quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

In reading, there are those who talk about felons getting guns but there is no talk about what that felony might be. If it was a violent felony, then I'd be okay if they never even got a chance to look at gun, let alone own one but if it is a nonviolent felony I don't see the problem of gun possession, especially after a 10 year waiting period.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

In reading, there are those who talk about felons getting guns but there is no talk about what that felony might be. If it was a violent felony, then I'd be okay if they never even got a chance to look at gun, let alone own one but if it is a nonviolent felony I don't see the problem of gun possession, especially after a 10 year waiting period.

The choir applauds your thesis.

Increasingly you find laws making things a "felony" that are totally non violent. Felony cable television theft and felony music downloading got me shaking my head so hard I think I sprained something. (D.A. did some contortions to sell that idea based on a 1890s law that allowed for asking for felony punishments for theft of more than $500 worth of goods.)

Personally, I think it is past time to move to more categories of law infractions than simply felony and misdemeanor. What ever the terms end up being, consider the categories:

Minimal consequence regulation infractions. i.e. 8 mph over the sped limit. Crossing a red light at 2am with no other cars visible anywhere on the road.

Theft and actions that could have hurt someone that didn't actually harm anyone. i.e. reckless driving, driving impaired, shoplifting, theft of services (not paying for stuff you contracted to)

Actions that caused bodily harm, major hardship to multiple persons, threatening bodily harm with a weapon in hand.

Intentionally causing major harm, injury, and death. And causing major health and safety problems whether through intention or gross incompetence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
As pointed out repeatedly requirements for a dl vary from state to state.
Should the state steal your car because of this, of course not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
You don't seem to understand that the reason those states don't
tighten up the requirements is that people with ccws don't suddenly start
committing crimes, in fact it is safer to allow them to have firearms than to allow cops to have them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

In reading, there are those who talk about felons getting guns but there is no talk about what that felony might be. If it was a violent felony, then I'd be okay if they never even got a chance to look at gun, let alone own one but if it is a nonviolent felony I don't see the problem of gun possession, especially after a 10 year waiting period.

The choir applauds your thesis.

Increasingly you find laws making things a "felony" that are totally non violent. Felony cable television theft and felony music downloading got me shaking my head so hard I think I sprained something. (D.A. did some contortions to sell that idea based on a 1890s law that allowed for asking for felony punishments for theft of more than $500 worth of goods.)

Personally, I think it is past time to move to more categories of law infractions than simply felony and misdemeanor. What ever the terms end up being, consider the categories:

Minimal consequence regulation infractions. i.e. 8 mph over the sped limit. Crossing a red light at 2am with no other cars visible anywhere on the road.

Theft and actions that could have hurt someone that didn't actually harm anyone. i.e. reckless driving, driving impaired, shoplifting, theft of services (not paying for stuff you contracted to)

Actions that caused bodily harm, major hardship to multiple persons, threatening bodily harm with a weapon in hand.

Intentionally causing major harm, injury, and death. And causing major health and safety problems whether through intention or gross incompetence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

In reading, there are those who talk about felons getting guns but there is no talk about what that felony might be. If it was a violent felony, then I'd be okay if they never even got a chance to look at gun, let alone own one but if it is a nonviolent felony I don't see the problem of gun possession, especially after a 10 year waiting period.

The choir applauds your thesis.

Increasingly you find laws making things a "felony" that are totally non violent. Felony cable television theft and felony music downloading got me shaking my head so hard I think I sprained something. (D.A. did some contortions to sell that idea based on a 1890s law that allowed for asking for felony punishments for theft of more than $500 worth of goods.)

Personally, I think it is past time to move to more categories of law infractions than simply felony and misdemeanor. What ever the terms end up being, consider the categories:

Minimal consequence regulation infractions. i.e. 8 mph over the sped limit. Crossing a red light at 2am with no other cars visible anywhere on the road.

Theft and actions that could have hurt someone that didn't actually harm anyone. i.e. reckless driving, driving impaired, shoplifting, theft of services (not paying for stuff you contracted to)

Actions that caused bodily harm, major hardship to multiple persons, threatening bodily harm with a weapon in hand.

Intentionally causing major harm, injury, and death. And causing major health and safety problems whether through intention or gross incompetence.

Any crime where a weapon is used should have a special category.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
As pointed out repeatedly requirements for a dl vary from state to state.
Should the state steal your car because of this, of course not.

But then it's not illegal, with a 3 year or more sentence, to drive from state to state, now is it?

And since you mentioned dls, cdl requirements used to vary from state to state but problems began to arise from that and the Federal Government had to step in and they made cdl requirements the same for every state.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
You don't seem to understand that the reason those states don't
tighten up the requirements is that people with ccws don't suddenly start
committing crimes, in fact it is safer to allow them to have firearms than to allow cops to have them.

Why would you say I don't seem to understand? In fact in really doesn't matter if I understand that or not, although I do.

