An education about reciprocity in general

[mbinpa]

I have found this forum to be very well educated and I am hoping some of you can help me out with something.

I have been reading the thread about national reciprocity for LTCF and the pros and cons of a national agreement. Federal control vs. states rights. But before I can have an informed opinion I was wondering about other state licenses that we take for granted as valid anywhere.

The most obvious is the driver's license. As far as I know there are not federal statutes or requirements involved with a state driver's license test or requirement for a national 'knowledge' - you just have to know the rules in your state. The tests and even the minimum/maximum ages vary from state to state. Yet it is my understanding that I can drive in all 50 states without a problem as long as I have a valid license from any state.

Same with marriage licenses. At least hetero for now. If you are married in PA you are married in all 50 states. Again, marriage regulations are dictated at at the state level.

I am sure there are other licenses like this but can't think of any offhand.

My question is how does this work? I heard something about it with regard to gay marriages about how there are states banning a marriage in one state from being valid in another but don't know the basis for such bans.

But I also know that there certain licenses that are NOT reciprocal. A trade license or professional license from one state is not valid in another. A doctor or plumber in PA can't practice in NY (I don't believe).

Why are LCTF different? Do all states have actual reciprocity agreements for drivers and marriage licenses and just choose not to for firearms? Some states require blood tests and waiting periods yet a marriage from a state like NV that has no such requirement is still valid not only nationally but is recognized by the IRS on a federal level. So it PA does not require a LTCF test and other states do is that a valid comparision?

What makes some license universal and others restricted to the state?

All I know is that I would love to be able to carry just like I drive - regardless of borders. I would even submit (an even appreciate from some of the people I have seen on the range) reasonable training requirements if required.

Thanks!

[ErSwnn]

I see there aren't too many takers on the topic. I'm surprised because it's a politically charged question.

From my understanding the matter is one of interstate commerce, and under the juristiction of the Commerce Clause within the COTUS. At present it seems they don't consider the lack of recognition between some states of a LTCF a commerce issue. It sure is for me though. I do my best to avoid such states and leave as little money behind as possible when I do venture over the border. Particularly NJ where the politians have decided people have no right to defend themselves and are tyrannical about enforcing that stance.

Myself I don't think we should need a license anywhere in the U.S. So long as you are legal to purchase you should be legal to carry. After that it becomes a matter of private property rights as to whether we could carry at a particular location.

[Statkowski]

One thing that people must remember, and they really don't teach this in school, is that ours is a country of fifty (50) sovereign entities, each with their own laws and governments. The federal government is a creation of these individual sovereign entities.

All fifty entities have agreed to abide by certain rules, with the federal government also abiding by certain rules. Whether one or all do or don't is another subject.

Operating a motor vehicle on public roads has been deemed a privilege, not a right, and is therefore subject to licensing by the individual states (and territories and other entities). Since there is no national driver's license applicable to all states (since the federal government lacks the authority to issue such), the individual states have all agreed to recognize each other's licenses by means of an interstate compact.

Until the federal government states that owning and carrying a firearm is a right (yes, the Supreme Court already did that, but Congress hasn't), then the individual and separate states may or may not license such ownership and carrying, whether carrying openly or concealed.

There are currently various interstate compacts in effect where one particular state recognizes licenses from other states, or doesn't, but there is no one nationwide interstate compact for such as there is with driver's licenses.

State "A" might "recognize" a license issued by State "B" or it might not. Whether is does likewise with State "C" is a separate issue. Right now, the federal government can't constitutionally force the issue.

Is LEOSA really, really constitutional according to strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution? Maybe, and maybe not. SCOTUS says it is, but they also bend and warp what's been written into something totally opposite, and base rulings on previous questionable rulings.

Interstate Commerce may or may not apply, if not superceded by the 10th Amendment.

[OwnTheRide]

What makes some license universal and others restricted to the state?

Poor interpretation of the Constitution by judges, politicians, and a whole lot of anti-gun people.

[Yellowfin]

I see there aren't too many takers on the topic. I'm surprised because it's a politically charged question.

From my understanding the matter is one of interstate commerce, and under the juristiction of the Commerce Clause within the COTUS. At present it seems they don't consider the lack of recognition between some states of a LTCF a commerce issue. It sure is for me though. I do my best to avoid such states and leave as little money behind as possible when I do venture over the border. Particularly NJ where the politicians have decided people have no right to defend themselves and are tyrannical about enforcing that stance.

Myself I don't think we should need a license anywhere in the U.S. So long as you are legal to purchase you should be legal to carry. After that it becomes a matter of private property rights as to whether we could carry at a particular location.

Same with me. For me there's both tourism and states I do business in or would were they not adverse to me being able to maintain my own personal security while there. My work requires me to carry confidential business documents containing details of multiple individuals' financial positions, a laptop w/ lots of personal info that would be an identity thief's wet dream, voided checks, etc. That's WAY more than many armored car pickups. Ya think I want to do that unarmed? I'd be stupid to, yet some states say I must. Guess where I do business and where I don't--and for every contact I have in bad states that's one I can't work for, so that's directly money out of my pocket, and lately I've been noticing just how badly that adds up.

[theshadow]

Until the federal government states that owning and carrying a firearm is a right (yes, the Supreme Court already did that, but Congress hasn't), then the individual and separate states may or may not license such ownership and carrying, whether carrying openly or concealed.

Technically speaking you are incorrect. Congress HAS stated "Owning and carrying a firearm" is a basic right, in fact it's the second one of the amendments to the Constitution of the US, they phrased it "keep and bear" you can't keep something you don't own, and bearing is carrying. Problem is as you pointed out, many states and legal entities try to twist that to mean something it doesn't.

[JDrini-NJ]

I have found this forum to be very well educated and I am hoping some of you can help me out with something.

I have been reading the thread about national reciprocity for LTCF and the pros and cons of a national agreement. Federal control vs. states rights. But before I can have an informed opinion I was wondering about other state licenses that we take for granted as valid anywhere.

The most obvious is the driver's license. As far as I know there are not federal statutes or requirements involved with a state driver's license test or requirement for a national 'knowledge' - you just have to know the rules in your state. The tests and even the minimum/maximum ages vary from state to state. Yet it is my understanding that I can drive in all 50 states without a problem as long as I have a valid license from any state.

Same with marriage licenses. At least hetero for now. If you are married in PA you are married in all 50 states. Again, marriage regulations are dictated at at the state level.

I am sure there are other licenses like this but can't think of any offhand.

My question is how does this work? I heard something about it with regard to gay marriages about how there are states banning a marriage in one state from being valid in another but don't know the basis for such bans.

But I also know that there certain licenses that are NOT reciprocal. A trade license or professional license from one state is not valid in another. A doctor or plumber in PA can't practice in NY (I don't believe).

Why are LCTF different? Do all states have actual reciprocity agreements for drivers and marriage licenses and just choose not to for firearms? Some states require blood tests and waiting periods yet a marriage from a state like NV that has no such requirement is still valid not only nationally but is recognized by the IRS on a federal level. So it PA does not require a LTCF test and other states do is that a valid comparision?

What makes some license universal and others restricted to the state?

All I know is that I would love to be able to carry just like I drive - regardless of borders. I would even submit (an even appreciate from some of the people I have seen on the range) reasonable training requirements if required.

Thanks!

Another one would be lawyers, you must be barred for each state you practice in.

[Statkowski]

Another one would be lawyers, you must be barred for each state you practice in.

Perhaps some/many should be barred (other definition) from practicing in the state they're currently in.

[JDrini-NJ]

Perhaps some/many should be barred (other definition) from practicing in the state they're currently in.

I got a chuckle out of that! LMAO