71 replies to this topic

[RV]

I am alerting all to a law that does affect RVrs directly whether they own a gun or not. The Washington Post published a piece this morning lambasting an attempt to make each state honor the Concealed carry licenses from other states. I think the article is flawed and personally am writing to my reps to support the legislation.

This topic has the potential to get political and ignite the tired gun versus non-gun debates. I am posting this as an alert so those that think the license from one state should be honored in another, just like a driver license, can contact their reps and support it. And those that disagree can contact their reps and tell them to vote against it. In my opinion RVrs who currently have guns but no license to carry are already protected and limited by title 18 while traveling if the letter of the law is followed. But if reciprocity was the same as for driver licenses, it becomes motivation for those in our community that choose to own arms, whether they intend to carry or not (I own but very rarely carry,) to go and get a license. The sum total result is more training, and a good safety refresher for each, as well as limiting the ability for LEOs to seize guns or arrest solely on the basis of a law abiding citizen's possession of a gun when no crime has been committed with or or while carrying it.

http://www.washingto...src=nl_cuzheads

Again that is an opinion piece that I disagree with. I don't need to attack the author. I am glad it got to my attention and I can take my vote from there.

Let's focus on the RV aspect, as we try in the other topics. It is an RV issue when someone who is about to go full or half time in an RV and owns guns for whatever reason, sport, heirloom keepsakes, for self-defense if needed, for security work, whatever, asks if they can travel with them legally in the US. We do answer whether they can legally in the US (They can have them in the RV locked up and unloaded while underway in all states - Title 18) and point them to state laws which are a tangle. Just like it would be for driver licenses for HDTs if driver licenses did not have reciprocity. Once they are earned in one state, honored in all - reciprocity. Just because a person decides to become a fulltimer does not mean the loss of any rights that we have in a S&B, including the right to vote. Remember each state licenses with an eye to not allowing felons and the mentally unstable to own a gun at all let alone license them to carry in their own communities. Just like driver licenses screen for eyesight and have a practical test before you can earn one. I like the fact that it would not force any gun owners to get a carry license, some would still choose not to, but for those who already do have them it is a big incentive, when we are RVrs traveling many states, to go get the training and license. It is a win win. More people trained by professionals that are now certified law abiding and stable people with no felony background. No one forced to do anything.

Edited by RV, 21 September 2011 - 03:31 PM.

[KayC]

That is a very interesting article and rebuttle. (Well written by yourself!) I have my doubts that something like this will pass, (just my negative nature kicking in) but I would be on cloud 9 if it did. THANK YOU for the heads up. I hadn't read anything about this, but I have been remiss on my latest NRA magazines... :- (

Will you keep us posted on any further details, please?

Kay.

[bowlturner]

I have a CC permit from New York and Pa. New York is the most restrictive state for a CC permit !!! If I am allowed to carry in New York , I should be allowed anywhere !!! My 2c....

[Paul Stough]

So shall we just eliminate the 10th Amendment to make it easier for RVers to go from state to state?

Paul

[Mark & Dale Bruss]

Kind of a grey area between the 10th Amendment and the Full Faith Clause where states are supposed to respect the laws of other states.

RV example, every state has to accept the registration of a RV from another state, but each state can have its own rules on thing like overall length.

The complex world of today makes Black and White decisions hard.

[RV]

Paul,
You are ever the most interesting and reliable devils advocate I have read here and I mean that as a compliment. Let us remember that the second amendment precedes it, but let's look at the 10th. Putting aside all but this issue the 10th importantly states that the powers it deals with as responsibilities and powers are powers that " . . . are reserved, respectively, to the states or the people." I would assert my powers as one of those people mentioned before I would make it a state's right issue.

However my opinion and your's aside, I alerted you so you can vote for or against it if your state has a referendum or state legislation brewing for or against. Or contact your representatives. And then it will be defeated or not. If not then it would be time to bring that up to your representatives and the Supreme Court. As I used to say in the military, that is above my pay grade, and incidentally is also above yours.

