NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

[DC-W]

I posted this in the Bianchi thread. We likely see orders Friday morning.

 

[Mike OTDP]

I seem to recollect that there was an agreement among the states to accept drivers licenses.

 

[Fedora]

Bruen presumes the shall-issue regimes of all the other states and the district are constitutional. Many of those require some form of training, though requirements vary.

I understand now.
Thank you.

 

[camo556]

The big problem with reciprocity is not training. The big problem is that what makes you a prohibited person in State A may not make you prohibited in State B. States treat all sorts of records like juvenile records differently. They also have different schedules for what constitutes a disqualifying offense. A "misdemeanor" assault in Maryland can be prohibiting because there is no limit to your sentence. But in State B, it might be 6 mos max. Would PA consider a PBJ for misdemeanor assault disqualifying, or not? MD might consider certain mental health records, PA might not. The list of potential disparities is long. Oh, what about soon-to-be federally legal pot? Disqualifying or not?

If someone has a spotless record, as most ppl here do, the answer is easy. The edge cases of reciprocity are hard.

 

[camo556]

I posted this in the Bianchi thread. We likely see orders Friday morning.

And interesting that they still did not schedule Aposhian or GOA v Garland

 

[Texasgrillchef]

I'm skeptical of required W&C/CCW training beyond what could be conveyed on a color pamphlet. Show some diagrams depicting the rules of the road regarding defensive firearm use and brandishing. The last page of the pamphlet should entice (not merely suggest) the reader to take a class.

I'm not anti-knowledge. I would never think of hopping into a Cessna and flying off into the wild blue yonder. Not because I don't have government issued pilots license but because my self preservation would stop me. Why? Because I don't know how to fly a plane.

That same instinct would keep me from carrying a gun if I didn't know how to handle one safely. I think anyone interested enough in their self preservation to take the time, money and effort to buy a firearm would do some research or ask for help to achieve that same level of confidence.

I've taken the online and the in-person versions of Virginia's required class. I've also taken a variety of classes from tactical to shoot house / simunitions training. They were very useful and I would take all of them again. BTW I strongly recommend newer shooter to take the W&C/CCW class (ie stay out of jail class) from a LAWYER!!!! MIL and LEOs (many of my friends are) aren't trained like civilians need to be to stay out of jail. Do take a "How Not To Lose A Gunfight" class from a former MIL.

Will more accidents happen with fewer classes? I would assume they will but more people carrying means more honest folks are around tomorrow. Should W&C/CCW holders be allowed to carry in a bank? I assumed for many years that LEOs were lucky to not mistakenly shoot lawful W&C/CCW bank customers present at a robbery. It sounds completely logical to me that such mistakes would happen. At least occasionally. I'm not aware of it happening at all. (I could be wrong). Just because it seems likely, doesn't mean it happens.

I think examining the accident or improper DGU rates in states with no or little training requirement should be the basis for supporting, reducing or disposing of training requirements.

Now than Bruen is decided maybe the States will have to prove that the training directly supports a Government Interest. I don't think you can make 100,000 people take a 16 hour class to prevent 1 accident.

While Your Instinct would keep you from climbing into a plane and flying without lessons, or grabbing a gun without instruction, etc for various other dangerous items and activities in the world. For Self Preservation.

There are alot who dont. Just watch the "Jackass" movies or Youtube to discover that!

Hell you mentioned flying! Look at all the things you can legally "fly" without any form of training form of training, and none being required by the FAA. (Ultralights and hang gliders etc)

Trust me as an Instructor I see people coming to class that have no business handling a gun! They need all the help they can get!

However.... That being said...

Most classes like the one i do for Texas is 99% all legal.

What i do think is that for a permit, take a written test, do a qualification shooting. No different then obtaining your Drivers License.
You fail the test or the qualification shooting. Then your required to take the class.

