• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

National Reciprocity...Does it have a chance?

DoubleDoeHoe said:
YA and your missing the point the requirement is STATE LEVEL not Federal. There are states that do not require a "permit" or license of any kind to buy and own a firearm. The litigation if any should always be done at the state level not the federal level. The car thing is a ridiculous argument. No where in the US Constitution or the MA Constitution that it is your "right" to drive. In fact the DOT (Registry) is on record saying "it is a privilege not a right". I have yet to see that view the DOT has to be challenged in SC. But would be curious to see the outcome.


Maybe I needed to be a douche to see the doucheyness of it.
Click to expand...

LOL, well at least you admit it. What I was getting at is that we currently can exercise more "rights" in regards to driving (even though it's a privilege) than we can with guns. True national reciprocity would not require constitutional carry states to change. In an ideal world every state would be constitutional carry, and there would be no need for permits. It's the way it should be...but it isn't, and we have to deal with that fact until it's changed.
 
smcnally said:
LOL, well at least you admit it. What I was getting at is that we currently can exercise more "rights" in regards to driving (even though it's a privilege) than we can with guns. True national reciprocity would not require constitutional carry states to change. In an ideal world every state would be constitutional carry, and there would be no need for permits. It's the way it should be...but it isn't, and we have to deal with that fact until it's changed.
Click to expand...


So true. I just think when people talk of Fed regulation it is a sticky subject just because the whole thing is asinine. I don't think we will ever see a "perfect world" according to our eyes. But at the moment if you don't like what one states laws are you always have the option to move, if you could afford it now a days.

AAhhhhh a good debate to bring my work day to an end. Time for the ride home in my privileged vehicle LOL
 
DoubleDoeHoe said:
YA and your missing the point the requirement is STATE LEVEL not Federal. There are states that do not require a "permit" or license of any kind to buy and own a firearm. The litigation if any should always be done at the state level not the federal level. The car thing is a ridiculous argument. No where in the US Constitution or the MA Constitution that it is your "right" to drive. In fact the DOT (Registry) is on record saying "it is a privilege not a right". I have yet to see that view the DOT has to be challenged in SC. But would be curious to see the outcome.

Maybe I needed to be a douche to see the doucheyness of it.
Click to expand...

I'll just drop these here and you can try to figure out what they mean:

9th Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10th Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
 
EddieCoyle said:
You know what? I just looked through the whole Constitution and didn't see anything in there that guaranteed anybody a driver's license. Maybe I missed it.


So, under your plan, are you going to force the good people of Vermont, Alaska, and Arizona to get permits?
Click to expand...

Ok, that argument is just plain ignorant, and you know it! The whole concept of driving a car was not even dreamed of during the time the Constitution was authored, but I'm pretty sure you already knew that.[rolleyes] And you are correct that while nobody is guaranteed a driver's license, once you do have one, you are free to drive anywhere in this country that you wish - which is exactly what my argument is![wink]

And you are wrong in the second statement, because that is exactly the way it is now! Just because they can carry without a license in their so-called free states, doesn't mean shit once they travel into most other states, so once again your commentary has no merit.
 
Actually those clever folks covered DLs with the Ninth amendment. Why didn't they put carriage driving/horse riding licenses in that silly document?
Terminator03 said:
Ok, that argument is just plain ignorant, and you know it! The whole concept of driving a car was not even dreamed of during the time the Constitution was authored, but I'm pretty sure you already knew that.[rolleyes] And you are correct that while nobody is guaranteed a driver's license, once you do have one, you are free to drive anywhere in this country that you wish - which is exactly what my argument is![wink]

And you are wrong in the second statement, because that is exactly the way it is now! Just because they can carry without a license in their so-called free states, doesn't mean shit once they travel into most other states, so once again your commentary has no merit.
Click to expand...
 
smcnally said:
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.
Click to expand...

The interstate driver license agreement isn't forced on the states by the federal government. States enter into it voluntarily amongst themselves.

This idea of national reciprocity sounds really good to people from the NE, where local reciprocity will never happen.

