Is that the funniest thing you're ever heard, or what? These responsible citizens can get the concealed carry permit they've always wanted "without having to meet tougher requirements their home states may impose, such as firing a gun with an instructor."Virginia is issuing a rising number of concealed-carry gun permits to people who live in other states in a trend that may be helped along by online gun classes.The commercial courses allow applicants to seek a permit from Virginia that is valid in their state, but without having to meet tougher requirements their home states may impose, such as firing a gun with an instructor.Virginia State Police issued 1,632 concealed-carry permits to nonresidents through the first half of 2012, topping the previous year's total of 1,321 nonresident permits. There was no corresponding increase in demand for resident permits, with just under half the previous year's number reached by mid-2012.Their home states may impose more stringent requirements, he tells prospects, but they can get a Virginia permit simply by paying $39.99, reading five chapters about firearms and correctly answering 15 of 20 true-or-false questions on a quiz. The customer receives a certificate to be mailed along with other application materials to the Virginia State Police. After passing a criminal background check, the applicant receives a permit to carry a concealed weapon in his or her home state and 26 others that have reciprocity agreements with Virginia.
These gun-rights fanatics are more fun than a barrel of monkeys.
To me, this type of reciprocity is a disgraceful abuse of the system. It should be stopped immediately.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Wait a sec. Virginia following all applicable laws in the issuance of out-of-state carry permits is an abuse, but Chicago and D.C. creating a labyrinthine licensing and registration scheme in order to discourage gun ownership is a-okay? How does that work?
ReplyDeleteMoonshine7102
That's a pretty whacky comparison.
DeleteThe exportation of carry licenses to other states where the requirements are stricter is an abuse because those states with the stricter laws have a right to expect their citizens to obey.
The same way that southern states had the right to expect blacks not to vote? Mikeb, once again, you make to fundamental errors:
Delete1. Governments do not have rights. They have powers that must be strictly limited in a free society.
2. Citizens have rights no matter where they live.
@mikeb:
DeleteThen those states with the stricter laws can choose to no longer recognize Virginia CCW permits. If you must assign blame, assign it to those who refuse to change their law in an effort to combat this "exporting" of CCW permits. It is in no way Virginia's fault that other states choose to recognize Virginia permits. I'm sure we can agree that, under current law, each state is responsible for setting their own standards for CCW permit issuance and recognition, right?
Moonshine7102
Yes, we are in agreement on that, and that's exactly the problem. It should be federally controlled.
DeleteNo, the Federal Constitution should be respected by all states--in its exact and plain language: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
DeleteWell this will all be resolved when the Federal reciprocity bill passes. You are in favor of Federal control of the gun laws right?
ReplyDeleteI have a Florida non-resident permit, but at some point, I'll look into getting a Virginia one as well. Thanks for reminding me, MIkeb. Many states have reciprocity agreements with others, but not all. One reason for getting multiple licenses is to add more states where a person may carry. Arkansas and Michigan have the most reciprocity, but when it's time for me to renew my license, I'll be glad to have a spare in case there's any delay in processing the paperwork.
ReplyDeleteStates that impose more stringent requirements on good citizens are infringing on their rights. Some states--Virginia, we see here, but also Florida, Utah, and others--respect our gun rights, and good for them.
What's the problem with training levels? MikeB says that attacks are so rare that citizens don't need to carry guns in public anyway. Thus an armed citizen with minimal training poses no significant risk to the public because they would never have to use their firearm to defend themselves ... and never put the public at risk because of the incompetence that MikeB fears.
ReplyDeleteToo bad it's not so simple. Every single day we see stories of lawful gun owners acting badly. Sometimes it's because they got fired from the job or because the girlfriend left them. Other times it's because they forget there's one in the chamber and negligently shoot themselves or someone else.
DeleteGuns cause more harm than they prevent.
No, you're exaggerating. You label anyone who has an accident or commits a crime with a gun as lawful, even though you don't know that to be the case. You speculate that every one of them could have had a carry license, then you treat your speculations as proof. You reject even the most conservative figures about how many defensive gun uses occur in a year.
DeleteYour assertions aren't being accepted as evidence.