Constitutional Carry: Good or Bad for Gun Owners in the Long Run

[SIGNES]

I think I can distill it to two possible outcomes:
1) With Constitutional Carry there will be more idiots with guns and, in the current social climate of hypocritical extremism on all sides, there will be more horrific events that are successfully used to rationalize abridging the rights of responsible gun owners.

2) Even without a sharp rise in violence, (both sides are painting a 'rising violence' narrative to support their positions when, in fact, we're STILL way down off our horrific highs in violent crime, yes, even in those areas so many pro 2A folks use dogwhistles and describe as $%^&holes because they're not REALLY mainly interested in 2A rights but rather some OTHER agendas I needn't name) the extreme anti-gun crowd will be so afraid it COULD happen, they'll successfully persist impose more restrictive policies because "just too many scary guns with too many people".

It seems likely both of these lead to a long term reduction in gun rights on a Federal level. Remember, women had a constitutional right to determine of themselves whether to bear a child for decades until.... not. Nobody should assume Bruen is forever.

Absolutism is met with absolutism.

"Compromise" doesn't mean 'you have been compromised', it means 'we came to an agreement neither party loves but can live with'.

Pro 2A absolutism, engineering 'gamesmanship' (strangely similar to F1 rule interpretation which for a sport is fun, but for 'real life' is a recipe for disaster) for example wherein the "no new full auto" intent of NFA related regs' spirit is being breached, tone elements that raise the temperature like truly reckless or downright fascistic 'GunTubers' being positioned as 2A champions, bozos open carrying at Starbucks... all these are frustratingly self defeating tactics that won't, in the long term, maintain and broaden 2A rights.

I sure would like to be able to have my rights maintained and am absolutely willing to take responsibility for exercising those rights not just responsibly but politely in order to keep and even broaden those rights.

 

[M1911]

I think I can distill it to two possible outcomes:
1) With Constitutional Carry there will be more idiots with guns and, in the current social climate of hypocritical extremism on all sides, there will be more horrific events that are successfully used to rationalize abridging the rights of responsible gun owners.

Shall issue won't solve that problem. The only way to keep morons from carrying is may issue and we know where that leads -- discrimination, corruption, and abuse.

 

[Dench]

I've been muzzle swept by a Vietnam vet who has had an LTC for decades.

like @AllaSnackbah says, if I had a dollar for every time I've been flagged I'd be a millionaire.

 

[thesyguy]

This.... If you haven't been muzzle swept by a guy with a fresh LTC then you haven't been around too much....

I made this mistake once when I was a newbie. I was immediately corrected by someone in the room. I was embarrassed that I was that stupid and ignorant. After that I became very aware of both muzzle and trigger discipline. A few of my contractors have told me they knew I was a gun owner by the fact that I was indexing on power tools.

 

[AllaSnackbah]

like @AllaSnackbah says, if I had a dollar for every time I've been flagged I'd be a millionaire.

Red flagged or muzzle flagged? Lolol

 

[Dench]

I made this mistake once when I was a newbie. I was immediately corrected by someone in the room. I was embarrassed that I was that stupid and ignorant. After that I became very aware of both muzzle and trigger discipline. A few of my contractors have told me they knew I was a gun owner by the fact that I was indexing on power tools.

When I was learning how to use iron sights on my M16A2 I learned it by aiming at people in my company, pulling the trigger and trying my best to stay on target while they moved around doing whatever it was that they were doing which was unrelated to what I was doing.

Shortly after that we graduated to the range where you do the same at paper targets.

 

[SIGNES]

Shall issue won't solve that problem. The only way to keep morons from carrying is may issue and we know where that leads -- discrimination, corruption, and abuse.

Very true. It won't solve it but with background checking, it, theoretically anyway, reduces the likelihood of the 'we knew this about that guy and we let him have a gun?' poster child stories. So, in my 'compromise' model, if we had universal background checks with specific criteria (violent felony convictions, recent substance abuse convictions/treatment?) would we be able to sustain "shall issue" and avoid the whole "green town" insanity that plagued in MA before Bruen? I do get it, my safe, club membership, training classes and ammo bills will confirm my enjoyment of my 2A rights, I'm not some closet gun grabber. I just think we're never going to get rid of for example, IMO, stupid suppressor regulation if we aren't more willing, again for example, to say "Yeah Glock Switches, bad..." when having the arguments.

 

[drgrant]

I suppose I am one of the few that use the portal. It's free(to me) insurance against getting charged with selling to a felon.

The /validation/ portal itself is mostly useless, because the same thing happens when you go to perform a mircs transfer. I think the idea was that you could validate a license pre-transfer so there were no "surprises" when the transfer occurred but that whole idea is mindlessly pedantic.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

I just don't get why it's so hard to understand, and Unalienable rights are universal and nontransferable

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's a giant shit show, like monkeys f***ing a football. Even the SCOTUS was wrong on fees and permits BS.

 

[GML]

How is this thread even a thing? Leave it to a bunch of MA gun owners to ponder if maximizing gun rights is a good or bad thing.

Seriously...
I think the only people who would support National Reciprocity over Constitutional Carry are those already living in a state where you need a permission slip...

 

[Qwikdraw45]

Not sure how constitutional Carry has anything to do with malicious actors... do you guys really think that Constitutional Carry has /anything/ to do with somebody who isn't going to care about "muh laws" to begin with?

Wow.

At least with most (although not all) classes required for a permit, the instructor will at least tell the idiots what they should/shouldn't do. i.e. that they can't just shoot someone because they are stealing their stuff, or that if they shoot them in the back, outside, don't go and drag them inside and lie about it.

Let's see ... how has it worked for Vermont, the Stste with the longest Constitutional Carry?

NES says there are a lot of meth heads up there, but I don't hear horror stories.

There is always going to be someone out there thst thinks you can't be trusted, be it a gun, a knife, a car ... so, if we go by that no one will be able to drive, buy guns, buy alcohol ...
Also, what you mentioned is one of the argument they use in favor of red flag laws.

The last one I heard about was up near St. J. and it was the usual out-of-state drug deal gone wrong.

 

[drgrant]

At least with most (although not all) classes required for a permit, the instructor will at least tell the idiots what they should/shouldn't do. i.e. that they can't just shoot someone because they are stealing their stuff, or that if they shoot them in the back, outside, don't go and drag them inside and lie about it.

I took my class with a firearms attorney (RIP Darius, you are missed by many here) but IMHO my experience is the exception rather than the rule. Most LTC classes will only graze into legal issues like that, if at all.

 

[eboos]

I just think we're never going to get rid of for example, IMO, stupid suppressor regulation if we aren't more willing, again for example, to say "Yeah Glock Switches, bad..." when having the arguments.

I think you are under the mistaken belief that arguments with antis are an honest exchange of differing perspectives and ideas. There is no pound of flesh that we may sacrifice that would appease the anti gun mob. They will take whatever we are willing to give up and then they will demand more. Bump stocks and Glock switches may be dumb, but so were DC9s, Street sweepers, USAS12s. When was the last time you saw one of those? Don’t be willing to give the bastards an inch.

 

[M1911]

I think you are under the mistaken belief that arguments with antis are an honest exchange of differing perspectives and ideas. There is no pound of flesh that we may sacrifice that would appease the anti gun mob. They will take whatever we are willing to give up and then they will demand more. Bump stocks and Glock switches may be dumb, but so were DC9s, Street sweepers, USAS12s. When was the last time you saw one of those? Don’t be willing to give the bastards an inch.

Exactly. To paraphrase someone here (Mr. Boudrie?): “compromising with anti gunners is just giving them some restriction that they don’t currently have the power to take and it won’t stop their future efforts to take more”.

 

[pastera]

Bruen limits the games that can be played.

It doesn't limit games like accuracy testing, training requirements, and unobtainable appointments with long wait times.

 

[pastera]

Shall issue won't solve that problem. The only way to keep morons from carrying is may issue and we know where that leads -- discrimination, corruption, and abuse.

May issue doesn't keep idiots from getting a license in general either - it might get the ones that are "known" to the police but in general the licensing officer doesn't know squat about you.

 

[Blackbeard83]

I think you are under the mistaken belief that arguments with antis are an honest exchange of differing perspectives and ideas. There is no pound of flesh that we may sacrifice that would appease the anti gun mob. They will take whatever we are willing to give up and then they will demand more. Bump stocks and Glock switches may be dumb, but so were DC9s, Street sweepers, USAS12s. When was the last time you saw one of those? Don’t be willing to give the bastards an inch.

This. Period. The anti-gunners will never be content. F them.

 

[40 Creedmoor fan]

Seriously...
I think the only people who would support National Reciprocity over Constitutional Carry are those already living in a state where you need a permission slip...

Reciprocity is not the same thing as Constitutional Carry. Some states have an age limit different from others, usually for handguns. So if a state has an age limit of 21 for handguns, an 18yo visitor from a state where it is legal to carry a gun, would be breaking the law. National reciprocity would address this problem.

 

[GML]

Reciprocity is not the same thing as Constitutional Carry. Some states have an age limit different from others, usually for handguns. So if a state has an age limit of 21 for handguns, an 18yo visitor from a state where it is legal to carry a gun, would be breaking the law. National reciprocity would address this problem.

I know it's not the same, that is why I don't support it. With Constitutional Carry I continue to live my life as I currently do. With National Reciprocity I'd have to ask for a permit and submit to whatever guidelines that come along with getting/maintaining said permit.

 

[aeromarine]

There could be a downside to Constitutional Carry should the winds ever blow the other way and states decide to re-institute licensing, say as a knee-jerk after a particularly horrendous tragedy. Can you imagine the panic of everyone trying to get new LTCs issued again? I may be being a little overly cautious or even paranoid, but I continue to renew my non-resident permits in states even after they've approve CC. maybe an unnecessary cost in the scheme of things but maybe, then again, it's cheap insurance.

