Skip to main content

To advocate effectively for repeal or passage of firearms legislation we must first know and understand current law and how both are implemented. In this primer we introduce the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. It was introduced by the GOP and passed the House with broad bipartisan support.

Reciprocity refers to a bilateral agreement between two states that agree to honor each other's concealed carry permits. When one state honors another state's concealed carry permit it is called recognition. Do you know the requirements in your state for a concealed carry permit?

Please join us below the fold for an introduction to concealed weapons law.

Handgun and magazine found improperly packed in checked baggage, stuffed inside a pair of Air Jordan sneakers.
Handgun and magazine found improperly packed in checked baggage, stuffed inside a pair of Air Jordan sneakers.

Have you ever considered what is required in your state to carry a concealed weapon in public? Please take a few minutes to look up your state and use it as a benchmark for this diary.

CONCEALED CARRY LAWS – Handgun Law

(ht/ PavePusher) Handgun Law has assembled a summary page for each state that includes links to state laws. They also have an extensive Glossary of Firearms Terminology and other useful links.
AL CCW - Shall Issue
AL - Reciprocity
KY CCW - Shall Issue
KY - Reciprocity
NC CCW - Shall Issue
NC - Reciprocity
AK CCW - Shall Issue
AK - Reciprocity
LA CCW Shall Issue
LA - Reciprocity (nice map)
OH CCW Shall Issue
OH - Reciprocity
AZ CCW - Shall Issue
AZ - Reciprocity
ME - CCW Shall Issue
ME - Reciprocity
OK CCW - Shall Issue
OK - Reciprocity
AR - CCW Shall Issue
AR - Reciprocity
MD CCW - May Issue
MD - Reciprocity (none)
OR CCW - Shall Issue
OR - Reciprocity (none)
CA - CCW May Issue
CA - Reciprocity (none)
MA CCW - May Issue
MA - Reciprocity (none)
PA CCW - Shall Issue
PA - Reciprocity
CO CCW - Shall Issue
CO - Reciprocity
MI CCW - Shall Issue
MI - Reciprocity
RI CCW - May/Shall Issue
RI - Reciprocity (none)
CT CCW - May Issue
CT - Reciprocity (none)
MN CCW - Shall Issue
MN - Reciprocity
SC - CCW Shall Issue
SC - Reciprocity
DE - CCW May Issue
DE - Reciprocity
MS CCW - Shall Issue
MS - Reciprocity
SD- CCW Shall Issue
SD - Reciprocity
DC CCW - No Issue
DC - Reciprocity (none)
MO CCW - Shall Issue
MO - Reciprocity
TN - CCW Shall Issue
TN - Reciprocity
FL CCW - Shall Issue
FL - Reciprocity
MT CCW - Shall Issue
MT - Reciprocity
TX CCW - Shall Issue
TX - Reciprocity
GA CCW - Shall Issue
GA - Reciprocity
NE CCW - Shall Issue
NE - Reciprocity
UT CCW - Shall Issue
UT - Reciprocity
HI - CCW May Issue
HI - Reciprocity (none)
NV - CCW Shall Issue
NV - Reciprocity
VT - CCW Constitutional Carry
VT - Reciprocity
ID - CCW Shall Issue
ID - Reciprocity
NH - CCW Shall Issue
NH - Reciprocity
VA - CCW Shall Issue
VA - Reciprocity
IL - CCW Shall Issue
IL - Reciprocity (none)
NJ - CCW May Issue
NJ - Reciprocity (none)
WA - CCW Shall Issue
WA - Reciprocity
IN - CCW Shall Issue
IN - Reciprocity
NM CCW - Shall Issue
NM - Reciprocity
WV - CCW Shall Issue
WV - Reciprocity
IA - CCW Shall Issue
IA - Reciprocity
NY - CCW May Issue
NY - Reciprocity (none)
WI - CCW Shall Issue
WI - Reciprocity
KS - CCW Shall Issue
KS - Reciprocity
ND - CCW Shall Issue
ND - Reciprocity
WY - CCW Shall Issue
WY - Reciprocity

ACRONYMS and DEFINITIONS:
The meaning of license and permit depends on the state. Some states regulate public carry while leaving possession at home unregulated. Other states regulate ownership and public carry separately. For example,  in NY residents must apply for a license to own a handgun just to keep it in their home or business. NY residents who want to carry a handgun in public must apply separately for a concealed carry permit.

CCW - Concealed Carry Weapon - A permit/license to carry a concealed firearm.
CCW - Carry Concealed Weapon - To carry a handgun concealed.

CFP - Carry Firearms Permit.
CHL - Concealed Handgun License.
CPL - Concealed Pistol License.
CWL - Concealed Weapons License.
CWP - Concealed Weapons Permit.

Constitutional Carry - The state does not require any kind of permit and any lawful gun owner can carry a gun in public

May Issue - The state grants law enforcement some discretion in deciding whether to issue a concealed weapons license. Examples: In NY, and MD, an applicant must show "good cause" to carry a gun in public. In NY a county official evaluates the application and in MD the state police evaluates the application.

No Issue - No permits are issued.

Shall Issue - A permit must be issued to anyone who meets the statutory requirements set by state law.

Constitutional rights lack uniform national recognition


We usually consider constitutional rights to exist everywhere in the country, and especially so the enumerated rights listed in the Bill of Rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Most of us can freely travel across state lines for any reason and express these freedoms without regard to which state we happen to be visiting.

Driving a car across state lines is uncomplicated because we have national standards that define lawful driving. Uniform proficiency testing for driving enables any state to recognize a driver's license issued by any other state. And we also have national laws that specify sanctions for various driving infractions. Some sanctions apply to the operator while others apply to the vehicle. If you are speeding the operator faces a fine and points are marked on their driver's license. If you park illegally the owner of the vehicle will receive a parking ticket and in some cases temporary forfeiture (towing). There is no need for a national driver's license because every state's driver license is honored by all the other states.

In contrast to the easy way we can all drive across state lines, exercising the right to vote or carry a concealed weapon depends on state and local laws. There are no uniform national standards for voting or for firearms. There is no national voter ID law and there is no national permit to carry a firearm in public. Both voting laws and concealed carry laws vary widely across the country.  When a responsible gun owner wants to take their gun with them when they travel across state lines it can be quite challenging to remain in compliance with the law.

What is reciprocity?

There is enormous variability in gun laws across the country. The relative utility/relative risk of firearms is different on a 500 acre ranch in Montana than for a 1000 square foot apartment in New York. State and local laws reflect that diversity.

Concealed carry laws also vary widely across the country. Some states conduct extensive background and mental health checks and require an applicant to show "good cause" (e.g. New York, New Jersey) before they will issue a permit. Those states are called may issue states. They grant local law enforcement some discretion when they decide whether to issue or deny a concealed carry permit. At the other extreme is Vermont, which requires no permit at all to carry a gun in public, openly or concealed. Most states, however, do require a permit, and most states must issue a concealed weapons permit to any applicant who meets their statutory requirements. Those states are called shall issue states. A few jurisdictions do not permit gun owners to carry firearms in public at all (e.g. Washington, D.C., American Samoa, N. Mariana Islands). Some states are legally may issue states, but have not issued any concealed carry permits in many years, effectively becoming a no issue state without elected officials passing any laws (e.g. Hawaii). States also have variable residency requirements for out-of-state applicants.

Reciprocity refers to a bilateral agreement between two states that agree to honor each other's concealed carry permits. When one state honors another state's concealed carry permit it is called recognition. Do you know which concealed carry permits your state will honor?

USA Carry

 
(h/t Meteor Blades) Click to view an interactive National Reciprocity Map

Who may/must be issued a permit from which states

Shall Issue to Residents Only: [These states must issue a concealed weapons permit to their own state residents who meet statutory requirements. Law enforcement has no discretion.]
Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
Colorado
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Michigan
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New Mexico
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Tennessee
Vermont
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Shall Issue to Residents and Non-Residents: [These states must issue a concealed weapons permit to residents of any state who meet statutory requirements. Law enforcement has no discretion.]
Arizona
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Maine
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Dakota
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
May Issue to Residents Only: [These states may issue a concealed weapons permit to their own state residents who meets statutory requirements. Law enforcement has some discretion.]
California
Delaware
District of Columbia
Guam, Hawaii
New York City
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
May Issue to Residents and Non-Residents: [These states may issue a concealed weapons permit to residents of any state who meet statutory requirements. Law enforcement has some discretion.]
Connecticut
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Jersey
New York
Right Denied: [These states do not issue a concealed weapons permit to any state resident. Law enforcement has no discretion.]
American Samoa, N. Mariana Islands

The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act

In 2011 the GOP introduced the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act. This federal law would force states with strict gun permit laws to honor every other state’s concealed carry permits, no matter how much the requirements differ. The PRO-reciprocity argument relies on three principles. First, the right to self defense is a fundamental human right. Second, the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense is articulated in the US Constitution. Third, protection of constitutional rights should not vary depending on where one lives or where one travels.