What I do understand is that people in states with the strict ccp standards seem to like people with ccps to conform to those standards, that's why they made it a law in their state and so they probably are not real interested in having people roaming the streets with ccps that don't conform to the strict standards that they feel comfortable with.

I have to ask, I reside in a state with open carry do you feel that because I do that I should be allowed to open carry in a state that it is against the law?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

The lack of reciprocity is the only thing to make it apples and oranges.
If a state doesn't like people going to other states they can outlaw
their citizens getting a ccw in another state. You are making a mountain
out of a molehill. And you are still trying to say that letting a state steal your property is ok as long as they don't lock you up.
If you were going to argue this why didn't you suggest that the state hold the weapon till the owner is ready to go home?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

The lack of reciprocity is the only thing to make it apples and oranges.
If a state doesn't like people going to other states they can outlaw
their citizens getting a ccw in another state. You are making a mountain
out of a molehill. And you are still trying to say that letting a state steal your property is ok as long as they don't lock you up.
If you were going to argue this why didn't you suggest that the state hold the weapon till the owner is ready to go home?

Honestly, if you can't answer the simple questions from someone who is pretty much on your side on this, how do you expect to answer the questions of those that are in opposition to you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

The lack of reciprocity is the only thing to make it apples and oranges.
If a state doesn't like people going to other states they can outlaw
their citizens getting a ccw in another state. You are making a mountain
out of a molehill. And you are still trying to say that letting a state steal your property is ok as long as they don't lock you up.
If you were going to argue this why didn't you suggest that the state hold the weapon till the owner is ready to go home?

Honestly, if you can't answer the simple questions from someone who is pretty much on your side on this, how do you expect to answer the questions of those that are in opposition to you?

This would mean that if you have a ccw from one state it would be good in all states.
It does not mean that you can do the same things you can in your home state, you have to follow the rules for the state you are in.
For example in Alabama my permit allows me to carry (concealed) any handgun I can conceal.
I usually carry a .45 automatic. If I was in NJ I could not carry that because
you cannot carry anything that will hold over 7 rds, (mine is 10 +1)
I normally carry hollow points (primarily because they do not penetrate as much as steel jackets).
If for some reason I were to go to NJ I would have to carry a revolver (6rds)
And steel jacketed bullets because that is the rules for carrying there.
In NJ open carry is prohibited so even though it is legal in Al I would have to follow the practice in NJ.
Your assumptions seem to be that not only would the permit be good but that I would be allowed to
carry by the same standards as in Al. That would be an unworkable situation.
All this would do would be to keep people from going to jail because (as in one case) a lawyer
told them there permit was good when it wasn't. You are making this far more complex than it needs to be.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

The lack of reciprocity is the only thing to make it apples and oranges.
If a state doesn't like people going to other states they can outlaw
their citizens getting a ccw in another state. You are making a mountain
out of a molehill. And you are still trying to say that letting a state steal your property is ok as long as they don't lock you up.
If you were going to argue this why didn't you suggest that the state hold the weapon till the owner is ready to go home?

Honestly, if you can't answer the simple questions from someone who is pretty much on your side on this, how do you expect to answer the questions of those that are in opposition to you?

This would mean that if you have a ccw from one state it would be good in all states.
It does not mean that you can do the same things you can in your home state, you have to follow the rules for the state you are in.
For example in Alabama my permit allows me to carry (concealed) any handgun I can conceal.
I usually carry a .45 automatic. If I was in NJ I could not carry that because
you cannot carry anything that will hold over 7 rds, (mine is 10 +1)
I normally carry hollow points (primarily because they do not penetrate as much as steel jackets).
If for some reason I were to go to NJ I would have to carry a revolver (6rds)
And steel jacketed bullets because that is the rules for carrying there.
In NJ open carry is prohibited so even though it is legal in Al I would have to follow the practice in NJ.
Your assumptions seem to be that not only would the permit be good but that I would be allowed to
carry by the same standards as in Al. That would be an unworkable situation.
All this would do would be to keep people from going to jail because (as in one case) a lawyer
told them there permit was good when it wasn't. You are making this far more complex than it needs to be.

Thanx for the info.

Since I'm not interested, at least at this time, in carrying a gun across state lines and only the cc laws in my state are of interest to me. And since, I'm old and senile, the laws in all the other state seem like tmi and it seems enough to know that each state has different laws that you need to know before you need to take a gun there. I just went on a 8 state motorcycle trip and rather than try to memorize the laws of all of those states and try to remember the laws of each state as I crossed the lines, I just left the guns at home. And yes, a ccp reciprocity law would seem to eliminate a lot of the worry but as you just pointed out you would still need to know the laws in each state anyway.

Also, I was not assuming that not only would the permit be good but that you would be allowed to carry by the same standards as the state in which the ccp was obtained but I was assuming that a person in a state that would not be able to obtain a ccp in that state would be able to go to another state and get a ccp and then return to to state with a ccp and carry a gun in the state that didn't want him to carry in this first. What does the new law have say about that?

