why NOT to get a conceal/carry

[TSNAPCRACKLEPOP]

well, in a discussion, i heard that if you do get the permit, and then commit an offense, such as a D.U.I., it is a FEDERAL charge, not a local or state charge, since it violates the conceal carry law.

get caught with the gun and no permit, and it is a local charge.

fyi

[Joeaksa]

Another reason is that the minute its all done your name as a owner of firearms goes into a state and federal database. Its just not needed in most cases...

[BlueSkyJaunte]

No kidding, as soon as Hitlery wins '08 and begins her "Let's Clean Up America" campaign by confiscating the weapons of law-abiding Americans, where do you think she'll turn first?

CCW lists.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by TSNAPCRACKLEPOP
well, in a discussion, i heard that if you do get the permit, and then commit an offense, such as a D.U.I., it is a FEDERAL charge, not a local or state charge, since it violates the conceal carry law.

No, that's incorrect. If you're convicted of a felony under state law, then federal law considers you a "prohibited person", you lose the right to vote and own firearms. Most state concealed carry laws do prohibit carrying under the influence though, needless to say that's a bad idea even if you're not inclined to brandish a weapon. Usually, that's not a felony and does not affect firearms ownership, but will remove your permit for a time, and require you to reapply later.

get caught with the gun and no permit, and it is a local charge.

fyi

Which might be a felony depending on the state you live in, also prohibiting you from owning firearms if convicted.

[fastpat]

I considered not applying for a CWP for quite a while, but finally did so a couple of weeks ago. My thinking was based on my philosophical resistance to getting a license to exercise a basic right, and I'm still troubled by this. The fact that South Carolina is moving in the right direction, CWP's are now good for 4 years and there's movement on making them permanent, made the compromise possible for me. South Carolina also has a very aggressive pro-self defense group whose power is increasing year by year helped to seal my decision.

Concern about future government confiscations certainly isn't misplaced; it's happened in California and New York already, and is likely in Illinois and New Jersey soon. I don't think it's likely in the Western states, nor the south, probably not ever unless the continued erosion of America as an armed culture is allowed to take place via government schools. Time will tell.

If that does happen in the near term, I think it might be the thing that will galvanize gun owners against the state, without regard to parties; and become the state's undoing.

[red-beard]

Originally posted by TSNAPCRACKLEPOP
well, in a discussion, i heard that if you do get the permit, and then commit an offense, such as a D.U.I., it is a FEDERAL charge, not a local or state charge, since it violates the conceal carry law.

get caught with the gun and no permit, and it is a local charge.

fyi

Check out the facts. Things heard or over-heard tend to not be correct. And this is the case here.

[Jeff Higgins]

Pat, I believe in the California and New York confiscations, the gun owners were located off of firearms registration lists, not CCW lists. An important difference.

I share your reluctance in being on any list identifying me as a gun owner. However, my desire to be able to defend myself outweighed that over 20 years ago, and I have been a CCW holder ever since. I have never had any trouble associated with it. Even in routine traffic stops, where presumably the officer runs my plates before approaching my car, it has never even come up. That leads me to believe I'm not in some database that is readily accessible, or at least not routinely accessed, under those circumstances. I'm sure they could find me if they wanted to, but it doesn't seem to be abused at least here in Washington. Yet.

I realize all states are different with regards to their CCW laws. Washington is a "shall issue" state, with no requirements other than a background check. No required classes, no specific gun listed with your CCW, and a state pre-emption law to keep the local jurisdictions from passing their own laws and ordinances. There are no requirements piggy-backed onto it either, such as rendering aid to law enforcement, etc. It's really pretty wide-open here. If we can just get past the fact that we are now on some one's list...

[Zeke]

Intersting topic. Someone from NV should chime in. An Old West attitude exists in most of the state AFA carrying weapons. Most counties, I believe, allow one to carry a sidearm not necessariky concealed. Don't try that in Clark County where the Strip is located. Now, the City of Las Vegas has a different set of laws, last I knew, I lived there in '94. That would be an example of municiple law overriding the local county laws.

Anyway, a very different place. You should have read the LA Times expose of the local and state judges this last week. In a word, corrupt. So, if you have the dough and an inside lawyer, you do as you damn well please in NV.

[pwd72s]

Funny tie in...I don't know whether to post this on the thread about street racing or this one about concealed carry permits.
Oh well, here we go...from the 9 June 2006 issue of THE OREGONIAN:


Car, guns taken from Blazers' Randolph
Friday, June 09, 2006
MAXINE BERNSTEIN and MIKE TOKITO
Trail Blazers forward Zach Randolph had a car and two loaded guns taken by police after an incident in downtown Portland early Thursday morning.

Randolph was a passenger in a Dodge Magnum he owns that was involved in speed racing at 3:15 a.m. on Southwest Broadway. Taquan Portis, 22, who was driving the Dodge, was cited for speed racing, careless driving and failure to obey a traffic signal. He is scheduled to appear in court July 6.

Portis was racing against a Cadillac Escalade, also owned by Randolph, with the cars going 50 to 60 mph in a 20 mph zone, Portland police spokeswoman Cathe Kent said. The Dodge was towed under a Portland law designed to curb dangerous racing.

The occupants of the Cadillac left by the time police approached the car.

Randolph had two loaded handguns in the car, but he was not cited because he has a concealed weapons permit in Clackamas County.

Police, aware of Randolph's permit, asked him if he had a gun in the car, and he said he did. However, when Portis and Randolph were asked to provide keys to the car so police could perform an inventory and give the gun to Randolph before towing the vehicle, Portis and Randolph both said they did not have a key.

Sgt. Roger Axthelm wrote in his report that Randolph told him, "I don't know who has the key." When Axthelm informed Randolph that not cooperating could have an effect on his concealed weapons permit, Randolph responded, "You gotta do what you need to do," Axthelm wrote.

Later, when Axthelm called Randolph on his cell phone to again ask for the key, Randolph told the officer that his attorney had advised him to not provide the key. Police had a towing company unlock the car, and police took both guns for safekeeping until Randolph picks them up.

The Blazers issued a statement saying they would conduct an investigation but have no further comment. Randolph and his agent, Raymond Brothers, did not respond to messages left on their cell phones.

Maxine Bernstein: 503-221-8212; maxinebernstein@news.oregonian.com

Mike Tokito: 503-294-7603; miketokito@news.oregonian.com

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by milt
Intersting topic. Someone from NV should chime in. An Old West attitude exists in most of the state AFA carrying weapons. Most counties, I believe, allow one to carry a sidearm not necessariky concealed. Don't try that in Clark County where the Strip is located. Now, the City of Las Vegas has a different set of laws, last I knew, I lived there in '94. That would be an example of municiple law overriding the local county laws.

Anyway, a very different place. You should have read the LA Times expose of the local and state judges this last week. In a word, corrupt. So, if you have the dough and an inside lawyer, you do as you damn well please in NV.

Someone from Arizona, which is in the West already did. We have the open carry law and anyone can carry any pistol on their side as long as its open anywhere in the state. Old laws and feelings die hard and it will be a long time before that one is voted down in this state.

[Shuie]

We have open carry here as well. Don't get excited yet. I've been told that exercising this right usually results in a 'disturbing the peace' or 'public intimidation' offense.

[TSNAPCRACKLEPOP]

redbeard, thats why i am bringing this up here, for discussion. i was enjoying a few beers with active and retired law enforcement when we decided to solve this world problem, so here we are!!

in Missouri, you carry rifles and pistolas in the pickup all the time when in the countryside. i rarely hunt with a long gun anymore.

in cities, (not small towns) you may get pulled over and asked, but even if you have one, its a minor infraction if you are not up to no good.

i have mentioned trading sometimes for quality used guns over the last 30 years, and believe me, we are definitely packing in ks and mo.

[red-beard]

To answer your question, no. A DWI with a firearm, if you hold a CHL will not result in any FEDERAL charges.

There is a bill in the Senate right now which would make the CHL like a drivers license, and that each state would have to respect each other's permits. If a state doesn't have permits, then they spelled out some simple rules.

And Again, this would not create a Federal violation, only force each state to recognize each others permits.

[Wrecked944]

I don't understand why this is a problem. If I understand the post properly, you only get into trouble if you break the law. So law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about - only criminals should be concerned and that seems just about right to me. So unless you are planning to carry a concealed weapon and commit crimes, then how is this a problem?

[fastpat]

Originally posted by JanusCole
I don't understand why this is a problem. If I understand the post properly, you only get into trouble if you break the law. So law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about - only criminals should be concerned and that seems just about right to me. So unless you are planning to carry a concealed weapon and commit crimes, then how is this a problem?

Well, a couple of things. First, governments all across the US; and MA is one of the worst, are constantly defining new crimes, particularly with firearms.

When we speak of a "law abiding person", we should mean one who doesn't steal from, rape, or murder others; not someone who carries a loaded rifle in his car while speeding and gets arrested and charged with a felony if stopped by a cop.

That's one of the reasons I couldn't leave CA fast enough; their firearms laws are getting worse, not better. Most of the northeastern US is the same way, infringing on basic freedoms is never good.