To RKBA advocates (including yours truly) the PRO-reciprocity argument is appealing, since it relies on the special status we give to constitutional rights. We generally reject the idea that our constitutional rights can be curtailed by the whims of a state government. It is easier to see the distinction with respect to religion. Most of us would reject any state law requiring every public school to include bible study, and most of us would reject any state law that prohibited religious schools from including bible study. Nevertheless, all of us have attended many public school events that begin with prayer.

H.R. 822 - National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

The bill would allow individuals with valid state-issued concealed firearm permits or licenses to carry a concealed firearm in any other state that also issues concealed firearm permits or licenses, or in any other state that does not generally prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms.

H.R. 822 would require the Comptroller General of the U.S. to conduct an audit of the laws and regulations of each state that authorizes the issuance of a valid permit or license to permit a nonresident to possess or carry a concealed firearm.  The audit would include a description of the permitting or licensing requirements of each state that issues concealed carry permits or licenses to persons other than the residents of that state.  The audit would also include the number of valid permits and licenses issued or denied (and the basis for the denial) by each state, and the effectiveness of state laws and regulations in protecting public safety.

ABC News: House passess bill making concealed carry permits valid across state lines (Nov. 16, 2011)

By a bipartisan vote of 272-154, the House passed a measure that will enable non-resident gun owners to carry a concealed firearm across state borders.

Forty-three Democrats joined 229 Republicans in supporting the measure, which had 245 co-sponsors. Just seven Republicans joined 147 Democrats in voting against the bill.

Brian Malte, the federal legislation director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the bill would create a “race to the bottom,” where people would flock to states with the most lax requirements in order to obtain a concealed handgun license.
“This bill says, ‘Forget states rights, forget the ability of states to determine which states you want to have a reciprocal agreement with,’” Malte said. “It’s a one-size-fits-all that tramples states rights, that allows dangerous and untrained people to carry in any state.”

Official Summary from OpenCongress.Org

11/16/2011--Passed House amended. National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 - Amends the federal criminal code to authorize a person who is carrying a valid, government-issued identification document containing that person's photograph and a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in one state, and who is not prohibited from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm under federal law, to possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machine gun or destructive device) in another state in accordance with the restrictions of that state. Directs the Comptroller General to conduct an audit of:

(1) state laws and regulations that authorize the issuance of a concealed firearm permit or license to a nonresident, including a description of the permitting or licensing requirements;

(2) the number of such valid permits or licenses issued or denied (and the basis for such denials) to nonresidents by each state; and

(3) the effectiveness of such state laws and regulations in protecting the public safety. Directs the Comptroller General to conduct a study of the ability of state and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of concealed firearm licenses or permits issued by other states.

Barriers that stand in the way of National Reciprocity

First, hundreds of gun laws have been challenged since Heller and the vast majority are being upheld. Lower courts are giving state and local governments wide latitude to address local crime and regulate the right to own and carry guns in public. Lower courts are holding that it is elected governments, not the courts, that are in the best position to balance protecting individual expression of the RKBA with the duty of the state to reduce crime and ensure public safety for everyone.

Second, there are no national standards for gun ownership, lawful use and concealed carry. There are no national standards for safety training or proficiency testing. There is no national agreement on requirements for licensing gun ownership and use. And there are no national standards that sanction negligent and criminal gun owners when they create a menace for themselves and others.  

Third, there is no agreement in the lower courts that concealed carry falls within the scope of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The supreme court has already declined to review New York's concealed carry law, which is one of the most strict concealed carry laws in the country, (Kachalsky v. Cacace, in April 2013).

Most notably, out of six federal courts of appeal that have directly reviewed challenges to restrictions on concealed or open carry, five have upheld the laws at issue in their entirety.,28 For example, the Second Circuit in Kachalsky v. Cacace rejected a challenge to New York’s requirement that applicants for a concealed carry permit obtain a license by demonstrating that they have “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.”29 Although the court assumed that the Second Amendment had “some” application outside of the home, it found that the law satisfied intermediate scrutiny because New York’s legislature “reasonably concluded that only individuals having a bona fide reason to possess handguns should be allowed to introduce them into the public sphere.”30 The Third Circuit upheld a New Jersey law similar to the New York law upheld in Kachalsky by finding that such restrictions on the concealed carrying of weapons are “long-standing” regulations under Heller and therefore presumptively valid.31The Tenth Circuit went even further in Peterson v. Martinez, holding flatly that “the Second Amendment does not confer a right to carry concealed weapons.”32

28 Peterson v. Martinez, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3776 (10th Cir. Feb. 22, 2013); Woollard v. Gallagher, 712 F.3d 865 (4th Cir. 2013); Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933, 940-42 (7th Cir. 2012); Kachalsky v. Cacace, 701 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2012); Hightower v. Boston, 693 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2012).
29 Kachalsky, 701 F.3d at 86 (quotations and citations omitted).
30 Id. at 89, 98-99.
31 Drake v. Filko, No. 12-1150, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15635 (3rd. Cir. Jul. 31, 2013). The New Jersey law at issue had its origins in the early 20th centrury, roughly the same time the first prohibitions on felons possessing firearms (which Heller called “long-standing”) were enacted.
32 Peterson, 707 F. 3d at 1211.  

...Continue reading Post-Heller Litigation Summary (September 5, 2013)

We are a large and diverse country. Gun culture in cities is very different than gun culture in rural areas. This primer on concealed carry law reviews important legal terms relating to guns, and introduces the concept of state reciprocity for concealed carry permits. As appealing as it may sound to have national standards for firearms permits I don't believe that a one-size-fits all approach will get anywhere near passage into federal law during my lifetime. But I would support funding the first step, a federal audit of state laws and regulations. We may have to wait for a supreme court decision on the constitutionality of concealed carry before states are willing to invest time and money toward establishing a national standard.




The Daily Kos Firearms Law and Policy group studies actions for reducing firearm deaths and injuries in a manner that is consistent with the current Supreme Court interpretation of the Second Amendment. We also cover the many positive aspects of gun ownership, including hunting, shooting sports, and self-defense.

To assist ourselves and Daily Kos readers in becoming familiar with firearms laws where we live the Firearms Law and Policy group is planning to walk all across the country, state-by-state. We will dedicate a diary to a survey of each state's gun laws. If you would like to write about gun laws in your state please send a Kosmail to the The Daily Kos Firearms Law and Policy group or to LilithGardener.

To see our list of original and republished diaries, go to the Firearms Law and Policy diary list. Click on the ♥ or the word "Follow" next to our group name to add our posts to your stream, and use the link next to the heart to send a message to the group if you have a question or would like to join.

We have adopted Wee Mama's and akadjian's guidance on communicating.  But most important, be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.

8:49 PM PT: Thank you to Pavepusher for his comment correcting my description of the discretion granted to law enforcement in may issue states.

2. "May Issue - The state grants law enforcement some discretion in deciding whether to issue a concealed weapons license."

     Ummm, no.  In "May Issue" states, the issuing authority has total discretion and control over issuing, subject only to a reversing court decision.  I'm sure everyone here would scream blue murder if any other Constitutional or Civil Right was regulated that way.

I also added the following sentence to highlight one of the problems with giving law enforcement absolute discretion. "Some states are legally may issue states, but have not issued any concealed carry permits in many years, effectively becoming a no issue state without elected officials passing any laws (e.g. Hawaii)."

Thu Oct 03, 2013 at  9:09 AM PT: The CCW link for Delaware has been corrected (h/t KVoimakas) Shall May Issue.


Originally posted to Firearms Law and Policy on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 03:45 PM PDT.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA and notRKBA.

Poll

When the Supreme Court eventually rules on the right to carry concealed firearms in public what do you think they will decide?

12%9 votes
20%15 votes
2%2 votes
27%20 votes
37%28 votes

| 74 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tips for national standards (33+ / 0-)

    in firearms safety training and the use of lawful force.

    "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

    by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 03:44:11 PM PDT

  •  The Constitution implicitly ratified slavery. (7+ / 0-)

    It boggles the mind that we still have the second amendment.

  •  nice work (7+ / 0-)

    Rivers are horses and kayaks are their saddles

    by River Rover on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 04:51:02 PM PDT

  •  Great job, Lilith! (6+ / 0-)

    Tip and rec'd and will be back to take a second look.

    Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

    by JoanMar on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 05:11:19 PM PDT

  •  Excellent diary. I know nothing about firearms (7+ / 0-)

    and gun laws, so these diaries are a real education for me.
    Thanks so much.  

    "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

    by rubyr on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 05:11:25 PM PDT

    •  Well... (5+ / 0-)

      You've come to the right place!

      Concealed carry law can be very confusing even for someone like myself who grew up with guns. Many states have changed their laws recently and it is hard even for gun owners to keep up with all the changes.

