Most states don’t require notification. Seems to work fine. I’ll be happy if it gets scrapped (although I’m not sure Ohio is up for that yet).
Just to clarify things. Just because a person doesn’t need to undergo a background check doesn’t mean they are legally allowed to carry. If you are a prohibited person due to convictions, a protection from abuse order, or a mental confinement, you cannot own or use a gun, let alone carry one around. These states have not decided that everyone can carry, they have decided that the government shouldn’t set up hurdles and collect fees. In short, if you are not allowed to own or use a gun, you likewise cannot carry one. It should be obvious, and probably is, but I didn’t want people to think that having no permit means having no laws on the issue.
As far as carrying out of state, you will still need to comply with federal firearms laws if this law is reconciled and passed.
Agree. I see no reason why a cop needs to know if I’m carrying. Letting him know will just create anxiety and probably delay the whole process. From what I read online, notifying the cop often results in the cop disarming the person, which involves lots of unnecessary handling of the gun, usually by someone that may not be familiar with that particular model. But, again, we don’t need to notify in my state. You need to know your state’s law on the matter.
But I agree the person who failed to tell the fourth cop clearly met the law when he informed the first officer.
I believe in the full faith and credit clause.
This (meaning national reciprocity laws - I’m just now reviewing the text of the House version) seems like an appropriate use of that Constitutional power. I don’t see the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act as an affront to the Constitution either.
OK, I agree that is unusual, and will almost certainly get changed during reconciliation. But I could argue that a Kansan who is used to carrying in bars is not creating any problems by carrying in bars in Kentucky. And he might not be aware of the prohibition - yes, I know it is the citizen’s burden to know the laws, but knowing every law in every county, town, city and state is a bit unrealistic.
Right, but if you are from a state that has a background check before they issue a CCW, then if you get pulled over or questioned in another state, you an just show your CCW, and all should be good.
If you are from one of the states that does not require you to apply for a CCW, then if you are out of state with your gun, you just show them your driver’s license, and then it is on the police to run a background check then and there to find out whether or not you are legally carrying.
What would be a better bill would be to make a federal CCW, along with federal requirements and background checks that is valid in all the states, but I don’t know if that would pass constitutional muster.
I see your point, and I think the constitutional carry states will create carry permits for exactly this purpose, if they haven’t already. Except Vermont, which likes to be weird about most everything. 
If that’s an attempt to explain how H.R. 38 would operate, I think you’re mistaken. But, it’s possible that I’m mistaken, so let’s examine it (preferably civilly).
(2)(a) says “a person 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”
Let’s talk about Arizona, because it’s an example I’m rather familiar with. Arizona has both a shall-issue CCW permit system, whereby one can obtain an actual physical credit-card-sized permit, and a “constitutional carry” law that allows people in the state to carry guns without the need for obtaining the aforementioned permit. Why would one want to obtain the permit then? To carry in other states.
HR 38 seems to allow someone from Arizona who went through the background check and obtained a CCW permit to carry in other states, but not someone who is simply a lawful person who can legally carry within Arizona. What am I missing or mistaken on (remember, civilly please)?
I’m looking at (2)(a), and I am not seeing that it requires that the gun owner carry a state issued CCW, just that they have to carry an ID that the state recognizes allows them to carry a gun concealed, and in those states, all that is is a driver’s license or state ID. In vermont, you cannot even get a CCW, what is a vermont resident supposed to show?
And this is in addition to the fact that in Virginia, according to the article I cited earlier, does not require a background check before issuing a CCW.
Now, the language is ambiguous, so it could go either way, but considering that
and
Tells me that not only does the presentation of a document that the resident state finds to be acceptable to be enough, but questioning that could get the police officer in trouble, and pressing charges could get not only the cop in trouble, but the whole court system.
Now, like I said, it’s ambiguous, and IANAL, so my reading of it may be wrong, but I see no where that explicitly states that they have to get an actual issued CCW for the purposes of reciprocity with other states, and I see quite a number of penalties for any cop or court who gets it wrong and does not accept a person’s ID as a license to carry concealed.
Vermont residents are probably SOL. Or perhaps they could get a non-resident permit from Maine or elsewhere.
That article was not correct.
Here is the actual law for Virginia. The last paragraph says:
You are misunderstanding.
The most charitable explanation for the article you quoted is that they’re talking about states that grant a permit without a live-fire test, and indeed Virginia is such a state. So when they say, “Permits from Virginia are valid in North Carolina, and only require applicants to pay a fee, watch a gun safety video, and answer an online questionnaire,” the unspoken addition is “…as opposed to demonstrate competency by firing.”
But Virginia does require a background check. Va Code § 18.2-308.02(E), “Application for a concealed handgun permit; Virginia resident or domiciliary,” provides:
(emphasis added for clarity)
The less charitable explanation, of course, is that the authors of that article were deliberately deceptive.
ETA: Ultra-ninja’d with extra red color!
LOL. It’s because you spent extra time outlining the most-charitable and less-charitable explanations of the article.
It’s true. Hoist by my own charitard.
That clause is being perfectly implemented today. See prior cites on Supreme Court rulings that leave no doubt as to that conclusion. You’re arguing for Federal preemption of the state police power.
I don’t either, because that law is at it’s heart about interstate commerce.
Could you elaborate on this point a bit more? I’m not sure if you’re misunderstanding my position or I’m misunderstanding your argument.
I missed it too, but “or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides” sounds like it could allow an Arizonan with no permit to carry in another state. Or, it is meant to apply to police or something, hard to say for sure.
There was a interesting legal issue when some states would not recognize same sex marriages when others did. Something like you get married to a same sex partner, then go to a state that didn’t recognize it and get married to a opposite sex partner, which is OK as the state didn’t recognize the first marriage, but bigamy in the second state, but you were not married at the time you were married as it was not recognized.
How does reciprocity work with Constitutional Carry? I live in Maine, where anyone who is legally allowed to have a gun can conceal carry without needing a permit.
If someone from a constiutional carry state(NH,VT,AZ,AK,WV,ME) goes to another state where permits are required, are they allowed to conceal carry there, or must they get an actual permit from that state?
I would suggest that you go to http://www.handgunlaw.us , click on your state and see what it says.
Reciprocity is a patchwork of agreements, and they change from time to time. For example, Nevada has flip-flopped back and forth in recent years on whether they recognize a Utah permit or not.
You can get official lists of which states’ permits are recognized, often on the state government’s website, but a lot of people will just refer to sites like this: http://www.handgunlaw.us/.
They must get a permit recognized by that state, but it does’t necessarily have to be issued by that state. For example, if you live in Maine, and want to visit Utah, you could get an Arizona permit and come carry here without issue.
ETA: but it’s probably easiest to get your home state permit, assuming you live in a shall-issue state like Maine (Maine’s CCW permit appears to be recognized in 27 states)
ETA: And now it’s my turn to be ninja’d by Orwell