# Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act-Good Idea or Not? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 27, 2017, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368 "2017-04-27T15:16:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/61 "2017-04-27T19:49:00Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Would this bill effect the need to get a permit to carry in other states? IANAL, but it appears not. Senate bill: an individual who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a **valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the individual to carry a concealed firearm** “(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document containing a photograph of the person, **and who is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides** , ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/62 "2017-04-27T19:53:13Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > A better analogy would be to professional licensing. Lawyers, doctors, insurance adjusters, morticians, hairstylists and so forth can’t just show up in a new state and practice their trade in reliance on their existing licenses. As a professional engineer, I can tell you this is bullshit too. I can’t seal designs in Iowa because Iowa wants $300 from me first, not for any public safety or public interest reasons. And there’s absolutely zero defensible reason that a freaking hairdresser should require licensing at all, let alone be prohibited from working until they get licensed _again_ in a different state. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/63 "2017-04-27T19:59:01Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > That is **not** what “shall issue” means. You still, in most if not all cases (I don’t know of any exceptions), have to take a class and a background check. What it means is that the LEO or issuing authority is not allowed to make an arbitrary decision to not allow a CCW even if the background check comes back clear. In a “may issue” state, the county may retain a CCW system, but de facto not allow _anyone_ (without the proper connections) a permit even if they follow the law to the T. I’m using fictional examples, so I fully admit I’m glossing over details. Should one of these laws pass, I think we could probably predict that constitutional carry states would likely churn out permits like they were postage stamps. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/64 "2017-04-27T19:59:52Z")
Really? That’s all Iowa requires to give you a license? $300? Nothing else? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/65 "2017-04-27T20:00:09Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I’m not a big gun supporter by any means, but I’ve often wondered why all states don’t recognize other states’ CCW permits. > > Can you explain how this is different than all states recognizing other states’ drivers licenses? So far as I am aware, there is no federal rule requiring all states to recognize each others’ licenses, although I welcome correction on this point. So that would be the difference 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/66 "2017-04-27T20:00:58Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > IANAL, but it appears not. > > Senate bill: > an individual who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a **valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the individual to carry a concealed firearm** > > “(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document containing a photograph of the person, **and who is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides** , The House version seems to be a bit looser: “A qualified individual must: (1) be eligible to possess, transport, or receive a firearm under federal law; (2) carry a valid photo identification document; and (3) carry a valid concealed carry permit issued by, **or be eligible to carry a concealed firearm in, his or her state of residence.** ” (bolding mine) This seems to indicate that if your state doesn’t require any permit, then you don’t have to carry it in other states. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/67 "2017-04-27T20:01:09Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m using fictional examples, so I fully admit I’m glossing over details. Should one of these laws pass, I think we could probably predict that constitutional carry states would likely churn out permits like they were postage stamps. Possibly, I think some of them do offer some form of permit if necessary. But would they offer these to nonresidents? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/68 "2017-04-27T20:02:43Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > Did you have the same opinion on nationwide concealed carry for active and retired law enforcement officers that passed a few years back, that they shouldn’t have pressed for the law because if they ever felt in danger they should just go home? I didn’t have any opinion about it at all that I can recall. Even political junkies like me aren’t aware of every last piece of Congressional legislation. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/69 "2017-04-27T20:04:05Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I didn’t have any opinion about it at all that I can recall. Even political junkies like me aren’t aware of every last piece of Congressional legislation. [This one](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act), presumably. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/70 "2017-04-27T20:04:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So far as I am aware, there is no federal rule requiring all states to recognize each others’ licenses, although I welcome correction on this point. > > So that would be the difference 🙂 Well, sure, come into the thread NOW after I already found that out! 🙂 What is the federal rule regarding marriage licenses? Someone mentioned the Constitution required states to recognize each others licenses? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/71 "2017-04-27T20:06:29Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > Possibly, I think some of them do offer some form of permit if necessary. But would they offer these to nonresidents? I welcome correction, but I seem to remember that folks used to seek out permits from Utah because the process was easy, the permits were recognized in quite a few states, and they welcomed non-residents to apply. I seem to remember ads in various magazines offering to assist residents from other states in getting a Utah permit. This is from memory, so I could be wrong, or things could have changed. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/72 "2017-04-27T20:07:34Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > But some states require several hours of training and background checks before you get a CCW, and some states just require you to be able to sign your name. Which states do not require a background check before issuing a CCW permit? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/73 "2017-04-27T20:13:06Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Well, sure, come into the thread NOW after I already found that out! 🙂 > > What is the federal rule regarding marriage licenses? Someone mentioned the Constitution required states to recognize each others licenses? There is a general rule for marriage licenses under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, but even that yields to a clear public policy exception – in other words, if one state clearly lays out a public policy that disfavors a class of marriages, the FF&C clause may not apply. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/74 "2017-04-27T20:15:05Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I welcome correction, but I seem to remember that folks used to seek out permits from Utah because the process was easy, the permits were recognized in quite a few states, and they welcomed non-residents to apply. I seem to remember ads in various magazines offering to assist residents from other states in getting a Utah permit. > > This is from memory, so I could be wrong, or things could have changed. Utah is favored because a) many other states accept it, and b) they make it easy for nonresidents to get, yes. But you still have to pay money to sit in a class, and then more money to the state of Utah for fingerprints and background check etc. But I meant that Vermont is not going to give you a permit to carry in Michigan without any test or fees unless you live in Vermont. > [@Slash1972](#): > > Well, sure, come into the thread NOW after I already found that out! 🙂 > > What is the federal rule regarding marriage licenses? Someone mentioned the Constitution required states to recognize each others licenses? Not sure, but interesting point: some states allow you to enjoy the legal rights of marriage without legally marrying (common law marriage). Most don’t allow this. But in most cases (I welcome any exceptions I am unaware of), even if common law marriage will not occur in state A no matter how long you cohabit or what you call yourself, if you have a common law marriage in state B and move to A, it is valid in both. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/75 "2017-04-27T20:16:22Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > A better analogy would be to professional licensing. Lawyers, doctors, insurance adjusters, morticians, hairstylists and so forth can’t just show up in a new state and practice their trade in reliance on their existing licenses. Not so for armored car crew members, courtesy of Congress: > [@](#): > > In 1993 Congress enacted the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act (ACIRA). The original act aimed to lift the burden created by states’ diverse requirements for licensing and issuing permits to carry handguns and “allow armored car crew members to travel freely in interstate commerce” while protecting transported valuables. The act provided, “This chapter shall supersede any provision of state law (or the law of any political subdivision of a state) that is inconsistent with this chapter.” > > The industry and various states sought changes to the original act. Subsequently, Congress authorized changes that resulted in the Armored Car Reciprocity Amendments of 1998. > > a) In general—If an armored car crew member employed by an armored car company— > > 1. has in effect a license issued by the appropriate state agency (in the state in which such member is primarily employed by such company) to carry a weapon while acting in the services of such company in that state, and such state agency meets the minimum requirements under subsection b) of this section; and > > 2. has met all other applicable requirements to act as an armored car crew member in the state in which such member is primarily employed by such company, then such crew member shall be entitled to lawfully carry any weapon to which such license relates and function as an armored car crew member in any state while such member is acting in the service of such company. > > For both the initial and subsequent license issuance, federal law relies on each state to determine to its own satisfaction that “the crew member has received classroom and range training in weapon safety and marksmanship during the current year from a qualified instructor for each weapon that the crew member will be licensed to carry. [source](https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/december/armored-car-industry-reciprocity-act-and-local-law-enforcement) ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/76 "2017-04-27T20:17:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > There is a general rule for marriage licenses under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, but even that yields to a clear public policy exception – in other words, if one state clearly lays out a public policy that disfavors a class of marriages, the FF&C clause may not apply. I don’t know what you mean by “general rule” here. A law? Court case? ---
**Author:** ![Orwell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/dfb087/32.png) [@Orwell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orwell)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/77 "2017-04-27T20:19:16Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Personally, I wouldn’t mind. Government-mandated training and licensing is almost always a useless money-grab. I was a cautious driver when I started, got a bit stupider as my teenage years waned, and then became quite competent with more experience. No classroom, sit-down test or $25 fee had any effect on that. > > You’d think the actual on-the-road driving test would be worthwhile but I’m still doubtful. I see shitty drivers everyday who would have failed had someone been testing them. Passing a five minute test every few decades on how to stop at stop signs and park on hills is no indicator of skill or safety behind the wheel. I agree. There are lots and LOTS of horrible drivers. I don’t necessarily have much of a problem with a minimum, \*reasonable \*training qualification. But, in reality, the anti-gun states have just turned this into an expensive barrier for no reason other than to erect hurdles. > [@](#): > > A better analogy would be to professional licensing. Lawyers, doctors, insurance adjusters, morticians, hairstylists and so forth can’t just show up in a new state and practice their trade in reliance on their existing licenses. It’s well recognized that professional licensing is mostly used for two reasons: a) revenue for the state; and b) to reduce competition for current licensees. If you think there aren’t plenty of lousy license holders in every profession, you haven’t been paying attention. I am decidedly in favor of gun rights, and I applaud these bills. Of course, I also think there is nothing wrong with the 13 states that have decided that their citizens don’t need to fill out forms, pay fees and jump hurdles to exercise a constitutional right. Furthermore, if this law passes, it will be a well-deserved payback to the states that have been unreasonable and dictatorial to their citizens, and haven’t played fair with visitors, either. > [@](#): > > Really? That’s all Iowa requires to give you a license? $300? Nothing else? Come to Pennsylvania. No classes, no test, and our license to carry costs $20.00 for five years. Mine runs out next month, so I have to go to the courthouse with a $20.00 money order (credit cards, checks and cash are not accepted). We do have to pass a background check. And, no, there is not wild west mayhem and madness amongst license holders. Probably second-best in the country, next to the constitutional carry states. ---
**Author:** ![Orwell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/dfb087/32.png) [@Orwell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orwell)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/78 "2017-04-27T20:21:21Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I welcome correction, but I seem to remember that folks used to seek out permits from Utah because the process was easy, the permits were recognized in quite a few states, and they welcomed non-residents to apply. I seem to remember ads in various magazines offering to assist residents from other states in getting a Utah permit. > > This is from memory, so I could be wrong, or things could have changed. It’s not because it was easy, it was because it was accepted in the most states. I have seen Utah-approved classes here in PA, because the combination of having PA and UT permits gets you most of the states that allow reciprocity. Still no good in NY, NJ, MD, etc. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/79 "2017-04-27T20:21:47Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I welcome correction, but I seem to remember that folks used to seek out permits from Utah because the process was easy, the permits were recognized in quite a few states, and they welcomed non-residents to apply. I seem to remember ads in various magazines offering to assist residents from other states in getting a Utah permit. > > This is from memory, so I could be wrong, or things could have changed. It’s true that Utah’s permit is a popular one. I believe that’s largely due to the low cost and wide recognition. Some states expressed concern to Utah that their residents were bypassing their state’s system and just obtaining a Utah permit, so Utah passed a law that (if you live in a shall-issue state) requires you to obtain a permit from your home state before being issued a Utah permit. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2017, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368/80 "2017-04-27T20:24:40Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I’m curious: why is this bill a matter of any importance to its supporters? > > Maybe I’m just a wimp, but the question that comes to my mind with some of these laws (and obviously this one specifically) is: if I felt I would need a gun someplace that I didn’t _need_ to go to, why would I _want_ to go there? Two reasons I care about it: 1. I’d like to be able to travel to any state in the Union and protect myself while doing so 2. It gives a chance for our brethren trapped “behind enemy lines” (in states that refuse to issue permits) a way to get a permit so that they can protect themselves, at least in some cases. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-good-idea-or-not/785368.md?page=5)