      We welcome any questions our readers have on any aspect of firearm law or policy.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 05:16:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  An interesting problem (12+ / 0-)

    The extent to which a federally recognized right (which is how it is currently interpreted) can be regulated or restricted by the states is one which should be looked at very carefully in the light of say Roe v. Wade and recent developments in Mississippi and Texas, or places that do or do not allow same-sex marriages, legalization of marijuana, changes in voting laws, etc.

    The extent to which you grant states the final say on the issue cuts both ways. Regardless of which way you look at it.

    Democrats will not always be running things at the state or federal levels (much as we might wish, even the current head-up-assery in DC will not set R's back forever), and legal precedents set now will still apply when Republicans are the ones applying them.

    As a thought experiment, if the price of a national-level standard for a "concealed carry permit" was also a national level standard for same-sex marriage, uniform voting rights, uniform abortion clinic laws and uniform worker's rights...would you think it was a better deal than the current situation? If so, then there may be something to be said for national standards that supercede state ones.

    And there are no national standards that sanction negligent and criminal gun owners when they create a menace for themselves and others.  
    But, since there is no uniform standard for what constitutes drunk driving (something that certainly claims a lot of lives), would it be acceptable to argue that driver's licenses should only be valid in the state they are issued?
    Gun culture in cities is very different than gun culture in rural areas.
    As someone raised in the north, I think the southern half the driving population should not be allowed behind the wheel north of the Mason-Dixon line anytime between Thanksgiving and Valentine's Day, but despite differing "car culture" I still support nationally valid driver's licenses.
    •  To understand the range of "car culture" (6+ / 0-)

      it helps if you've ridden a motorcycle anywhere out west, in the Adirondacks, the Catskills, and across the George Washington bridge through Manhattan and out to Eastern tip of Long Island.

      The extent to which you grant states the final say on the issue cuts both ways. Regardless of which way you look at it.
      I'm not set in my view, but can get my mind around the idea that regulations for gun possession within the home, or on private property would largely be left to the states. OTOH, since guns travel easily across state lines, out of legal hands in one place into criminal markets in other states, there is a rational argument for national standards for public carry.

      We already have national standards for healthcare and public health policy, including where both intersect with religious freedom, employment law, and public access to healthcare.

      Re marriage, it's only a matter of time until its recognized that objections are all based on religious dogma, and that state prohibitions of marriage equality based on religious dogma is a violation of constitutional rights.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 05:29:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am a bit groggy tonight but just to make sure I (5+ / 0-)

        am on point with my understanding, when you refer to "public carry", does that include concealed carrying in public, open carrying in public or both?  I am trying to wrap my mind around things and some states allow one or the other or both  

        •  That's right (5+ / 0-)

          when I say public carry, I mean any time you take your gun with you somewhere in public, to the range, to the gunsmith, hunting, to/from a gun show.

          The state laws are quite diverse and it quickly becomes confusing. I'm trying to be precise in my language and to always spell out concealed carry when I mean concealed carry.

          For neophytes, concealed carry could be on your person, in your bag or purse, or in a gun case, just as long as the gun is not visible.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 06:46:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  when referring to concealed carry (6+ / 0-)

            we are referring to pistols, I think.  I am still a bit thick but it seems many states have different laws for long guns vs pistol carry (I grew up in an era when a shotgun or rifle in a gun rack in a vehicle was a common sight, even in HS parking lots and no one thought anything of it)

            This is one reason planning a hunting trip in another state is such a headache because you have to plan the transport of weapons and notification of carriers and varying laws state to state.  For this reason, it is simpler to simply rely upon the host to provide weapons at the hunt site

            •  Speaking of different eras (7+ / 0-)

              I'm old enough to know that you used to be able to take a rifle on the plane and stow it in the overhead racks (or keep it in the seat next to you if it would not fit). The notion of searching people boarding a plane did not even exist until the 1960's. When the idea was first floated in Congress, Senator Engle (D-CA, note that, D-CA), argued that such searches pushed the acceptable limits of the 4th Amendment, saying "digging through people's luggage and 'shaking them down' with reference to trying to find concealed weapons gets pretty close to the limit." (Senate hearings, 1961). Can you imagine a Democratic Senator from California today, arguing against searching people for guns before getting on an airliner?

              FYI, this was back when the homicide rate was 4.8 per 100,000, compared to the vastly lower 4.7 per 100,000 today (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 1961 and 2011).

              Until the 1970's you could still take your gun onto the plane, where the stewardess would take it from you, secure it, and then give it back to you when you got off the plane. Compare that past attitude (and that past crime rate) to the hair-on-fire attitude we see now (presumably from people too young to have any perspective on the issue) if someone merely engages in open carry in a public place.

              There's more to the problem of gun violence than simple availability, either in general terms of firearm acquisition or specific cases like being allowed to concealed or open carry...

              •  20+ years of "brainwashing" have brought (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ER Doc, BlackSheep1

                us to this moment.

                http://www.examiner.com/...

                "What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that it’s not acceptable, it’s not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we’ve changed our attitudes about cigarettes,” he said in January 1995.

                "We need to do this every day of the week and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way," Holder advised.

                It still makes me ill that he's mostly succeeded in "manufacturing consent" against a basic right, especially in light of the Supreme Court's decision claiming the police have no constitutional duty to protect anyone.

                It's really simple, as I see it, if I'm denied the right to self defense with the most effective tool man has created and our government won't, how does a physically weak, disabled or frail older person do so?  We are being denied the most basic universal human right to protect ourselves.

                The only thing that give me hope here, violent crimes have been going down but on the flip side, there are more and more Americans being forced into perpetual poverty:

                http://nortonbooks.typepad.com/...

                5. Low-income people are more likely to be victims

                The NCVS data reveal that those with household incomes below $7,500 are more than three times more likely to be robbed than those with incomes above $75,000.

                If 80% of us are in or near poverty than THERE IS NO MIDDLE CLASS.
                By pretending that poverty does not exist and lumping everyone in a mythical middle we are deluding ourselves from the real crisis facing America, because a nation where 80% of the people are at or near poverty is a nation that is one bad month away from total disaster.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 07:04:06 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Is that the FBI number for homicide? (2+ / 0-)

                A link to your reference would be nice so neophytes can follow your argument.

                How many hijackings had there been in the 60s? I don't know why anyone would hang all of gun regulation on a single parameter, homicide, when one thing changed radically in the 70s - bus hijackings and plane hijackings. In the 80s it was carjacking.

                But yes, I agree it's a shame that it was easier to subject everyone to an invasion of privacy than it was to demand the airlines to install secure cockpit doors.

                "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 08:07:49 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Actually, with only a very few exceptions... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, ER Doc, BlackSheep1

              transport of long-guns between states is relatively simple.  

              http://www.tsa.gov/...

              http://en.wikipedia.org/...

              A few states/areas are notable for their insistence on violating these laws, cue the usual suspects (IL, NY, MA, NJ, DC....).

              Your hate-mail will be graded.

              by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 06:02:52 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, most times when someone refers (3+ / 0-)

              to a concealed carry weapons permit, or CCW (or any of the other acronyms) they are talking about pistols or revolvers.

              Am I correct in my initial study, that most states don't regulate long guns except to require a hunting license and limit hunting to specific guns/ammo during a given hunting season.

              e.g. certain guns/ammo are allowed for grouse, pheasant, duck, turkey...

              Certain guns/ammo are allowed for dear, elk, etc.

              "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

              by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 08:03:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  It's quite astonishing (10+ / 0-)

    how keen so many are to trample State's Rights for their own, pet issue, while banging on about the same when it suits them.

    If we have a national reciprocity arrangement, then we need a National Standard to go with it.

    They make the same argument about selling Health Insurance across state lines .... Great idea, lets find the State whose regulations we can destroy (if they have any in the first place), them move there and hawk our crap products to the entire nation.

    If you want to recognise ANYTHING across State lines, then you need to regulate it nationally, or the whole House of Cards comes tumbling down, and ordinary folk are the victims.

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    Who is twigg?

    by twigg on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 05:24:44 PM PDT

    •  Yes, it took decades of research before (9+ / 0-)

      there was any agreement on any definition of driving under the influence or driving while intoxicated.

      I was dumbfounded when I discovered 6 months ago that most states have no prohibitions against selling a gun to someone under the influence of alcohol. There are federal prohibitions against narcotics, but alcohol is not considered a controlled substance with respect to guns.

      This thread was the beginning of my education on that intersection, (alcohol and the RKBA).

      I wrote my first gun diary soon thereafter.
      Background Check 101 - What is a Straw Buyer?

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 05:38:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is there any such prohibition for sale of any... (5+ / 0-)

        manufactured commodity?  Other than more alcohol?

        If there is, I admit I'm ignorant of such a restriction.'

        And I'd have to wonder if this is actually a statistically significant problem in any area of commerce.

        Your hate-mail will be graded.

        by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:47:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I matters re guns because (5+ / 0-)

          a) most gun crime involves alcohol (criminals use alcohol and other drugs to blunt their natural repulsion for violence)

          b) alcohol reduces inhibitions and impairs judgment.

          As they point out in

          "A Review of Legislation Restricting the Intersection of Firearms and Alcohol in the U.S.," Public Health Rep. 2010 Sep-Oct; 125(5): 674–679.

          Injury is the leading cause of alcohol-related death in the United States, and alcohol is the leading risk factor for injury.1,2 Owing to the considerable presence of alcohol in injury events of all types, alcohol's relationship to injury has been the subject of modern scientific investigation for an entire century.3–7 Roughly one-quarter of the alcohol-related injury deaths in the U.S. each year are due to motor vehicle crashes.8 As a result, the great majority of the research dedicated to understanding alcohol's relationship to injury has focused on drunk driving. This work has effectively decreased the number of traffic fatalities involving alcohol,9 and the prevention of drinking and driving has been hailed as one of the top 10 U.S. public health achievements of the 20th century by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).10,11 A nearly equal one-fifth of alcohol-related injury deaths are the result of firearm injuries;8 however, little research has focused on alcohol use and shootings.

          PS I'm very proud of finally learning how to code superscripts in html. Can you tell?

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 10:00:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Heh, well done. (6+ / 0-)

            It took me a while to learn that trick as well.

            But I'll readily admit there are freshly picked carrots with more computer knowledge than myself.

            Any day we learn something new is a good day.

            I see the relationship between alcohol and violence/accidents (hey, I'm in the military, guess what? 8>)  ), but don't see anything linking that relationship to commonly committed gun sales to intoxicated persons.  Based only on my own experiences with gun owners and gun store personnel, I'd say they will go far out of their way to avoid making such a sale.  Liability City if anything bad results.... much like bars and serving badly intoxicated people.

            Your hate-mail will be graded.

            by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 10:18:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Oops, forgot to link the article (4+ / 0-)

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 10:02:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I can't get behind national standards (5+ / 0-)

    What suits rural states doesn't suit some other states. Anyway, I really don't think it's the laws. If some a--hole is about to shoot up a school I don't think concealed carry laws, or prohibition to carry on school grounds, factor into that nuts equation. Laws for the the law abiding. That is why I favor background check rules, including criminal penalties for not adhering to them.

    A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned how to walk forward. Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by notrouble on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 06:24:12 PM PDT

    •  I agree that mass shooters are less likely to (8+ / 0-)

      be impacted by any national standards for safety or proficiency. I think massacre shooters' drive toward infamy as an anti-hero is something that deserves separate research.

      I'm not set in my view, but can get my mind around the idea that regulations for gun possession within the home, or on private property would largely be left to the states. OTOH, since guns travel easily across state lines, out of legal hands in one place into criminal markets in other states, there is a rational argument for national standards for public carry.
      I'm thinking about the value of minimum standards that would include teaching anyone seeking a concealed carry permit basic principles of self defense and de-escalation. I'd support public funding for that. Anyone who seeks a protective order could be offered that training for free, even if they have no plans to carry a gun.

      We could begin teaching those skills in high school, in the 9th grade when teen violence rises sharply. It could be included in gym class.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 06:40:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, except for the fact that... (6+ / 0-)

      Constitutional Rights shouldn't be dependent on geography or population density..... everything else you said seems to be right on.

      Your hate-mail will be graded.

      by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:48:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I can. Basic training with and demonstrated com- (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LilithGardener

      petence in safely handling, maintaining, storing, transporting and using a firearm -- start with something like a single-shot rifle. Work up through a magazine fed semiautomatic, rifle or pistol. Have that be a universal, no homeschooler-waiver, requirement for high school graduation in the US of A. Not an optional course. A required course. Public school, private school, preparatory academy, religious school. It's a matter of safety.

      (Just like reading and writing and arithmetic to a basic competency level are matters of safety, and learning to not outspend your income.)

      There's nothing there to say a rural area couldn't teach additional courses (driver's ed isn't common in Texas schools in the cities any more, but many small-town / county schools do teach it, sometimes with a fee to cover the insurance, gas &c on the vehicle used) should they wish / need to do so.

      LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

      by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 02:57:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes & no (0+ / 0-)

        What do we cut to make room for weapons training?

        I love the notion of self sufficiency. That's how I was raised (in the country).

        Now I live in NYC. Self sufficiency in the city has a whole skill set that no one would mandate for rural schools.

        There are millions of kids who will never come in contact with a gun. Some will probably not ever even learn to drive. E.g. in NYC, high school students take the subway to school. They don't drive, they take public transit. We don't have yellow buses. They don't have cars.

        Should we mandate driver's ed for those kids? In the trade offs what gets dropped to make room for driver's ed? What  gets dropped in favor of gun training?

        "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

        by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:15:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  we don't cut. That's the wrong approach. We teach (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          notrouble, Joy of Fishes

          kids -- and adults too for that matter -- all the skills, from looking both ways before you walk across the street to how to recognize the peculiar stink of a meth lab before you open a door into it.

          What happens to those kids if they ever move out of NYC to upstate, or go to college somewhere without mass transit? Are we doing them favors leaving them helpless?

          I taught a NYC native VISTA volunteer to drive a standard transmission a few years ago. Took half a day in a big parking lot. Tripled his utility to the organizations he worked with just having him able to handle their (donated) truck on the road.

          So we quit teaching to "the" test. That's step one.
          Curriculum for kids in <3th grade = reading / writing / math / basic study skills, simple science (kitchen chemistry: the baking soda volcano, or what makes yeast bread rise; kitchen physics: why you shouldn't rinse your hands in actual boiling water, but you should your dishes -- whoops, that's bio/health too, but oh well), and music -- singing, reading the notation, playing simple instruments -- think recorder or tambourine or ukelele, not garage-band or marching-band stuff.

          Starting in 4th grade, instruments -- piccolo, tuba, violin, etc. Let the child choose the one s/he wants to learn and the venue -- school band or orchestra or choir. Now is when you start formal PE too, instead of random playground sports / swings and see-saws. A good foundation in yoga-based or calisthenics/stretching, the principles of warming up and cooling down, and activities as fun as they are strenuous -- dance, trampoline, swimming, basketball, polebending or team roping --- and here's where the rest of the curriculum needs to expand. Kids who've been seeing pictures from Hubble need to be submitting experiments to the ISS by 5th or 6th grade, and learning to do stuff like make correct change. I'd start basic traffic safety (walk across the street, ride a bike alone) in 1st grade, and driver's ed in high school. Have the NYC kids do labs on weekends (or at night under the lights in the parking lot at the stadium). Firearms safety? You can't start too soon, IMNVHO. Once upon a time most high schools had firing ranges -- I bet many still do, just shut down. If those don't see whether the Scouts or CampFire folks might know of a place to exercise the skills being taught.

          LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

          by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 04:09:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I have problems with this (0+ / 0-)

        One of the biggest problems I have is WHO would be teaching and WHAT MESSAGE the kids would get.  

        I imagine NRA freaks lining up around the block to get certified to do this.  Sorry--if I had a kid, I wouldn't want anyone involved with the NRA within 10 miles of his/her class.  

        I guess I'm not the type to trust a total stranger to stick a firearm in my child's hands or the hands of his classmates...and I'd SERIOUSLY question the judgment of any parent who is.  

        You RKBAers don't appear to think through any of your ideas....

        Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

        by Mark Mywurtz on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 09:38:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe you should look into the course material.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KVoimakas

          and audit some classes before having such knee-jerk claims of "I imagine NRA freaks" and " trust a total stranger to stick a firearm in my child's hands or the hands of his classmates".

          Ignorance is a poor basis for decision-making.

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 09:45:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The same material can be presented with (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener

            any kind of bias.  And obviously the people who would gravitate toward "providing this service" (ahem) would clearly tend to be very pro-gun, anti-regulation, and a good many of them would be NRA assholes (though you'll never admit it).  Sorry, I wouldn't want anyone affiliated with the NRA anywhere near my child--who, by the way, WOULD be a total stranger in many cases unless we NOW have to discuss having some stupid "Meet your kid's gun instructor night!" at the school or something.  

            Until you RKBA people can loudly denounce the NRA and its ideals, you won't get a sympathetic ear from me.

            Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

            by Mark Mywurtz on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:38:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I can't rec this comment even though I (0+ / 0-)

          agree with your main point.

          Please leave the personal insults behind so we can welcome/discuss the rest of your perspective.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 12:07:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Concealed carry vs. Open carry (10+ / 0-)

    Far many more states have concealed carry licenses than do open carry licenses.

    This always struck me as strange.  In my mind, anyone that WANTS to conceal the fact they have a gun must be up to no good.

    When I ask my gun-owning friends about this, they told me something surprising: that it is more dangerous to the gun-owner to openly carry a weapon, and of course, more upsetting to the (non-gun owning) public to have lots of people going around openly carrying guns.

    For this reason, it easier to get a concealed carry law passed thru the legislature.

    Do you have any information on how reciprocity might work out for those few states that allow open carry, and the many states that prohibit open carry?

    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 06:35:40 PM PDT

    •  I have to disagree with you about open carry (7+ / 0-)

      There are lots of reasons to carry a concealed firearm and I'm among those that want people to be trained and licensed and then I never want to see their gun in public.

      Open carry, I'm afraid allows guns to become an accessory, rather than a tool that is brought out only when it is needed and is about to be used.

      Open carry always demands attention. It's impossible to ignore an openly carried gun, and it definitely changes the conversation and the social dynamics for everyone present. You immediately must consider whether the person is competent, sober, and in a calm state of being. You will be reviewing everything you know about the person's mental and emotional state, their values, politics, and potential purpose for carrying their gun on this particular day to this particular location.

      There is an additional argument for concealed carry. If concealed carry is prohibited then criminals would be the only ones carrying concealed. Mandated open carry could enable criminals to plan an attack where they first neutralize any/all those who are legally armed.

      Of course the social dynamics are context dependent. E.g. during hunting season it's normal to see a hunters walking together and openly carrying hunting rifles, and sometimes also carrying a handgun holstered on their hip. That's a context in which being heavily armed is consistent with the purpose of hunting and is not, by itself cause for alarm.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 07:06:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Stop it. (2+ / 0-)

        There is no good evidence that guns prevent crime.

        But we have one hundred thousand people shot so we have absolute proof that guns cause crime.

        •  We don't need absolute proof (4+ / 0-)

          We need to face the fact that since December the country is talking about guns. And will continue to talk about guns. It has only been five years since Heller and we are just at the very early stage of redefining what the Second Amendment means for the 21st century.

          You've come to the right place if you are prepared to open your mind to evidence for/against regulating guns. To become effective advocates for/against gun rights we need to know the law.

          Have you looked up your state yet? Do you know what your state requires to issue a concealed carry permit to your  neighbor? Your cousin? Your ex-partner who might decide to stalk you in the future?

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 07:41:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Animism? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          oldpunk, ER Doc, gerrilea

          Interesting.....

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:56:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Unless (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea, KVoimakas, andalusi, FrankRose
          There is no good evidence that guns prevent crime.
          Unless you count the recent CDC study on gun violence which said that guns are better as a self-defense tool than anything else available.

          Personally, I think that stopping serious injury or death to myself from someone else's hostile actions counts as "preventing crime".

          But we have one hundred thousand people shot so we have absolute proof that guns cause crime.
          I suppose that number is accurate as long as we are counting suicides and accidents as crime. Otherwise, not so much.
          •  Which CDC study? (5+ / 0-)
            "Unless you count the recent CDC study on gun violence which said that guns are better as a self-defense tool than anything else available. "
            I would like to see that CDC study.  Can you give me a reference or a link?

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 07:17:22 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  That one hundred thousand people shot is (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FrankRose, PavePusher

            proof criminals use guns in committing crime. There is a difference ... many people deny that it exists, but it is so.

            The gun is like the knife is like the baseball bat is like the privately-owned-automobile.

            It's the user who's the determining factor in what it gets used for.

            Put meat on the table? Clean fish? Play a ball game? Go to the store?

            Or kill somebody?

            It's all up to the person.

            LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

            by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:24:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not really (3+ / 0-)

              about 2/3 are suicides, and there is a significant chunk of kids/teens shooting themselves, their friends...

              "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

              by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:38:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  'Scuse me ... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                LilithGardener, FrankRose, PavePusher

                but, if it's successful, how does one prosecute suicide?
                And if it's not, how come the person isn't getting help for the issues driving that impulse, instead of being prosecuted?

                Now. I think I'm a minority here, but to me, suicide is not a crime UNLESS you use some method in the process that puts others at risk, or you traumatize people through suicide-by-cop.

                Is the loss of life tragic? Almost certainly yes.
                But faced with incurable degenerative disease, I could see making that choice. Or in a "Captain Phillips'' situation, even.

                In terms of the kids shooting themselves / peers ... that's on the parents who left the firearms accessible, IMO.

                LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

                by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:47:28 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think we're in agreement (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Glen The Plumber

                  I was objecting to your statement that 100,000 shot reflects criminal use of guns.

                  I think the suicides fall under a public health crisis, not a criminality crisis. I'm curious about some of what I've read about assisted suicide protocols. That when people have an option to talk with their doctor, in the process of talking through their options they decide they want to keep living.

                  I don't know, but suspect that alcohol is a big factor in gun suicides. The cost of suicides are born by those who survive.

                  Definitely agree that children and teens getting a hold of guns is the fault of the person who failed to secure their gun.

                  "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                  by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:52:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  This is fascinating (4+ / 0-)

        This dynamic of human psychology and guns is fascinating!

        In my mind, the guy who wants to carry lethal power and conceal MUST be up to no good.

        To you, the guy who openly carries his lethal power around is up to no good.  (And the issue about intimidation and implied threat is right on, IMO,)

        What is the appropriate way to carry your lethal tools?  What would Jesus do?

        Police are highly trained in weapons use - they carry openly.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 08:50:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  How many criminals carry their guns in the open? (3+ / 0-)

          Police carry their guns in the open.

          How many criminals carry their guns in the open?

          "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

          by Hugh Jim Bissell on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 08:52:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I am used to being around (5+ / 0-)

            people who do both, conceal and open carry. The sight of someone carrying doesn't immediately make my hair go up, the behavior of the person does. But, for many people seeing someone openly carrying is upsetting, it scares them and I do understand that. CC allows someone to carry w/out freaking others out. How someone carries doesn't afford knowledge of intentions.

            And daddy won't you take me back to Muhlenberg County Down by the Green River where Paradise lay. Well, I'm sorry my son, but you're too late in asking Mister Peabody's coal train has hauled it away. John Prine

            by high uintas on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:37:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Do you carry fists? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ER Doc, BlackSheep1

          Oh my.....

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:56:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  My fists only have a range of two feet or so (6+ / 0-)

            My fists only have a range of two feet or so.

            A gun of course has a range measured in hundreds if not thousands of feet.

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 06:53:34 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  But they are still lethal weapons. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ER Doc

              And by bringing in range as a criteria, you've moved your goal-posts.

              Your hate-mail will be graded.

              by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 08:51:03 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  My fist have never killed kids (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Mark Mywurtz, Glen The Plumber

                My fist have never been involved in a mass killing.

                And it is safe to say my fists will NEVER be involved in a mass killing.  Had I gone to an elementary school and tried to use my fists to kill lots of kids, I can pretty much guarantee you that I could not kill more than one: by the time I was finished killing one kid with my fists, all the other kids would have run away to safety, and the cops would be there taking me down.

                Why is it you want to obvious explained to you?

                "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 12:43:47 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  My guns have never killed kids. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  andalusi, BlackSheep1, PavePusher

                  My guns have never been involved in a mass killing.

                  And it is safe to say my firearms will never be involved in a mass killing.

                  •  I wouldn't say *never*, KV: if you sell them or (3+ / 0-)

                    will them to someone who's not as careful about not having them stolen, they could be misused.

                    LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

                    by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:28:19 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Then they're not mine are they? (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PavePusher, BlackSheep1

                      That sounds flippant but the truth is I sell to people I know or people who get a background check OR people who have a carry permit. And once it's sold, it's not mine anymore.

                      •  But what I'm suggesting is that they're yours (0+ / 0-)

                        NOW, and while they're under your' control they're safe; and that makes them safe NOW. Sadly, not everybody is / will be as careful as you. It's a very uncomfortable truth... but it's a truth nonetheless. Are you saying you'd never consider them recoverable if they were stolen? Would that mean they no longer mattered to you at all?

                        I know if mine were stolen, I would want them returned (I still check around for the one taken from my Dad's house a few months before he died). But if they'd been used in a separate crime, I would be more than willing to have them kept as evidence UNTIL the matter resolved. After that I would want them back -- same as I would any of my property that was stolen.  

                        LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

                        by BlackSheep1 on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 03:41:48 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

          •  I do, and feet. Also elbows, knees & teeth. (3+ / 0-)

            Never unarmed. Furthermore, I live by the Gibbs rule: never go anywhere without a knife. Admittedly, the other day visiting JSC, it was the dinky one in the nail clippers, but still ... (Yes, it did come in handy. The ketchup bottle still had the seal on it under the lid ...)

            LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

            by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:27:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Who cares what a fictional guy would do? (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea, PavePusher, ER Doc, andalusi

          Police aren't highly trained in firearm use. Not most anyway (excepting SWAT, HRT, etc).

          I've open carried and continue to carry concealed. Why don't I carry openly anymore? Because people assume I'm a bad guy. So they can be happy in their ignorance when I'm sitting in A&W with a concealed firearm versus an openly carried one.

          •  Police vs. civilain training (6+ / 0-)

            I like this presumption that police are badly trained so it is up to the gun owners to be the police.

            100% of police receive training in firearm use.  What percent of civilians receive training in firearm use?

            I assume police must receive a certain amount of training in firearm use to become police.  What percentage of civilians receive an equivalent (or greater) amount of training in firearm use?

