Concealed Carry

[MRBB]

I just wish ALL states would honor any states permit, as if your drivers lic is legal in them all, so should a carry permit
as heck? ! more folks die in car crashes that from guns every year in the states!
if some reform needs to be done IMO< its on bad drivers and driving skill laws!
all these new vehicles with auto park, lane assist auto driving, IMO< is just making for worse drivers that never take the time to learn any skills
like how smart phone seem to have made people dumber IMO< as so many think when they need to know something all they have to do is look it up, as to actually learning and mastering any skills! having been in the gun business for many yrs, I see far more BAD drivers than I do bad gun owners!

 

[4wanderingeyes]

Jack, those thugs are already carrying with the laws how they are. They aren’t going to all of a sudden carry 2 guns. It will just allow the law abiding citizens to carry legally without having to pay fees, and “register”.

 

[yoderjac]

I just wish ALL states would honor any states permit, as if your drivers lic is legal in them all, so should a carry permit
as heck? ! more folks die in car crashes that from guns every year in the states!
if some reform needs to be done IMO< its on bad drivers and driving skill laws!
all these new vehicles with auto park, lane assist auto driving, IMO< is just making for worse drivers that never take the time to learn any skills
like how smart phone seem to have made people dumber IMO< as so many think when they need to know something all they have to do is look it up, as to actually learning and mastering any skills! having been in the gun business for many yrs, I see far more BAD drivers than I do bad gun owners!

I take more of a state's rights perspective. I think each state should decide how to handle the control of firearms. They can be quite different. I can see how one state may look at the control requirements of another and come to the conclusion they don't fit here (more or less stringent). While I like the convenience of reciprocal agreements, I like the principle of each state making their own choices.

Jack, those thugs are already carrying with the laws how they are. They aren’t going to all of a sudden carry 2 guns. It will just allow the law abiding citizens to carry legally without having to pay fees, and “register”.

You may have missed the point. It is a crime to carry concealed without a concealed carry permit. My point was that cops can use that to arrest and convict young gang members that have committed no other crime. They can be stopped on other probably cause grounds, searched for safety of the officer, and when found with a concealed gun arrested on that basis alone. We are an open carry state, so if they had not concealed the firearm, they would walk. Of course they know if they walk around open carrying they are going to be a target for law enforcement.

For hardened gang members with criminal records, possession alone is breaking the law, but for newer gang members without a record the concealed carry laws serve a purpose.

Even with the low bar of a "shall issue" state, it requires going through a process, paying $50, and providing personal information to law enforcement. These kids will never do that.

They don't keep guns out of their hands, but they do give law enforcement one more tool to deal with them. There are also folks with mental health issues that need to be weeded out. In our state, private sales don't require a background checks. Some folks in this condition will apply for a CCP, and this is a way to weed out some of them.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[thedoublejranch]

I was aware of mine, expires in April, was able to do it all online, so made it super handy. Goof for 5 more years. I have had it since early 80's

 

[Turkish]

I'm not sure I want things to go quite that far here. Police use charges against new gang members without a record. Many carry in a waste band and cover with a shirt. I do like the "Shall Issue" that we have where the state needs to show cause to deny rather than the individual having to show need. The bar here is low which I like, but I'm not sure I want to see no bar at all.
I guess I’m more of a fan of “SHALL not be infringed.” :)

 

[MRBB]

I take more of a state's rights perspective. I think each state should decide how to handle the control of firearms. They can be quite different. I can see how one state may look at the control requirements of another and come to the conclusion they don't fit here (more or less stringent). While I like the convenience of reciprocal agreements, I like the principle of each state making their own choices.

well I feel I live in the united states of america, and not just one state should be able to ell me what I can or cannot do!
federal law should be for the whole country, as again, just like my drivers lic is! if my drivers lic is valid in any state so should my carry permit, I'm still the same legal law biding citizen of the USA

 

[yoderjac]

well I feel I live in the united states of america, and not just one state should be able to ell me what I can or cannot do!
federal law should be for the whole country, as again, just like my drivers lic is! if my drivers lic is valid in any state so should my carry permit, I'm still the same legal law biding citizen of the USA

I believe we are a federal republic. When we became a nation and ratified the constitution, it was the basis of an agreement between the states to form a union and only powers listed in that agreement or its amendments are ceded to the federal government. There have long been arguments as to what those ceded powers are. Those are adjudicated by the supreme court and I doubt any of us completely agree with all their decisions.

A driver's license is only good across the nation because all of the states agreed to respect the driver's license qualification process of all of the other states. It is not a federal law. An individual state could choose not to recognize licenses from other states. None ever will because it would be a huge economic impact to them.

To my personal way of thinking, congress has far overstepped their bounds by relying on the interstate commerce clause where It doesn't really apply, but the supreme court sees it differently than I do.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

If you are not legal to carry, because you have a felony, or you beat your wife, and you get busted carrying a gun, you still get ticketed, regarless if your state has open carry, or where you don’t need a permit to conceal. No need to have the law abiding citizens have to pay a fee, and go through hoops, that felons don’t go through to carry.

If you are legally able to carry, why would you have to be penalized by paying fees, and having to register in order to carry a gun?

 

[yoderjac]

I'm not sure I want things to go quite that far here. Police use charges against new gang members without a record. Many carry in a waste band and cover with a shirt. I do like the "Shall Issue" that we have where the state needs to show cause to deny rather than the individual having to show need. The bar here is low which I like, but I'm not sure I want to see no bar at all.
I guess I’m more of a fan of “SHALL not be infringed.” :)

The question has always been, "how far does that go and does it apply to individuals or the states". Punctuation seems to be ambiguous in that clause. All rights have to be balanced against each other as they often conflict. The court has ruled that it applies to individuals as far as home defense goes. On the other side it has also ruled that some level of regulation is permitted.

 

[yoderjac]

If you are not legal to carry, because you have a felony, or you beat your wife, and you get busted carrying a gun, you still get ticketed, regarless if your state has open carry, or where you don’t need a permit to conceal. No need to have the law abiding citizens have to pay a fee, and go through hoops, that felons don’t go through to carry.

If you are legally able to carry, why would you have to be penalized by paying fees, and having to register in order to carry a gun?

I completely agree with the first part. the CC laws come in to play for police for new gang members that don't have a felony on their record.

We have no registration requirements here. As for a CC fee, that is covered with what the court has said are "reasonable regulations".

 

[Turkish]

Meh, I think you’re taking the bait with the “new gang member” thing. I suspect that’s a ploy from LEO opposed to citizen carry, in general. I can’t prove it, but I also doubt there’s much data out there about how many “new gang members” are nabbed this way. It sure sounds like something that might get a lot of traction among the blue hairs on Facebook!

 

[yoderjac]

Meh, I think you’re taking the bait with the “new gang member” thing. I suspect that’s a ploy from LEO opposed to citizen carry, in general. I can’t prove it, but I also doubt there’s much data out there about how many “new gang members” are nabbed this way. It sure sounds like something that might get a lot of traction among the blue hairs on Facebook!

Just passing on a law enforcement perspective. I'm not out there personally, but I've got friends in law enforcement. I buy their argument. The bar here is so low, it is not a problem from my perspective. I certainly would not want to see the bar lifted. We have a neighboring state where I would never be able to get a CC.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

I completely agree with the first part. the CC laws come in to play for police for new gang members that don't have a felony on their record.

We have no registration requirements here. As for a CC fee, that is covered with what the court has said are "reasonable regulations".

No registration? Does your state, or county keep track of who has a permit? Why yes they do. So you pay a fee, and they keep your name in their data base. Sounds like you just registered.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

So the “new gang member” that doesn’t have a felony, or they haven’t done anything wrong to be denied a cc, why should they be denied their right to bear arms?

Hell we could all be a potential felon, or wife beater, maybe no one should have a gun.

 

[yoderjac]

No registration? Does your state, or county keep track of who has a permit? Why yes they do. So you pay a fee, and they keep your name in their data base. Sounds like you just registered.

Sure. There is no requirement to register a weapon. There is no weapon associated with our CCs. It is the difference between states where the weapon is registered.

 

[yoderjac]

So the “new gang member” that doesn’t have a felony, or they haven’t done anything wrong to be denied a cc, why should they be denied their right to bear arms?

Hell we could all be a potential felon, or wife beater, maybe no one should have a gun.

I think you are missing the point. I'm simply relating what I'm told happens in practice by some law enforcement guys. I'm not saying the new gang members have done nothing wrong. I'm saying they have not been caught doing anything that would disqualify them from possessing a firearm. In practice they carry them concealed. They don't, in practice, apply for permits. When caught with a concealed firearm, the CC laws are simply one tool that law enforcement uses when others are not available.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

I never said registering the weapon, you are the one that is registered.

Sounds like the left, and CNN propaganda to me.

Let’s make a law that says a person that hasn’t done anything wrong, and is legally capable to carry a gun, except that they didn’t Regiter themselves and pay their fee to take advantage of their legal rights.

So the only thing that makes them illegal, is the law that says it is illegal for them to carry, unless you pay your fee and register. But that is suppose to somehow prevent gangs?

You do know that all of these democratic ran cities just play catch and release with the gangs anyhow. If the DA won’t charge or prosecute them, it doesn’t matter what laws they break.

 

[Turkish]

Lower tier gang members qualify as librarians here. It’s us hateful conservatives that are a danger. ;)

 

[Buckly]

County rules and the judge you get. We have 4 judges. 3 almost always deny 1 will give them out. You have to be able to prove you need it for work. I got a denial letter that said if my employer would write a letter saying it was dependent on my employment I could re-apply. There is zero consistency in how they give them out but the vast majority are declined.

Fortunately we just have the one judge here that handles the permits. All around outdoorsman and unless you’ve got an automatic rejection like being a convicted felon you’re getting a CC permit. Lol.

 

[yoderjac]

I never said registering the weapon, you are the one that is registered.

Sounds like the left, and CNN propaganda to me.

Let’s make a law that says a person that hasn’t done anything wrong, and is legally capable to carry a gun, except that they didn’t Regiter themselves and pay their fee to take advantage of their legal rights.

So the only thing that makes them illegal, is the law that says it is illegal for them to carry, unless you pay your fee and register. But that is suppose to somehow prevent gangs?

You do know that all of these democratic ran cities just play catch and release with the gangs anyhow. If the DA won’t charge or prosecute them, it doesn’t matter what laws they break.

Ok, I got it. Every opinion that is not yours sounds like teh leff CNN propaganda to you. I understand how those leftists like William F. Buckley are out to get us all..