National Reciprocity...Does it have a chance?

Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,254
Likes
146
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
Wayne LaPierre addressed CPAC last week and urged politicians to push "National Carry". As much as I would love for this to come about, and as much as I think it's the way it should be, I don't think it will ever happen. I know there are some 2A advocates that are against it because they feel that it would make the 2A friendly states have to follow more stringent laws. I don't know if that's true or not (and would be against it if it is), so I thought I'd throw it out here for people to discuss. If this has been discussed ad nauseam, then feel free to delete this. I did a search for "National Carry" and "National Reciprocity" and came up with little. Here's his speech...I thought it was very good.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think there shouldn't be licensing at all, so no I don't think ingraining more moronic legislation that further tramples the constitution and states rights together is a good idea. How about just enforcing the 2A and ABOLISHING permits. I don't need a permit to speak freely, get a trial by jury or vote so I shouldn't need one to carry a gun.
 
I think there shouldn't be licensing at all, so no I don't think ingraining more moronic legislation that further tramples the constitution and states rights together is a good idea. How about just enforcing the 2A and ABOLISHING permits. I don't need a permit to speak freely, get a trial by jury or vote so I shouldn't need one to carry a gun.

I agree with this. My thought on it though is, that as long as there is licensing, your license should be honored in every state just like a driver's license is.
 
our federal government ..... up everything it is involved in. I do not want them involved in my protection of myself and my family, at home or otherwise. I can only imagine the potential restrictions that would come about from a national carry set up that is backed by the federal government.

Now, if it was simply "a CCW in one state, is good in all others" with leaving individual states to make their rules on prohibited places, I would be a bit more amenable to that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reciprococity should be a given, just as with a driver's license. If you're from NH, you're not nessecarily required to have insurance, and you're permitted to drive out of state.

That said, it'll never happen. See, cars are one thing, but Icky Guns (tm) are EVIL!.... Or that's what I get from watching the news....
 
Now, if it was simply "a CCW in one state, is good in all others" with leaving individual states to make their rules on prohibited places, I would be a bit more amenable to that.

That will never happen. Even with the ideal method, which is a "shall issue CCW compact" license (eg, a "compliant" license issued by each member state) there will still be carve outs for every west podunk state in there for binding signage and other crap like that. Binding signage is a joke anyways, and in the grand scheme of
things, it's not the biggest hurdle in implementing this.

FWIW, these "compact" licenses could be set up not to exclude or preclude other existing CCW permit arrangements in the member states. They would just be set up to be a lowest common denominator license that all the states in the compact would accept without question.

The problem with such a system is it would be like herding cats. The other problem is that it might potentially destroy or alter existing reciprocity agreements, as some states might just say "well, we're going to use the compact for reciprocity instead of maintaining individual agreements"... and in some cases, this could result in downgrades, which is bad.

This would have to be done WITHOUT involving the feds, too, as all they could do is f**k it up.

A more reasonable solution is for more and more states to follow the lead that AZ and AK have taken, and hopefully, NH soon enough. Dumping the stupid permit as compulsory makes life easier on all. The whole idea of a "permit" is abhorrent anyways.

-Mike
 
I agree with this. My thought on it though is, that as long as there is licensing, your license should be honored in every state just like a driver's license is.

our federal government f***s up everything it is involved in. I do not want them involved in my protection of myself and my family, at home or otherwise. I can only imagine the potential restrictions that would come about from a national carry set up that is backed by the federal government.

Now, if it was simply "a CCW in one state, is good in all others" with leaving individual states to make their rules on prohibited places, I would be a bit more amenable to that.

As above!

Recognizing any state's license in ALL states is fine, as long as we have to put up with licensing.

HOWEVER, if it means the Feds create a license and RULES . . . NO F'n way would I support it!
 
It helps to remember once government creates laws on any subject, they always follow with more laws, not less. Giving the feds control of this opens the door for them to create exactly the same system you have in MA. i.e. they could make the "federal license" limited to low cap mags, etc.
 
They will never do it because they will lose revenue from non-res applications and the opportunity to further register you in every state database you wish to apply to. I am at $250 for my non-res permits so far..and rising.

Politicians will try it, knowing that it won't pass only to say "well we did try". A complete set up à la Harry Reid to win the confidence of the simple folk who own guns. Cuz we all idiots in their minds.

I'd rather see the hideous Mass gun laws changed, become Shall Issue (if not constitutional carry), repeal the AWB and toss out the AGs stupid firearms regulations.
I know it is a pipe dream but once the restrictive states come into focus then 2A carry or reciprocity is more feasible.
 
I think there shouldn't be licensing at all, so no I don't think ingraining more moronic legislation that further tramples the constitution and states rights together is a good idea. How about just enforcing the 2A and ABOLISHING permits. I don't need a permit to speak freely, get a trial by jury or vote so I shouldn't need one to carry a gun.

Bingo. Reps incoming.
 
They will never do it because they will lose revenue from non-res applications and the opportunity to further register you in every state database you wish to apply to. I am at $250 for my non-res permits so far..and rising.

Politicians will try it, knowing that it won't pass only to say "well we did try". A complete set up à la Harry Reid to win the confidence of the simple folk who own guns. Cuz we all idiots in their minds.

I'd rather see the hideous Mass gun laws changed, become Shall Issue (if not constitutional carry), repeal the AWB and toss out the AGs stupid firearms regulations.
I know it is a pipe dream but once the restrictive states come into focus then 2A carry or reciprocity is more feasible.

How about we get rid of the '34 act and start from there.
 
That will never happen. Even with the ideal method, which is a "shall issue CCW compact" license (eg, a "compliant" license issued by each member state) there will still be carve outs for every west podunk state in there for binding signage and other crap like that. Binding signage is a joke anyways, and in the grand scheme of
things, it's not the biggest hurdle in implementing this.

FWIW, these "compact" licenses could be set up not to exclude or preclude other existing CCW permit arrangements in the member states. They would just be set up to be a lowest common denominator license that all the states in the compact would accept without question.

The problem with such a system is it would be like herding cats. The other problem is that it might potentially destroy or alter existing reciprocity agreements, as some states might just say "well, we're going to use the compact for reciprocity instead of maintaining individual agreements"... and in some cases, this could result in downgrades, which is bad.

This would have to be done WITHOUT involving the feds, too, as all they could do is f**k it up.

A more reasonable solution is for more and more states to follow the lead that AZ and AK have taken, and hopefully, NH soon enough. Dumping the stupid permit as compulsory makes life easier on all. The whole idea of a "permit" is abhorrent anyways.

-Mike

A good idea in theory, but I am hesitant to think that anyone would get any more carry rights (i.e., in more states) than they do currently under the current patchwork of reciprocity.
 
My idea would be this:

If we can't get every state to honor every other state's LTC then why not have the feds issue one ONLY to people who have an LTC in their state (or states that don't require an LTC). The Federal LTC would be good in every state (even states without LTC laws). Another idea is to have the feds issue an endorcement sticker that would go on the front (or back) of a current LTC.
 
A good idea in theory, but I am hesitant to think that anyone would get any more carry rights (i.e., in more states) than they do currently under the current patchwork of reciprocity.

It would work if the states that fell out of compliance with various other states would adopt a secondary license in their state set up at the higher standard of scrutiny. Of course where this idea fails miserably is there is ZERO incentive for the bureaucrats in any given state to do this, unless they made these secondary licenses so expensive that they could actually start making money off them to generate revenue. The other problem is even if some states would do it, others would still be butthurt about it. One of the carolinas, for example, is completely retarded, and would never give up its discretionary power. At the end you probably wouldn't be at a place which was much better than what getting Utah, Florida, PA, and a couple others gets you.

-Mike
 
I agree with this. My thought on it though is, that as long as there is licensing, your license should be honored in every state just like a driver's license is.

^totally agree! Everyone is quick to say that government shouldn't be involved, bla, bla, but where have you been? It DOES exist, and has been existing in most states for a very long time. While I don't agree that they should be able to control the 2A right, they do, so why not have something in place to allow universal reciprocity, like your driver's license? I don't see how this would even affect "free" states like Vermont anyway. If you live in a "free" state, then the only reason to obtain a license to carry would be for reciprocity with every other state. That is how it is currently, so I don't see what the big problem is?
 
It's a trap... I don't care if it sounds "better," its still wrong...

We are so doomed if even people suffering under the MA regime can't figure that out...

The only valid Federal regulation on this issue is "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." Enforce the laws that are on the books...
 
^totally agree! Everyone is quick to say that government shouldn't be involved, bla, bla, but where have you been? It DOES exist, and has been existing in most states for a very long time. While I don't agree that they should be able to control the 2A right, they do, so why not have something in place to allow universal reciprocity, like your driver's license? I don't see how this would even affect "free" states like Vermont anyway. If you live in a "free" state, then the only reason to obtain a license to carry would be for reciprocity with every other state. That is how it is currently, so I don't see what the big problem is?

The problem is by doing so you legitimize the entire licensing scheme. Giving more ground to bureaucrats only makes them think it's OK to trample on you some more.

ETA: This is really what the heart of the McDonald/Heller cases will be about. Those cases are the best chance gun owners have of completely eliminating licensing. If you agree to the Fed system you abandon any last bastion of hope for actually having a real 2A right that matters.
 
Last edited:
It's a trap... I don't care if it sounds "better," its still wrong...

We are so doomed if even people suffering under the MA regime can't figure that out...

I disagree. Reciprocity is reciprocity no matter how you slice it. If "National Reciprocity" ever went through then it would mean that other states have to honor your permit in their state. The definition of "Reciprocity" is:

: a mutual exchange of privileges; specifically : a recognition by one of two countries or institutions of the validity of licenses or privileges granted by the other

Now, that doesn't mean that they wouldn't instead go for something called "National Carry" which could be something entirely different (and could be a trap)
 
Back
Top Bottom