• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Why does Texas honor non-reciprocal State CHL licenses?

T

The Trade

New member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
1
Location
, ,
imported post

It annoys the hell out of me that Texas honors CHL licenses from many non-reciprocal states, including Nebraska, Rhode Island, New York, Hawaii, Washington, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, California, Connecticut, Iowa, Nevada, and Colorado.

Does this anger anyone else??? :cuss:

Why does Texas honor non-reciprocal State CHL licenses? The only logical reasoning is that Texas is attempting to set a trend. But I hope there is an expiration to this policy for states that do not reciprocate. It is patently unfair.

Once an avid traveller, particularly to Mexico, Central America, and the Carribean, I am now inclined to travel only in the U.S. (and possibly U.S. Territories) for awhile due to the current state of the world. I was hoping to see Puerto Rico, California, New York, Hawaii, an Colorado on the reciprocity list, but am shocked to see none of them recipocrate! (I know, Puerto Rico doesn't even have CHL).

Well, I guess Florida, Utah, New Mexico, and Alaska will benefit from my hard-earned tourist dollar. Screw the rest of them. Hell, I might even visit Kansas, Alabama, Indiana, Deleware, South Dakota, Missouri, Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Caraloina, North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, Mississippi, Idaho, North Carolina, Wyoming, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. They deserve our loyalty too.

[align=center]:banghead: The Trade is Angry about these non-reciprocal states. :banghead:
[/align]
 
N

Notso

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
432
Location
Laveen, Arizona, USA
imported post

Arizona does the same thing. Look at the bigger picture. If nothing else, it gives those pro-gun legislators in the non-reciprocal states ammunition(pun intended) to get the laws and reciprocity in those states changed. I think the more open all states can be, the betterthe future for everyone.

Edited to add:

Also, it only makes our states safer due to having more law-abiding citizens carrying here, regardless of where they are from.
 
W

W5DVC

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
56
Location
Beaumont, Texas, USA
imported post

The Trade wrote:
It annoys the hell out of me that Texas honors CHL licenses from many non-reciprocal states, including Nebraska, Rhode Island, New York, Hawaii, Washington, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, California, Connecticut, Iowa, Nevada, and Colorado.

Does this anger anyone else??? :cuss:

Why does Texas honor non-reciprocal State CHL licenses? The only logical reasoning is that Texas is attempting to set a trend. But I hope there is an expiration to this policy for states that do not reciprocate. It is patently unfair.

Once an avid traveller, particularly to Mexico, Central America, and the Carribean, I am now inclined to travel only in the U.S. (and possibly U.S. Territories) for awhile due to the current state of the world. I was hoping to see Puerto Rico, California, New York, Hawaii, an Colorado on the reciprocity list, but am shocked to see none of them recipocrate! (I know, Puerto Rico doesn't even have CHL).

Well, I guess Florida, Utah, New Mexico, and Alaska will benefit from my hard-earned tourist dollar. Screw the rest of them. Hell, I might even visit Kansas, Alabama, Indiana, Deleware, South Dakota, Missouri, Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Caraloina, North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, Mississippi, Idaho, North Carolina, Wyoming, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. They deserve our loyalty too.


[align=center]:banghead: The Trade is Angry about these non-reciprocal states. :banghead:
[/align]
Click to expand...
The answer to your question is first it paves the way for a reciprocal agreement with that state , the most important reason to me is it paves the way for a National Concealed Handgun Carry Bill . If I can't carry in New York CITY ...... that just means that I'm not going to New York ......which means I am not spending one thin dime ofthe money I earn there until I can . If I can't carry there ......I'm not spending any money there , and I'm not traveling there. The places that I can carry enjoy my patronage . Also I don't vote for politician's who don't carry concealed , THAT WAY I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE POLITICIANS I SUPPORT.....SUPORT ME , THE 2ND AMENDMENT , THE BILL OF RIGHTS , AND THE CONSTITUTION . W5DVC
 
KBCraig

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
imported post

The proper, legal, answer is that many of the states recognized by or reciprocal with Texas don't meet the standards set forth in the Texas statute. The political explanation is that the current Governor and Attorney General declared that they would unilaterally recognize every license without demanding reciprocity. They may have been trying to prime the pump, or they may have been after the non-resident business by making a Texas CHL more widely accepted. (FAIL on two fronts: our unilateral recognition hasn't increased the number of states accepting a Texas license; and, non-residents can only get a Texas CHL by taking the course in Texas.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top