Is nation-wide reciprocity for CPL a good idea?

[bigtex]

bigtex,

The story was told to me from him. I don't care where someone is from. By the way, he leaving for places unknown. He took this job sight unseen and didn't have a clue what this area was like.

I am just saying prior to being commissioned as a USFS LEO he must have attended the academy. They don't give people badges and guns prior to attending the academy 

[Fl0und3rz]

As with all legislation, the devil is in the details.  But as an abstract idea, I think that nation-wide reciprocity for CPL is a step toward more liberty as originally conceived in the Privileges and Immunities and Full Faith and Credit Clauses. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Faith_and_Credit_Clause

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law

Note that the Firearm Owners Protection Act's safe passage provision attempts to accomplish similar aims, at least for mere passage through a state, and subject to its requirements for restricting accessibility.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act#.22Safe_Passage.22_provision


However, a national CPL registry would not be required, and any such attempts to attach such a registry should be rejected, even if that means no reciprocity enacted on a federal level.   

I, too, believe that at least some (if not most) of the restrictions on keeping and bearing arms of the more restrictive states amount to unconstitutional infringements.  But as a matter of practicality, it is a bit easier to conceive a path to federal reciprocity by legislation, at least now, than it is to conceive of the Supremes ordering it based on judicial precedent and a test case.

[CAMPMEAT]

bigtex,

The story was told to me from him. I don't care where someone is from. By the way, he leaving for places unknown. He took this job sight unseen and didn't have a clue what this area was like.

I am just saying prior to being commissioned as a USFS LEO he must have attended the academy. They don't give people badges and guns prior to attending the academy 

I know. If you knew the guy, you might, he's just so goofy and unprofessional with people.

[bigtex]

Well just a warning, I am sure the next USFS LEO wont be liked either.

Around 2011 the USFS made a policy that the local USFS LE command staff nationwide would no longer have hiring authority. Basically prior to this the local command staff (typically the Captain) did the hiring and selection process. Now, the local command staff does interviews, forwards a list of about 5-10 people on to HR in DC and HR in DC chooses who they will hire for the position. So it's a total surprise to the local command staff who they get to fill the position.

The reasoning for this is USFS has a diversity program and LE wasn't meeting it. HR told LE to essentially get with it and start diversifying, they didn't. So as a result HR is diversifying USFS LE by doing the hiring. Problem is now LEOs are going to areas where they might not fit in well at and are quitting/leaving quickly.

[Special T]

Our Forest Service LEO went to school in Kalifornia to become a biologist. There were no biologist jobs, so he started looking for a FEDERAL job, found this one in Republic with zero training in law enforcement at all, got hired on. Then his head got so big, it exploded with his power trips. Sure, he got raining AFTER the fact, but he needs more training for people skills. He's a horrible representation of any LEO I know. I know this guy personally too.

He'd even write bigtex a ticket for doing something completely legal..............

There ARE lots of people that have fled Kalifornia and move here who have not adjusted thier way of thinking... Most of our states problems IMO. Leo or not.

[Special T]

Well just a warning, I am sure the next USFS LEO wont be liked either.

Around 2011 the USFS made a policy that the local USFS LE command staff nationwide would no longer have hiring authority. Basically prior to this the local command staff (typically the Captain) did the hiring and selection process. Now, the local command staff does interviews, forwards a list of about 5-10 people on to HR in DC and HR in DC chooses who they will hire for the position. So it's a total surprise to the local command staff who they get to fill the position.

The reasoning for this is USFS has a diversity program and LE wasn't meeting it. HR told LE to essentially get with it and start diversifying, they didn't. So as a result HR is diversifying USFS LE by doing the hiring. Problem is now LEOs are going to areas where they might not fit in well at and are quitting/leaving quickly.

 This book does a great job of documenting the How and Why the USFS hiring  promotes the best selection.
The Tinder Box: How Politically Correct Ideology Destroyed the U.S. Forest Service Paperback
by Christopher Burchfield (Author)

[blackdog]

My drivers license is recognized in all 50 States, my marriage license is recognized in all States and my CPL should be recognized in all 50 States. I do not fear this legislation and believe it to be a step forward to upholding the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution.

[bearpaw]

My drivers license is recognized in all 50 States, my marriage license is recognized in all States and my CPL should be recognized in all 50 States. I do not fear this legislation and believe it to be a step forward to upholding the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution.

  sounds like a step in the right direction

[netcoyote]

My drivers license is recognized in all 50 States, my marriage license is recognized in all States and my CPL should be recognized in all 50 States. I do not fear this legislation and believe it to be a step forward to upholding the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution.

  sounds like a step in the right direction

Thanks for getting this thread back on topic...seemed like it was getting off into the bush there for awhile. Back to the topic of CPLs.

I think it's a bit misguided to compare CPL to driver's license or marriage license. The privilege to operate a motor vehicle or the excise tax in the form of a state marriage license certificate are not guaranteed by the Constitution as the enumerated right to own a firearm provided for in the 2nd amendment. You could make the case that the Constitution doesn't get into the level of detail of whether a firearm can be carried concealed or not but it does leave that level of detail explicitly in the hands of the state to work out the details. I don't think we want to make a proposal to throw any state issues back to the Federal government and that's what this proposal would do.

Assuming that this proposal would only guarantee reciprocity and leave the details to the states, it would open up a real can of worms for states rights issues. If a state recognizes the need for safety training as a prerequisite for CPL granting, why should they be forced to accept permits from states that have no requirement?

[Curly]

Is there any state that would deny a person to conceal carry a pistol, but still allow that person to open carry/own firearms? 

Just wondering because I don't see why a conceal carry permit is really necessary unless there are gun owners that can't be trusted to conceal carry but yet are allowed to own guns. 

I don't know what to think of national reciprocity, seems risky to let the Feds get involved where they shouldn't.  So, I think reciprocity would be ok as long the Feds don't get involved.  (But I'd rather not even have to have a CPL.  The 2nd Amendment should be all the reciprocity needed.)

[blackdog]

I hear what your saying the Federal Constitution says the States shall give"full faith and credit to the official acts" of the States. I'm licensed here in Washington and expect that to be honored nationwide.

[bearpaw]

I don't know what to think of national reciprocity, seems risky to let the Feds get involved where they shouldn't.  So, I think reciprocity would be ok as long the Feds don't get involved.  (But I'd rather not even have to have a CPL.  The 2nd Amendment should be all the reciprocity needed.)

I agree, does this require any federal intrusion or oversight, or anything other than reciprocity between states?
If not then it seems like a good idea.

I hear what your saying the Federal Constitution says the States shall give"full faith and credit to the official acts" of the States. I'm licensed here in Washington and expect that to be honored nationwide.

   I agree

[washelkhunter]

Every single CPL/CWP holder in the US has been veted by FBI. You have been fingerprinted and thoroughly background checked. In reality your CPL is an acknowledgement by the Fed govt that YOU are an outstanding citizen, something not implied by a mere drivers license or passport. I believe that as such you should be considered as a "deputy at large" to any and all law enforcement entities or jurisdictions in which you happen to find yourself nation wide.

[KFhunter]

It's a good idea, but unfortunately there isn't enough trust in the federal government to allow such a good idea to pass.


As mentioned in a previous post state preemption trumps all county/city.  A Federal CC permit would trump all state CC laws. 
I think it's a good idea because no matter what part of the country you find yourself in, the rules would be the same. 
We'd all finally have the same play book.


It's too bad there is no trust though. 
This would come with registration, and in conjunction with ACA....it would be easy to get diagnosed with a mental disorder and loose your right to carry.
Heck you could even go in for something routine and get prescribed a drug with Psychological Side Effects and loose your right.

Got heart burn problems?  You could get prescribed heart burn medication with potential psychological side effects, and trigger a loss of gun rights.  Everything a doc says or does is recorded in a computer, same with the nurses...right down to those two Tylenol pills they gave you while you were in the hospital.

Here is a nice little article discussing Psychological Side Effects of common prescription drugs.
http://www.healthcentral.com/static/pp/pdf_guides/psych65.pdf

[netcoyote]

Every single CPL/CWP holder in the US has been veted by FBI. You have been fingerprinted and thoroughly background checked. In reality your CPL is an acknowledgement by the Fed govt that YOU are an outstanding citizen, something not implied by a mere drivers license or passport. I believe that as such you should be considered as a "deputy at large" to any and all law enforcement entities or jurisdictions in which you happen to find yourself nation wide.

This post gets to a problem I have with WA CPL as well as the notion of a universal reciprocity across all states. The NICS check only verifies that you do not meet the threshold for not being able to purchase a firearm. It DOES NOT indicate anything else such as you being an outstanding citizen, have any working knowledge of firearms or the legal implications of using a firearm in any particular state. THAT is a large deficiency in my opinion. Other than not being a felon, consuming oxygen is the only criteria for obtaining a CPL in WA. Like many on this forum, a lot of people take time to learn firearm techniques and some even go the next step to learn some of the legal issues and the responsibilities of using a firearm. It's those who don't have a clue, go out and buy a gun, get a permit and think they are ordained to resolve any conflict that comes their way that are the problem. They are a disaster waiting to happen will only serve to give the rest of us a bad name when they make a foolish mistake. Some states take this more seriously and do require some amount of training or proficiency to go along with the responsibility. My guess is that the states with higher standards would not look kindly on the notion of universal reciprocity.