Maybe We Should Just Give Up Now!
The Feds are already involved! The SCOTUS has held that concealed carry is a privilege and the Federal Government has declared that some people have, through due process, been disenfranchised from having rights under the 2nd Amendment.
The following classes of people are ineligible to possess, receive, ship, or transport firearms or ammunition:
o Those convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment for over one year, except state misdemeanors punishable by two years or less.
o Fugitives from justice.
o Unlawful users of certain depressant, narcotic, or stimulant drugs.
o Those adjudicated as mental defectives or incompetents or those committed to any mental institution.
o Illegal aliens.
o Citizens who have renounced their citizenship.
o Those persons dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces.
o Persons less than 18 years of age for the purchase of a shotgun or rifle.
o Persons less than 21 years of age for the purchase of a firearm that is other than a shotgun or rifle.
o Persons subject to a court order that restrains such persons from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner.
o Persons convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
Persons under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year are ineligible to receive, transport, or ship any firearm or ammunition. Under limited conditions, relief from disability may be obtained from the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, or through a pardon, expungement, restoration of rights, or setting aside of a conviction.
And here is the current situation with the States! Currently there are ten (10) states that do not recognize concealed weapons carry permits issued by any other states in violation of Article IV, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. (CA, CT, HI, IL MA, MD, NJ, NY, OR, & RI) Of these, one (IL) does not have any provisions for issuing concealed weapons carry permits and does not allow concealed weapons carry.
Conversely, there are eleven (11) states that honor all other states' concealed weapons carry permits in compliance with Article IV, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. (AK, AZ, IA, ID, IN, MI, MO, OK, SD, TN, & UT). One state (VT) allows concealed weapons carry without a permit and therefore does not issue concealed weapons carry permits.
The remaining twenty-eight (28) states recognize some other states' concealed weapons carry permits but do not recognize other states' concealed weapons carry permits, again in violation of Article IV, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. These remaining 28 states are also not consistent with each other thus creating a mind-numbing and constantly changing environment for travelers with valid state issued permits for concealed weapons carry.
In some states, you can not even possess a handgun without a permit and permits are only issued to residents with a “demonstrated need”; effectively violating residents' U.S. Constitutional, 2nd Amendment rights .
We should have the right to protect ourselves in any state while traveling or on vacation. All but one state have passed concealed carry laws because the right to self-defense does not end when one leaves their home. However, as listed earlier, interstate recognition of those permits is not uniform, is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, and creates great confusion and potential safety and legal problems for the traveler.
But let's not do anything because maybe sometime somebody may make some changes to some laws or Bill that may not be good for the furtherance of our 2nd Amendment rights. We should instead work very hard to make sure that there are absolutely no changes to any gun laws or new gun laws, even if they are perceived as good, while we continue to complain about the current gun laws??????
And then there is the GOA! The Gun Owners of America want us to tell our Senators to not support S. 2188 because Senators Thune and Vitter plan to submit a Bill sometime that may support the GOA's position on concealed carry. However, they are not telling us what that Bill says or when that Bill can be expected to be introduced. Senator Thune has been saying he is going to introduce a Bill for months but, as yet, hasn't. A Bill that GOA supported, H.R. 2900, was introduced in the House on 09/23/2011 and was referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security where it sits with 20 co-sponsors while H.R. 822 was voted out of that subcommittee and passed in the House by a vote of 272 Ayes vs. 154 Nays. We need something now; not a would'a - could'a - should'a Bill sometime (if ever) in the future. The unknown Thune-Vitter Bill hasn't even been introduced in the Senate and, if it's a companion Bill to H.R. 2900, has not even been voted on in the House Subcommittee. Otherwise, the Thune-Vitter Bill doesn't exist anywhere. If GAO wants us to support a Bill then they need to give us details so that we can make an informed decision. Until then, “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”. The net result of supporting multiple Bills will be that we get nothing!