 

[Brute]

What i do think is that for a permit, take a written test, do a qualification shooting. No different then obtaining your Drivers License.
You fail the test or the qualification shooting. Then your required to take the class.

If there has to be a training requirement, this is pretty much what I would like it to be. I think I'd also be ok if the test first option was only for those who have taken a course in the past and if not the class is required. But not the class as it stands now, something more in line with most other states' requirements.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

The big problem with reciprocity is not training. The big problem is that what makes you a prohibited person in State A may not make you prohibited in State B. States treat all sorts of records like juvenile records differently. They also have different schedules for what constitutes a disqualifying offense. A "misdemeanor" assault in Maryland can be prohibiting because there is no limit to your sentence. But in State B, it might be 6 mos max. Would PA consider a PBJ for misdemeanor assault disqualifying, or not? MD might consider certain mental health records, PA might not. The list of potential disparities is long. Oh, what about soon-to-be federally legal pot? Disqualifying or not?

If someone has a spotless record, as most ppl here do, the answer is easy. The edge cases of reciprocity are hard.

I get what your saying.

Therefore a State should be required to do one of the following. Their choice.

1. Become constitutional carry

2. Have reciprocity for all states

3. Issue Non-Resident permits. Required online application filing. Fingerprints if needed any identigo nationwide should be used. Photo uploaded. as well as any other documents, including training or testing or qualification documents.

#3 allows the state to have and use their own requirments for BG check, Training etc & allow them to collect fees.

Illinois allows one to do everything online. Except for training. Fingerprints are not required. But one can upload all needed documents.

 

[Allen65]

I seem to recollect that there was an agreement among the states to accept drivers licenses.

Here is the Interstate Drivers License Compact:
https://apps.csg.org/ncic/Compact.aspx?id=56

 

[DC-W]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/28/supreme-court-new-york-guns-racist-policing/

 

[Texasgrillchef]

If there has to be a training requirement, this is pretty much what I would like it to be. I think I'd also be ok if the test first option was only for those who have taken a course in the past and if not the class is required. But not the class as it stands now, something more in line with most other states' requirements.

I like the testing option to get a permit, fail and class is required.

Especially tested on the legal matters. For all 4 states i teach. (Texas, Utah, Illinois, Maryland) you wouldnt beleive the number of people who have misconceptions on when you cant do certain things with your firearm, as well as where you can and cant carry.

Without the class, i would suspect many people who get tickets or get arrested.

But i still beleive, Issue a book like we do for driving licenses, and then do a test. Like i said fail the test. Take the class.

Its crazy as an example. I am even an NRA Instructor.

However to get my Massachusetts permit. I have to take a class that i have taught a hundred times to get my permit. Why? because im not a MA instructor approved by MA, nor was my Instructor approved by MA.
crazy! Luckily i found a MA approved instructor that will sign me off after i do a qualification shooting for her. Yeah!!

 

[jcutonilli]

And interesting that they still did not schedule Aposhian or GOA v Garland

Neither of these cases are impacted by Bruen. I believe the WV case may impact the decision, but that has not been released

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Neither of these cases are impacted by Bruen. I believe the WV case may impact the decision, but that has not been released

WV is coming tomorrow on the last opinion day.

The other 4 cases that have been on hold, are going to conference today (6-29-2022)

So on those we should know something today or tomorrow.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Has any court ever ruled on reciprocity for concealed carry permits under the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause?

No

 

[camo556]

Neither of these cases are impacted by Bruen. I believe the WV case may impact the decision, but that has not been released

possibly. However the 5th circuit just took a bump stock case en banc.

Federal Court to Rehear Challenge to Bump Stock Ban :: Guns.com

The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to a rare en banc hearing of a challenge to the Trump administration's arbitrary and controversial federal ban on bump stocks.

www.guns.com

They may be waiting for this one. The en banc 5th may provide a split. Or not.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

possibly. However the 5th circuit just took a bump stock case en banc.