As for making it more complex than it has to be, not really. It is as complex as it's going to be and me asking questions does not change that fact. The only thing that happens when a person asks questions is that more people are informed about the subject and with that information you can either bring people on your side or turn them away and since so many now either don't like to think or can't think, how the information is delivered is often the deciding factor for them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Perhaps, but dl's requirements vary greatly from state to state so my point stands.

Actually, no, it doesn't. Like I pointed out it is not illegal to drive across lines or for that matter to take your car across state lines. But it is very illegal to transport a gun across state lines for any nunber of reasons the least of which is ccps. So comparing the two is comparing apples to oranges

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No, first off I feel that open carry is stupid. 2nd this would only affect ccw
not open carry.

Okay, you think it is stupid but that's not the point is it? The point is open carry and concealed carry are a closer comparison than your dl comparison.

So this ccp reciprocity law is a little like forcing states without open carry to allow me to open carry in their state because I reside in an open carry state.

So unless there is there is a Federal law passed that makes ccp requirements the same in every state, then passing a ccp reciprocity law is going to be a mess in a hand basket. I mean what is to stop someone from a strict requirement state from checking out the state that has the lowest requirements and going there and getting a ccp and just coming back to a strict requirement state? I mean that is what people did with cdls for a long time.

The lack of reciprocity is the only thing to make it apples and oranges.
If a state doesn't like people going to other states they can outlaw
their citizens getting a ccw in another state. You are making a mountain
out of a molehill. And you are still trying to say that letting a state steal your property is ok as long as they don't lock you up.
If you were going to argue this why didn't you suggest that the state hold the weapon till the owner is ready to go home?

Honestly, if you can't answer the simple questions from someone who is pretty much on your side on this, how do you expect to answer the questions of those that are in opposition to you?

This would mean that if you have a ccw from one state it would be good in all states.
It does not mean that you can do the same things you can in your home state, you have to follow the rules for the state you are in.
For example in Alabama my permit allows me to carry (concealed) any handgun I can conceal.
I usually carry a .45 automatic. If I was in NJ I could not carry that because
you cannot carry anything that will hold over 7 rds, (mine is 10 +1)
I normally carry hollow points (primarily because they do not penetrate as much as steel jackets).
If for some reason I were to go to NJ I would have to carry a revolver (6rds)
And steel jacketed bullets because that is the rules for carrying there.
In NJ open carry is prohibited so even though it is legal in Al I would have to follow the practice in NJ.
Your assumptions seem to be that not only would the permit be good but that I would be allowed to
carry by the same standards as in Al. That would be an unworkable situation.
All this would do would be to keep people from going to jail because (as in one case) a lawyer
told them there permit was good when it wasn't. You are making this far more complex than it needs to be.

Thanx for the info.

Since I'm not interested, at least at this time, in carrying a gun across state lines and only the cc laws in my state are of interest to me. And since, I'm old and senile, the laws in all the other state seem like tmi and it seems enough to know that each state has different laws that you need to know before you need to take a gun there. I just went on a 8 state motorcycle trip and rather than try to memorize the laws of all of those states and try to remember the laws of each state as I crossed the lines, I just left the guns at home. And yes, a ccp reciprocity law would seem to eliminate a lot of the worry but as you just pointed out you would still need to know the laws in each state anyway.

Also, I was not assuming that not only would the permit be good but that you would be allowed to carry by the same standards as the state in which the ccp was obtained but I was assuming that a person in a state that would not be able to obtain a ccp in that state would be able to go to another state and get a ccp and then return to to state with a ccp and carry a gun in the state that didn't want him to carry in this first. What does the new law have say about that?

As for making it more complex than it has to be, not really. It is as complex as it's going to be and me asking questions does not change that fact. The only thing that happens when a person asks questions is that more people are informed about the subject and with that information you can either bring people on your side or turn them away and since so many now either don't like to think or can't think, how the information is delivered is often the deciding factor for them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I spent 6 years based in Md, I have no intention of ever going back to the East coast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I spent 6 years based in Md, I have no intention of ever going back to the East coast.

I spent 22 years in upper New York state and although it was beautiful there, have no intention of ever moving back.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I spent 6 years based in Md, I have no intention of ever going back to the East coast.

I spent 22 years in upper New York state and although it was beautiful there, have no intention of ever moving back.

Upper NY state is much better than NYC, from what I understand.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I spent 6 years based in Md, I have no intention of ever going back to the East coast.

I spent 22 years in upper New York state and although it was beautiful there, have no intention of ever moving back.

Upper NY state is much better than NYC, from what I understand.

Most people when they hear New York they think of the city but up state New York is mostly rural and forested with mountains and beautiful lakes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

Most people when they hear New York they think of the city but up state New York is mostly rural and forested with mountains and beautiful lakes

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

Most people when they hear New York they think of the city but up state New York is mostly rural and forested with mountains and beautiful lakes

Yup, upstate New York is pretty country, especially around the finger lakes.

Only problem is that you walk into a truck stop and try to order breakfast and ask for grits they dont know what the hell you talking about.