Gun rights should cross state lines
 

I agree, except I also agree to state's rights. It would have to be a state's decision, except that it's a constitutional issue....


This is why US citizenship is graduate level.

I also agree, but too many opinions with 50 states and the nutty states like NY, CA that it would never pass or resolve anything. If our FED. govt would step in and uniform conceal carry to any not crazy person it would solve all our problems.....If you can buy a pistol you can carry a pistol its just that easy....right????

I bump into "A constitutional right" regarding guns where there is no constitutional right regarding driving. I believe that there is indeed a federal role here. I maintain homes and possess CC permits in two states, recognized in most states, yet it is illegal in several states I have to cross between those states for me transport a hand gun no matter how or where it is packed contrary to Federal guidelines. I believe that is a problem many face that needs to be addressed. Last time I checked the constitution is in effect in all 57 Obama states. Dennis

The problem with the fed being involved is the many ways they would restrict this. The fed should stay out and Concealed licenses...licenses, not permits....issued by states should be honored like drivers' licenses.

This^^^^^

I didn't say this but what I was getting at, we honor all drivers licenses and gun license should apply the same......well said.....DL are regulated by the FEDS states just follow most of the rules with them.....

I also mistrust the Feds however in my case, outlined above, the Feds say I can transport from one residence to the other encased and locked in the rear as long as I have a CC permit in both states and are traveling directly from one to the other. State laws such as MA for example (a may issue state) possession without a State permit (only issued to residents who can prove need) is an automatic one year in the slammer. That is, ironically, in violation of the Constitution in the cradle of liberty. I satisfy the Federal laws but am in violation of the laws of several states by transporting a gun I am legally permitted to purchase. The libtards in the northeast are never going to allow freedom to practice my Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Not ever.

I'm not so sure about that....Chicago and Washington DC have been pushed into concealed carry. Sure, they are still making it tough, but it exists, and crime rates are dropping. It will spread if Gun Rights groups are kept funded and keep filing lawsuits. Won't be soon, but it'll happen. Obama tried his damnest to screw gun owners and place restrictions on firearms...he got nowhere. A few states increased their gun control laws, which will be overturned through lawsuits. Gonna take time, but citizen carry is gaining ground all over.

You don't have to prove a need to be issued an LTC in Mass. You're required to take and pass a course in order to apply for one, and out of staters can apply for a non-resident license as well. As long as you're licensed in your home state and are participating in a sanctioned shoot, or traveling through you don't need a Mass. license. The one year mandatory (which was not supposed to be plea bargained away) has never been utilized in the courts I was involved with, and for some strange reason all those signs at the borders of Mass. declaring a one year mandatory have been removed. So there!:p

OK, I have a Texas and Oklahoma permit. Which other permit should I get to make it 50 states, less the commie states, of course.

You could get the Utah license which is recognized by 32 states if that'll help.

Good to hear and I hope you are correct and they are indeed changing. I am not trying to start an internet pissing contest just saying that for my needs the Feds are, at this point, where I need to be while some states are not. I believe it should be a state licensing issue but while there are some states that would prefer to be protection free zones there is a lot of work for interested citizens to do, Mass. among them.

Pony Up. The chief of police is the issuing authority for LTC's. The problem is each chief has his/her little fiefdom and does things their way. Contrary to what the statute reads, some chiefs add things to the requirements, such as you must qualify every renewal, you must belong to a gun club, some will only issue a Class B and if you're a "good boy" they might bump you up to a class A, when you renew in 5 years. The state recommends the license be issued for all lawful purposes and some chiefs will only issue for target and hunting or sporting purposes. Sporting purposes?? Does that mean for golfers, ball players, etc.? I handled licensing for my department and our chief although being on the left of center, was surprisingly very liberal when it came to issuing licenses. The executive office of public safety has warned the chiefs to comply with written statute or they could lose the authority to issue licenses to the state police. The EOPS has an approved list of firearms which conflicts with the anti-gun Harshbarger who was the attorney general who came up with his own list. He has since been prosecuted and admitted that what he did was illegal, but it's still on the books. Massachusetts........the name says it all!

You'll never get fifty states...the northeast is out for the most part, probly California too unless very limited.

Tony and I have all 50 states, its called the LEO exemption :)

Yaaaaahhhh, not so much.....on paper ya do.....Hawaii will not honor your badge, and good luck in NYC. I know of problems in those two states. For the record I think you guys should be totally exempt, but you would be surprised how many states won't give professional consideration. I know of the two I mentioned for sure....have heard of a recent rift between South Carolina and Florida. Am sure there are others, not worth digging up. The South Carolina/Florida rift originates from LEO's speeding on the I-95 corridor. The Hawaii problem was from LEO's from Hawaii being on the mainland and not receiving professional consideration, so they stopped giving consideration, on Oahu anyway. Times are changing in Hawaii, women that have been raped are filing lawsuits for concealed carry, but the old guard is fighting them. Once the new guard completely takes over it will change quickly. I lived there, have family there, so I keep up on Hawaii.

I've been to NYC as it's across the river for me and they always extend curtesy to me and many of LEO's especially if you go to sporting events.
While I've neem to Hawaii twice I've yet to take my gun there.
There's a difference between professionally curtesy and giving you a hard time about carrying. Many southern states do not give professionally curtesy to their own let alone to our northern brothers, but the issue of carrying has never been an issue.

Besides is a law: They have to honor it.

What the Law Enforcement Safety Act (HR 218) Allows

A qualified active or retired law enforcement officer who has photographic identification issued by their employing agency may carry a concealed firearm transported across state lines.
The Fine Print

Additional Requirement for Retired Officers

Retired officers must also bring state issued documentation that they qualified with the weapon they are carrying within the last 12 months.

Federal Land and Buildings

This law exempts officers from state and local laws concerning concealed carry but not Federal laws. HR 218 does not exempt you on:

Aircraft
Federal buildings
Federal property
National Parks

Private Property, State and Local Government Land and Buildings

The law also grants states the authority to:

Permit private property owners to restrict concealed firearms on their property
Permit state and local governments to restrict concealed firearms on state or local government property.

Under LEOSA, being a retired hired gun, I have to qualify annually. Although it's a federal statute I have heard some stories about officers running into trouble in other states, like New York and New Jersey. In New Jersey Hollow Points are a felony and police officers aren't even allowed to have them (so I'm told). I read in P1 that an officer was arrested in New York when he was napping in a rest area and was carrying. I've never had an issue anywhere I went carrying nationwide, but then I carry concealed and unless one is acting like an a$$hole, who's to know you're packing? I always gave courtesy of the shield when dealing with out of state officers, because like me, I'm sure they've put bad people away who're looking to get revenge.

We can and do carry hollow points up until we retire. Once we retire we can longer carry them.
The threshold I use when people ask me what should they do is do what your state requires when you retire. You're' then, at a minimum, legally and civilly covered.

You protect the public your whole career and when you retire you then become untrustworthy to carry hollow points. Reminds me of a Ted Kennedy statement when they were trying to pass LEOSA, "Well, we don't want these guys running around the country carrying bazookas." Seems like when you retire, nobody wants to know you anymore.

Yeap. I can make the same argument about people's rights. So someone that lives in Texas, Florida or states like those are treated like less of an American because they go or move to states like ours.
How is that fair?