Concealed Weapons Ban- should it be lifted or no?

I just double checked myself (because I always worry when I disagree with Ken!), and I was wrong on the citation. Don't know why my brain was drifting on that for a moment, but it IS Article IV of the Constitution that speaks of the "full faith and credit doctrine." I believe my assertions concerning it are true, but my referrence was completely incorrect.

"But isn't my license to be able to operate a motor vehicle within the state of Florida recognized as being a valid license for me to drive within all other states of the USA?"

Yes, but what is not at all universal is the consideration each State requires for its own citizens concerning what one must do to obtain a license in his own State. If the driving age in FL is 16, but it is 18 in MO, then a 16 year old FL resident with a valid driving permit can legally drive in MO. But, my 16 year old daughter cannot claim an inherent right to drive at 16 in MO because that is the law in FL. MO must give "full faith and credit" to FL's driving records, but has no requirement of following FL's lead on laws pertaining to issuing driving permits to MO citizens.


"And this argument could further branch off into the argument that the US Constitution is only a limit on the federal government, so that although the federal goverment cannot place this sort of restriction, state governments CAN. Except for the implication (my belief), that all states which have entered into uniting together to form the United States of America are bound to recognize and uphold those basic rules laid down in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights."

Until the passage of the 14th Amendment, it was recognized that none of the Bill of Rights were applicable any further than to the national government. There was no right to Free Speech in New York in 1789 (and precious little now, unless you're on the "correct" side, it seems), but when the 14th Amend. nationalized the Bill of Rights, they are have been applied individually on a case-by-case basis, through Court decisions. Unfortunately (or fortunately, if you see the Court as having been anti-gun up till recently), the 2nd Amend. has never been brought before the Supreme Court in this light, so it has never had the question of nationalization answered definitively.


"Otherwise, what is "united" about the United States of America?"

Man, is THAT ever a loaded question!!! Not nearly enough bandwidth for us to hammer that one out, Rich. We'll have to have a steak together at Tinley Park sometime!


"Can the County Commissions here in my home county of Wakulla in Florida pass local laws that would violate the State of Florida and the US Constitution?"

Yes, and No.

No, the County of Wakulla cannot pass (by "pass" I mean "pass with expectation of successful implementation;" they can do anything they want, if they don't mind reversals!) any law that is contrary to the State Constitution of Florida, because, according to Dillon's Rule (a doctrine of State governmental institution), the County/City is a creature of the State, and exists and operates solely at the disgretion of the State which gave it power to exist.

Yes, the County of Wakulla can pass an ordinance for gun control that would clearly be in opposition to the 2nd Amend., but because it has never been specifically nationalized, as I said above, there is not much chance that anything could be done about it on a national level.

The comparison of CCW permits in relation to a drivers license is not to enforce other states to follow another state's lead in how such permits would be issued, but instead to grant the same rights granted motorists in one state the recognition of their legal right to drive in another state once holding a valid license from any other state. In like kind, the point would be that someone from Florida, having passed the requirements of legally carrying a concealed weapon, would have this permit recognized as being valid in any other state this person may happen to pass through in traveling throughout the USA.

In other words, if I were to drive from Florida to California, as things are now, how many, and in which, states would I be legally carrying a concealed weapon when I stopped at a rest stop? And in which states would I be in violation of that state law and subject to arrest, which in some instances could result in my losing my CCW in my home state, as well as the ability to even own a firearm? In some states during my travels, I would be perfecly legal, whereas in others I would be subject to a felony arrest.

It should be mentioned that FF&C is not the reason drivers' licenses are recognized by all other states, as the federal government had no hand in that matter. Drivers' licenses are actually recognized nationally due to an interstate agreement.

Also worthy of mention is the for FF&C is not automatic. For it to be binding upon the states, FF&C must be invoked by federal legislation.

Congrats to Mo residents.Now maybe we can get a recipricol agreement with them.

Originally posted by Copperheadman
Congrats to Mo residents.Now maybe we can get a recipricol agreement with them.

Your Arkansas CHL is honored in MO under the new law.

Sweet!!!! Thanks Ken.

> As a wife of a police officer I am way against it, for his safety and to protect people against using their firearms in hostile, brash, not so well thought out moments. But that's my opinion.

Why? A Texas study found that CHL holders are 8 times less likely to be arrested for a iolent crime than an average citizen without a CHL. The people getting carry permits (which shouldn't be necessary to carry in the US, but that is another story) are the LAW abiding citizens.

As the wife of a policement, your attitude that is is better to take away my freedoms than to... well is better than ANYTHING... scares me a whole lot more than people with guns probably scares you. BTW, do you know what a state where only the police have/carry guns is called? I do.

> Would you carry a concealed weapon?

I do...and have for years. I've also never had a reckless, dangerous, discharge nor have I broken any violent laws.

My thoughts on the matter only. I know you didn't post your opinions in anger, disgust, or to put any of us down. My opinions are returned in the SAME manner. No offense taken and none meant by me. As private citizens, we are allowed our own opinions. Are lawmakers have sworn to defend out constitutional rights, though - but most are just trying to take some away.
KJ

Originally posted by Copperheadman
Also on the other subject,I know that you can buy a gun in MO,I did at Bass Pro,but a lady I work with wanted a handgun,but said the Sherrif would not sign the slip so she could.

Reminds me of the south with their Jim Crow laws in the early 1900's. I am not saying she is or isn't aminority (or if that has anything to do with it or not). I'm saying that if you are a friend of the Sherriff, you probably get your permit signed immediately.

Thank God I've only lived in Texas and Louisiana where we don't have to ask some fat thug permission to exercise our second amendment rights - YET.

KJ

Originally posted by irishsnakes
webslave, i see your !and i sincerely hope you guys are right and i am wrong.
you gentlemen seem wll versed on the subject so maybe you can tell me; if people want to or feel the need to carry firearms, why must they feel concealed? i personnally think i would feel more comfortable if i knew exactly who around me was carrying a weapon. Ithink that as thorough as the background checks may be, some people who should not be allowed to obtain a permit will find a way to beat the system.

Personally, I would if it were legal and not likely to get my arrested for "inciting a riot." Texas has a CONCEALED handgun license. If I carry it visibly, I get fined and could lose that right to carry it at all. In Louisiana, it is legal to open carry without a license, but they give you heck about it in too many places (hence my inciting comment).
KJ