But I'll bite. For the sake of argument, some of which are sound, and only sound, as we both know, don't you think it is a bit late for that? If the 10th were applicable then how do you explain title 18?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_18_00000926---A000-.html

Let's not try to change the subject by talking about the difference between locked and in a case, and carried. Title 18 first applies to all especially RVrs. Reciprocity however is for those already trained, examined and not found wanting, to carry by one state and granted a license. That is why I used the HDT turned into a motorhome example above. Some states will register one and another will not but all will honor the license/registration from another despite not allowing it licensed locally. Which leads us to the next premise. Does the state in question allow their own citizens, after some training and checking, to carry concealed? Then it would follow that they have no problem with people carrying. And I doubt it could be challenged under 10. You see it is only about reciprocity not about carrying. And who grants the license to carry? States just like driver licenses. It does not challenge the right of states to examine their own and grant the initial license or not.

Only Illinois could make the argument that they don't allow their own citizens to carry, therefore cannot be included. Even if they have an issue, I doubt they would hold long with the entire rest of the country voting for it. See the article above, which is against the reciprocity proposal in congress. It states that "The act would force states that allow concealed-carry to permit out-of-town visitors to tote hidden handguns if they have obtained a license elsewhere " Then goes on to say regardless of their standards. That is pretty funny. They don't want out of town visitors allowed to walk their town and be allowed to (cue scary music) "tote hidden handguns." Who proofread that article? If their state allows concealed carry licenses then perhaps they also grant them to people from other towns in that state? That would make those people also from out of town. That is actually silly. We grant them in our state but don't want out of towners passing through and carrying from other towns in our state?

Anyway it does not have states forced to do anything they haven't already done all by themselves with no federal duress, granting CCLs. In other words only states that allow their own people to carry can be included. And Illinois cannot deny me my title 18 rights if I absolutely have to cross into their state and pass through with my guns in my vehicle. But since they don't allow their own citizens to carry I won't be able to carry there either even if the if the proposal passes because it does not force any state to have to honor it that does not issue CCLs to their own citizens. That simplifies traveling with a firearm or a CCL. Much easier! All you have to do is avoid Illinois and the rest are ok. Simple. If you don't want a CCL no problem, don't get one. No one is being forced to anything. Don't want a gun don't have one. This is not about that.

Edited to put the sentences that jumped out of order from a keystroke back in order and clarify them.

Edited by RV, 21 September 2011 - 10:13 PM.

[Bob Cochran]

I like the idea but me personally; I always worry about the Federal Government control over States or Individuals. It is just something that scare's me when the Federal Government forces any issue not just this one.

[RV]

Kay thank you!

Bob it only applies to states who already issue licenses to their own folks. I personally don't think one state has better people than another. And one state has no right to tell another how to issue if they feel safe in their communities with their may or shall issue laws are applied. I would have to lock em up and make sure they are unloaded in Illinois only, after the 49th state also issues licenses. I could not complain about that at all. Title 18 even covers me in Morton Grove Illinois where they don't allow their own citizens to even possess a handgun in their own home last time I checked. So if I need to go through Illinois I don't have to detour around the whole state.

Besides I don't carry by and large because in my state it is legal to have a loaded gun, hidden or in plain sight, anywhere in the passenger compartment of my vehicle.

[HamRad]

RV,
Thanks. Dennis

Edited by HamRad, 21 September 2011 - 11:57 PM.

[RV]

Dennis,
C'mon, that is a political comment my friend. Party discussions true or false,slams or kudos belong elsewhere. That is between you and your conscience, party leaders and your reps. (or you can go to a political website and start political discussions, just not here) Try and control yourself bud!

This legislation will be a protection to RVrs that own guns and trtavel as well as other travelers, some that already carry. Texas for an example has a list of the states they have reciprocity with for concealed carry here: http://www.txdps.sta...reciprocity.htm


Dennis I have no idea what you're talking about. I do know that Texas demands that residents get a Texas license and registration after 30 days in state. Many other states have similar laws. But I first became a Texan in 1975 for my first tour at dear old Lackland. No issues then. Besides we were exempt from everything if we chose to be, could keep paying tax to our home state or switch each time we moved and claim a new home state. Texas stayed mine until I was here for good.

[HamRad]

RV,
Thanks. Dennis

Edited by HamRad, 21 September 2011 - 11:58 PM.

