Virginia Halts Concealed Carry Reciprocity With 25 States

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So much for conservative 'support' for 'states' rights.'

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

Of course, no one is being 'denied' the right to carry a firearm, Virginia's reciprocity law wouldn't be subject to a court challenge, there's no Second Amendment 'issue' at stake.

 

[Rustic]

I guess Virginia doesn't trust other states to keep guns out of the hands of killers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/23/u...oncealed-gun-permits-from-25-states.html?_r=0

Virginia will no longer recognize concealed handgun permits issued by 25 other states, its attorney general announced Tuesday, a stark change in policy for a state known for its expansive gun rights.

The announcement by Attorney General Mark R. Herring, a Democrat, means that permit-holding residents of the 25 states, which span the country from Alaska to Florida, will no longer be able to carry concealed weapons in Virginia, beginning Feb. 1. Virginia is revoking its so-called reciprocity agreements with those states.

Mr. Herring made the decision, his office said in a statement, after “months of research and evaluation,” including an audit of 30 states whose concealed handgun permits have been considered valid in Virginia. All but five of those states, he said, grant permits to people who would be barred from carrying concealed weapons in Virginia.

Virginia has a government full of cowards...

 

[The Rabbi]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

Of course, no one is being 'denied' the right to carry a firearm, Virginia's reciprocity law wouldn't be subject to a court challenge, there's no Second Amendment 'issue' at stake.

Out of state visitors with valid carry permits are being denied that right. The right to keep and bear arms is the second amendment.

 

[The Rabbi]

My opponents whine, "Oh, he's lying!" Tens of thousands of murders every year and they pretend none of them are by people with concealed carry permits! Can you believe these people?

They hate America. They don't care if we all get killed.

We must be vigilant!

tens of thousands of murders? Where? Not here that is for sure I believe the last number was less then even one 10 thousand.

There are 15 to 20 thousand homicides a year in the US.

So far this year, there have been 16,380. And the gun lovers would have you believe none of them were committed by people with conceal carry permits.

Vigilance!

Actually none of them were committed by people with permits. People with permits dont commit crimes. That's why they have permits.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

My opponents whine, "Oh, he's lying!" Tens of thousands of murders every year and they pretend none of them are by people with concealed carry permits! Can you believe these people?

They hate America. They don't care if we all get killed.

We must be vigilant!

tens of thousands of murders? Where? Not here that is for sure I believe the last number was less then even one 10 thousand.

There are 15 to 20 thousand homicides a year in the US.

So far this year, there have been 16,380. And the gun lovers would have you believe none of them were committed by people with conceal carry permits.

Vigilance!

Provide evidence of tens of thousands of murders with firearms. Then provide data on how many were done by concealed carry permit holders. I notice you still haven't answered my point that almost all the conditions outlined by Virginia are Federal so almost every other State bars the same people.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So much for conservative 'support' for 'states' rights.'

That went right out the window with gay marriage.

 

[2aguy]

My opponents whine, "Oh, he's lying!" Tens of thousands of murders every year and they pretend none of them are by people with concealed carry permits! Can you believe these people?

They hate America. They don't care if we all get killed.

We must be vigilant!

According to the FBI…table 8…there were 8,124 gun murders in 2014……those are the relevant murders for our discussion since you guys don't seem to care if people are murdered by other means….

And yes….very few are committed by people with concealed carry permits…why…because the nuts and the criminals carried guns before it was legal and only now are normal gun owners able to carry legally….so the ones who waited to do it legally are the ones Not shooting other people……..

So the crap about concealed carry permit holders being dangerous is exactly that….crap.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

Of course, no one is being 'denied' the right to carry a firearm, Virginia's reciprocity law wouldn't be subject to a court challenge, there's no Second Amendment 'issue' at stake.

Carry isn't a 2A issue anyway. See Presser, where the Supreme Court said that the guys marching around with non-concealed guns weren't protected by the 2A either. And Heller upheld Presser.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

I understand that point. However people are making the point that if you don't have guns, then the criminals will go crazy. Will they? They're basing this on what?

If the US tries to sort out all of the problems, instead of only dealing with the problems of the rich, then maybe you'd not have that situation.

 

[2aguy]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

Of course, no one is being 'denied' the right to carry a firearm, Virginia's reciprocity law wouldn't be subject to a court challenge, there's no Second Amendment 'issue' at stake.

And the democrats did not deny blacks the right to vote in the south….they just had to pay a huge fee they couldn't afford and pass a literacy test they couldn't pass….but no one was denying them the right to vote…..right?

 

[Conservative65]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

I understand that point. However people are making the point that if you don't have guns, then the criminals will go crazy. Will they? They're basing this on what?

If the US tries to sort out all of the problems, instead of only dealing with the problems of the rich, then maybe you'd not have that situation.

What problems?

 

[2aguy]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

I understand that point. However people are making the point that if you don't have guns, then the criminals will go crazy. Will they? They're basing this on what?

If the US tries to sort out all of the problems, instead of only dealing with the problems of the rich, then maybe you'd not have that situation.

They are basing it on Britain…..they gave up their guns and their gun murder rate stayed the same but their violent crime rate went up…..

Australia….gun crime is going up….after the confiscation….and gun ownership is back to where it was….

And countries without civilian gun ownership…..tend to have more violence, not less…..

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

I understand that point. However people are making the point that if you don't have guns, then the criminals will go crazy. Will they? They're basing this on what?

If the US tries to sort out all of the problems, instead of only dealing with the problems of the rich, then maybe you'd not have that situation.

We are basing it on several things: First of all is our mass shootings which normally take place in gun free environments. People who want to commit mass murder often avoid places where people can protect themselves.

Secondly is the fact that even if you don't carry or own a firearm, a criminal doesn't know that. They take precautions to make sure residents are not home when they go to burglarize the place. Years ago when people normally didn't have a firearm in the house, burglaries many times were conducted while people were home.

Gun violence and violence in general has been on the decline since the mid 90's. That's about the time more and more states adopted better gun laws for citizens such as CCW's and Castle Doctrine laws. Can I prove that's what reduced those crimes? No I can't, but it has to be more than just coincidence. Not much else has changed since then.

I'll give up my gun when somebody can show me how government can disarm the criminals first. When that can be accomplished, then we could talk about it. Until that time, I'm arming myself when I feel necessary.

 

[Iceweasel]

The AG of Virginia is doing exactly what follows from Trump Logic. They are banning concealed gun carriers from other states until those other states improve their vetting of gun owners.

No difference in reasoning at all.

The AG didn't ban all the other states. He was satisfied with the vetting of 5 of the states.

He's following Trump's logic? What drug are you shooting up? Democrats want more involvement with gun ownership and will take everything they can get. It's what happens when people vote stupidly and give more power to totalitarians. What are the crime stats? Did they vet that? That wasn't even a concern.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What are the chances the Supreme Court doesn't say that everyone has the right to carry arms? I mean, if "bear arms" were the right to carry, then you'd have the right to carry arms as you see fit. Funny how the right claims the right to bear arms is the right to carry but manages to ignore this point.

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

I understand that point. However people are making the point that if you don't have guns, then the criminals will go crazy. Will they? They're basing this on what?

If the US tries to sort out all of the problems, instead of only dealing with the problems of the rich, then maybe you'd not have that situation.

We are basing it on several things: First of all is our mass shootings which normally take place in gun free environments. People who want to commit mass murder often avoid places where people can protect themselves.

Secondly is the fact that even if you don't carry or own a firearm, a criminal doesn't know that. They take precautions to make sure residents are not home when they go to burglarize the place. Years ago when people normally didn't have a firearm in the house, burglaries many times were conducted while people were home.

Gun violence and violence in general has been on the decline since the mid 90's. That's about the time more and more states adopted better gun laws for citizens such as CCW's and Castle Doctrine laws. Can I prove that's what reduced those crimes? No I can't, but it has to be more than just coincidence. Not much else has changed since then.

I'll give up my gun when somebody can show me how government can disarm the criminals first. When that can be accomplished, then we could talk about it. Until that time, I'm arming myself when I feel necessary.

You say mass shootings normally take place in gun free environments. Is this because certain places which are more likely to be shot up are more likely to feel the effects of guns and see them as negative and therefore ban them, or do these crimes happen because there are no guns there?

Is there any evidence at all that the implementation of gun free zones has made things worse? Or are you just pulling assumptions out of a hat?

Secondly, in other countries, do burglaries happen when people are at home or not?

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf

In the US 27% of burglaries take place with the victims at home.

I don't have time to find other information. But is there a difference in the UK or other first world countries? Or are you just assuming?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If we get enough liberal judges on the court, one day we may not be able to bear arms. It's something that people should seriously consider when voting for a President.

If that were the case, it would basically outlaw guns for law abiding citizens. The criminals would be festive and celebrate. We would all be at the disadvantage of the criminal element in our society.

I've lived in countries without many guns, I felt safer.

Criminals are not festive in those countries, unless it's Christmas and they're not in prison.

Are people in those countries at a disadvantage? Maybe, but then they're not going to experience more crime, and will experience less murderers.

That all depends. In this country, if you take away guns, the criminals will still have them just like they have illegal narcotics. Unlike other countries, our prison system is not all that much of a deterrent. In fact going to prison is a badge of honor in some of these communities also known as Street Cred.

So I don't know what countries you are talking bout, their prison system, or their criminals, but just because something works in other places doesn't mean it will work here.

I understand that point. However people are making the point that if you don't have guns, then the criminals will go crazy. Will they? They're basing this on what?

If the US tries to sort out all of the problems, instead of only dealing with the problems of the rich, then maybe you'd not have that situation.

We are basing it on several things: First of all is our mass shootings which normally take place in gun free environments. People who want to commit mass murder often avoid places where people can protect themselves.

Secondly is the fact that even if you don't carry or own a firearm, a criminal doesn't know that. They take precautions to make sure residents are not home when they go to burglarize the place. Years ago when people normally didn't have a firearm in the house, burglaries many times were conducted while people were home.

Gun violence and violence in general has been on the decline since the mid 90's. That's about the time more and more states adopted better gun laws for citizens such as CCW's and Castle Doctrine laws. Can I prove that's what reduced those crimes? No I can't, but it has to be more than just coincidence. Not much else has changed since then.

I'll give up my gun when somebody can show me how government can disarm the criminals first. When that can be accomplished, then we could talk about it. Until that time, I'm arming myself when I feel necessary.

You say mass shootings normally take place in gun free environments. Is this because certain places which are more likely to be shot up are more likely to feel the effects of guns and see them as negative and therefore ban them, or do these crimes happen because there are no guns there?

Is there any evidence at all that the implementation of gun free zones has made things worse? Or are you just pulling assumptions out of a hat?

Secondly, in other countries, do burglaries happen when people are at home or not?

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf

In the US 27% of burglaries take place with the victims at home.

I don't have time to find other information. But is there a difference in the UK or other first world countries? Or are you just assuming?

Your link also points out that 65% of the time, the offender is not a stranger to the residents. Of course it's easier to commit a crime if you are invited in or otherwise know the people there.

As far as shootings in gun free zones, do you think that is coincidence as well?

 

[Wilbur Right]

Six American soldiers, fully armed and on a combat patrol were killed by a surprise attack by a terrorist.

But some gun nutter with a CC permit will be able to stop a surprise attack from an American terrorist.

You gun nutters are delusional about your capabilities and actions.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Six American soldiers, fully armed and on a combat patrol were killed by a surprise attack by a terrorist.

But some gun nutter with a CC permit will be able to stop a surprise attack from an American terrorist.

You gun nutters are delusional about your capabilities and actions.

Plenty of stories out there about citizens with their CCW and firearm saving the day one way or another. Of course you have to look for them; the MSM doesn't like to make too big a deal out of those stories.