A Federal CCW, Who wants it?

[Fiercely Loyal]

In the wake of the recent Ft. Hood attack the question of CCW holders in uniform and on post has become a frequent topic of conversation not only on this forum but YouTube and other places that have like minded individuals.

My question is who wants it? Who would like to see a Federal CCW be available? I have already contacted the NRA ILA (National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action) to find out if there is a current bill being pushed and if not, where to start.

What I would like is feedback on what you could see as plausible things that should be part of the legislation.

TR already gave some help in another thread.

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I think there should be a national carry, with very few limitations, and a Federal carry permit, much as retired LE has national priviliges, that would be good on installations as well.

These permits would require significant training on the legal issues of lethal force as well as a performance based demonstration of the applicant's capabilties to make judgements and engage threats in real time.

What I can offer is updates that I get thru the NRA ILA and links to any info I do come up with.

Thanks for the help,
FL

[Ambush Master]

There have been several attempts to make the CHL/CCW Licenses viable in ALL States just like Drivers Licenses. If that would go through, then the Military would need to ammend their Regs to recognize that Law or like you said a Blanket Fedeal Law allowing the carrying on Fedeal Property.

[rubberneck]

Originally Posted by Fiercely Loyal

In the wake of the recent Ft. Hood attack the question of CCW holders in uniform and on post has become a frequent topic of conversation not only on this forum but YouTube and other places that have like minded individuals.

My question is who wants it? Who would like to see a Federal CCW be available? I have already contacted the NRA ILA (National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action) to find out if there is a current bill being pushed and if not, where to start.

What I would like is feedback on what you could see as plausible things that should be part of the legislation.

TR already gave some help in another thread.


What I can offer is updates that I get thru the NRA ILA and links to any info I do come up with.

Thanks for the help,
FL

I don't want a national CCW. I want all states to issue a license that all others must honor just like drivers licenses and marriage licenses. I don't want the Federal government involved in another aspect of my life.

I have little enthusiasm for a Federal CCW because it would, by it's nature, cater to the least common denominator. Many of us in states with generous rules would lose ground. On the other hand, a Federal law requiring states to honor other state's licenses as we do with driver's licenses might be a rewarding avenue.

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by rubberneck

I don't want a national CCW. I want all states to issue a license that all others must honor just like drivers licenses and marriage licenses. I don't want the Federal government involved in another aspect of my life.

How would this address the issue of carrying on Federal installations?

[rubberneck]

Originally Posted by abc_123

How would this address the issue of carrying on Federal installations?

I suppose the Federal Government can write the rules for CCW on a Federal installations.

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by abc_123

How would this address the issue of carrying on Federal installations?

I think the word is Comity (or reciprocity)..

In law, comity specifically refers to legal reciprocity—the principle that one jurisdiction will extend certain courtesies to other nations (or other jurisdictions within the same nation), particularly by recognizing the validity and effect of their executive, legislative, and judicial acts.

In the law of the United States, comity may refer to the Privileges and Immunities Clause (sometimes called the Comity Clause) in Article Four of the United States Constitution. This clause provides that "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

I think the laws are already on the books. The interpreters (SCOTUS) needs to be awaken..

We do not need more Federal intervention...

[Fiercely Loyal]

I do suppose clarification is already in order. I at this time am not advocating for a National CCW.

What I would rather see is the ability to carry within your state if you meet your states CCW criteria, and a separate CCW criteria on Federal Installations. Much how you can drive a motorcycle off post but to drive it on post you must attend the safety class. I can see this catering to a unique group of people but keep in mind there are a lot of DOD civilians that could use this also.

I would also venture to say that if you were able to obtain thru training and background checks, a CCW for all federal installations, that this would probably require more than all state CCW programs in place. That in turn could be recognized as required training for said states program making it easier to obtain, or instate automatic reciprocity for any Federal CCW holder.

Furthermore I believe that it SHOULD NOT be BRANCH nor RANK specific. If you have met the back ground checks and the required DOD safety / scenario training and firearms proficiency, you should be able to obtain this CCW. This would be the same EXACT training for everyone.

If we hire non military civilians just turning 21 to man our gates and trust them with a loaded firearm why not the Joe who has checked all the blocks and demonstrates the correct intent?

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by Fiercely Loyal

I do suppose clarification is already in order. I at this time am not advocating for a National CCW.

What I would rather see is the ability to carry within your state if you meet your states CCW criteria, and a separate CCW criteria on Federal Installations. Much how you can drive a motorcycle off post but to drive it on post you must attend the safety class. I can see this catering to a unique group of people but keep in mind there are a lot of DOD civilians that could use this also.

That's what I thought you were referring to. Thanks for the clarification.


That would work for me. As would mandated reciprocity...althought i'm not sure I understand the difference between that and a national CCW permit...?

I just can't keep thinking about how stupid it is that I can't carry in so very many places...(state, local, federal) when I'd do nothing but make EVERYONE safer if allowed to do so by law.

[GratefulCitizen]

Probably best overall to keep the feds out of the States' business.
Let the feds deal with the federal business.

The States have been progressing nicely without federal interference.
http://www.kc3.com/CCW_progress.htm
http://www.handgunlaw.us/

[Triman19]

I agree with Rubberneck..we have had enough of Uncle Sam telling us what we can and cannot do. IMHO I feel that arming our soldiers on posts is a Terrible idea..terrible. I have been a LEO for 5 years and I can honestly say that I have had the privilage of attending many great schools and courses. Some were tactical while others were more not. Once a weapon is placed in your sole responsibility much more liability has been placed on that individual. With that responsibility also comes a required understanding that far more mature thinking is not only required- it is demanded of our LEO.
I simply feel that todays soldiers are not trained properly to handle the responsibility and in some unfortaunate cases- the culpability which may come from one poor judgment call. A firearms violation, depending on the severity, could possibly destroy a soldiers family and career. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable stepping foot on an installation where a high, very high percentage of soldiers may possibly have any level of PTSD. Obviously we all know how that affects some soldiers. Would you want to bump into a soldiers vehicle accidently only to find him/her angry and armed??
I am a great example of what PTSD and LE can do when combined. Short story.. came back from deployment a bit fried. I hit the street ready to work only to find myself in an honest level 2 Use of Force situation.......of which I nearly took to a LEVEL 4. I was not ready for this type of work at all. The best thing I did was take a lot of time off. I see a counselor weekly and I have made progress. It is a long road, but like the SF pipeline I am mentally, emotionally and physically prepared to take on the challenges I am facing.
What if a soldier who was armed didn't have the mental tenacity and intellectual foresight that I was blessed with that day?
Our soldiers, as a mass body, are not trained well enough to handle carrying a side arm in the same capacity as LEO. True, we are trained to handle the M4, the M9 and other systems (of course this varies upon the specific MOS and assisgnment) But in many cases, I have seen soldiers who are insufficiently trained and flat out too immature to handle the responsibility which comes with a weapon.
Just my opinion. Hope everyone is having a great weekend.

-Triman19

[Fiercely Loyal]

I am sorry Triman19 but i very very much disagree with your point.

You can trust these soldiers to be armed overseas 24/7 for a year or more at a time (pre, during, and post traumatic events) and then strip that trust once they have come home to make the right decision?

The point of mandatory training is to ensure you are getting mature decision makers that have the ability to protect themselves and others. It is a process. It should weed out those who should not be carrying. Simple fact is had a CCW holder been there and armed a lot less folks would have been hurt in ALL of the mass shooting scenarios.

Not to digress from the original topic of a Federal CCW I can understand how folks would not want any FED / STATE fiascos. Instead you would like to see simply a Federal CCW for installations correct?

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by Triman19

I agree with Rubberneck..we have had enough of Uncle Sam telling us what we can and cannot do. IMHO I feel that arming our soldiers on posts is a Terrible idea..terrible. I have been a LEO for 5 years and I can honestly say that I have had the privilage of attending many great schools and courses. Some were tactical while others were more not. Once a weapon is placed in your sole responsibility much more liability has been placed on that individual. With that responsibility also comes a required understanding that far more mature thinking is not only required- it is demanded of our LEO.
I simply feel that todays soldiers are not trained properly to handle the responsibility and in some unfortaunate cases- the culpability which may come from one poor judgment call. A firearms violation, depending on the severity, could possibly destroy a soldiers family and career. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable stepping foot on an installation where a high, very high percentage of soldiers may possibly have any level of PTSD. Obviously we all know how that affects some soldiers. Would you want to bump into a soldiers vehicle accidently only to find him/her angry and armed??
I am a great example of what PTSD and LE can do when combined. Short story.. came back from deployment a bit fried. I hit the street ready to work only to find myself in an honest level 2 Use of Force situation.......of which I nearly took to a LEVEL 4. I was not ready for this type of work at all. The best thing I did was take a lot of time off. I see a counselor weekly and I have made progress. It is a long road, but like the SF pipeline I am mentally, emotionally and physically prepared to take on the challenges I am facing.
What if a soldier who was armed didn't have the mental tenacity and intellectual foresight that I was blessed with that day?
Our soldiers, as a mass body, are not trained well enough to handle carrying a side arm in the same capacity as LEO. True, we are trained to handle the M4, the M9 and other systems (of course this varies upon the specific MOS and assisgnment) But in many cases, I have seen soldiers who are insufficiently trained and flat out too immature to handle the responsibility which comes with a weapon.
Just my opinion. Hope everyone is having a great weekend.

-Triman19

What is you position on CCW in general? Civilians as a mass body are not trained at all to handle carrying a side arm in the same capacity as LEO either.

When I went down to the courthouse to apply for my CCW, neither I nor any of the other people standing in line with me were ever tested for PTSD. The only tests were making sure I had passed the requisite firearms safety course or presented a DD214, was not a felon, and that my credit card had enough room on it for the application fee.

[sitfly200]

I believe that states should get on board with reciprocity across the board. To clear up the difference between state reciprocity and federal or national level CCW is Fed control. If the states agree to unilateral reciprocity then it will stay within the span of state regulation. If we go to a National CCW then the Feds will have direct control of regulation and the definition of self defense and a clean shoot will be extremely narrow. States that have "loose" or citizen favorable regulations will lose that ability when the federal gov't tightens the noose. If they don't comply then the feds can do what they always do and threaten to remove federal funding as they did with the legal drinking age.

As for military men ansd women carrying on post it can be a double edged sword. While there are those with the common sense to do the right things there is a large majority who don't. The post stab and jabs would become more lethal and a big black eye for the military would ensue. Because the press loves nothing more than to jump on military and bash us when convienent. The overall big picture and 2nd and 3rd order effects could be potentially very bad. I am all for soldiers having special rights for the sacrifices made, being an active duty guy myself, but I think some thought would have to be put into this carrying on post. Just my thoughts

[LongWire]

Originally Posted by Triman19

But in many cases, I have seen soldiers who are insufficiently trained and flat out too immature to handle the responsibility which comes with a weapon.
Just my opinion. Hope everyone is having a great weekend.

-Triman19

Agree completely. Some of the worst offenders I have seen were MP's. De-cocking their M9 hammers with thumb and trigger???? Hello!!!!!!