House approves concealed-carry reciprocity, gun bill faces challenge in Senate

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

4 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

I was talking about the same thing and was willing to make a concession for a federal concealed carry permit database.  It would be practical and reduce time people have to wait for LE to confirm their concealed carry permit.  You added multiple demands to your initial acceptance of that concession.  

 

Which part of the law is sloppy?  It is fairly simple, similar to a drivers license, every state must accept and recognize another state's concealed carry permits.  It isn't forcing every state to issue concealed carry permits at higher rates or to even issue them at all.    

 

It could be challenged, but the NRA will work with the Department of Justice to quickly move it to the Supreme Court for a Constitutional test.    

 

But to your first point, I'm just trying to get you to acknowledge factual statistics about concealed carry permit holders.  I'm trying to gauge how honest and straight forward you are being in this conversation.

 

 

I don't take kindly to attacks on my honesty. 

[jayjayj 571]

Just now, Il Mango Dulce said:

I don't take kindly to attacks on my honesty. 

As you shouldn't.  But I don't know you, so I'll try to figure out how you are approaching this specific conversation for myself.   

 

What is your final goal for guns?

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

1 minute ago, jayjayj said:

As you shouldn't.  But I don't know you, so I'll try to figure out how you are approaching this specific conversation for myself.   

 

What is your final goal for guns?

I don't have a gun agenda, but if one group is going force another group to allow concealed weapons in their neighborhood, at least equip us with a true  national online registration with common standards and current criminal records. This is really no different than a drivers liscense.

 

Other than that I maintain that local voters  know what is best for their community with concealed weapons. 

[jayjayj 571]

3 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

I don't have a gun agenda, but if one group is going force another group to allow concealed weapons in their neighborhood, at least equip us with a true  national online registration with common standards and current criminal records. This is really no different than a drivers liscense.

 

Other than that I maintain that local voters  know what is best for their community with concealed weapons. 

Illinois issues concealed carry permits.  There are already people carrying guns all around you.  You will never see them because by definition, they are "concealed". The Supreme Court declared Chicago's ban on hand guns unconstitutional in 2010 when they ruled on the Heller case.  There are already real-time national wide criminal databases.  Information missing from those databases is due to errors on the part of the people who are supposed to enter the information - you'll never have a database without missing information.

 

You are right about the drivers license point.  It is exactly the same type of issue.  There are different standards in different states for obtaining a drivers license.  Despite those differences, every state's DL is acknowledged as valid in every other state.  This is because of the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution - which is why the SCOTUS will certainly uphold the current national reciprocity law making its way through Congress.      

[jayjayj 571]

41 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

I don't have a gun agenda, but if one group is going force another group to allow concealed weapons in their neighborhood, at least equip us with a true  national online registration with common standards and current criminal records. This is really no different than a drivers liscense.

 

Other than that I maintain that local voters  know what is best for their community with concealed weapons. 

I'm planning a road trip through all 48 contigious states, beginning the day after the new national reciprocity bill is enacted into law.  Hopefully, I'll be the first person to ever travel through all 48 of those states with a concealed carry weapon.  Would this qualify for the Guinness Book of World Records?  Who wants to join me? 

 

Here is the route - either beginning or ending near Chicago.  It is a little over 100 hours of driving and covers over 6900 miles.  

 

 

Courtesy of - http://www.howderfamily.com/blog/shortest-48/

Edited December 9, 2017 by jayjayj

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

18 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

Illinois issues concealed carry permits.  There are already people carrying guns all around you.  You will never see them because by definition, they are "concealed". The Supreme Court declared Chicago's ban on hand guns unconstitutional in 2010 when they ruled on the Heller case.  There are already real-time national wide criminal databases.  Information missing from those databases is due to errors on the part of the people who are supposed to enter the information - you'll never have a database without missing information.

 

You are right about the drivers license point.  It is exactly the same type of issue.  There are different standards in different states for obtaining a drivers license.  Despite those differences, every state's DL is acknowledged as valid in every other state.  This is because of the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution - which is why the SCOTUS will certainly uphold the current national reciprocity law making its way through Congress.      

I really do not need a patronizing primer on Illinois law.

 

I am not a lawyer but iam fairly sure  the "full faith and credit" clause is about debt and judgement.  States and Canadian provinces have compacted over DLs. There are no universal compacts say for a doctor or a business. 

 

 

[jayjayj 571]

1 minute ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

I really do not need a patronizing primer on Illinois law.