            I know you are convinced you are a better gunman than any police, but what about all those other civilian gun owners around you?  Are you as confident of their skills?

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 06:59:05 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No. That's not the presumption at all. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ER Doc, PavePusher, andalusi

              I made no comment about civilian training. My point was that LEO firearm training for non-speciality officers isn't as intensive (or extensive) as most people think.

              100% of Michigan permit holders receive firearm training. It's there, even though it's just the basics.

              I have no idea what that % is.

              What you know is wrong. What I've said, repeatedly, is that I have outshot some LEOs on the range. This does not make me better than any LEO.

              •  Presumptuous (6+ / 0-)

                Your presumption is that police are badly trained so it is up to you to defend me at A+W.

                Your presumption is you are a better defender than the police (just the sight of police standing around in an A+W will prevent a criminal attack - a much better defense for all than you opening fire in a restaurant AFTER bad guys stage a hold up).

                Your presumption is that I want you and your gun around me at A+W (I am safer away from guns and bullets than I am when guns and bullets are present).

                "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 07:26:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Actually no, I won't defend you at A&W. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ER Doc, PavePusher, BlackSheep1

                  The conversation from the other day crystalized that in my mind. I'll protect my family and my friends. Other than that, I'll just go away. Why bother trying to protect someone that won't help themselves?

                  I am a better defender of me and mine than the police because, you know, I'm actually there if I'm attacked/robbed/assaulted/etc. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

                  And quite frankly, I don't give a damn if you want me around you or not. There are 49 states with some form of civilian concealed carry (and Illinois is on the way!) If you're in the US, there's someone like me most likely nearby. (With some rare exceptions.)

                  I'll tell you what though. I won't frequent your house or business if you have a "no guns" sign or if you mention it before I set foot on your property.

          •  so get one of those CCW badges (0+ / 0-)

            and casually affix to your belt. Nobody'll get close enough to try to see what kind of cop you are, and that iron on your hip won't scare 'em anymore.

            Unless they're up to no good, in which case you maybe want to notice how twitchy they get.

            LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

            by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:29:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  P.S. Re: Police... highly trained.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ER Doc, BlackSheep1

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 08:52:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What did the study show? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener, Glen The Plumber

            Well, don't leave us hanging: what did the Rand study show?

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 12:46:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  NYC website has a free copy of the study (3+ / 0-)

              http://www.nyc.gov/...

              There is an entire section on training, but if you want to skip to the observations and recommendations, they start on page 35. In a nutshell, though, the study found that the firearms training was crafted to meet legal standards and fell short in the goal of real-life use of firearms. The

              They also noted that the NYPD have advanced ranges, and also that staff firearms trainers are aware of the need for better training. The NYPD has developed a tactical shooting regimen where officers are trained on moving targets, firing from different positions, firing while moving, firing as part of a team, etc., but due to costs, the course and the advanced ranges are not used as part of the semiannual firearm requalification tests.

              What the semiannual exams do consist of is a lecture with slides, a chance to practice with up to 45 rounds on  stationary paper targets at fixed ranges of 7, 15, and 25 yards, and the actual test, which is firing 50 rounds at stationary paper targets at the same fixed ranges. A score of 38 hits or above is a pass: any remedial instruction or problems are not noted in the officer's file as long as he or she achieves the 38-shot pass.

              That is not to say that NYPD officers do not ever receive other training, whether optional or mandatory, and certainly there are officers who choose on their own time to shoot more than the minimum 100 rounds a year needed to qualify. The requirements listed in the study, though, do not provide proof of a particularly high level of proficiency with firearms.

              But I will say that the average gun owner probably shoots at least 100 rounds per visit to the firing range. Though on the flip side, they're also not graded on accuracy, supervised by an instructor, or required to shoot at a specific distance.

      •  Sigh.... (6+ / 0-)
        Open carry always demands attention. It's impossible to ignore an openly carried gun....
        Sorry, this may be your personal experience, but I can assure you it's not at all true for everyone.

        Really, you should visit Arizona.  Expand your horizons.

        Your hate-mail will be graded.

        by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:55:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  See, I'm of the opposite opinion (3+ / 0-)

        Open carry shows me things.

        That hot-pink pistol dangling from a keychain? I don't wanna be around that chick. Esta no bueno.

        That twitchy guy in line at the bank with a hogleg under one arm or sticking out above his belt in back? Aquel tipo nervioso con un arma podría ser un ladrón, o sólo un cabrón inútil. ¿Por qué debería yo querer entrar en su camino? Esto no es nada bueno para nadie o nada, también. Or he could be FB&I, AT&F, or DEA. Same difference ...

        The guy who's got a scoped pistol in a thigh holster? I might want to ask him what he's hunting with it, and how well he likes the way it works ...

        LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

        by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:21:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, all context dependent (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BlackSheep1, Joy of Fishes

          not necessarily safer. Certain kinds of open carry are no cause for alarm in rural areas where that is part of the normal day to day culture.

          And it's because of your shared experience that you see that thigh holster, or some such, and might strike up a conversation about a common interest.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:45:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sigh. I coveted a good tiedown (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener, PavePusher

            holster the whole time I had to wear a pistol in the Air Force.
            Would've saved so much aggravation, not to mention bruises.

            LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

            by BlackSheep1 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 03:49:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  This keeps coming up and I reject it (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            earlybird, LilithGardener

            this idea that "Oh, it's a rural area and people are used to guns so anything goes."  

            A bullet will kill you in a rural area just as easy as it will in an urban area.  Stupid behavior with guns in a rural area is as dangerous as stupid behavior with guns in an urban area.  People might be less willing to speak up in a rural area because of the dominant anti-gun-regulation culture of rural areas, but that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people who feel unsafe with the current permissive state of affairs.  

            Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

            by Mark Mywurtz on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 10:04:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Really? Who is saying this: (0+ / 0-)
              people are used to guns so anything goes
              ??

              Open Carry is not, in and of itself, stupid behavior.  What you seem to be objecting to is dangerous handling.  A gun in a holster doesn't equate to that.

              Your hate-mail will be graded.

              by PavePusher on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 10:13:14 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  That's not what I said (0+ / 0-)
              "Oh, it's a rural area and people are used to guns so anything goes."  
              I do agree with you that there are likely people who keep their mouth shut for fear of reprisal. But that's true in cities as well as in other places.

              "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

              by LilithGardener on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 12:16:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Re Open Carry (4+ / 0-)

      I haven't made any systematic study of open carry laws yet. Off the top of my head, I think Vermont's law is in their state constitution, so for Vermont to adopt any national standard would require changing their constitution.

      IIRC, one of Georgia's concealed carry laws was upheld in part because open carry is available there without restriction. Since open carry was available for self defense the court rejected the argument that regulating concealed carry was unconstitutional.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 07:47:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The people who tell you that OC is more dangerous (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ER Doc, gerrilea, BlackSheep1

      ... do they provide evidence to base that claim on?

      Based on my experience, I'd bet on "No."

      Your hate-mail will be graded.

      by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:53:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The dangers of open carry (7+ / 0-)

        Of course your mileage may vary.

        This is what gun owners themselves have told me about the dangers of open carry.

        Let's say you are openly carrying your assault rifle around town, when a group of armed men decide to rob the local bank.  The first thing the armed men want to do is neutralize anyone who has got a gun.  You are in danger.

        Next the police show up.  They of course are looking for bad guys with guns.  You have a gun.  You are in danger.

        So, my understanding is that open carry makes you a target, for both the bad guys and the police.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 06:48:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This is exactly right (6+ / 0-)

          In any crime/live shooter situation the police have to neutralize every active gun because they don't know who has a license to carry, they don't know what the civilian's training/experience is, and they don't know what happened prior to their arrival.

          In the immediate moment it's a big distraction, and anyone with 2 neurons firing will be very intentionally putting their gun down and their hands up the moment the first police officer is on the scene.

          Unless you like staring down the barrel of a gun you won't ever put yourself in this situation.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 08:39:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Heh, and your side says WE worry about... (3+ / 0-)

          low probability events....

          (And I will continue to note that you're moving goal posts with "you are openly carrying your assault rifle around town".  But I digress...)

          "The first thing the armed men want to do is neutralize anyone who has got a gun."

          Please give us an estimate of how frequently this occurs against non-uniformed Citizens, as opposed to uniformed security or police.  You make it sound fairly common, but I don't recall hearing about any such instances.  Anything is possible, I suppose....  Seriously, this gets hypothesized constantly, but it doesn't really seem to be a noticable problem In Real Life(tm).

          "Next the police show up."

          Now, getting at the real meat of the issue, this falls under the header of "what you do during/after an armed confrontation when the police show up".  This gets stated repeatedly in most CC training, any decent additional self-defense training and discussed nearly ad naseum on most firearms groups.

          Basically, with modifications for location/scenario:

          1.  When the police show up to a crime scene, if you are holding a gun in your hands, put your gun down before they even get out of the car.  (Preferably as soon as you see them, if it is safe to do so.)  Hold your hands in the air and follow their commands exactly.

          2.  If your sidearm is holstered or slung, do not touch it or move a hand towards it.  Hold your hands up, attempt to inform the police that you are lawfully armed, and follow commands exactly.

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 11:05:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Recced for this (5+ / 0-)
            Now, getting at the real meat of the issue, this falls under the header of "what you do during/after an armed confrontation when the police show up".  This gets stated repeatedly in most CC training, any decent additional self-defense training and discussed nearly ad naseum on most firearms groups.

            Basically, with modifications for location/scenario:

            1.  When the police show up to a crime scene, if you are holding a gun in your hands, put your gun down before they even get out of the car.  (Preferably as soon as you see them, if it is safe to do so.)  Hold your hands in the air and follow their commands exactly.

            2.  If your sidearm is holstered or slung, do not touch it or move a hand towards it.  Hold your hands up, attempt to inform the police that you are lawfully armed, and follow commands exactly.

            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

            by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 11:08:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Low-probability events (3+ / 0-)

            Of course, very few states allow open carry (because the LEGISLATURES have decided it is too dangerous to the public),  so having armed criminals in the middle of a criminal act shoot openly carrying citizens is indeed a rare event.

            I am guessing (tho' I know of no actual data to back this up) that the incidence of armed criminals shooting at uniformed and armed security personnel is greater than the incidence of armed criminals shooting at openly carrying citizens.  What do you think?

            NONTEHELESS, I stand by my original point that openly carrying a gun makes you a target of both bad guys and good guys with guns.  And for this very reason, few states allow open carry.

            Why is it that you think so few states allow open carry, and so many states allow concealed carry

            I have never had gun safety training, so I am assuming that what you say about training armed citizens in how to respond to police is exactly right (but entirely irrelevant to the point)

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 12:55:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  P.S. I should also point out... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LilithGardener, BlackSheep1

          that in the vast majority of self-defense incidents I've read, the incident is essentially over long before the police arrive, so there's plenty of time to prepare for them.

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 11:07:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, and if police aren't trained to deal with... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LilithGardener, BlackSheep1

          lawfully armed Citizens, no matter what the situation is, they are lawsuit bait.

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 11:08:34 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Stand Your Ground laws (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          earlybird, LilithGardener

          make open carriers into targets as well.  

          Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

          by Mark Mywurtz on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 10:09:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not sure what you mean by... (4+ / 0-)
      how reciprocity might work out for those few states that allow open carry, and the many states that prohibit open carry
      If you are in a state that has reciprocity with your home state, you have to obey the laws of the state you are actually present in.

      Your hate-mail will be graded.

      by PavePusher on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 06:08:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, I'm not aware of the existence of "open (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shamash, gerrilea, LilithGardener

      carry" licenses. I haven't researched it, but AFAIK, open carry is a matter of state law explicitly permitting any person who can legally own a gun being also allowed to carry that gun openly. Concealed carry almost always requires a permit, but open carry is a blanket right in those places.

      -7.25, -6.26

      We are men of action; lies do not become us.

      by ER Doc on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 06:13:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Very thorough report, LilithGardener. (8+ / 0-)

    Thank you as always for your earnest attention to help us move toward better understanding of these complicated issues.

  •  Rec'd and Rec'd for the broad references..... (10+ / 0-)

    and thoughtful tone.

    2 minor points of contention:

    1. Thank you, but I really don't deserve any credit for the reference, it's a widely known source.

    2. "May Issue - The state grants law enforcement some discretion in deciding whether to issue a concealed weapons license."

         Ummm, no.  In "May Issue" states, the issuing authority has total discretion and control over issuing, subject only to a reversing court decision.  I'm sure everyone here would scream blue murder if any other Constitutional or Civil Right was regulated that way.

    Your hate-mail will be graded.

    by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 08:08:42 PM PDT

  •  P.S. Thank you very much for the invite. n/t (7+ / 0-)

    Your hate-mail will be graded.

    by PavePusher on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 08:09:30 PM PDT

  •  Though there is something to be said for (6+ / 0-)

    uniformity, I find the need less than compelling. Not only do laws on many topics vary from state, but even limitations on fundamental freedoms such as free speech vary widely. So called "reasonable" restrictions on time, place, and manner, and the process (and fee) for exercising this basic right are all over the map.  

    An aside:
    Though abbreviations like CCW refer to weapons,and we talk about the right to keep and bear arms, these laws are petty much all about guns. I have owned guns and still own a gun, but I'm primarily a knife person. Laws about knives are different from and generally more restrictive than those about pistols, even though their range is far,far less. This is a parallel issue that really needs to be addressed at some point in time.

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 08:52:41 PM PDT

  •  Are you a shill? This is appaling.n/t (0+ / 0-)

    There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

    by oldpotsmuggler on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 09:59:04 PM PDT

    •  P.S. I knew I was making the right decision (0+ / 0-)

      when you demanded that I confrom to your inexplicable orthodoxy.

      There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

      by oldpotsmuggler on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 10:02:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rule No. 1 RTFD (8+ / 0-)

      Your assignment, if you choose to accept it, is to look up any of these cases and either engage the topic of today's diary or prepare to engage when we publish a diary on these cases.

      Barriers that stand in the way of National Reciprocity

      First, hundreds of gun laws have been challenged since Heller and the vast majority are being upheld. Lower courts are giving state and local governments wide latitude to address local crime and regulate the right to own and carry guns in public. Lower courts are holding that it is elected governments, not the courts, that are in the best position to balance protecting individual expression of the RKBA with the duty of the state to reduce crime and ensure public safety for everyone.

      Second, there are no national standards for gun ownership, lawful use and concealed carry. There are no national standards for safety training or proficiency testing. There is no national agreement on requirements for licensing gun ownership and use. And there are no national standards that sanction negligent and criminal gun owners when they create a menace for themselves and others.  

      Third, there is no agreement in the lower courts that concealed carry falls within the scope of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The supreme court has already declined to review New York's concealed carry law, which is one of the most strict concealed carry laws in the country, (Kachalsky v. Cacace, in April 2013).

      Most notably, out of six federal courts of appeal that have directly reviewed challenges to restrictions on concealed or open carry, five have upheld the laws at issue in their entirety.,28 For example, the Second Circuit in Kachalsky v. Cacace rejected a challenge to New York’s requirement that applicants for a concealed carry permit obtain a license by demonstrating that they have “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.”29 Although the court assumed that the Second Amendment had “some” application outside of the home, it found that the law satisfied intermediate scrutiny because New York’s legislature “reasonably concluded that only individuals having a bona fide reason to possess handguns should be allowed to introduce them into the public sphere.”30 The Third Circuit upheld a New Jersey law similar to the New York law upheld in Kachalsky by finding that such restrictions on the concealed carrying of weapons are “long-standing” regulations under Heller and therefore presumptively valid.31The Tenth Circuit went even further in Peterson v. Martinez, holding flatly that “the Second Amendment does not confer a right to carry concealed weapons.”32

      28 Peterson v. Martinez, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3776 (10th Cir. Feb. 22, 2013); Woollard v. Gallagher, 712 F.3d 865 (4th Cir. 2013); Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933, 940-42 (7th Cir. 2012); Kachalsky v. Cacace, 701 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2012); Hightower v. Boston, 693 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2012).
      29 Kachalsky, 701 F.3d at 86 (quotations and citations omitted).
      30 Id. at 89, 98-99.
      31 Drake v. Filko, No. 12-1150, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15635 (3rd. Cir. Jul. 31, 2013). The New Jersey law at issue had its origins in the early 20th centrury, roughly the same time the first prohibitions on felons possessing firearms (which Heller called “long-standing”) were enacted.
      32 Peterson, 707 F. 3d at 1211.  

      ...Continue reading Post-Heller Litigation Summary (September 5, 2013)

      We are a large and diverse country. Gun culture in cities is very different than gun culture in rural areas. This primer on concealed carry law reviews important legal terms relating to guns, and introduces the concept of state reciprocity for concealed carry permits. As appealing as it may sound to have national standards for firearms permits I don't believe that a one-size-fits all approach will get anywhere near passage into federal law during my lifetime.

      You might consider these to be our terms and conditions for participating here.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Wed Oct 02, 2013 at 10:40:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So, hide the truth in the legalese? That's been an (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        Tom Seaview

        NRA tactic for at least 50 years that I know of.

        I got my J.D. in 1976. At the time, I was more gungho on 2A than KV is today (though no one paid me a cent for it). And I still place an extremely high value on individual access to an AK47/AR15, for people being killed by oppressors in Third World countires.

        But our country has evolved to the point where gun nuts like you are no part of the solution.

        I do give you credit for the best camouflage job that I've ever seen, though.

        There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

        by oldpotsmuggler on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 07:26:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So you're not here to elect more or better (7+ / 0-)

          Democrats, got it.

          Bill Clinton to Democrats: Don’t trivialize gun culture

          But, Clinton warned, the issue of guns has a special emotional resonance in many rural states — and simply dismissing pro-gun arguments is counterproductive.

          -cut-

          “All these polls that you see saying the public is for us on all these issues — they are meaningless if they’re not voting issues,” Clinton said.

          -cut-

          “Do not be self-congratulatory about how brave you for being for this” gun control push, he said. “The only brave people are the people who are going to lose their jobs if they vote with you.”

          You really want to get the Republicans elected when you say this:
          But our country has evolved to the point where gun nuts like you are no part of the solution.
          I'll be standing against your bullshit at ever turn, as a Progressive Liberal Democrat and NON-GUN OWNER.

          Deal with it.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 06:59:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's a point you need to win from Markosn/t (0+ / 0-)

            There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

            by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:31:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um, did Markos say that "we gun nuts" (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              oldpunk

              are not to be brought into the conversation?

              Are we now forbidden from espousing what we think our government policies going forward should be?

              If he said that, could you provide a link for us?

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 06:59:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The way I read it he has clearly said "fight NRA (0+ / 0-)

                to the death" (paraphrasing, of course), and I've never seen you (in the year or so that we've been locked in hand to hand combat) be very far away from the party line.

                You know, you act like we don't have a history, and that you've never exposed yourself.

                There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

                by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 07:57:04 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  "Exposed myself"??? We have a history??? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  oldpunk

                  Party Line???

                  So, I can only surmise that you believe I'm part of the NRA, correct?  As for any "history" we have, as I stated above, I'll fight anyone whom wishes to get Republicans elected.

                  When you espouse banning or regulating firearms that will not reduce violence, including gun violence, I will stand and be counted against such red herrings.  They only serve to energize the one issue voters against us and as Colorado has shown, we will be removed from office.

                  I honestly can't believe we haven't moved on from this issue and focused on ending the war on drugs, ending unfunded resource wars and ending the destruction Republicanism has brought to this nation for the past 30 yrs.  The Overton Window has been pushed so far to the right that we have a "democratic" POTUS, that I voted for twice, telling me his policies are that of a moderate Republican!

                  How the fuck did we get to this point again? Gun Control!

                  No thanks.  But go ahead and exclude us from this discussion, soon you'll find yourself talking to a wall.

                  The vote on national gun control failed and its been six months and what has our party accomplished in that time? NOTHING.  Millions of Americans are still in perpetual poverty, millions more are getting ever closer to it, millions upon millions are unemployed.  The banksters are still stealing homes and committing crimes against humanity and doing so with impunity.

                  The crimes of our government have become ever more egregious as they pass laws to protect the interests of corporations like Monsanto, the Military Industrial Complex, the Prison Industrial Complex and the New American Police State exemplified in the NSA.

                  The extremists in our party have taken hold of the microphone and are pursuing their demagoguery on guns to the point of self-destruction.

                  So you keep on keeping on, I'll be pushing for policy initiatives that will actually help us all and reduce violence that will certainly include gun violence.

                  I'll be pushing to elect more and better Democrats that used to be like my democrats of old, the ones that got things done and helped all Americans.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Sat Oct 05, 2013 at 01:42:20 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  please stop with the accusations... (8+ / 0-)

          you are wrong about this group and our goals.

          discuss the topic of the diary...or be HR'd for threadjacking and insults.

          We are not broke, we are being robbed...but we can fight back...#KosKatalogue

          by Glen The Plumber on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 07:02:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  "You might consider these to be our terms and (0+ / 0-)

            conditions for participating here."

            And I might consider that statement to be over the top.

            There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

            by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:34:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  And who has access in 3rd World Countries? (4+ / 0-)

          The Oppressed?  Not so much.

          And I still place an extremely high value on individual access to an AK47/AR15, for people being killed by oppressors in Third World countires.
        •  HR for accusation of paid shillery (4+ / 0-)
          I was more gungho on 2A than KV is today (though no one paid me a cent for it).

          Things are more like they are now than they've ever been before...

          by Tom Seaview on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 07:34:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't know a real (0+ / 0-)

            "accusation" if it jumped up and bit you. But you could check a legal dictionary sometime if you get bored.

            There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

            by oldpotsmuggler on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:28:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Accusing LG of being a "gun nut"?! (4+ / 0-)

          ROFLLLLL!!!!!!!!!

          (No offense intended, LilithGardener.)

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 10:51:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  You could put that J.D. to good use here (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Miggles, Glen The Plumber

          at the great Orange Satan, breaking down some of the legal concepts for those of us who are not schooled in the law.

          Some think I'm a troll, some think I'm a gun nut and some can't seem to make up your mind.

          Good thing I'm armed only with a curious mind, a reasonable command of the English language, and a Daily Kos account. Whatever ignorance I possess and whatever wrong headed ideas I currently hold, what should be abundantly clear is that I need collaborators who have been educated in the law.

          Are you up to it?

          Feel free to start whenever you want.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 12:29:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Two examples for may issue: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    Delaware (if memory serves) is may issue but in practice is shall issue. Hawaii, on the other hand...

    From the Hawaii Reporter (Newspaper) 2/17/06
    In the last 15 years, no law abiding citizen applying for a permit to carry a concealed firearm in Honolulu has
    been granted one -- not one domestic violence victim, not one person whose life was in danger, not one
    person working where they may be robbed at gunpoint. link
  •  Defensive Gun Use - HJB's trilogy is up (2+ / 0-)

    He really breaks down the two studies, goes through the pros/cons of each design, and is now discussing both.

    Defensive Gun Use (Part V) - A Comparison of Two Studies

    This diary is fifth in a series on defensive gun use published by the Firearm Law and Policy group.  Part I reports on defensive gun use as described in the Center for Disease Control review of gun violence in America.  Part II discusses the many difficulties in defining and determining a proper and legal defensive use of a gun.  Part III reviewed the well-known McDowall & Wiersema 1994 study that estimated the incidence of defensive gun use in America.  Part IV reviewed the well-known Kleck & Gertz 1995 study that also estimated the incidence of defensive gun use in America.   This fifth part compares the methods of the two studies.

    "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

    by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 11:05:13 AM PDT

  •  My thoughts on concealed carry in my state (3+ / 0-)

    I am a Californian, which translates to essentially shall not issue in most counties (especially in and around LA and SF), may issue (often with a very high bar) in a few others, and practically shall issue (these are the more rural counties, though perhaps surprisingly, some of them are as strict as the major metro areas). It's a patchwork of different schemes grafted onto the state mandated process with very little oversight or consistency.

    What I would like is for the state to preempt and exclude any additional process or paperwork, thereby requiring every police department or sheriff's department to abide by the same rules. I would like to have an oversight committee to handle appeals and to make sure no one was unfairly receiving or denied permits (celebrities and politicians tend to be the ones allowed permits in places like Los Angeles or San Francisco, which is not just or fair). The new process should be fairly rigorous, including examination of mental health, as well as certification of the ability to safely handle a firearm and demonstration to a supervising officer that you can consistently hit on-target with it. Current state law requires a state-certified course that discusses the legal ramifications and correct practice for concealed carry: that should definitely remain a part of the process.

    But if you do pass all the criteria, then you should be issued the concealed carry permit. That should come with the requirement to put in X amount of hours of rangetime and to also perform a requalification process every two years or so.

    I am not speaking about legalities here, just what I would like to see. And that is in a nutshell that I want to see a standard process that is rigorous but fair, one that involves actual evidence that the person applying knows how to handle the firearm safely and accurately, and that requires evidence on a continuing basis that this is the case. Also an update on the laws and regulations about concealed carry.

    The above encapsulates how I feel about concealed carry generally. I do think that states have a right to regulate the practice of carrying firearms outside the home. I don't think a complete ban on carry would pass constitutional muster with the current SCOTUS bench; I do, however, believe that a wide latitude of permissible limits has a good chance. So what I am saying is that I believe the right to carry does exist, but like every other right, it is not an unlimited one.

    As for national reciprocity, the devil's in the details, but my first impulse is wariness about ordering every state to treat all concealed carry permits equally.

    •  Interesting point (3+ / 0-)

      about a continuing ed requirement. That would help make sure that permit holders remain abreast of changing laws.

      It does seem like permit schemes in "good cause" states have far too much room for county level unfairness and waivers or favors based on "personal connections."  

      Based on my layman's reading of some judicial opinions, I agree that outright bans and laws that effectively create a total ban are presumptively unconstitutional. E.g. the law in Chicago where they mandated range time and banned all civilian ranges in the city. I'm working on a diary about that case, and think the laws was correctly struck down.

      One aspect of licensing that appeals to me is the idea of graduated sanctions, like points on a driver's license, where small mistakes in which there are no injuries could be recorded and fined, and remedied by remedial training. Repeated "mistakes" would eventually enable at least temporary forfeiture a serious injury or gun crime occurs.

      Currently it seems too often the police don't want to bother enforcing laws re negligent discharge, so nothing happens until someone gets shot. And sometimes not even then.

      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

      by LilithGardener on Thu Oct 03, 2013 at 12:26:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site