[RV]

Dennis, that isn't reciprocity of a license, that is some collection of debts and taxes agreement or a very creative officer told a very convincing tale. I am sure that at some time in the past the states all agreed or the government enforced it or federal highway funds would be withdrawn or some such back in the 18 or 1900s. You can look it up, but driver licenses are reciprocal in the US between states and did you notice they are even reciprocal with all Canadian provices as well as in Mexico as well? Having different insurance requirements or ways to pay tickets or not may be different too but not reciprocity. It even extends Internationally if we get a cerificate of insurance for the countries we want to visit overseas and do the paperwork for an International Driver Permit Picture/pay/sign/get no test. http://www.aaa.com/vacation/idpf.html

Driver license reciprocity is pretty universal. Reciprocity within countries, between their states and provinces is also pretty universal.

I think you may be mistaken Dennis. That is not about agreements on driver license reciprocity whatever it is you are talking about. I am trying to understand but don't think it has anything to do with the topic at hand. Interesting perhaps but not about CC or driver license reciprocity.

I have seen that said about having national fishing licenses but haven't seen anybody start a grassroots effort to try to do it. If you see an initiaive for that or start one with your representatives let me know. Right now I am passing along the information about one for CC reciprocity.

Edited by RV, 22 September 2011 - 07:25 AM.

[harry bellerby]

This is a states rights issue. Marrage and drivers licenses are the only ones that I can think of that are portable. Even barbars and hairdressers must relicense state to state.
c u on the road

[harry bellerby]

This is a states rights issue. Marrage and drivers licenses are the only ones that I can think of that are portable. Even barbars and hairdressers must relicense state to state.
c u on the road

[Bob Cochran]

Kay thank you!

Bob it only applies to states who already issue licenses to their own folks. I personally don't think one state has better people than another. And one state has no right to tell another how to issue if they feel safe in their communities with their may or shall issue laws are applied. I would have to lock em up and make sure they are unloaded in Illinois only, after the 49th state also issues licenses. I could not complain about that at all. Title 18 even covers me in Morton Grove Illinois where they don't allow their own citizens to even possess a handgun in their own home last time I checked. So if I need to go through Illinois I don't have to detour around the whole state.

Besides I don't carry by and large because in my state it is legal to have a loaded gun, hidden or in plain sight, anywhere in the passenger compartment of my vehicle.

Well I live in Arizona and at this time anyone can carry concealed even with no license. I think a little extreme as I have no problem with testing and training to be safe and knowledgeable in fact I think everyone should. I also doubt many other states will adopt this as it is in Arizona but some may.

Thanks for posting by the way it is good to know what is happening out there as I can't seem to keep up with it all.

[RV]

Bob thank you! What a gem of a find your information was! Like Kay I was not really keeping up with CCL laws around the country much anymore until this proposal was published in the paper I get online.

Bob I already had done my homework for years because I had to teach it to Civlians, Civilian and military LEOs and forces around the country and overseas. (You ought to try unraveling status of forces agreements and international transport of personal arms and then find the legally registered guns you brought with you had to be papered and reimport your own guns and pay fees in a months long BATF process well before you were to return, and do that for a collection like I had at the time, then go through inspection in German airports and airlines!)

Anyway since I hadn't heard of the Arizona initiiatves as I have not looked at national arms issues for several years until now. I was really messed up when I saw the Governor Brewer repeal and then to confirm went to the Arizona DPS website and saw all the requiorements for the CCL ther and the fees schedule. Talk about bumfuzzled! After searching for a few minutes I found the following artick which I'll link to.

Bob earlier I made the point that I thought a national reciprocity would prompt some folks who trave and own arms to get a CCL and get the training. And I sad that the article complains tha [people from the next town over will be toting guns and then thought OMG! If Arizona allows their folks tyo carry with no CCL or training it makes the point of not being aas stringent as other states and since no CCLs issued there they would not be eligible for the national reciprocity.

It turns out that you are right and the DPS does still conduct classes and collect fees for their CCl classes . Why? So their citizens who travel can take advantage of reciprocity agreements. Just as I surnmised the effect would be earlier. Here is ther article. Thanks for the heads up!

http://www.arizonaccw.net/

Amazing

[RV]

Dennis I am sorry if I offended you by the above. I was just trying to get a grip on what you were saying but could find no sources that related anything about that.

Especially since it wasn't political!

I do know from working around the country that California was trying to collect taxes form folks who they thought owed them but moved elsewhere and angered some states with their aggressive collection efforts on other state's citizens. I still don't know what the issue was you and the Texas cop had or were discussing. I do value your input bud, always have.

Edited by RV, 22 September 2011 - 05:39 PM.

[Kirk]

This is a states rights issue. Marrage and drivers licenses are the only ones that I can think of that are portable. Even barbars and hairdressers must relicense state to state.

I view this with mixed emotions. I've been following it for a while now as I got a note about it previously. As stated, it can be a political issue, but then most things can if laws are involved. As much as I dislike the constantly growing federal control of our lives, some things do seem to be better when made uniform across state lines. That is a lot of what Homeland Security has been attempting to do with the driver's license. They have also been involved in the debate over CC issues as well.

To avoid the heated debate that this could bring, I'll not state if I support the bill or not, but it is good that people be informed and make their voices heard on this issue. A well informed citizen makes for a better citizen. If you happen to be following any sites that do carry the debate over this proposed bill, why not share them with other interested readers? It is not a simple issue.

[Bob Cochran]

Bob thank you! What a gem of a find your information was! Like Kay I was not really keeping up with CCL laws around the country much anymore until this proposal was published in the paper I get online.

Bob I already had done my homework for years because I had to teach it to Civlians, Civilian and military LEOs and forces around the country and overseas. (You ought to try unraveling status of forces agreements and international transport of personal arms and then find the legally registered guns you brought with you had to be papered and reimport your own guns and pay fees in a months long BATF process well before you were to return, and do that for a collection like I had at the time, then go through inspection in German airports and airlines!)

Anyway since I hadn't heard of the Arizona initiiatves as I have not looked at national arms issues for several years until now. I was really messed up when I saw the Governor Brewer repeal and then to confirm went to the Arizona DPS website and saw all the requiorements for the CCL ther and the fees schedule. Talk about bumfuzzled! After searching for a few minutes I found the following artick which I'll link to.

Bob earlier I made the point that I thought a national reciprocity would prompt some folks who trave and own arms to get a CCL and get the training. And I sad that the article complains tha [people from the next town over will be toting guns and then thought OMG! If Arizona allows their folks tyo carry with no CCL or training it makes the point of not being aas stringent as other states and since no CCLs issued there they would not be eligible for the national reciprocity.

It turns out that you are right and the DPS does still conduct classes and collect fees for their CCl classes . Why? So their citizens who travel can take advantage of reciprocity agreements. Just as I surnmised the effect would be earlier. Here is ther article. Thanks for the heads up!



http://www.arizonaccw.net/

Amazing

Yes DPS still conducts classes as do some community colleges, etc. I agree with the link as to reasons we in Arizona should take classes and wish more would. When this was first passed you would see a lot of people in Wally Word etc. carrying though not concealed. Never understood how this related to the need to all of a sudden carry unconcealed but it seemed to. You always could carry unconcealed in Arizona!!! You don't see it much anymore but some. At first it startles even me but in reality it does not bother me that much just something new. As far as I know crime rate involving guns is not up but then again I don't think it is down either but not sure. I suppose after a period of time those stat's will be available and a great thing to see.

There are those vocally for and against this and very radical in there view(including LEO's for and against) and I think we all are best advised that both views are appropriate and an extremely personnel decision to which I respect. I have a freind who is an Arizona Ranger and has all the training that a LEO does and he when requested will remove his firearm and lock in his vehicle. Again this has always been the case here though and I have a feeling a LEO out of uniform will get asked the same thing and would need to comply at least in this State especially if posted. I need to ask some of my LEO friends how that is handled actually because I am not sure. I think a LEO in Arizona in most Departments is required to carry even when off duty so this is a quandary. I know my Arizona Ranger friend will just not go anyplace that does not let him carry is how he handles it.

Again thanks for the post.

[Chipmonk Chaser]

I have a permit for Colorado and carry at all times and would love to see total reciprocity, but I'm not sure I would want to set any level of presidence (sp) in regards to the feds having any say so in the issue, revocation, or denial of concealed carry permits. In other words I have concern about that old " Foot in the door" thing.