Some form of carry is a constitutional right - “bear” must mean something. All states must have some scheme to allow some form of carry, be it open or concealed. Places like CA (before Peruta and still until that case is resolved) that didn’t allow either, were clearly violating the rights of its citizens. If you were an out of state resident and came to visit CA, you had zero ability to carry in any way since CA does not issue non-resident permits for either open or concealed carry. CA is violating the rights of any non-residents that wish to carry but are prohibited when visiting.
National reciprocity is not a constitutional right per se, but carry is and national reciprocity addresses that.
Hard to legislate and not always so black and white. Last summer we were in Northern Michigan and went to a cheesy tourist trap featuring a woody train ride. When we got back my Mom’s boyfriend noticed a guy wearing a sidearm. On one hand we were in the middle of the woods; on the other there was an armed man sitting alone at a children’s attraction. /shrug
I think your point about travelling is a good one. It doesn’t seem to make sense that it’s legal to have a weapon in one state and in another but you aren’t allowed to move it through the state in between. Seems to me that we should at least expect to be able to transport weapons if they are secured in a safe or temporarily disabled or something.
I walked right by the guy at the train station. Perhaps the kinds of people who see no need to own weapons aren’t the type of people who reflexively scan others for potential threats?
The constitution protects my right to lobby and yet I have to register as a lobbyist before I could talk to a congressman on behalf of a client.
I think we all agree that constitutional right doesn’t mean unhindered and unregulated in any way. Based on Heller, I’m pretty sure that gun registration and gun permits are constitutional (although I get the feeling that the ACLU has a problem with gun registries). I am equally sure that carry permits are constitutional.
I was really thinking of a permit that anyone could get. I don’t live in Michigan. Utah’s non-resident permit is recognized by more states than any other non-resident permit or a Virginia permit.
The last time I went to a gun show I saw a table signing people up for Utah gun permit classes, presumably because it had the most reciprocity a Virginia resident could get.
Yeah, I think that standard is stupid too.
I would rather trust the senate with that right and have universal coverage than trust individual states. I don’t think that a senate with about 80 senators that come from “shall issue” states with another 4 coming from “may issue” states that are “shall issue” in practice will place onerous requirements on carry permits.
On the other hand if California wanted really onerous requirements to carry, the folks from other states (or even within the state) could just ignore those requirements by flashing their federally issued permit. I think this eventually leads to a single standard, the federal one. You will see a story about how some guy in Idaho who couldn’t have gotten a federal license blew away a bunch of people with the gun he was carrying with his Idaho issued license and Idahoans will wonder why the federal standard isn’t the only standard.
They still arrest you for it in some places. Try driving from Virginia to Vermont with a gun locked in your trunk and stopping in NYC for a donut. Then mention to a cop in the donut shop that you are on your way to Vermont and you have a gun in your trunk.
It would be a stupid gun owner indeed that a) stopped in New York City with a gun in their car, b) told the police about it, and c) expected them to tell you everything was cool. Hours of road, hundreds of places to stop, but you just have to stop at Katz’s Deli for an expensive pastrami on rye and flap your gums. Why twist the tiger’s tail?
Yet another example of why I think open carry is unnecessarily provocative. All too often the police do not know the laws they are supposed to uphold. When you are in possession of a gun it behooves you to be as discreet as your personality permits you to be.
In that case I don’t see that Debaser has a point. People who are trying to follow the rules would be securing their weapons. Those travelling into the wrong states with unsecured weapons aren’t being trapped. It’s their own carelessness that’s potentially getting them into trouble. But Bone may have a point there.
I think states should work out some agreements with other states but I dont see making a one size fits all national policy.
In my area for example people who have a legitimate reason to carry a gun (they work in dangerous areas) frequently have to cross state borders. They should get things worked out in both states.
First, this law is hardly foolproof, as others have pointed out. It’s not enforced consistently and even with it on the books you are never certain of safety in between point A and point B.
Second, even if this law is perfect, it still just addresses transport. If I have a concealed carry permit in my home state, and I also have one in my state where I own a hunting cabin, why should I need to NOT carry concealed in between?
I don’t carry every day, but I have friends who do. I’ve seen people literally have to take their gun out of the holster on their belt and put it in a locked safe bolted to the console in their car as we pass over the state line. This is silly. If my friend forgot to do that for an extra mile, should we lock him up?
There’s even special products on the market designed to allow you to store your gun and ammo separately because some states require that.
Ideally, once someone has the permit they should be able to carry wherever they go, without having to lock it up every time they cross a state line.
And I don’t see why DC should have to accept a carry permit from a state that hands them out to anyone without a criminal record when their own resident will probably have to undergo significant safety training. I think the only real way to address this is at the federal level. the federal government gets involved and sets national criteria for a carry permit.
Why should they have to accept a drivers license from states where the requirements to get one are less stringent? Why don’t you have to register your car in every state you drive in but some states require you to register a firearm even if you are just visiting? Why is your car registration good in a state that requires annual inspections if you’re from one that doesn’t?
Does Article 4 of the U.S. Constitution override the 10th Amendment? Does the 2nd Amendment outweigh the 10th Amendment? And what aboutNaomi?
In the country with the world’s highest incarceration rate, there will be a lot of people unnecessarily in jail. There’s a middle ground between forcing New York City to have the same rules as Texas, and draconian enforcement of technical violations.
Taking the thread topic literally, it would mean true uniform world government, something I’m close enough to right wing to be against. As for firearms rules changing when you drive across a border, I think that having different rules in different jurisdictions, if enforced with a reasonably light hand, gently discourages gun ownership. As you may recall, I’d see that as a plus
If a person isn’t disciplined enough to master and follow border-related rules, maybe that person should consider whether they are disciplined enough to keep on carrying a gun.
I guess it’s because we are a representative democracy and that’s what the lawmakers decided.
In some ways things are harder for gun owners than drivers, but it seems to me that there are more ways they are easier. Given that gun deaths are about equal to vehicular deaths, why is it that driver’s tests are typically so much more stringent (as measured by pass rates) than are concealed carry permit tests? And why is that I have to pay a car registration fee every year, but there is no equivalent for guns?
How about an annual safety inspection to see that the gun is being well maintained?
Also, every year or two the regulations change to force the automakers to adopt new safety features, such as anti-lock brakes and increasing number of required air bags. Try that with gun owners, and here’s what you get:
If we could get a continuing program of safety improvements, such as in the link above, I think that would be a reasonable trade in return for respecting out-of-state registration.
Because you don’t have a permit to carry your weapon in the state in between, of course. Do you believe in state sovereignty? If so, there is your answer. That’s not a priority for me but if we are going to have a single nationwide policy then the desire of people not to be gunned down in neighborhoods where that happens with some regularity down should count for a hell of a lot more than the desire of people elsewhere to carry guns.
As it stands if a state decides not to permit you to carry your weapon then transport is the only issue. If there are flaws in the law, fix them.
Because nowhere in the U.S. Constitution, nor in the constitution of any state is owning/driving a car a right. And contrary to what the left would have you believe, “rights” and “privilege” are not the same thing.
They don’t have to. AFAICT, there are reciprocity agreements between all the states.
Once again, I think this is all the subject of reciprocity agreements because every state has comparable laws. The most lax driving states are not significantly more lax than the strictest ones. The disparity in gun laws is significantly greater.
So yeah, I still think we need federal rules to force California to accept a Utah permit.
The examples I remember are mostly in airports:
Its still a pain in the ass and infringes on my right to carry (perhaps permissibly so but I’d like to have them prove that it is permissible).
Some people thin the flaws might be more global than individual state laws. They think that the right to carry might be much broader than some states may allow.
No there isn’t. Wisconsin, for example, is not a member of the National Drivers Compact. Any traffic cites (other than criminal traffic offenses) received in another state will not result in demerit points on a Wisconsin drivers record. And any fines not paid in another state will not result in a suspended Wisconsin license.
Yet I can legally drive all over the country on my WI DL as long as I don’t permanently moved outside the state.