However, the rest of America has it figured out and pretty much does not need nor want the federal government mandating anything. And most politically aware gun owners in free states will vehemently oppose what you want.

Bottom line: fix your own state or go elsewhere. We will not accept your interference in our internal affairs.
 
GSG said:
Remember that reciprocity doesn't exempt you from the Gun Free School Zones Act in reciprocal states.
Click to expand...
You're wrong about that hoss.

Driving or walking on a public thoroughfare through school zones with firearms is 100% legal in Ohio, regardless of whether you have an LTC or not.
 
Terminator03 said:
See, I get the point that you guys make about the Feds setting standards, and such, but what is fundamentally wrong with that if it fixes a system that is totally broken now? Unless you can do this on the federal level, there is no chance in hell that reciprocity can ever function, because all 50 states will have their own individual standards, which in this case is counterproductive to our greater cause! Some of you keep spinning your tires in the mud saying that these laws shouldn't exist, but like I said - THEY DO! So, you really have to stop living in the past, and move on toward something that at least has a chance of making this crappy system better. I'm not sure how it works with driver's licenses, but I can see no logical reason that the same principles could not be applied to a LTC. The way it is now makes absolutely no sense at all. In my case, I live less than 10 minutes from the CT border, but can't carry once I cross that imaginary line - how the heck does that make sense to anyone?
Click to expand...

We don't care about your regional problem. Your problem does not exist in the overwhelming majority of the country and that same overwhelming majority will fight tooth and nail to keep the feds out of our gun laws.

So sorry. Sucks to be you.
 
We always hear the argument that carry licenses should be reciprocal "just like driver's licenses".

Guess what? They already are; that's exactly what we have now!

There is no federal law that requires states to recognize driver's licenses from other states - the states do so through mutual agreement, just like the states that have reciprocity agreements (or universal recognition).

Visitors always have to comply with the host state's restrictions. A 14 year old can have an unrestricted license in South Dakota, but would still have to comply with driving curfews in other states. Most NH drivers don't have to carry insurance, but they still have to have insurance to drive in other states.

Anyway, count me with those that say it's a bad idea. Once the federal government gets their nose in the tent, all bets would be off.
 
Last edited:
Jose said:
You're wrong about that hoss.

Driving or walking on a public thoroughfare through school zones with firearms is 100% legal in Ohio, regardless of whether you have an LTC or not.
Click to expand...

It's not legal if you're within 1,000 feet of a school without an LTC issued by the state you're in. Federal law, 18 USC 922(q) covers that, even though it's legal under Ohio law.
 
GSG said:
Remember that reciprocity doesn't exempt you from the Gun Free School Zones Act in reciprocal states. Even LEOSA doesn't do this. So you'd need a map of any areas you carried through to avoid all of those 1,000 foot bubbles around school properties.
Click to expand...

Has there even been a GFSZ case after US v Lopez? (the feds modified the law in response to it, but I don't think even the mods would pass scrutiny against the decision handed down there, it pretty much dragon punched the s**t out of that law. )

-Mike
 
Jose said:
We don't care about your regional problem. Your problem does not exist in the overwhelming majority of the country
Click to expand...

Really? Then why are you on this forum every day?

Nut busting aside...this isn't just a problem in the NE. Even in your more free state of OH, you still have to get a permit and you still have more "rules" than other states with regards to that permit. Until you have constitutional carry your in the same shit creek as us...just in a nicer boat.
 
smcnally said:
Really? Then why are you on this forum every day?

Nut busting aside...this isn't just a problem in the NE. Even in your more free state of OH, you still have to get a permit and you still have more "rules" than other states with regards to that permit. Until you have constitutional carry your in the same shit creek as us...just in a nicer boat.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
smcnally said:
Really? Then why are you on this forum every day?

Nut busting aside...this isn't just a problem in the NE. Even in your more free state of OH, you still have to get a permit and you still have more "rules" than other states with regards to that permit. Until you have constitutional carry your in the same shit creek as us...just in a nicer boat.
Click to expand...

Not quite. Even Ohio is Shall Issue, MA is anything but that. You can fart in the wrong place in MA and they can take your (or my) LTC away if they want, and with that, goes ownership rights, too.