 

[SIGNES]

There could be a downside to Constitutional Carry should the winds ever blow the other way and states decide to re-institute licensing, say as a knee-jerk after a particularly horrendous tragedy. Can you imagine the panic of everyone trying to get new LTCs issued again? I may be being a little overly cautious or even paranoid, but I continue to renew my non-resident permits in states even after they've approve CC. maybe an unnecessary cost in the scheme of things but maybe, then again, it's cheap insurance.

Yep, and be sure, the winds will blow the other way if the sane among us don't find some way to demonstrate our sanity quicly.

 

[eboos]

Yep, and be sure, the winds will blow the other way if the sane among us don't find some way to demonstrate our sanity quicly.

How could we demonstrate our sanity in a way that would be recognized by the other side while not ceding ground we are sure to regret and will take decades to reclaim?

 

[allen-1]

CC is fine but I’m keeping my cards in 2 states. I’m not traveling far nor do I want to. My permit allows passage into Acadia later this year. I wish it allowed carrying into the Allagash Wilderness.

Having a permit should be reason enough to bypass any private sale or waiting period but we know the antis would never allow it.

With regards to your second paragraph. I think you’re correct on the federal level - but there are already cross border restrictions.

As for on the state level - you appear to be MA based. Here in GA I can buy/sell privately without paperwork of any kind. Generally speaking, sellers require that purchasers display permit - but that’s mostly a CYA.

That way you can state after the fact that buyer appeared to be legally qualified to buy from you - you did not knowingly sell to prohibited person.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

its probably the closest thing we will get to National Reciprocity so two thumbs up from me.

 

[Broc]

There could be a downside to Constitutional Carry should the winds ever blow the other way and states decide to re-institute licensing, say as a knee-jerk after a particularly horrendous tragedy. Can you imagine the panic of everyone trying to get new LTCs issued again? I may be being a little overly cautious or even paranoid, but I continue to renew my non-resident permits in states even after they've approve CC. maybe an unnecessary cost in the scheme of things but maybe, then again, it's cheap insurance.

Not a valid concern.

 

[Broc]

Yep, and be sure, the winds will blow the other way if the sane among us don't find some way to demonstrate our sanity quicly.

Go to CVS and buy Depends, you need them.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Not a valid concern.

How are you so sure?

 

[Broc]

How are you so sure?

Thinking that a downside to CC is that one day people will panic and everyone will try to get a license at the same time is not worth worrying.

It is basically thinking "I prefer a license so that one day, maybe, I don't have to rush to get one".

The "not valid" comment was my way of being nice.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Thinking that a downside to CC is that one day people will panic and everyone will try to get a license se at the same time is not worth worrying.

It is basically thinking "I prefer a license so that one day, maybe, I don't have to rush to get one".

The "not valid" comment was my way of being nice.

I don’t trust them as far as I could throw them.

 

[SIGNES]

How could we demonstrate our sanity in a way that would be recognized by the other side while not ceding ground we are sure to regret and will take decades to reclaim?

I think it will depend on how we define 'ceding ground'. Off the top of my head, I personally don't think the following examples count as ceding ground we should be trying to keep. 1) A live fire training requirement with some reasonable level of qualification scoring (basic beat cop level qual here which is not hard?) for licensure. 2) Universal background checks (with carefully scoped requirements; 'no violent felonies', some 'substance abuse' boundaries for example) for all transfers. 3) A standardized course and assessment for de-esclation skills. 4) Minimum age of 21 for unsupervised carry except for hunting. (You can't carry any firearm without a licensed 'adult' present unless you're hunting where 18+ seems reasonable). No carry in elementary or high schools unless you're a LEO or explicitly trained for and working in a security role. Then, there's cultural efforts we could make: Socialize the idea that the "community" expects certain conduct. We're already pretty good about collectively dogpiling folks who flag. We should doing the same 'cultural standards setting'' against things like open carry, trying to carry guns on planes and the like. Simplistic example, of 'compromise to reach agreement' "We retain the right to make our own guns (P80 for example) but we agree we can't own them if we're not licensed and we can't transfer them to the unlicensed and the penalties have teeth". We accept the SPIRIT of prohibitions against owning full auto without an NFA-like process so we'll stop %^&ing around at the margins with things like forced reset triggers and bump-stocks and are fine with the government coming down like an anvil on Glock Switch buyers but the SBR, brace and suppressor regs have to go. (But hell, maybe we accept that we can't carry suppressed except when actively hunting or at a range?). I'm truly spitballing here, but the principle is; preserve the right to own and carry for self defense, preserve extremely broad latitude for recreational use but agree that participation in society means coming to terms with the idea that we need to participate in society in ways that reduce violence rather than acting in ways that have us seeming to almost be hoping for SHTF scenarios.