Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Full Faith and Credit Clause

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    One thing that has me baffled is that states can choose what other states can and cannot concealed carry in their state. The Full Faith and Credit Clause states that if you're married in 1 state you're married in all of the other 49 states. Same thing with you're DL, if you're legal to drive in 1 state you're legal to drive in all other 49 states. But concealed carry? Doesn't work that way now does it!?!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Columbus, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    16

    Post imported post

    I think it has to do with some states not meeting the same standards as others. State A may require a course completion. State B may want your money, proof of identity and a background check.

    While meeting A's reqs may still also qualify for B's. B denies reciprocity for little better an explanation than spite.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    489

    Post imported post

    the Gun License isnt a Judicial act is what i was told over on GPDO by one of the legal eagles...rather its an issue of Comity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comity

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    190

    Post imported post

    golightly00 wrote:
    One thing that has me baffled is that states can choose what other states can and cannot concealed carry in their state. The Full Faith and Credit Clause states that if you're married in 1 state you're married in all of the other 49 states. Same thing with you're DL, if you're legal to drive in 1 state you're legal to drive in all other 49 states. But concealed carry? Doesn't work that way now does it!?!
    Your premise is flawed, because FFCC doesn't say that if you're married or licensed to drive in 1 state you are married or licensed to drive in all other states. It says that all other states are not permitted to question whether you are married or licensed to drive in the 1 state. It's just that states provide comity to marriages and DLs from other states.

    The logical extension of what you would like FFCC to mean is that a person can export laws from one state to another at will -- and that clearly is not the case. If GA lowered its drinking age to 18, could you go to TN and insist that you can drink at 18 there because you can in GA? No. But, TN would be powerless to question your ability to drink at 18 in GA.

  5. #5
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    jrm wrote:
    It says that all other states are not permitted to question whether you are married or licensed to drive in the 1 state. It's just that states provide comity to marriages and DLs from other states.
    Actually the FFCC has never been held to mandate that states accept other states driver's licenses or marriages - they just have decided to do that.

    FFCC is about accepting other states' court judgements.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    489

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    jrm wrote:
    It says that all other states are not permitted to question whether you are married or licensed to drive in the 1 state. It's just that states provide comity to marriages and DLs from other states.
    Actually the FFCC has never been held to mandate that states accept other states driver's licenses or marriages - they just have decided to do that.

    FFCC is about accepting other states' court judgements.
    im gonna go with John Monroe knows

  7. #7
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915

    Post imported post

    I'll admit I used to be confuzzled about it as well, but I think I understand a bit more now.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    A measure in The United States Senate that would have corrected wthis problem failed to pass by two votes.

    Unfortunately, without the full Incorporation of The Full Faith and Credit Clause, which, is something The Federal Congress has not really used much, States are able to continue to accept or deny other State Permits for a variety of reasons. As another post on this thread said, '...some States require training, others do not...'. These reasons still continue to deny Full Incorporation of this Constitution Principle throughout the United States.

    Unless and until such a Senate Measure passes, this will continue to be the Case.

    ***Remember, Illinios and Wisconsin do not have a Concealed Pistol Permit Scheme at all, and a handful of other States that have Concealed Pistol Permits deny them outright, for the most part, to Citizens.***

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    Wouldn't buying a NR from FL, UT, etc be covered by INTERSTATE COMMERCE?
    Thereby blocking individual states from interfering with carry under commerce laws.


  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    That is the problem with The United States Congress.

    They use Interstate Commercefor 'their' purposes, not 'ours'.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    jrm wrote:
    It says that all other states are not permitted to question whether you are married or licensed to drive in the 1 state. It's just that states provide comity to marriages and DLs from other states.
    Actually the FFCC has never been held to mandate that states accept other states driver's licenses or marriages - they just have decided to do that.

    FFCC is about accepting other states' court judgements.
    This is correct, but also applies to state Supreme (or highest) Court rulings. In many cases, both blue law rulings and US Constituional safeguards co-witness, if I may use the term...it's more than "just deciding" to do that and the 14th Amendment comes into play "equal protection of the law." Court judgements, in fact, are based upon constitutional guarentees of the state or the Feds.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Possmo View Post
    I think it has to do with some states not meeting the same standards as others. State A may require a course completion. State B may want your money, proof of identity and a background check.

    While meeting A's reqs may still also qualify for B's. B denies reciprocity for little better an explanation than spite.
    Possmo hit the nail on the head.

    Some states don't require the same threshold of security regarding background or training as others; hence the states with laws the are similarly reflective of each other in terms of licensing tend to reciprocate each other. Florida, for example, doesn't honor several states which do not require permits.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •