Posted by Kromey at 4:19pm Sep 30 '11it has different implications than driver's licenses. For example, in some states, to get a CCW you have to pass a training course that includes demonstrating a minimum level of proficiency (i.e. you have to be able to hit a target); in other states, the training course is just a classroom lecture where you listen to someone drone on about the state's firearms laws; other states don't even require that much, and just ask that you fill out some paperwork and get printed.
It also will effectively turn the remaining may-issue states into shall-issue states, by virtue of anyone being able to get a shall-issue state's CCW and then have it recognized in the may-issue state. California's the common example of a technically may-issue state that in practice almost forbids it entirely (through virtue of most applications being denied); now Californians can hop over to Arizona or Oregon (both shall-issue, I believe), get a CCW there, and now can carry in California.
I disagree very strongly with the notion that our constitutional rights are literally up to the whim of some bureaucrat, but I'm not sure I'm any more comfortable with a federal law effectively stripping that away is an appropriate means of addressing it.
It also will effectively turn the remaining may-issue states into shall-issue states, by virtue of anyone being able to get a shall-issue state's CCW and then have it recognized in the may-issue state. California's the common example of a technically may-issue state that in practice almost forbids it entirely (through virtue of most applications being denied); now Californians can hop over to Arizona or Oregon (both shall-issue, I believe), get a CCW there, and now can carry in California.
I disagree very strongly with the notion that our constitutional rights are literally up to the whim of some bureaucrat, but I'm not sure I'm any more comfortable with a federal law effectively stripping that away is an appropriate means of addressing it.
Well - Kromey