there are apps for Smartphones that will handle this chore. Using ignorance of a state law as an affirmative defense may not end well.
Rep. Hudson to introduce Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act
- Thread starter swinokur
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
That's funny, because that's the phone I still use. Dinosaur-yes.
As far as B driving 90 miles an hour down the interstate and then telling the cop you didn't know the speed limit will be about the same as telling him you didn't know the firearms law of the state you are in.
As far as B driving 90 miles an hour down the interstate and then telling the cop you didn't know the speed limit will be about the same as telling him you didn't know the firearms law of the state you are in.
My thoughts on this are the same as your thoughts. I think some are reading way to much into this law with regard to Maryland.
I would guess that such a federal law will only apply to resident permits. Non-resident permits will be quickly ruled out of the mix.
It will be incumbent upon permit holders to know the concealed carry laws of each jurisdiction they visit. I suspect if you live in a jurisdiction that allows 20 round to be carried but visit one that only allows 10, you might find yourself in jail if caught carrying more than 10, or not.
If there is not time to make sure you're legal then I would suggest not carrying. Unless and until we have Con Carry in all of these 57 United States this is the hand we are dealt. Carrying is a right, indeed, but it also comes with responsibility.
There is a huge difference between driving and carrying.
When Driving, it is the states responsibility to inform the driver of the speed limit, otherwise 55 mph is the default option. The caveats: the driver needs to be cautious as to not drive to fast for road conditions, or lose control of their vehicle.
Carrying, the licensee (aka Carrier) needs to make sense of the labyrinth of laws.
As the bill is currently written non resident permits will be honored in all states besides your state of residence. There are no 10A complications the way the law is now written. Whether it survives going through congress is the question.
The point being that saying you didn't know the law is not a good defense in any situation.
Writing tand enforcing he law is the Govt's job. Knowing them is ours.
Deep Thought
Active Member
Maybe they can make it a rider in the new version of the Affordable Care Act. Sounds like a major health care issue to me. LOL.
Hope it stays intact but I'd have to bet on changes somewhere during the process if it ever makes its way out of the proverbial desk drawer. Hope I'm wrong.
My point: Carry laws (concealed or open) need to be easier to follow than Driving.
not ever going to happen. That pesky 10A keeps getting in the way.
Therein lies the irony: to follow the law for a privilege is a snap; to follow the law for a fundamental right, you gotta be a lawyer and research.
If SCOTUS would rule on carry outside the home, then perhaps some legal teeth for more standardized requirements might be made. At this point, I don't see it happening.
I don't see SCOTUS stepping on the 10A even if carry outside the home is recognized. SCOTUS and lower courts have ruled that reasonable regulation is Constitutional even if using strict scrutiny.
I think we are stuck with the current alphabet soup of laws we now have.
Federalism is a good concept most of the time.
I don't see SCOTUS stepping on the 10A even if carry outside the home is recognized. SCOTUS and lower courts have ruled that reasonable regulation is Constitutional even if using strict scrutiny.
I think we are stuck with the current alphabet soup of laws we now have.
Federalism is a good concept most of the time.
You raise a very good point, if the SCOTUS presents a favorable carry opinion with strict scrutiny.
It should become the duty of the states to inform carriers of what is legal.
All the above can be done, while allowing the states to create their own laws.
Many of the states I have permits from either send you a copy of the deadly force and firearms statutes, or make you sign a form that you have read them when you apply.
How much more can be required?
How much more can be required?
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
I'd like to take a second to recognize the numerous mdshooters IP's that provide handgun permit training. When this or a similar topic comes up on most other gun forums all/most of the trainers talk down to everyone about why they need a training certificate. These same trainers criticize constitutional carry and open carry where no permit is required. This statist attitude in the name of protecting their bottom line is at least a small part of the reason we haven't seen further movement on national carry before now.
Notice the lack of negative commentary about no/limited training requirements from our IP's. Our folks "get it" and they are great!
Notice the lack of negative commentary about no/limited training requirements from our IP's. Our folks "get it" and they are great!
We are not talking about permits that you get within a state.
We are talking about travelling on a permit. State's should provide visitor's with an easy to follow guide (possibly electronic) on what laws affect carrying, discharge, or the myriad of anything 2A related.
USCarry and Handgunlaw are good, but do not speak directly for the state.
If states can publish voter guides, or driving guides. It is entirely reasonable for them to publish carry guides.
j_h_smith
Ultimate Member
- Jul 28, 2007
- 28,516
If the SCOTUS deems the 2A is the right of ALL citizens and that right does not stop at your front door, the 10th Amendment will not come into play. Call it what you will, but once the 2nd Amendment is ruled to mean what we all know it means, this entire thread can be put to bed. Will this bill pass this year, my guess is that it will be tabled until the SCOTUS can rule on a few other issues concerning the 2A. Then and only then should this bill come up.
We are an instant coffee kinda society but this is one where we need to let it sit and brew for a little bit. Instant coffee can be very bitter and no one likes that.
We are an instant coffee kinda society but this is one where we need to let it sit and brew for a little bit. Instant coffee can be very bitter and no one likes that.
the info i received came with my non resident permit. Obviously going to that state involves travel to that state.
Can the feds mandate to a state that all possible travellers to that stae be given the info? I think many AG and state police web sites have this information, which is more official than the privately run sites. That seems no different than getting an MVA pamphlet, although perhaps not aggregated in one place.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PG County getting some Liberty Doll love over a bill that would ban computers for minors- Started by jc1240
- Replies: 6