Will the New USSC Gun Rights Decision Change How, When, If You Carry a Firearm in Your Rig?

[AbleGuy]

How (if at all) will the new USST Gun Rights Decision change how, when, if, you will carry along a gun in your camping rig?

Hopefully transporting a firearm in your camper across state lines will get much easier as some of the more restrictive laws fall by the wayside.

What are your predictions?

 

[Mickey Bitsko]

Meh.. politics
Transporting a firearm across state lines has never
been a problem for me.

 

[Umbrarian]

How (if at all) will the new USST Gun Rights Decision change how, when, if, you will carry along a gun in your camping rig?

Hopefully transporting a firearm in your camper across state lines will get much easier as some of the more restrictive laws fall by the wayside.

What are your predictions?

The decisions does not affect any of this.

All it does it says states can no longer be "may issue" but must be "shall issue", wrt to carry licenses. I imagine years more litigation as the most anti-gun states put up as many road blocks as possible.

 

[FordGuy1]

Does not change anything for me as a ccw holder. It would be nice to have 50 state reciprocity.

 

[AbleGuy]

Does not change anything for me as a ccw holder. It would be nice to have 50 state reciprocity.

We really need to see a 50 state reciprocity law passed. Traveling state to state without the threat of being in violation of carry laws still could be a problem for folks wanting to carry a hand gun in their camper as they travel.

To me, the barriers created here for lawful gun owners in the past (which still are in existence to a major extent) are a violation of the Right to Interstate Travel as implicated by and interpreted from the 14th Amendment of, and Article IV of the US Constitution.

When you look at the right of a citizen to move freely between states, which has long protected by USSCT decisions (even though it lacks a clear doctrinal basis), and that right guaranteed expressly by the first sentence of Art IV, which provides that a citizen of one state temporarily visiting (or transiting) another state should have the same Privileges and Immunities of a citizen of the latter state, a federal clarification protecting our right to freely travel throughout the USA carrying a lawful firearms seems to be a no brainer.

 

[AbleGuy]

The decisions does not affect any of this.

All it does it says states can no longer be "may issue" but must be "shall issue", wrt to carry licenses. I imagine years more litigation as the most anti-gun states put up as many road blocks as possible.

I think the decision does change things here. Justice Thomas basically made it a point to say that states should not restrict the right to carry a firearm only to those with special status, also pointed out that lawful owners should be treated equally with regards to the right to possess/carry.

I’m hopeful that those comments quickly get enforced to mean that if one is a lawful owner in their home state, and would otherwise be so in the state they’re traveling through if a resident there, then that person is safe to possess the firearm in any states being visited. That is not clear here yet.

And Thomas also made reference to an earlier NY gun rights case that the USSCT previously overturned, regarding protecting the right to possess a firearm for self defense in your home. Since our camping rigs are our temporary Homes when we travel, it’d be nice to see some strengthening of that concept for interstate traveling.

 

[Northland]

We really need to see a 50 state reciprocity law passed. Traveling state to state without the threat of being in violation of carry laws still could be a problem for folks wanting to carry a hand gun in their camper as they travel.

To me, the barriers created here for lawful gun owners in the past (which still are in existence to a major extent) are a violation of the Right to Interstate Travel as implicated by and interpreted from the 14th Amendment of, and Article IV of the US Constitution.

When you look at the right of a citizen to move freely between states, which has long protected by USSCT decisions (even though it lacks a clear doctrinal basis), and that right guaranteed expressly by the first sentence of Art IV, which provides that a citizen of one state temporarily visiting (or transiting) another state should have the same Privileges and Immunities of a citizen of the latter state, a federal clarification protecting our right to freely travel throughout the USA carrying a lawful firearms seems to be a no brainer.

I would be surprised to see 50-state reciprocity unless someone puts in place some standardized eligibility requirements, backgrounds, training, etc. Right now it’s all across the board as far as what each state requires. No way will a state that’s strict allow a person from a state with minimal requirements to carry there, even if just passing through.

 

[SDDiver5]

I’m hopeful that those comments quickly get enforced to mean that if one is a lawful owner in their home state, and would otherwise be so in the state they’re traveling through if a resident there, then that person is safe to possess the firearm in any states being visited. That is not clear here yet.

San Diego is already acknowledging this. You used to need a good cause statement basically stating why you needed a CCW for reasons other than personal protection. The amount of CCWs being issued for the last year has been about 100 per month, and the applications since the ruling has increased 5x. I just renewed my quals this weekend and should be getting my new permit in 2 weeks or so after my background check and investigation.

It's pretty incredible what a large group of gun owners can do when they pressure the local officials and voice what they want. 5 years ago they were hardly issuing them, now just about all of my friends have them and I encourage and San Diegan interested to apply. It's a simple process but it is a lengthy process so get started.

 

[Highlander]

You used to need a good cause statement basically stating why you needed

I think the same thing was in NJ. You needed to have a written explanation for owning a gun (shoguns not included).
Basically you had to write an essay and if they deemed you worth they would grant you a right (there actual people who think it's normal and the state grants you rights).
It's all gone now.

Would be interesting to see what the new "red flag" laws will be and how it will play out.

 

[FordGuy1]

I would be surprised to see 50-state reciprocity unless someone puts in place some standardized eligibility requirements, backgrounds, training, etc. Right now it’s all across the board as far as what each state requires. No way will a state that’s strict allow a person from a state with minimal requirements to carry there, even if just passing through.

But if you think about it, California for example has the strictest guidelines for CCW except for NY. My California CCW should be good in every state.

 

[Northland]

But if you think about it, California for example has the strictest guidelines for CCW except for NY. My California CCW should be good in every state.

There’s a flip side.

When I lived in VA circa 1995 (don’t know if it’s changed or not), all you needed for a concealed carry permit was to show proof that you had served in the military. That meant someone who joined a service branch that only made them qualify once with a .22 sub-cal M16 in boot camp and never even issued them a weapon thereafter could carry a concealed pistol in VA. Basically with no training other than being shown which end of a firearm the bullet comes out, let alone zero experience with a pistol.

CA and NY will not likely be favorable to a person like that carrying in their state. And unfortunately, the gun-toting population can only be as strong as the weakest link.

The only option I see - other than having every state actually agree on a standard and then bringing everyone who wants to carry up to that standard - would be if states would accept CCW applications from out of state residents. That would involve a given state spending the time and money to review applicants and their training on a case by case basis. Even if they had the desire and the resources to do it, they’d likely charge and arm and a leg to defray the cost.

 

[NevadaLover]

There’s a flip side.

When I lived in VA circa 1995 (don’t know if it’s changed or not), all you needed for a concealed carry permit was to show proof that you had served in the military. That meant someone who joined a service branch that only made them qualify once with a .22 sub-cal M16 in boot camp and never even issued them a weapon thereafter could carry a concealed pistol in VA. Basically with no training other than being shown which end of a firearm the bullet comes out, let alone zero experience with a pistol.

CA and NY will not likely be favorable to a person like that carrying in their state. And unfortunately, the gun-toting population can only be as strong as the weakest link.

The only option I see - other than having every state actually agree on a standard and then bringing everyone who wants to carry up to that standard - would be if states would accept CCW applications from out of state residents. That would involve a given state spending the time and money to review applicants and their training on a case by case basis. Even if they had the desire and the resources to do it, they’d likely charge and arm and a leg to defray the cost.

Personally I doubt kalifornya and neu york want anybody carrying concealed no matter the reason, they will hold out on reciprocity until forced to by the SC, and I doubt that will ever happen at all.

 

[Mickey Bitsko]

Why would anyone need a ccp for anything other than self protection?


Is this a difficult question?

 

[FordGuy1]

Personally I doubt California and neu york want anybody carrying concealed no matter the reason, they will hold out on reciprocity until forced to by the SC, and I doubt that will ever happen at all.

Orange County where I live, it has been very easy to get a CCW. Counties all over are already drafting the permit process to follow the SC ruling. The only super stupid CA issue is in San Franciso, you cant carry hollow points so you must be careful or change ammo. They are super smart, they want to make sure your bullet goes threw innocent bystanders, or multiple walls.

 

[Mike W.]

Personally I doubt California and neu york want anybody carrying concealed no matter the reason, they will hold out on reciprocity until forced to by the SC, and I doubt that will ever happen at all.

All the years I lived in California as an adult I had carry permit. About 30 years and since leaving I haven't followed the changes. Living in a basically crime free area now I don't unless traveling.

I have a finger safe within reach in my vehicle. If I feel I'm in an area I need to carry I do regardless of where or local regulations..