• 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.

OC, wa CPL, utah, florida, reciprocity, BIG study!!!

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
There are many lawsuits going on now that McDonald is decided, it is the natural course of the events...

Taka a look at Gray's lawsuit in CO.


Well I do hope you're right, just kinda hard for me to wrap my brain around the idea of legally being able to carry in Chicago or DC. I'm flying out to Buffalo in a few days and it's gonna drive me nuts being unarmed for more than a week :cuss:
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
It's called incrementalism. It's worked wonderfully for those who take away our rights for the last few decades. It can work the other way as well. Yes, it's an infringement, but in the case of the places mentioned, it's less of an infringement than was present before, therefore, an improvement. Also the only realistic way there ever will be any improvement (barring national cataclysm). Like it or not, you're simply not going to wake up one day to a libertarian paradise where you can OC down Pennsylvania avenue with no gov't permission slip.

According to the current SCOTUS, it is merely a "reasonable restriction". Don't expect it to go away any time soon. Permitted carry in 50 states is the first step, then onward from there.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Nowhere in the majority opinion is the term "reasonable restriction" used. McDonald v. Chicago. DO NOT FALL FOR THE ANTI'S USING THESE WORDS, IT IS NOT TRUE!

The 3 areas that the majority covered as areas that could be restricted are: 1) felons and the mentally ill 2) sensitive places (government buildings and schools are specifically mentioned) 3) commercial sale of arms (pg 39-40 Alito writing for the majority)

We made it clear in [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Heller [/FONT][/FONT]that our holding did not cast doubt on such longstanding regulatorymeasures as "prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill," "laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms." [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Id[/FONT][/FONT]., at ___–___ (slip op., at 54–55). We repeat those assurances here.


According to the current SCOTUS, it is merely a "reasonable restriction". Don't expect it to go away any time soon. Permitted carry in 50 states is the first step, then onward from there.
 

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
Nowhere in the majority opinion is the term "reasonable restriction" used. McDonald v. Chicago. DO NOT FALL FOR THE ANTI'S USING THESE WORDS, IT IS NOT TRUE!

The 3 areas that the majority covered as areas that could be restricted are: 1) felons and the mentally ill 2) sensitive places (government buildings and schools are specifically mentioned) 3) commercial sale of arms (pg 39-40 Alito writing for the majority)

Interesting. They throw that phrase around so much I was starting to believe it. I think either way we're in for some very long court battles yet as each one of the so-called "reasonable restrictions" is challenged all the way to the SCOTUS. What we need is a majority opinion stating that licenses or permits are, in fact, infringements. Maybe that'll be the next big VS case.
 

Tomas

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
702
Location
University Place, Washington, USA
Nowhere in the majority opinion is the term "reasonable restriction" used. McDonald v. Chicago. DO NOT FALL FOR THE ANTI'S USING THESE WORDS, IT IS NOT TRUE!

The 3 areas that the majority covered as areas that could be restricted are: 1) felons and the mentally ill 2) sensitive places (government buildings and schools are specifically mentioned) 3) commercial sale of arms (pg 39-40 Alito writing for the majority)


Damn! They had me believing it! :eek:

*sigh*

I need to go back and read those opinions again - I just went through them quickly first time - lots of stuff there.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Correct gentlemen, and now I expect you to correct others when they mess it up. :shocker:

I don't expect everyone to read a 200+ page decision of legal mumbo jumbo. I am a Constitutional Law junkie (it's what I studied in college).

Yes the left will use those words, but too bad, because it is not stare decis! Haha!
 

J_Douglass

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
86
Location
PBC, FL
In Feb FL became reciprocal with WA which means my FL cwp is good in WA now. Good for me because I didn't want to have to get another one.
 

ak56

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
746
Location
Carnation, Washington, USA
In Feb FL became reciprocal with WA which means my FL cwp is good in WA now. Good for me because I didn't want to have to get another one.

Not if you are now a resident of WA.

RCW 9.41.073
Concealed pistol license — Reciprocity.
(1)(a) A person licensed to carry a pistol in a state the laws of which recognize and give effect in that state to a concealed pistol license issued under the laws of the state of Washington is authorized to carry a concealed pistol in this state if:
...
(b) This section applies to a license holder from another state only while the license holder is not a resident of this state. A license holder from another state must carry the handgun in compliance with the laws of this state.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
50 State Carry permit

Maybe soon we will see all 50 States with one permit, not 2 permits for 38, etc. This current mess is similar to when the automobile was new. Different rules and requirements everywhere. That too took time.

I already have a 50 state permit. It is called the US Constitution.
 

gsx1138

Regular Member
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
882
Location
Bremerton, Washington, United States
Correct gentlemen, and now I expect you to correct others when they mess it up. :shocker:

I don't expect everyone to read a 200+ page decision of legal mumbo jumbo. I am a Constitutional Law junkie (it's what I studied in college).

Yes the left will use those words, but too bad, because it is not stare decis! Haha!

Thanks for the enlightenment. I believed the BS as well. Slippery bastards.
 

J_Douglass

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
86
Location
PBC, FL
Not if you are now a resident of WA.

Thank you, somehow I missed this. I called the department of licensing to confirm and because I would be here for 1.5 years I would need a WA CPL as well. I don't know what the cut off for being a resident is. I informed the lady that I was stationed In WA from FL and she asked how long I would be in WA for so I assume there is a time frame where someone becomes a resident.
 

911Boss

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
Thank you, somehow I missed this. I called the department of licensing to confirm and because I would be here for 1.5 years I would need a WA CPL as well. I don't know what the cut off for being a resident is. I informed the lady that I was stationed In WA from FL and she asked how long I would be in WA for so I assume there is a time frame where someone becomes a resident.

You may want to recheck that. If you are active duty military, you do not automatically become a resident after "X" days when stationed in another state.

There basically three addresses for those in the military. Home of record, which is where you lived when you entered service. Legal residence, which determines where you pay any state taxes, and physical address which is where you regularly reside in the area of your duty station.

If you keep your Home state's driver license and don't change your legal residence info with the military, you will continue to be a resident of your home state during your assignment in WA. The easiest determination of residency is where do you register to vote? If you continue to register and vote by absentee from your home state and are active duty, you do not become a resident where you get stationed.

While in the military, changing residency is up to you, you do not become a resident where you are stationed unless you choose to. active duty military are exempt from the laws requiring you to change vehicle registration and get a WA driver license.
 
Last edited:

J_Douglass

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
86
Location
PBC, FL
You may want to recheck that. If you are active duty military, you do not automatically become a resident after "X" days when stationed in another state.

There basically three addresses for those in the military. Home of record, which is where you lived when you entered service. Legal residence, which determines where you pay any state taxes, and physical address which is where you regularly reside in the area of your duty station.

If you keep your Home state's driver license and don't change your legal residence info with the military, you will continue to be a resident of your home state during your assignment in WA. The easiest determination of residency is where do you register to vote? If you continue to register and vote by absentee from your home state and are active duty, you do not become a resident where you get stationed.

While in the military, changing residency is up to you, you do not become a resident where you are stationed unless you choose to. active duty military are exempt from the laws requiring you to change vehicle registration and get a WA driver license.

I know the whole keeping your home state's driver licenses and stuff. I am doing that, I may call them again just to re check. I want to keep florida residency. I still have a legal address there. I'm not selling my house, its just going to be checked up on by the mother in law while we are gone for the next 1.5 years. I will have a more detailed convo with them tomorrow.
 

J_Douglass

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
86
Location
PBC, FL
Re checked an 911 you are right. As long as I don't get a Washington drivers license etc... I am still technically a Florida resident.
 

OrangeIsTrouble

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
1,398
Location
Tukwila, WA, ,
I started.....

to do some reading in my vehicle!





NOT!:lol:

Thx defender, I went to get one today. Too bad I got the large dictionary size one...
 

Attachments

  • IMG00232-20100730-1635.jpg
    IMG00232-20100730-1635.jpg
    70.9 KB · Views: 60
  • IMG00233-20100730-1635.jpg
    IMG00233-20100730-1635.jpg
    56.5 KB · Views: 65
Top