• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Concealled Carry Permits and state borders

Should reciprication of permits be mandatory?

  • Total voters
    25
Zyphlin

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,178
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Recently I was listening to my dad tell me about some of the different complications regarding gun laws between Virginia, West Virginia, DC, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. There was one part that struck me somewhat odd...

Apparently, concealled carry permits apply only to the state they're issued in or between states that have agreements to allow them to carry over. And what the laws in individual states vary widely.

Some states, like Arizona, see no difference between the legal notion of "concealled carry" or "open carry", there's just carrying. Others, like Virginia, have concealled and open and generally isn't difficult to get the permit. Others like Maryland have both categories, but are heavily restricted in CCW and seek to deny most requsts. Finally you have places like Illinois that also only has one legal notion of carrying, but that's essentially open carrying as concealled carry is completely illegal.

But why is it that if you cross the border from one state to another you can't assume that the state, in full faith and credit, will consider your permit from another state legal? Is it constitutional that all states aren't bound to reciprication in terms of concealled carry permits? Constitutional or no, do you think they should be bound to such?
 
IMO we shouldn't even need permits to carry and all permits should be "shall-issue" not "may-issue" like Maryland and their stupid "Good and Substantial Reason" to exercise your right.

But yes, every state that has permits should recognize other states' permits.
 
Zyphlin said:
Recently I was listening to my dad tell me about some of the different complications regarding gun laws between Virginia, West Virginia, DC, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. There was one part that struck me somewhat odd...

Apparently, concealled carry permits apply only to the state they're issued in or between states that have agreements to allow them to carry over. And what the laws in individual states vary widely.

Some states, like Arizona, see no difference between the legal notion of "concealled carry" or "open carry", there's just carrying. Others, like Virginia, have concealled and open and generally isn't difficult to get the permit. Others like Maryland have both categories, but are heavily restricted in CCW and seek to deny most requsts. Finally you have places like Illinois that also only has one legal notion of carrying, but that's essentially open carrying as concealled carry is completely illegal.

But why is it that if you cross the border from one state to another you can't assume that the state, in full faith and credit, will consider your permit from another state legal? Is it constitutional that all states aren't bound to reciprication in terms of concealled carry permits? Constitutional or no, do you think they should be bound to such?
Click to expand...

I think it is unconstitutional. not sure about EVERY example you described but in general that's how i feel and even if its not in my opinion this is how it should work

ALL states should allow open carry
ALL states should recognize my CWP (concealed weapons permit) just like my drivers licences
 
Yea, it is nuts.

I believe that OH has reciprocity agreements with 23 other states.

I look on the Ohio Attorney General's (OAG) website every month or so to see what has changed.

From the OAG website (http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/...arry/Concealed-Carry-Reciprocity-Agreements):

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Agreements

Ohio law gives the Attorney General the right to negotiate concealed carry handgun reciprocity agreements with other states.

Under such agreements, Ohio and other states agree to respect each other's concealed carry laws and recognize each other's permit holders.

In assessing whether to enter a reciprocity agreement, the Attorney General must determine if another state's concealed carry law and requirements are "substantially comparable" to Ohio's.

Ohio has reciprocity agreements with the following states. Click on the state name for more details about the agreement.
Click to expand...

Obviously, check your home state for relevant information for you.

I rarely leave OH these days, but the permit is absolutely worth it! :mrgreen:
 
It should go from state to state without issue, if you legally carry in your home state. If the left can argue ER/FF&C for gay marriage, the right can argue for this.

Constitutionally, yes.
 
Zyphlin said:
Recently I was listening to my dad tell me about some of the different complications regarding gun laws between Virginia, West Virginia, DC, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. There was one part that struck me somewhat odd...

Apparently, concealled carry permits apply only to the state they're issued in or between states that have agreements to allow them to carry over. And what the laws in individual states vary widely.

Some states, like Arizona, see no difference between the legal notion of "concealled carry" or "open carry", there's just carrying. Others, like Virginia, have concealled and open and generally isn't difficult to get the permit. Others like Maryland have both categories, but are heavily restricted in CCW and seek to deny most requsts. Finally you have places like Illinois that also only has one legal notion of carrying, but that's essentially open carrying as concealled carry is completely illegal.

