National CCW? - Page 2
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 66

Thread: National CCW?

  1. #11
    I wouldn't want to have a federal anything, but I would like to see all the states with a more standard set of requirements for it and for all states to be reciprocal.
    Do Not Meddle In The Affairs Of Dragons ~ For You Are Crunchy And Good With Ketchup

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by Peggy Reist View Post
    but I would like to see all the states with a more standard set of requirements for it
    NOOOOO!!!! Do you really want to see all states gravitate towards the standards of New York and California or even Texas? The standard in Washington is you pay a fee that equates to about $12/year, fingerprints, and within 30 days for a resident the government must grant your permission. That's it. That's too much, in my opinion, but I have no desire for my state requirements to become more standardized towards even Texas, let alone California.

    Delaware requires this: "Arrange with a newspaper of general circulation in your County to have your application published once, at least (10) days before the filing of your application with the Court" and "Have the reference questionnaires completed by five (5) citizens from the County in which you reside. Complete the attached questionnaire and have it notarized. (The Prothonotary Office will notarize a document for a $1.00 fee)"

    Do you REALLY want states to be more standard in their requirements given that we know the standard would be the direct opposite of Alaska, Wyoming, Arizona or Vermont?

    The 2nd Amendment SHOULD be the license that all states are required to honor. However, knowing that will never happen, maybe the next alternative would be a Federal carry license that all states must recognize as an optional addition to their own license. For example, a person in Vermont would not be required to have any license to carry in Vermont, just as it is now, but there would be a Federal license available to a Vermont resident, if they chose to obtain it, that all states like New York and California would be required to recognize.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  4. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    NOOOOO!!!! Do you really want to see all states gravitate towards the standards of New York and California or even Texas? The standard in Washington is you pay a fee that equates to about $12/year, fingerprints, and within 30 days for a resident the government must grant your permission. That's it. That's too much, in my opinion, but I have no desire for my state requirements to become more standardized towards even Texas, let alone California.

    Delaware requires this: "Arrange with a newspaper of general circulation in your County to have your application published once, at least (10) days before the filing of your application with the Court" and "Have the reference questionnaires completed by five (5) citizens from the County in which you reside. Complete the attached questionnaire and have it notarized. (The Prothonotary Office will notarize a document for a $1.00 fee)"

    Do you REALLY want states to be more standard in their requirements given that we know the standard would be the direct opposite of Alaska, Wyoming, Arizona or Vermont?

    The 2nd Amendment SHOULD be the license that all states are required to honor. However, knowing that will never happen, maybe the next alternative would be a Federal carry license that all states must recognize as an optional addition to their own license. For example, a person in Vermont would not be required to have any license to carry in Vermont, just as it is now, but there would be a Federal license available to a Vermont resident, if they chose to obtain it, that all states like New York and California would be required to recognize.
    Oh no! I didn't mean that at all. I meant more like Kansas. A shall-issue state, 8 hour class, permit good for 4 years, just pay to renew it. No permit required to buy a gun (or ammo). Only the simplest of background checks. Very few restrictions and fewer all the time. Something like that. Is that better?
    Do Not Meddle In The Affairs Of Dragons ~ For You Are Crunchy And Good With Ketchup

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Peggy Reist View Post
    Oh no! I didn't mean that at all. I meant more like Kansas. A shall-issue state, 8 hour class, permit good for 4 years, just pay to renew it. No permit required to buy a gun (or ammo). Only the simplest of background checks. Very few restrictions and fewer all the time. Something like that. Is that better?
    Not better than Washington. Nobody has to pay for a class in Washington. :-)
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  6. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    We already have a carry anywhere, anytime license, it's called the 2nd Amendment.

  7. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    I see this issue is going to be another "beat the dead horse" topic.

    The last thing we want as gun owners is to have the Federal government in charge of anything firearm related. The reason being is that if they have full overarching control on who gets a permit, what requirements are there for a permit, then the lowest common denominator of rules and sanctions will be used. In other words, the entire country will have rules and sanctions like a NY, a CA, or a HI.

    What scares me is that Constitutionally minded people ask for this. The second amendment makes it perfectly clear that the government's role is to be not just limited when it comes to firearms but non-existent. Shall not be infringed isn't just a bumper sticker slogan. When I hear people say their should be a national permit system, I feel all my hard work and politicking is for naught. You see, I realize that even the idea of a permit is a request for permission to be able to exercise a right and yet there are some who wish to have the permission granting process be overseen by the Feds. WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHH! Did you hear that sound? That was your 2nd Amendment right blowing out the window.

    I could go on a bigger rant and show all the reasons why this is a HORRIBLE idea, but hopefully with my small peaceful rant, you get the idea.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  8. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt1861 View Post
    Does anyone have a good status update on the possibility of a national concealed carry permit, valid in all states and territories?
    I guess you don't have a good handle on the political climate in the US

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,352
    This current administration would love to be in charge of who is, and who ISN'T!!!, "allowed" to have an "Obama carry permit".

    Asking the Feds for a universal carry permit isn't gaining the selfish convenience of being allowed to carry a gun anywhere in the U.S. but is asking the Feds to please be in charge of who is NOT ALLOWED to exercise the right to bear arms throughout the entire U.S..

    An "Obama carry permit" would very quickly become "Obama's gun ban".

  10. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Arnoldsville, Ga
    Posts
    463
    Look at all the things the government screws up, and you want the government to have its fingers in national carry laws?

  11. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by bernardbarker View Post
    It's amazing to me as an immigrant from the UK to see how little uniformity there is in the USA. I think that's what makes it so interesting and such a great place to live. In the UK they have retained some vestiges of National Identity and resisted full integration into the EU. I'd rather see the UK become the 51st State of America personally.
    The united States of America was formed to be 13 (now up to 50) SEPARATE state governments. The only real bond was for the Federal Government to be the protector of the different states, to adjudicate disputes between the states and to see to it that the rights in the Bill of Rights were never compromised. They have not done to well in the last issue -- especially the 2nd of these rights.
    "I want a government small enough to fit inside the Constitution." Harry Browne - 1933 - 2006.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast