To carry in all 50 states

[jbombelli]

LEOs current and retired can carry concealed in any US state or territory thanks to a recent federal law.

The shaft is that LEO agencies asked for help in the private and public sectors to get this passed with the promise that they would support a similar measure for private citizens to do the same, then they laughed in our faces and went before congress to argue that it NOT pass.

Exactly.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't quite understand that line of logic. It IS the federal government's responsibility to make sure all the states in the union follow the Constitution. But they aren't even making it so we can carry in places not allowed, just making sure states that HAVE some form of license recognize each others pre-existing license. It wouldn't get us Illinois.

There is already a version of this for LEO and it seems to work pretty well and no state has complained that it the fed gov is stepping on their toes.

I'm a Constitutional purist. The Constitution should only restrict the federal govt. If the states entered into a compac among themselves, awesome, but I don't like the idea of the feds dictating what individual states should or should not do.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I'm a Constitutional purist. The Constitution should only restrict the federal govt. If the states entered into a compac among themselves, awesome, but I don't like the idea of the feds dictating what individual states should or should not do.

Even if what the states do among themselves goes against the intent of the Consitution?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Even if what the states do among themselves goes against the intent of the Consitution?

Im of the belief that the intent of the Constitution was, unless specifically stated, solely to restrain federal power, engage in diplomacy with other nations, provide defense of the nation, regulate state to state trade, and settle disputes between states, etc, etc.
I freely admit, that such can create moral dilemnas (ie slavery), which technically, the federal govt shouldnt have had a say in. It's still a issue a struggle to reconcile with; but letting the federal govt being the final say in the internal affairs of a particular state, I believe is wrong.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Im of the belief that the intent of the Constitution was, unless specifically stated, solely to restrain federal power, engage in diplomacy with other nations, provide defense of the nation, regulate state to state trade, and settle disputes between states, etc, etc.
I freely admit, that such can create moral dilemnas (ie slavery), which technically, the federal govt shouldnt have had a say in. It's still a issue a struggle to reconcile with; but letting the federal govt being the final say in the internal affairs of a particular state, I believe is wrong.

If this was 1840 I would say you are 100% correct. And I wish we could back to that, but with the increases in federal powers and the increased dependency on federal government by the states themselves as well as continued errosion of the Republic I don't think we can rely on the states to do the right thing any longer.

I'm still a little conflicted on it because I am definitely NOT for bigger government in any form, but there are those rare exceptions where government does what it is there for. IMO.

 

[Linc8301]

Where can I find out what states my IN Permit allow me to conceal and carry my handgun, I am going on a trip this coming summer and was curious.

 

[chevy07_man]

www.handgunlaw.us

 

[Linc8301]

Thank you

 

[kludge]

Well the constitution says you are allowed to bear arms so you should be able to carry in any state of the federation.
Too bad it's not the case.

The Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case said that if they had ruled the other way, that he would have constitutional rights and be able to carry arms wherever he went.

So that proves only two things...

1. The racist bent of the court seems quite clear to me.
2. The 2nd Amendment was clearly understood to mean exactly what it says.

 

[jkwparrott]

I don't understand the difference in federal and state laws. Colorado and Washington just passed laws making it legal for residents to use marijuana for recreational use. But federal law says it is still against the law to do so. I can carry my gun is some states with my LTCH and the constitution says that I can carry in any state. Why do we allow politicians to decree what we can do and what we can't? The LAW should be the law of the land as a whole.