But why is it that if you cross the border from one state to another you can't assume that the state, in full faith and credit, will consider your permit from another state legal? Is it constitutional that all states aren't bound to reciprication in terms of concealled carry permits? Constitutional or no, do you think they should be bound to such?
Click to expand...

Apparently the Congress has not passed laws that blanketly require all states to recognize the judgments of laws in all other states.

Full Faith and Credit Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Damn, I voted wrong. :(
 
This is a complicated issue. I feel that these state's individual constitutional rights rental agreements are unconstitutional. Some permits (e.g. driving) are normally honored while others require paying a "non-resident" fee to gain that privilege (e.g. fishing/hunting). The bottom line is that there should be no "rights" permits, only those for "privileges" in any state to begin with.
 
Last edited:
AGENT J said:
I think it is unconstitutional. not sure about EVERY example you described but in general that's how i feel and even if its not in my opinion this is how it should work

ALL states should allow open carry
ALL states should recognize my CWP (concealed weapons permit) just like my drivers licences
Click to expand...

Why do you prefer open to concealed carry for a handgun? The 7-11 feakout factor alone makes concealed carry a better idea.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Why do you prefer open to concealed carry for a handgun? The 7-11 feakout factor alone makes concealed carry a better idea.
Click to expand...

prefer?

sorry i didnt mean to suggest i prefer either or
 
Yes, and it has been a real issue for me. I ended up breaking CA's law as the first time I ever set foot here, to take my kids to DL, it was three weeks after the Rodney King riots, and there was no way I was coming here without protection. CCWed in Idaho, and remained so till a few years ago when I left the state to gypsy around the west and see where I wanted to settle for my last leg of life. Now I'm here in CA to stay with a gun I can't carry or use really in anyway legally. I was going to send it back to my dd in Idaho who is now a CCW but hasn't purchased her Glock because I was going to give her mine, and damn! I can't even send it to her without jumping through hoops. Seems and unloaded weapon in the original case, firing pin set separate, ought to be enough, but apparently I have to pay a gun dealer to send it to a gun dealer who'll then allow it to go to my daughter. Seems everyone along the way wants to be paid as well...OY!

I am totally for background checks and CCW or some some of personal licensing to carry outside the home that indicates some level of knowledge and training. But there are a whole lot of really onerous and stupid laws out there, and expecting someone to ...what? lose our handguns as we cross state borders is ridiculous.
 
Fortunately, all the states around me have reciprocity.

I don't usually travel by vehicle further than that, and on the rare occasion when I do, it goes in the bottom of the locked truck bin.

I have to agree with Gipper on this, if you have a CCW in your home state, in should be accepted in any state you are traveling through.
 
AGENT J said:
prefer?

sorry i didnt mean to suggest i prefer either or
Click to expand...

I prefer that our constitutional rights do not become downgraded to mere privileges simply because a majority in any state wishes to place conditions (tests, fees and permits) upon retaining (regaining?) them. While it may indeed be a "very good idea" to require that one understand the safe handling of firearms and know the laws concerning their use, that appears nowhere within the 2A as it plainly states that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". To demand that one take a class, pass a test, pay a fee or that one provide the state a "good reason" to carry a handgun is insane - imagine the outrage if these same "reasonable restrictions" were applied for the right to vote, speak or have an attorney present during police questioning.
 
I live in the worst state in the country when it comes down to CCW permits, and I think that my state (and all others) should be expected to recognize the other state's CCW permits.

However, I also think that my state should be allowed to NOT issue CCW permits (even though I think they should issue CCW permits, if that makes any sense to people).
 
Tucker Case said:
I live in the worst state in the country when it comes down to CCW permits, and I think that my state (and all others) should be expected to recognize the other state's CCW permits.

However, I also think that my state should be allowed to NOT issue CCW permits (even though I think they should issue CCW permits, if that makes any sense to people).
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. I think my state is about to get MUCH worse with the election of Ed Markey to John Kerry's senate seat. :roll:
 
Tucker Case said:
I live in the worst state in the country when it comes down to CCW permits, and I think that my state (and all others) should be expected to recognize the other state's CCW permits.