Federal Court to Rehear Challenge to Bump Stock Ban :: Guns.com

The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to a rare en banc hearing of a challenge to the Trump administration's arbitrary and controversial federal ban on bump stocks.

www.guns.com

They may be waiting for this one. The en banc 5th may provide a split. Or not.

Still a Chevron Case. The issue of the 2nd or 14th amendment has yet to be brought up.

 

[camo556]

Still a Chevron Case. The issue of the 2nd or 14th amendment has yet to be brought up.

The first step of Chevron is to interpret the text of the statute. They may not even get that far. see here:

Supreme Court Decides Major Chevron Case Without Citing Chevron

American Hospital Association v. Becerra is another indication that lower courts are too quick to give agencies Chevron deference.

reason.com

They could decide without deciding Chevron. The text of the NFA statute is fairly clear on a single function of the trigger - not a single function of the finger.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

The first step of Chevron is to interpret the text of the statute. They may not even get that far. see here:

Supreme Court Decides Major Chevron Case Without Citing Chevron

American Hospital Association v. Becerra is another indication that lower courts are too quick to give agencies Chevron deference.

reason.com

They could decide without deciding Chevron. The text of the NFA statute is fairly clear on a single function of the trigger - not a single function of the finger.

Well its down to WV. It is true it could be decided without effecting Chevron.

However, The bump stock issues relys entirely on Chevron. Using it or not using it. The AHA case is in our advantage.

There is absolutely NOTHING in the text of the law that says anything about Bump Stocks not being legal.

The interpretation comes entirely from the ATF.

The ATF at one time said they were legal, and then on Trumps order back slided.

The ATF also waived their initial use of Chevron Deference, However are trying to claim it now.

Therefore if it comes down to pure Text like the AHA case. We will win.

However its all speculation until they make a decision on either Aposhian or GOA or both.

 

[camo556]

Well its down to WV. It is true it could be decided without effecting Chevron.

However, The bump stock issues relys entirely on Chevron. Using it or not using it. The AHA case is in our advantage.

There is absolutely NOTHING in the text of the law that says anything about Bump Stocks not being legal.

The interpretation comes entirely from the ATF.

The ATF at one time said they were legal, and then on Trumps order back slided.

The ATF also waived their initial use of Chevron Deference, However are trying to claim it now.

Therefore if it comes down to pure Text like the AHA case. We will win.

However its all speculation until they make a decision on either Aposhian or GOA or both.

Aposhian and GOA have not been scheduled for a conference (Unlike Frosh, Young, and the other gun cases), which means that they will not be GVRd based on WV v EPA (or anything else that comes out this term). Best guess, SC is holding them and will consider them at a future conference after the 5th circuit issues its en banc opinion in its own bump stock case.

Read Alder: ppl misunderstand Chevron. This issue with Chevron is that it's a two-step test and appellate courts skip over step one (interpreting the actual text).

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Aposhian and GOA have not been scheduled for a conference (Unlike Frosh, Young, and the other gun cases), which means that they will not be GVRd based on WV v EPA (or anything else that comes out this term). Best guess, SC is holding them and will consider them at a future conference after the 5th circuit issues its en banc opinion in its own bump stock case.

Read Alder: ppl misunderstand Chevron. This issue with Chevron is that it's a two-step test and appellate courts skip over step one (interpreting the actual text).

Oh I totally agree. I do not expect GOA or Aposhian to be PC GVR. At least not anytime soon.

Hard to say whats going on with those two cases. With or without WV.

WV may or may not have impact.

But like i said... its all speculation until something actually happens with GOA and/or Aposhian.

I fully understand Chevron. Which makes one wonder since the ATF waived Chevron. So why didnt we win at lower levels? Well in some ways we did. We even had one En Banc court had a pure even split.

They (SCOTUS) really needs to take this issue on.

It maybe that the pure split of justices in an even vote, intentionly did to give SCOTUS a good reason to take up the case.