MA and OH aren't even on the same planet as far as gun laws are concerned.

-Mike
 
smcnally said:
Really? Then why are you on this forum every day?

Nut busting aside...this isn't just a problem in the NE. Even in your more free state of OH, you still have to get a permit and you still have more "rules" than other states with regards to that permit. Until you have constitutional carry your in the same shit creek as us...just in a nicer boat.
Click to expand...

2nd that
 
drgrant said:
Not quite. Even Ohio is Shall Issue, MA is anything but that. You can fart in the wrong place in MA and they can take your (or my) LTC away if they want, and with that, goes ownership rights, too.

MA and OH aren't even on the same planet as far as gun laws are concerned.

-Mike
Click to expand...

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that as long as there is any permit/license structure in place we are absolutely on the "same planet". Shall issue means less to me when you can't carry in establishments with specific liquor licenses and when you are required to stick your hands out you car window and declare to a cop that you are armed while being pulled over for a speeding violation.
 
smcnally said:
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that as long as there is any permit/license structure in place we are absolutely on the "same planet". Shall issue means less to me when you can't carry in establishments with specific liquor licenses and when you are required to stick your hands out you car window and declare to a cop that you are armed while being pulled over for a speeding violation.
Click to expand...

There's a big difference between a state where your gun ownership rights can be taken away at a whim by ONE person ( a police chief who doesn't like you ) and one where your rights are at least subject to due process under the law. In MA that's hardly the case.

Binding signage and "Must Notify" suck, but that's piddly crap on the whole compared to what we face in MA.

Oh, and OH and all the normal states don't have all that safe storage fascist bulls**t, either. (that tons of gun owners in MA get collared on for, every year).

Then there's the MA AWB and all the other horsecrap that uses like 85% of the bandwidth on this forum, that simply doesn't exist anywhere but here and a few other commie states.

-Mike
 
Last edited:
drgrant said:
There's a big difference between a state where your gun ownership rights can be taken away at a whim by ONE person ( a police chief who doesn't like you ) and one where your rights are at least subject to due process under the law. In MA that's hardly the case.

Binding signage and "Must Notify" suck, but that's piddly crap on the whole compared to what we face in MA.

Oh, and OH and all the normal states don't have all that safe storage fascist bulls**t, either. (that tons of gun owners in MA get collared on for, every year).

-Mike
Click to expand...
Since few of us will ever have to deal with the business end of MA courts, its all too easy to forget how perverted and corrupt the legal logic of this state has gotten...

(slight paraphrase) "This court does not follow the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court." -SJC

That's all you need to know - kangaroo court...
 
drgrant said:
There's a big difference between a state where your gun ownership rights can be taken away at a whim by ONE person ( a police chief who doesn't like you ) and one where your rights are at least subject to due process under the law. In MA that's hardly the case.

Binding signage and "Must Notify" suck, but that's piddly crap on the whole compared to what we face in MA.

Oh, and OH and all the normal states don't have all that safe storage fascist bulls**t, either. (that tons of gun owners in MA get collared on for, every year).

Then there's the MA AWB and all the other horsecrap that uses like 85% of the bandwidth on this forum, that simply doesn't exist anywhere but here and a few other commie states.

-Mike
Click to expand...

You're clearly missing my point. I never said we weren't worse off...I said they are still in the same boat as us...e.g. They do not have constitutional carry. They still cannot exercise their rights completely. Are you saying that's good enough for you? Jose has this bullshit attitude of "sucks to be you" when his state could just as easily wind up where we are. I doubt it will happen, but it is not impossible.
 
yanici said:
Hate to say it but he's right. It does suck to be us. Maybe he's a hardass but that don't make him wrong.
Click to expand...

It does suck to be us...and it sucks less to be him...and even less to be be a VT or AZ gun owner.

The difference between him and me (as far as 2A goes) is that I care about how it's handled across the country. He seems to only care about how the laws are in OH.
 
smcnally said:
You're clearly missing my point. I never said we weren't worse off...I said they are still in the same boat as us...e.g. The do not have constitutional carry. They still cannot exercise their rights completely. Are you saying that's good enough for you?
Click to expand...

No, it's not, but it's better than anything we have in MA, period end, full stop. Your gun rights in MA are subject to the whims of ONE individual. Pick your nose and it gets reported back to the chief, and if he doesn't like it.... guns, gone, right to carry GONE.

That type of BS isn't even in the same universe as free america.

If we're talking boats MA gun owners are in life rafts which leak air constantly and are held together by duct tape, and there is a guy with a badge holding a 12 gauge shotgun pointed at your raft with 00 buck loaded in it, at all times, with his finger on the trigger. Agitate him, and the whole boat sinks after he blows 9 holes in it. That's what being a gun owner in MA is like. You will never get that guy with the gun to go away. (At least not without rolling technicals on Boston common...)

So, if Jose is in a "nicer boat" it's a cruise ship where the purser is occasionally a pain in the ass.

That's the difference.

Constitutional carry? All for it, but it's likely a pipe dream in anti states. It would be great if the courts ruled all those laws unconstitutional, but that's likely not happening, under the BS of "reasonable restrictions". The feds trying to "force" carry license reciprocity is only going to be a pile of garbage, as the law is unlikely to be wide enough to prevent the states that don't want it from acting like 110% douchebags. It won't make violation of peoples rights a slam dunk easy to convict federal felony, for example, which is what would have to happen in order for the law to have teeth. People will still get abused the same way LEOs carrying under LEOSA often get abused in NY/NJ, except it would be worse because there would be no thin blue line involved.

I guess I have very little faith regarding those currently in congress... especially in the senate. Even if the house passed a decent bill, it would probably die in the senate.

-Mike
 
Last edited:
Right and you want to make it better for you at the expense of making it worse for Jose and the residents of 45 or so other states. That is mighty progressive of you. We are better off having states compete, not just at gun laws(which there shouldn't be any) but at everything, taxes, right to work laws, etc. Let states set their own laws, collect residents and businesses according to how smart/stupid they are. We still have the option of moving freely around the country.
smcnally said:
It does suck to be us...and it sucks less to be him...and even less to be be a VT or AZ gun owner.

The difference between him and me (as far as 2A goes) is that I care about how it's handled across the country. He seems to only care about how the laws are in OH.
Click to expand...
 
I hear what your saying, but the country as a whole has been getting much better lately with 2A laws. I believe it will get better, but I'm not expecting it to happen quickly.

Side note: I'd still prefer to live in MA over OH even if it means I have to fight to change commie laws :)
 
Climbnsink said:
Right and you want to make it better for you at the expense of making it worse for Jose and the residents of 45 or so other states. That is mighty progressive of you. We are better off having states compete, not just at gun laws(which there shouldn't be any) but at everything, taxes, right to work laws, etc. Let states set their own laws, collect residents and businesses according to how smart/stupid they are. We still have the option of moving freely around the country.
Click to expand...

And you apparently didn't read anything I wrote, did you? If you did, you'd see where I said I would only be for it if it meant that if you were licensed that any state would accept that license...no further restrictions. IMO not state should be able to put restrictions on rights given to us by the constitution.
 
smcnally said:
And you apparently didn't read anything I wrote, did you? If you did, you'd see where I said I would only be for it if it meant that if you were licensed that any state would accept that license...no further restrictions. IMO not state should be able to put restrictions on rights given to us by the constitution.
Click to expand...
But that's the problem...

You ask for an orange, they give you herpes...

That's how government works. The only way to get good government is to tell them to get the hell off your lawn and you will fix it your damn self...
 

Similar threads

Does anyone have
2
Replies
30
Views
859
appraiser
appraiser
Does FN Five-seven have preban 20 round mags?
2
Replies
34
Views
542
Agnotology
Agnotology
National Red Flag
Replies
3
Views
227
Matt_SERE
Matt_SERE
Maine Gov. Mills Pushes to Make it Easier to Have Firearms Confiscated
Replies
3
Views
278
Uzi2
U
I don't even have an AK and I want it
Replies
19
Views
502
Agnotology
Agnotology
Back
Top Bottom