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,388
Messages
623,023
Members
74,210
Latest member
tgtjf
Top