However, I also think that my state should be allowed to NOT issue CCW permits (even though I think they should issue CCW permits, if that makes any sense to people).
Click to expand...

I don't mind if a state doesn't want to issue CCW permits, as long as non-residents aren't required to observe those laws.

States should have some ways to differentiate themselves, as to attract certain types of people that share the overall viewpoints of that state. For instance, I'd never live in New York or Massachusetts - ever. Ever. Ever ever ever. The liberalism that exists there is well beyond the realm of stupidity. I'm sure there are states where liberals would never dare to tread as well. I imagine that I'm living in one of them.
 
Gipper said:
I don't mind if a state doesn't want to issue CCW permits, as long as non-residents aren't required to observe those laws.

States should have some ways to differentiate themselves, as to attract certain types of people that share the overall viewpoints of that state. For instance, I'd never live in New York or Massachusetts - ever. Ever. Ever ever ever. The liberalism that exists there is well beyond the realm of stupidity. I'm sure there are states where liberals would never dare to tread as well. I imagine that I'm living in one of them.
Click to expand...

I don't mind living in Liberalland because we've got great pizza and the Bears.

Otherwise I agree with you 100%
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I prefer that our constitutional rights do not become downgraded to mere privileges simply because a majority in any state wishes to place conditions (tests, fees and permits) upon retaining (regaining?) them. While it may indeed be a "very good idea" to require that one understand the safe handling of firearms and know the laws concerning their use, that appears nowhere within the 2A as it plainly states that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". To demand that one take a class, pass a test, pay a fee or that one provide the state a "good reason" to carry a handgun is insane - imagine the outrage if these same "reasonable restrictions" were applied for the right to vote, speak or have an attorney present during police questioning.
Click to expand...

well i agree in general

this is why i think open carry should be legal in every state but im ok with conceal weapons permits as long as they arent restrictive
i was cleared to buy a handgun many years ago and it took 15 mins, im sure its faster now
my concealed weapons permit took about 10-14days if i remember right.

as far as fees, mine is 25$ and im ok with that only because where does it stop? free guns?
now if a person could prove hardship then fine give it out free

as for classes? i would also be ok with this AS LONG as it wasnt a necessity. Meaning if you have to take the clasess within a year or two or something like that and they were also dirt cheap or free but did not STOP you from obtaining your gun.

While i get your reference to voting rights in reality those arent quite the same.

Basically i guess what im saying is im ok with permits, fees and classes IF they dont actually stop me from getting a gun. if i can still get one with a quick background check im ok with it.
 
Tucker Case said:
I'm so sorry that you've been subjected to that injustice. If you want, I can mail you some real pizza.
Click to expand...

Oh I've been to Chicago. They have some perks to them.

I just managed to stay on the outskirts, instead of chugging up and down Michigan Ave. and trying not to cry in a traffic jam.
 
Gipper said:
Oh I've been to Chicago. They have some perks to them.

I just managed to stay on the outskirts, instead of chugging up and down Michigan Ave. and trying not to cry in a traffic jam.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you acted like a Chicagoan. :lol:
 
Summerwind said:
Yes, and it has been a real issue for me. I ended up breaking CA's law as the first time I ever set foot here, to take my kids to DL, it was three weeks after the Rodney King riots, and there was no way I was coming here without protection. CCWed in Idaho, and remained so till a few years ago when I left the state to gypsy around the west and see where I wanted to settle for my last leg of life. Now I'm here in CA to stay with a gun I can't carry or use really in anyway legally. I was going to send it back to my dd in Idaho who is now a CCW but hasn't purchased her Glock because I was going to give her mine, and damn! I can't even send it to her without jumping through hoops. Seems and unloaded weapon in the original case, firing pin set separate, ought to be enough, but apparently I have to pay a gun dealer to send it to a gun dealer who'll then allow it to go to my daughter. Seems everyone along the way wants to be paid as well...OY!

I am totally for background checks and CCW or some some of personal licensing to carry outside the home that indicates some level of knowledge and training. But there are a whole lot of really onerous and stupid laws out there, and expecting someone to ...what? lose our handguns as we cross state borders is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Occasionally you see NYC tourists arrested for approaching workers at places like the Empire State Building about checking their guns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom