PDA

View Full Version : Problem with constitutional carry?


DoubleTap45
28th July 2010, 21:01
I love the idea and I'd as soon move to AZ just for the Constitutional Carry laws. I have one nagging doubt though. If you have to get a license (even in a shall-issue state) you have a background check. If NO permit is needed HOW do they screen out the creeps? I doubt the police have a hand "creep detector".

-Ray

Dial 1911 for Help
28th July 2010, 21:25
How do they screen out the creeps in VT or AK? Also, depending on the context of the scenario, you're talking about, why is concealed carry any more dangerous than open carry, which is already legal without a permit and causes no problems?

DoubleTap45
29th July 2010, 07:17
I'm worried that they will pounce on the idea that with no required paperwork of any kind there'll be a "flood" of illegal buyers and "stray purchasers". Now I know there are heavy penalties for straw buying, but if no paperwork is required won't somebody try to hold the dealer responsible if and when a convict buys a handgun?

-Ray

Rich-D
29th July 2010, 12:17
Ray, The Senate Bill does not change the laws, rules and regulations regarding the purchase of firearms or possession by felons. The law removes the need to obtain a carry permit for concealed carry with some exclusions. Such as, where alcohol sold for on premises consumption or when traveling in reciprocal states.

DoubleTap45
29th July 2010, 13:28
Rich,

You're singing my tune, but you're also relying on rationality and logic which are two things the antis are allergic to. Look at the recent attempt by Lousenberg from Jersey to take guns away from anyone who's filed bankruptcy because they might commit suicide. They'll leave the knives, and his car. Can we say carbon monoxide?

-Ray

Aguila Blanca
31st July 2010, 01:25
I'm worried that they will pounce on the idea that with no required paperwork of any kind there'll be a "flood" of illegal buyers and "stray purchasers". Now I know there are heavy penalties for straw buying, but if no paperwork is required won't somebody try to hold the dealer responsible if and when a convict buys a handgun?
You are intermingling two unrelated issues. So-called "constitutional carry" applies to carrying a firearm. It has nothing to do with buying or selling firearms. The laws on buying and selling did not change (at least, not in Arizona when they adopted "constitutional carry").

DoubleTap45
31st July 2010, 23:27
All it clear now. It's just the way they condition you in NYC to expect a setup. Like that guy who called Cam last night. He got a VERY strange e-mail which was clearly worded as an entrapment to sell a gun in NY State illegally.

-Ray

Aguila Blanca
1st August 2010, 00:28
If you have to get a license (even in a shall-issue state) you have a background check. If NO permit is needed HOW do they screen out the creeps? I doubt the police have a hand "creep detector".
So you are from New York? How well does New York's "creep detector" system work? Are you trying to tell us that in New York state no "creeps" have guns, only dutifully licensed good guys? C'mon ...

DoubleTap45
1st August 2010, 12:22
Half the creeps are on the City Council.

-Ray

Frank
12th August 2010, 15:35
Note also that under Arizona's "constitutional carry" law there are still some good reasons to get a permit.

For example, with a permit one may legally now carry concealed in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol (as long as not posted in the particular manner required by law), although one still can't drink. I found this very handy during my recent trip to Arizona. I didn't have to leave rosoce in the car when I went to dinner; I just had to stay off the sauce (I have an Arizona permit).

kenhwind
13th August 2010, 15:59
Note also that under Arizona's "constitutional carry" law there are still some good reasons to get a permit.
Another good reason is reciprocity. I believe that a residential permit is required for reciprocity in most states.
My CCW permit is good in 30 something states, and on a recent trip to Louisiana it was good to know that I was legal from here to there and back. So my Detective Special stayed handy except when we went to dinner at a sports bar.

DoubleTap45
13th August 2010, 19:49
You can STILL carry if you don't imbibe. Kinda cool and sensible, no? I heard many years ago that in OK it was not unusual for the cowboys to walk into church and hang their hats, coats and hoglegs on pegs in the vestibule, attend service and strap on as they left and nobody thought it was weird. :appld:

-Ray

Aguila Blanca
14th August 2010, 01:39
Another good reason is reciprocity. I believe that a residential permit is required for reciprocity in most states.
This is another dangerous generality.

Each state is different. Some states offer no reciprocity and no recognition of any other state's permits. Some states recognize ANY state's permit. Some states recognize home-state resident permits but not non-resident permits, even when they accept the same states for residents thereof.

And some states will accept non-resident permits from some states and won't accept non-resident permits from others.

It is very much a patchwork system, and there simply is NO general rule on which you can rely. You MUST do your research for each and every state you expect to be traveling in or through.

Johannes
17th August 2010, 22:47
I don't have any problem with concealed carry. Creeps or felons (referring to Double Tap-45's initial comment) carry whether it's legal or not regardless of background. As far as I'm concerned the more good guys who carry the better. With regard to training, I think we can trust that responsible people will be the ones who will carry and they'll already have had the training.
Here in Arizona we've had open carry all along; as long as any part of the handgun or holster it's contained in is visible, you are legal. It is no big leap from going to open carry to concealed carry as far as I'm concerned.

kenhwind
18th August 2010, 16:35
This is another dangerous generality.

Each state is different. Some states offer no reciprocity and no recognition of any other state's permits. Some states recognize ANY state's permit. Some states recognize home-state resident permits but not non-resident permits, even when they accept the same states for residents thereof.

And some states will accept non-resident permits from some states and won't accept non-resident permits from others.

It is very much a patchwork system, and there simply is NO general rule on which you can rely. You MUST do your research for each and every state you expect to be traveling in or through.
Yes, but if I lived in Vermont I cannot carry in Florida because Vermont does not issue a concealed carry permit. I would need a FL non-resident permit. The situation I was referring to is this:
(2) The State of VERMONT is unique in that it does not issue weapon/firearms licenses. Florida licensees - indeed, licensed or unlicensed citizens from any state - may carry in Vermont. This presents a problem for reciprocity with Florida. Florida law provides that an out-of-state resident must have in his or her immediate possession a valid license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm. Since Vermont residents have no such license, the right to concealed carry cannot be extended to them under Florida law.

No permit no reciprocity.

Aguila Blanca
18th August 2010, 21:03
Yes, but if I lived in Vermont I cannot carry in Florida because Vermont does not issue a concealed carry permit. I would need a FL non-resident permit. The situation I was referring to is this:
...

No permit no reciprocity.
While this is true, it is also true that Vermont is completely unique in this regard. But "no permit no reciprocity" is not entirely correct, because a few states will allow Vermonters to carry concealed on the basis that their hiome state allows this ... and, of course, Vermont allows everyone to carry concealed.

But the statement to which I was responding was this:

Another good reason is reciprocity. I believe that a residential permit is required for reciprocity in most states.
That statement is, quite simply, wrong. I have non-residential permits from three states. On the basis of those three non-residential permits, I am allowed to carry concealed in 31 or 32 states, approximately 28 of which do not recognize my home state permit

DoubleTap45
18th August 2010, 21:12
We elect some seriously pro-gun folk to Congress AND our various State Legislatures and then have them pass nationwide constitutional carry on the AZ model. I'd prefer VT but you can't always get what you want. :)

-Ray

Johannes
19th August 2010, 02:57
I believe that we could solve many problems if in public schools we taught youngsters about the awesome responsibilities, and liabilities that accompany firearms use. In some rural areas it would be prudent to teach kids how to use firearms properly, but in major metropolitan areas we need to do more than just teach kids to call an adult when they encounter a gun.
The key is to teach principles of personal responsibility in everyday life and in everyday personal conduct, both in the home and at school. One of the wonderful things about our founding documents (and the founders who wrote them) is that they start with individual freedom and trust in the fundamental good sense of the informed American citizen.
We can debate reciprocity, training and out of state concealed carry permits but we must first trust in the reason and in the prudence of the common man.

DoubleTap45
19th August 2010, 06:51
I'm only 53 but I remember 30 years ago when I carried a CVA muzzleloader home on a BUS. I remember high schools having SHOOTING TEAMS in the City. Now you can't even have ARCHERY they're so afraid of lawyers and the Animal "Rights" whackoes don't want to SEE anyone shooting a bow.

We used to have a PUBLIC archery range in the Bronx near a golf course. Not big but definitely convenient. The City would mow the grass THREE times from June to September and not till next year. HOW do you practice for Fall hunting if you can't retrieve arrows? :butthead:

Ray

kenhwind
20th August 2010, 11:37
That statement is, quite simply, wrong. I have non-residential permits from three states. On the basis of those three non-residential permits, I am allowed to carry concealed in 31 or 32 states, approximately 28 of which do not recognize my home state permit
Well OK maybe it should have been worded differently. I did notice that more states than I thought do in fact recognize the Florida non-resident permit.
I guess I'm fortunate because I'd have to travel a long ways from here before I'd need a permit from another state.
But the point is "you still need a permit" for reciprocity.

Another minor issue is that the FL permit is a concealed weapons permit: some states only allow concealed carry of a handgun. So yes you are right it gets to be:
Each state is different.
It is very much a patchwork system, and there simply is NO general rule on which you can rely. You MUST do your research for each and every state you expect to be traveling in or through.

Johannes
20th August 2010, 23:25
How about this:
Criminals carry concealed weapons illegally and when they use them they are held responsible under law. So, if everyday American citizens are permitted under law to carry concealed weapons then they should be responsible under law when they use them. Any questions?

DoubleTap45
20th August 2010, 23:44
You are making TOO MUCH sense!!!! American politicians don't WANT to deal with the criminals. The thugs have lawyers, they clog the "system" and they get sweetheart deals. Go to WWW.NRANEWS.COM and near the ended of each show they give out the "Deal of the Day". These sleazy deals will make your blood boil. :mad:

Rather than do the HARD WORK of securing the streets they do the "drunkard's search". Basically it's an old joke. A guy sees a drunk crawling around on the ground under a street light. He's looking for his house keys. The guy asks where he lost them and he points to a dark alley. Then, when he asks the drunk why he's looking so far away, he tells him "Because the light's a lot better here!".

That's why they harass lawful citizens. They KNOW we'll abide by any idiotic laws they pass and then when crime continues to climb they know they can crank up the pointless restrictions. They get to look like they're doing something. The public who are mostly NOT shooters then THINK the problem is being addressed and vote them back in. :butthead:

-Ray

Johannes
21st August 2010, 00:29
@ Double Tap45
Ray,
I was a LEO for 28 years, my first eight years (where I learned my trade in the middle seventies) was in the City of Baltimore and my last 20 were spent in southeast Az on the border. I can assure you that I have never in all my years as a cop, harassed anyone. I was one of those guys who got into the profession when the prevailing philosophy was that Americans have a right to do what ever they want to do as long as they don't violate the law. It may mean looking funny, it may mean talking crazy, it may mean acting funny, it may mean being a vagrant, it may mean sleeping on the park bench or the sidewalk grate downtown when its cold. I was never concerned about everyday people engaged in their pursuit of happiness. I never went out of my way to fxxx with an anyone, and I can look in the mirror to shave to this day and see who I am without any problem.
My philosophy is "live and let live" and as long as you don't fxxx with me I'll live and so will you.
I don't' care who carries a concealed weapon and I never will.

DoubleTap45
21st August 2010, 01:17
The problem is the gaggle of anti-gun pols and their police hierarchy minions who dance to their tune. Case in point is Nanny Bloomberg and his political marionette of a commissioner. Have you EVER seen anyone go from a cruiser to Commisioner? I have yet to her of it. I don't mean a token few months as a rookie. I mean a few YEARS in a rotten area. I hear most of the fast rising "cops" actually got there via the "rat squad" dropping dimes on their fellow cops.

-Ray

Johannes
21st August 2010, 18:52
I don't know much about NYC except that alot of guys came to our department in Baltimore from NYC because they thought of Baltimore as a small town and they liked working there. In our department (at the time I served) dropping dimes on brother officers didn't put anyone on the fast track.

DoubleTap45
21st August 2010, 22:22
The media always print the new Commish's photo in his rookie days and then you NEVER hear about his 10 years on the street. By they time they make Borough Chief Deputy Commish they're usually about 50. Even if the DID spend 10 years on the street, which almost nobody can point to, they spent the next 20 as a "house mouse" or in administration.

The guys we get other than Kerik (who was ultimately awful) most have little connection with routine police work. I have a cousin who recently retired from federal law enforcement. He can't recall the last time the latest "whiz kid" state level supervisor was OUT of the office much less chasing smugglers.

-Ray

Rich-D
22nd August 2010, 11:57
The problem is the gaggle of anti-gun pols and their police hierarchy minions who dance to their tune. Case in point is Nanny Bloomberg and his political marionette of a commissioner. Have you EVER seen anyone go from a cruiser to Commissioner? I have yet to her of it. I don't mean a token few months as a rookie. I mean a few YEARS in a rotten area. I hear most of the fast rising "cops" actually got there via the "rat squad" dropping dimes on their fellow cops.

-Ray

Ray, To be realistic one must move up through the ranks or have extensive law enforcement experience to become a Chief of Police or Commissioner. I started in law enforcement in 1969 and served as President of a Superior Officers Union. I never heard of anyone moving up through the ranks by being a rat. In most Departments one must pass Civil Service Tests in order to attain rank, which are usually administered by the State, or testing administered by the State Chiefs of Police Association.

Denigrating law enforcement by stating that fast rising cops attained their rank by being rats is offensive to those of us, myself and my fellow officers who attained rank. If Officers are informing you of the information you are posting, it is most likely sour grapes as they were not able to attain rank.

Furthermore, the thread is titled "Problem with constitutional carry?" which is in a "Concealed or Open Carrying Legal Issues" forum. Which has nothing to do with how rank is attained in law enforcement.

DoubleTap45
22nd August 2010, 21:17
the pattern of ranking cops becoming detached from the public and the public's wants. The result is that most street cops don't have a problem with legal CCW but a LOT of ranking cops and the mayors who pull their strings DO. I don't mean illegal guns, I mean working to dismantle all the work we've done since 1987 on CCW.

Ray

Johannes
22nd August 2010, 23:00
Like I said, and I was a supervisor for the last ten years of my career, I don't have any problem with reasonable and prudent people carrying concealed. The founders had faith in the fundamental good sense of the common man, and so do I.

DoubleTap45
22nd August 2010, 23:28
Something in our Noo Yawk water? ;)

-Ray

Rich-D
22nd August 2010, 23:39
If the majority of the public desired a law or a change in lawmakers, it could be accomplished by ballot. However, large cities are known for having a population majority that are against "Open and Concealed Carry of Firearms."

However, you are painting law enforcement in this nation from the prospective of a resident of New York. The Commissioner of Police in NY, like most large cities of this nation is a political appointee and of the same political persuasion as the Mayor.

I believe that it hurts the cause of gun rights when alienating statements are made, such as "I hear most of the fast rising "cops" actually got there via the "rat squad" dropping dimes on their fellow cops." There are many in Public Office & Law Enforcement who are staunch supporters of the 2ND Amendment.

DoubleTap45
23rd August 2010, 11:16
I've heard some cops refer to I.A. as a faster track to better positions. I guess that's wrong?

-Ray

Dial 1911 for Help
24th August 2010, 01:10
@ Double Tap45
Ray,
I was a LEO for 28 years, my first eight years (where I learned my trade in the middle seventies) was in the City of Baltimore and my last 20 were spent in southeast Az on the border. I can assure you that I have never in all my years as a cop, harassed anyone. I was one of those guys who got into the profession when the prevailing philosophy was that Americans have a right to do what ever they want to do as long as they don't violate the law. It may mean looking funny, it may mean talking crazy, it may mean acting funny, it may mean being a vagrant, it may mean sleeping on the park bench or the sidewalk grate downtown when its cold. I was never concerned about everyday people engaged in their pursuit of happiness. I never went out of my way to fxxx with an anyone, and I can look in the mirror to shave to this day and see who I am without any problem.
My philosophy is "live and let live" and as long as you don't fxxx with me I'll live and so will you.
I don't' care who carries a concealed weapon and I never will.
Thanks for your service, Johannes. I take my hat off to every LEO that enters the profession with that mentality.

DoubleTap45
24th August 2010, 07:05
I am SICK of hearing about illegals stopped "for looking Mexican"!!! The law SPECIFICALLY forbids any HINT of profiling.

-Ray

Aguila Blanca
24th August 2010, 20:01
I am SICK of hearing about illegals stopped "for looking Mexican"!!! The law SPECIFICALLY forbids any HINT of profiling.
How does this comment relate to the topic of this thread, and what does it have to do with GUN politics of any sort?

DoubleTap45
24th August 2010, 22:28
Goes to the comment about harassment above.

Ray

Fisherman
28th November 2010, 16:34
We'd like to see Constitutional Carry in Texas. That's why we're doing something about it. Check out our website. Lone Star Citizens Defense League (http://www.lonestarcdl.org/)

Why? Because it's a right that was taken away from us over a hundred years ago and we want it back.