• 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
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...

I disagree.

I think anytime you carry you should carry as openly as possible.

It's a courtesy to everyone.
 
AGENT J said:
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.
Click to expand...

In Texas a CHL requires a 10 hour class (about $100), passing a test that requires firing 50 rounds of ammunition (about $30) and a non-refundable application fee of $140 (total expense of $270). A driver's license in Texas costs $24 and includes the practical and written tests. Carrying a loaded handgun is ONLY legal if you have a CHL since open carry is illegal in Texas (even with a CHL). What is being ignored is the vast difference between a constitutional right and a state issued privilege.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
1.)In Texas a CHL requires a 10 hour class (about $100), passing a test that requires firing 50 rounds of ammunition (about $30) and a non-refundable application fee of $140 (total expense of $270). A driver's license in Texas costs $24 and includes the practical and written tests.
2.)Carrying a loaded handgun is ONLY legal if you have a CHL since open carry is illegal in Texas (even with a CHL).
3.)What is being ignored is the vast difference between a constitutional right and a state issued privilege.
Click to expand...

1.) yeah im not cool with that so much especially if it prevents me from carrying concealed
2.) open carry is illegal in texas????????? thats shocking
3.) i agree i guess that im just admitting that some restriction i would be ok with but i would never say they are 100% constitutional because i would be wrong IMO and I think all the restrictions should be done the right way.

shocked open carry is illegal in texas
 
Dapper Andy said:
I disagree.

I think anytime you carry you should carry as openly as possible.

It's a courtesy to everyone.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Open carry offers a much better chance for a "bad guy" to preplan either taking you out first or to attempt to take your handgun from you. Just as it is wiser to conceal valuables in a parked vehicle, it is better to not advertise that you are armed. I like the option of either, since with our 100 degree weather my OWB holster may not always be covered well.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) yeah im not cool with that so much especially if it prevents me from carrying concealed
2.) open carry is illegal in texas????????? thats shocking
3.) i agree i guess that im just admitting that some restriction i would be ok with but i would never say they are 100% constitutional because i would be wrong IMO and I think all the restrictions should be done the right way.

shocked open carry is illegal in texas
Click to expand...

Texas gun law says no to open carry:

PC §46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:

(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

(a-1) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun in a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control at any time in which:

(1) the handgun is in plain view;...
Click to expand...

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/internetforms/forms/chl-16.pdf
 
I do think that someone who has gotten a CCW should be allowed to use it anywhere in the country. But I also see how it's really unfair for people who live in a state that doesn't allow CCW, or makes them very hard to get, that visitors can carry concealed, but residents cannot.

The better solution would be to simply have national shall-issue CCW laws.
 
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...



Excellent point. States are required to give "full faith and credit" to many things from other states AUTOMATICALLY, like driver's licenses and marriage certificates. Carry permits are treated differently because.... um, because.... well, just because dammit! :lamo
 
molten_dragon said:
I do think that someone who has gotten a CCW should be allowed to use it anywhere in the country. But I also see how it's really unfair for people who live in a state that doesn't allow CCW, or makes them very hard to get, that visitors can carry concealed, but residents cannot.
Click to expand...

They can always move...
 
Gipper said:
They can always move...
Click to expand...

I hear this excuse about so many things, and people always make it sound so easy. Moving's a pretty big pain in the ass, especially if it means moving to another state, often leaving family and friends behind, forcing you to find a new job, etc. "Just move" doesn't really cut it.
 
molten_dragon said:
I hear this excuse about so many things, and people always make it sound so easy. Moving's a pretty big pain in the ass, especially if it means moving to another state, often leaving family and friends behind, forcing you to find a new job, etc. "Just move" doesn't really cut it.
Click to expand...

I moved out of a state whose condition I did not approve of. Not like you're moving to Serbia or Indonesia or something.
 
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, concealed 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 "concealed carry" or "open carry", there's just carrying. Others, like Virginia, have concealed 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 requests. Finally you have places like Illinois that also only has one legal notion of carrying, but that's essentially open carrying as concealed 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 reciprocation in terms of concealed carry permits? Constitutional or no, do you think they should be bound to such?
Click to expand...
I live in South Dakota. I landed a great job that requires me to travel. The fist job site is in Oklahoma. I have to drive through Nebraska and Kansas to get to Oklahoma. Neither Nebraska or Kansas honor my South Dakota carry permit.

111.jpg

Neither Nebraska or Kansas issue non-resident permits. If I want to carry while passing through those states I will need a permit from a state they honor.

I have a Utah non-resident permit. I have never been in Utah in my entire life, but I have their permit so that I could carry in various other states. Nebraska honors my Utah permit, so I can carry while driving through Nebraska, but Kansas does not honor the Utah permit, so I cannot carry in Kansas.

222.jpg

As a result, I'm applying for the Arizona non-resident permit. I have never been to Arizona in my life, but in a couple months I will have the Arizona non-resident permit so that I can carry through Kansas to get to the job site.

333.jpg

Oklahoma honors every other state's permit, so once in Oklahoma I will have 3 permits granting me permission to carry in Oklahoma when I only need 1. Additionally, if I lived in Alaska, Arizona, Vermont or Wyoming (states which do not require residents to have a permit to carry), I would not need any permit to also carry in Oklahoma even-though I don't live in Oklahoma....but I would still need other permits in order to pass through other states to get to Oklahoma.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/

*****
Short of a Federal "constitutional carry", gun permits should be treated like state IDs: Federal guidelines and minimum requirements, issued by the state, honored in every other state.
 
Last edited:
SMTA said:
Yea, it is nuts.

I believe that OH has reciprocity agreements with 23 other states.
Click to expand...
It's to bad you folks don't offer an OH non-resident permit, I would gladly give my money. I had to get a Utah non-resident permit so that I could carry in your state, and I've never even been to Utah.
 
Tucker Case said:
Illinois is solidly the worst in the country.
Click to expand...

Massachusetts doesn't recognize any out of state permits, and in a lot of cities a permit will only be issued at the discretion of the Chief of Police.
 
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...

Everywhere and nowhere.....is that the 56th or 57th state? :mrgreen:
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I disagree. Open carry offers a much better chance for a "bad guy" to preplan either taking you out first or to attempt to take your handgun from you. Just as it is wiser to conceal valuables in a parked vehicle, it is better to not advertise that you are armed. I like the option of either, since with our 100 degree weather my OWB holster may not always be covered well.
Click to expand...

At first I was thinking that it might be a good deterrent, but you make a pretty good point against it.
 
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...
1. Open-carry allows for safer holsters. Most concealed-carry holsters are only level-1 retention. Open carry holsters are retention level-2 & 3.

2. It's easier to draw an openly carried gun.

3. Like a poisonous frog with bright skin, I like to let would-be criminals know that attacking me can result in their death. In the service we call openly carried weapons "show of force". When someone attacks me knowing I have a gun, I can safely assume they intend to inflict grave bodily harm. This makes for a cleaner legal case.

4. Some people still freak out when they see a gay couple holding hands. Would you tell gays that they shouldn't express affection in public so that those rare few won't freak out? Don't gays still have a right to be affectionate in public? Do you also support concealing political and religious views; would you have Christians tuck in that cross, or Buddhist monks leave the orange robe at the temple? IMO it's the person freaking out who is in the wrong.
 
Dapper Andy said:
I disagree.

I think anytime you carry you should carry as openly as possible.

It's a courtesy to everyone.
Click to expand...
My Colt is a work of art, why would I want to deprive others of the joy of viewing it?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) yeah im not cool with that so much especially if it prevents me from carrying concealed
2.) open carry is illegal in texas????????? thats shocking
3.) i agree i guess that im just admitting that some restriction i would be ok with but i would never say they are 100% constitutional because i would be wrong IMO and I think all the restrictions should be done the right way.

shocked open carry is illegal in texas
Click to expand...
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/texas.pdf
 
I'm a little confused by my own link.

NRA-ILA | Massachusetts

Here it states this:

NON-RESIDENTS
A non-resident may possess a rifle or shotgun in Massachusetts:

While hunting and in possession of a valid hunting license.
While on a firing or shooting range.
While traveling in or through Massachusetts if the rifle or shotgun is unloaded and enclosed in a case.
While at a firearms show organized by a “regularly existing gun collector’s club or association.”
If he or she has a license or permit to possess any firearm in his or her home state, if its licensing requirements are as stringent as those of Massachusetts, as indicated by a published list of such states promulgated by the colonel of state police.

The colonel of state police may issue a temporary license to carry a handgun to a non-resident, alien, or resident who does not live within the jurisdiction of a local licensing authority. A temporary license must clearly indicate whether it is a class A or B license. The fee for a temporary license is $100. Temporary licenses are good for one year, and renewable at the discretion of the colonel of state police. Unlike regular class A and B licenses, temporary licenses may not be used to purchase firearms.

A non-resident United States citizen with a license to carry a handgun issued by any state may carry a handgun in Massachusetts for the purpose of taking part in a competition or exhibition of an organized group of firearms collectors, or for hunting provided he has a valid hunting license issued by Massachusetts or the state of his destination.
Click to expand...

Then in another section, it says this:

Reciprocity

These states recognize Massachusetts permits:Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont

Massachusetts recognizes permits from:None
Click to expand...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
In Texas a CHL requires a 10 hour class (about $100), passing a test that requires firing 50 rounds of ammunition (about $30) and a non-refundable application fee of $140 (total expense of $270). A driver's license in Texas costs $24 and includes the practical and written tests. Carrying a loaded handgun is ONLY legal if you have a CHL since open carry is illegal in Texas (even with a CHL). What is being ignored is the vast difference between a constitutional right and a state issued privilege.
Click to expand...
Funny thing is that TX honors my SD permit and SD doesn't require any of that. No classes no firing rounds no nothing. $10 and 5 business days is all.
 
ChrisL said:
I'm a little confused by my own link.

NRA-ILA | Massachusetts

Here it states this:

Then in another section, it says this:
Click to expand...
The first section is who Massachusetts honors. The second section is who honors Massachusetts. These are not always the same. Just because you honor another state doesn't mean they will honor you.
 
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 [sic] 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 [sic] 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 [sic]. Finally you have places like Illinois that also only has one legal notion of carrying, but that's essentially open carrying as concealled [sic] 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 [sic] in terms of concealled [sic] carry permits? Constitutional or no, do you think they should be bound to such?
Click to expand...

There should not be any such thing as a permit to carry a gun.

This is a right which the Second Amendment explicitly affirms, and forbids government from infringing.

You do not need a permit to exercise a right. No agency of any federal, state, or other government in this nation has any legitimate authority whatsoever to restrict your right to carry a gun, nor to compel you to obtain any permit or other authorization to exercise this right.

There should be no discussion of permits or reciprocity, because every free citizen of this nation already has the right to carry a gun in any state or territory of this nation.
 
Jerry said:
The first section is who Massachusetts honors. The second section is who honors Massachusetts. These are not always the same. Just because you honor another state doesn't mean they will honor you.
Click to expand...

But it says this:

A non-resident United States citizen with a license to carry a handgun issued by any state may carry a handgun in Massachusetts for the purpose of taking part in a competition or exhibition of an organized group of firearms collectors, or for hunting provided he has a valid hunting license issued by Massachusetts or the state of his destination.
Click to expand...

So wouldn't that indicate that they DO recognize an out of state permit, but only under specific circumstances?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom