NEW YORK protects gun permit holders privacy!

Grapeshot said:

The mirror opposite of a CHP(R)

Think he is just indicating that a permit (P) and a license (L) are essentially the same.

Click to expand...

But I don't think they are the same at all. I view a license as a government endorsement to carry a gun. I base this view on the meaning of the word as it is used in many other states, since in Virginia, it is not used at all. In Virginia, a CHP only exempts you from the general law that says you may not carry a handgun in a concealed fashion. There is no "license" at all regarding the carry of a handgun.

In terms of the GFSZA, these two distinctions are miles apart.

TFred

TFred said:

But I don't think they are the same at all. I view a license as a government endorsement to carry a gun. I base this view on the meaning of the word as it is used in many other states, since in Virginia, it is not used at all. In Virginia, a CHP only exempts you from the general law that says you may not carry a handgun in a concealed fashion. There is no "license" at all regarding the carry of a handgun.

In terms of the GFSZA, these two distinctions are miles apart.

TFred

Click to expand...

Well gosh darn. In Missouri it is called a CCW Endorsement, not a permit or a license.

Permit, license, endorsement, they are all permission slips from the state. Splitting syntaxical hairs is like :banghead:. VA don't have a license, OK, then what is the concealed carry 'whatchamacallit' that some folks have paid good money for good for in VA called. It don't, apparently, protect you from a 1000' zone violation considering that the verbiage in the GFSZ law uses license.

And Grape is right/left , except every state that issues a permit, license, endorsement, or a whatchamacallit is treating it as a suitable substitute for the "license" requirement used in the GFSZ law. I guess the federales are quite happy with a license that may not actually be called a license.

OC for ME said:

Well gosh darn. In Missouri it is called a CCW Endorsement, not a permit or a license.

Permit, license, endorsement, they are all permission slips from the state. Splitting syntaxical hairs is like :banghead:. VA don't have a license, OK, then what is the concealed carry 'whatchamacallit' that some folks have paid good money for good for in VA called. It don't, apparently, protect you from a 1000' zone violation considering that the verbiage in the GFSZ law uses license.

And Grape is right/left , except every state that issues a permit, license, endorsement, or a whatchamacallit is treating it as a suitable substitute for the "license" requirement used in the GFSZ law. I guess the federales are quite happy with a license that may not actually be called a license.

Click to expand...

In Virginia, that 'whatchamacallit' it is a permit to ignore the law against carrying a handgun in a concealed manner.

And I agree, Virginia's CHP should not technically meet the standard required by the GFSZA. I don't think the BATF has any problem whatsoever with viewing every gun carrier in Virginia as a felon. They just know that they can't prosecute them, because the SCOTUS would eventually take their little hammer away from them.

Actually, I don't think any state cares about the GFSZA. Some states have their own versions of that law, but it is extremely rare to hear of anyone prosecuted under the federal law, and I don't think any state LEOs would be involved. I could be wrong, and would be interested in seeing such evidence, if so.

TFred

TFred said:

In Virginia, that 'whatchamacallit' it is a permit to ignore the law against carrying a handgun in a concealed manner.

And I agree, Virginia's CHP should not technically meet the standard required by the GFSZA. I don't think the BATF has any problem whatsoever with viewing every gun carrier in Virginia as a felon. They just know that they can't prosecute them, because the SCOTUS would eventually take their little hammer away from them.

Actually, I don't think any state cares about the GFSZA. Some states have their own versions of that law, but it is extremely rare to hear of anyone prosecuted under the federal law, and I don't think any state LEOs would be involved. I could be wrong, and would be interested in seeing such evidence, if so.

TFred

Click to expand...

tomayto tomahto

I fell ya brother. It is all about the syntax. If you have a CHP(L)(E)(W) then that data is not public, or should not be. Here in MO the SL made sure to include that in the law back in 2002. I hope VA gets on the band wagon.....good luck and keep pushing the issue.

Does traveling in your car on a public road, or jogging not exempt from the bubble? Im speaking of Va. I oc'ed here for a while with out issue, with no permit.
In fact I'll never forget the day I walked into the police station for printing. *finger prints were required for cc at that time.*

The cop was curious as to why I was getting one, as his comment was, "why give the state more money, Oc is completely OK in Virginia". We both chuckled, and I said, " because the day it rains, and I cover up to keep rain off my gun, a cop will nail me for something."

Sent from my Motorola Galaxy s3 using Tapatalk 2

Ya just gotta love Judge Jeanine Pirro

Judge Jeanine Pirro Exposes Journal News Outing her as Gun Owner! MUST WATCH!

http://www.fiscalconservatives.com/videos/NABJWUvrA6Y.html

She rips a new one on the Journal News folks. Her comments at the end are wonderful.

About OC, no. But it is all about gun owners rights, and so is she!


Read more at http://www.fiscalconservatives.com/videos/NABJWUvrA6Y.html#6krYtCzUUtEY2EP4.99

mpguy said:

Does traveling in your car on a public road, or jogging not exempt from the bubble? Im speaking of Va. I oc'ed here for a while with out issue, with no permit.
In fact I'll never forget the day I walked into the police station for printing. *finger prints were required for cc at that time.*

The cop was curious as to why I was getting one, as his comment was, "why give the state more money, Oc is completely OK in Virginia". We both chuckled, and I said, " because the day it rains, and I cover up to keep rain off my gun, a cop will nail me for something."

Sent from my Motorola Galaxy s3 using Tapatalk 2

Click to expand...

It does as far as state law but reading the text of the Federal, it does not.
I've gone into this before and don't want to again but the law as a stand alone charge against someone traveling on a public road within 1000 feet of a school, is not enforcable and is not enforced. It is used as an add on for other charges very rarely.

It's a personal decision everyone has to make but IMO, it's being afraid of the Bogyman.
I don't care if someone gets a CHP to feel better but get mad when they claim it's necessary for everyone to do so. That usually starts the fireworks.

Newcomers read that crap and take it as fact.

peter nap said:

It does as far as state law but reading the text of the Federal, it does not.
I've gone into this before and don't want to again but the law as a stand alone charge against someone traveling on a public road within 1000 feet of a school, is not enforcable and is not enforced. It is used as an add on for other charges very rarely.

It's a personal decision everyone has to make but IMO, it's being afraid of the Bogyman.
I don't care if someone gets a CHP to feel better but get mad when they claim it's necessary for everyone to do so. That usually starts the fireworks.

Newcomers read that crap and take it as fact.

Click to expand...

Well I didn't know that tid-bit of information, thanks for sharing.

Personally, it won't change my everyday ways of doing things. Prefer Oc to cc, and will continue to do so.

Sent from my Motorola Galaxy s3 using Tapatalk 2