Quote:
Originally Posted by theshadow
I look on this in several different ways. I think it is the best way to get "universal" recognition, an dthe least intrusive way to have the Fererals, sorry Federals weigh in on it.... However that said. The language of meeting said criteria, who DICTATES (yes that's the proper word in this case) what that criteria is? I have no doubt in my mind I'd pass any criteria and testing they designate, but I see that as a further infringemetn by the government. PA is one of the most liberal states in terms of issueing you a permit, you go in, pay your money, pass a background check and you're issued. the Only two I know more liberal than that are Alaska and Vermont, where as long as you're not a prohibited person, you can carry with OUT the permission slip from the government (much more in line with the 2A). Now how long to you think our two good friends in Washington are going to stand up in the senate and say, we'll not stand for infeingments and agressive 'standards' in issuing carry permits? How fast will they cave to the creatures from CA or NY, who say only the eilite should carry?
While I like the premise of the 'recognize' all permits and licenses, by allowing them the wording of 'as long as it meets.....' totally defeats the rest of it.
|
Completely agree with this statement. States like PA which do not require hundreds of dollars, training, fingerprints, etc. to obtain an LTC have nowhere to go but down on this issue.
IMHO, states like NJ, MD, and NY are going to fight very hard against national reciprocity becoming a reality. If these states think they're going to lose on this issue in the legislature, they're going to attempt, under the "meet certain criteria" clause, to make said criteria so ridiculous that either:
a) the bill will get voted down, OR
b) it will become much more difficult for ANYONE in ANY state to obtain a license.
These states will attempt to use the "meet certain criteria" clause to create a federally controlled, nationwide standard for the LTC licensing process, which is in direct conflict with the spirit of this bill: to force states to recognize carry licenses issued from other states, no matter HOW or WHY they were issued.
Even if the bill does pass, the above states will likely break the law and just not recognize the permits anyway. It will take someone who's exercising their rights to get falsely arrested and acquitted before they start following the law.
Call me a pessimist, but the risk for Pennsylvanians doesn't seem worth the reward. I like the bill on paper, and if it were to pass unmodified into law, I'd be really happy. I'd like nothing more than to be able to carry when I'm traveling in NJ to visit family. I just don't see it happening, and if there's any chance of it happening the antis are going to try and use it as leverage to take away even more of the protection of our rights, potentially putting us in a worse situation then we are now (which right now in PA isn't all that bad).