 

I am not a lawyer but iam fairly sure  the "full faith and credit" clause is about debt and judgement.  States and Canadian provinces have compacted over DLs. There are no universal compacts say for a doctor or a business. 

 

 

It wasn't meant to be patronizing.  It was meant to counter your assertion that there are neighborhoods throughout the United States that ban concealed weapons permit holders from carrying their weapons in a concealed manner.  That assertion is wrong.  Everywhere you go in America, you are already surrounded by gun owners legally carry concealed weapons.    

 

The Supreme Court disagrees with you about the "full faith and credit" clause and cited it in the multiple decisions striking down hand guns bans across America, including in Chicago.

 

I do agree with you that there should be a national standard for states in regards to issuing concealed carry permits.  Every state should be a "shall issue" state.  I have a feeling that will be the next gun law pushed through Congress once the reciprocity bill passes and becomes law.  

[jayjayj 571]

13 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

It wasn't meant to be patronizing.  It was meant to counter your assertion that there are neighborhoods throughout the United States that ban concealed weapons permit holders from carrying their weapons in a concealed manner.  That assertion is wrong.  Everywhere you go in America, you are already surrounded by gun owners legally carry concealed weapons.    

 

The Supreme Court disagrees with you about the "full faith and credit" clause and cited it in the multiple decisions striking down hand guns bans across America, including in Chicago.

 

I do agree with you that there should be a national standard for states in regards to issuing concealed carry permits.  Every state should be a "shall issue" state.  I have a feeling that will be the next gun law pushed through Congress once the reciprocity bill passes and becomes law.  

Correction -

 

My thoughts got inadvertently combined.

 

The Supreme Court incorporated the 2nd and 14th Amendments when striking down the hand gun ban laws of certain places.

 

What I meant to type was that the "full faith and credit" clause is the reason why your DL (as one example) is valid in your state and any of other state.  That clause isn't simply about debt and judgement. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

On 12/8/2017 at 12:31 AM, jayjayj said:

Vermont is the only state that is actually in compliance with the Constitutional requirement of "shall not be infringed", as far as concealed carry is concerned. 

 

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/shall-issue-may-issue-no-issue-and-unrestricted-states

 

"Vermont alone, requires no permits or licenses to carry concealed, for neither a resident nor a non-resident. Vermont has no law either for or against concealed carry. In the absence of law prohibiting concealed carry, it is legal in Vermont."

Alaska does not require a CCW permit.  They offer them, but they are not required.

[jayjayj 571]

2 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Alaska does not require a CCW permit.  They offer them, but they are not required.

Does that apply to non-residents as well?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

21 hours ago, jayjayj said:

Nice!  You're going to be much happier on the east coast.  As an added bonus, you are getting away from those horribly high California state and local taxes that you wouldn't have been able to deduct anymore under the new tax bill.  

 

Once the new national reciprocity bill passes, you should be able to conceal carry on Ft. Bragg as well.    

Taxes will be restricted on the new tax bill, but our standard deduction will double (which means the average person will have a reduced tax bill).  I know I don’t go much over the current standard deduction, even with a mortgage.

 

Reciprocity has nothing to do with CC on military installations.  It will be up to each commanding general.

[jayjayj 571]

Just now, IDWAF said:

Taxes will be restricted on the new tax bill, but our standard deduction will double (which means the average person will have a reduced tax bill).  I know I don’t go much over the current standard deduction, even with a mortgage.

 

Reciprocity has nothing to do with CC on military installations.  It will be up to each commanding general.

I'm hoping that a federal level reciprocity law will ultimately included language that takes that power away from installation commanders or branch commanders. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, jayjayj said:

I'm hoping that a federal level reciprocity law will ultimately included language that takes that power away from installation commanders or branch commanders. 

I doubt that very much.  Taking power away from a military commander on their own installation would set a bad precedent, IMHO.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

49 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

Does that apply to non-residents as well?

“Alaska's laws do not prohibit anyone 21 or older who may legally possess a firearm from carrying it concealed. A special permit is not required.”

[jayjayj 571]

30 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

I doubt that very much.  Taking power away from a military commander on their own installation would set a bad precedent, IMHO.

They would still have the power to act in individual situations, for instance (just one example), banning an individual who violates some SOP on proper gun safety.  Similar to how to can lose your driving privileges on base.  We should allow our soldiers the same rights as the population they defend, in my opinion.