State-by-State Gun Laws

[Tulecreeper]

I have to respectfully disagree. I do agree with the fact that everyone should get training on firearms safety either formally or informally before they carry but I do not believe it should be mandatory because every free person should have the right to defend themselves with or without training. People who have never been LEO can obtain the LEOSA card so no matter how much they train they will never have the same privileges as someone with that card.

No, people who have never been LE cannot obtain the LEOSA card. Where did you come up with that?

But, to comment on the last part. You go ahead and spend 25-30 years of your life carrying a firearm for public protection, getting in fights in a dark alley at 0200, and getting shot at and having knives pulled on you, then tell me it isn't fair that you can qualify for LEOSA and someone who didn't put up with that can't. I also spent 25 years in the military, which gives me certain privileges that a person who performed no military service doesn't get. Is that unfair?

No matter. My opinion is still, a person who wishes to carry a concealed weapon should be required to qualify and show proficiency with that weapon annually.

 

[Babe2201]

No, people who have never been LE cannot obtain the LEOSA card. Where did you come up with that?

But, to comment on the last part. You go ahead and spend 25-30 years of your life carrying a firearm for public protection, getting in fights in a dark alley at 0200, and getting shot at and having knives pulled on you, then tell me it isn't fair that you can qualify for LEOSA and someone who didn't put up with that can't. I also spent 25 years in the military, which gives me certain privileges that a person who performed no military service doesn't get. Is that unfair?

No matter. My opinion is still, a person who wishes to carry a concealed weapon should be required to qualify and show proficiency with that weapon annually.

It was a typo. Where did I ever say it was not fair that I can't qualify for a LEOSA? I never did I just mentioned that I can't. I actually do not feel I deserve to because I did not serve the way you did.

You are welcome to that opinion but if you are really a believer in the 2A please tell me where it says the people who are properly trained and proficient shall have the right to bear arms? I do not think the properly trained part is in there.

 

[TheBar]

I am very pro-2nd. I am also very pro-taking some kind of training to be able to carry. As a retired LEO, I am required to qualify annually with a local LE agency in order to maintain my LEOSA card. If I have to go through it, everybody else should also.

I am also very pro-2nd and have had a CCW license for many years. But - I don't agree with the new trend where states allow concealed carry without license or training. I'm afraid of the guy sitting next to me with a gun in his pocket who has never fired a gun in his life.

Regardless of concealed carry or not, I think gun shops and shows should be required to provide a 3 minute gun operation and safety instruction. Newbies are dangerous to themselves.

I also totally disapprove of states which allow guns to be legally sold at gun shows or between individuals without any proof of identity much less a background check.

Unfortunately there seems to be no middle ground. Both sides of the 2nd amendment discussion are all or nothing.

 

[Babe2201]

I am also very pro-2nd and have had a CCW license for many years. But - I don't agree with the new trend where states allow concealed carry without license or training. I'm afraid of the guy sitting next to me with a gun in his pocket who has never fired a gun in his life.

Regardless of concealed carry or not, I think gun shops and shows should be required to provide a 3 minute gun operation and safety instruction. Newbies are dangerous to themselves.

I also totally disapprove of states which allow guns to be legally sold at gun shows or between individuals without any proof of identity much less a background check.

Unfortunately there seems to be no middle ground. Both sides of the 2nd amendment discussion are all or nothing.

Do gun shows really allow private sales or are they done out in the parking lot?

 

[Tulecreeper]

It was a typo. Where did I ever say it was not fair that I can't qualify for a LEOSA? I never did I just mentioned that I can't. I actually do not feel I deserve to because I did not serve the way you did.

You are welcome to that opinion but if you are really a believer in the 2A please tell me where it says the people who are properly trained and proficient shall have the right to bear arms? I do not think the properly trained part is in there.

OK with the typo thing. I missed that.

The term "well regulated" was the 18th Century term for "well trained".

 

[Babe2201]

OK with the typo thing. I missed that.

The term "well regulated" was the 18th Century term for "well trained".

Unfortunately that is the same argument the anti 2A people use when it comes to firearms.

 

[Tulecreeper]

Do gun shows really allow private sales or are they done out in the parking lot?

In my state, I am legally allowed to sell any legal firearm to anybody at any time. No FFL, no background check, no nothing And it does not have to be at a gun show. The only law I am required to follow is to verify that the individual is a resident of my state. I cannot legally sell to a guy who lives 20 minutes away over the border in Oklahoma.

 

[RedForeman]

Nobody asked me, but I think current and former police and military should get a full exemption from any weapon regulations, even at the risk they may have some sort of ptsd or the like, that could make them a less stable candidate in the universe of possible gun owners. It's a risk I'll gladly take following what they went through to qualify for that exemption. And i've never served as either, so really have no dog in that fight other than voting, which I've about given up on anyway.

My opinion, that I fully understand some will disagree with is, gun laws serve no purpose other than to turn law abiding people into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

In the best of cases, they're an attempt to bring everyone up to a certain level of common sense or competence that never works. You either have it or you don't, no matter what sort of potentially lethal object you're purchasing is. In the worst cases, they're a virtue signal. Usually promoted in an effort to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals or the insane, who usually just take them from someone else anyway, which is already illegal, and no prohibition or background check will prevent.

 

[Tulecreeper]

Unfortunately that is the same argument the anti 2A people use when it comes to firearms.

I am only stating a fact. I am with Bar. I don't trust that the dummy who just bought his first pistol and is now carrying it concealed because the state law says he can without a permit has the requisite knowledge to handle himself in an emergency. And there are too many wanna-be Dirty Harrys out there who think they're the savior of the masses. That dude last year who took out the armed guy in the mall is a good example.

I carry a concealed weapon to protect myself and my loved ones...period. It is not my job to protect everybody in a live shooter situation. And it definitely isn't on my list to actually hunt the guy down like Rambo. That guy was stupid, and lucky. He could have got a lot of people hurt. If I am unlucky enough to find myself in a shooter situation like that, my first response is to hit the floor and head for the nearest exit. The screams of the people left behind would not distract me.

 

[Babe2201]

I am only stating a fact. I am with Bar. I don't trust that the dummy who just bought his first pistol and is now carrying it concealed because the state law says he can without a permit has the requisite knowledge to handle himself in an emergency. And there are too many wanna-be Dirty Harrys out there who think they're the savior of the masses. That dude last year who took out the armed guy in the mall is a good example.

I carry a concealed weapon to protect myself and my loved ones...period. It is not my job to protect everybody in a live shooter situation. And it definitely isn't on my list to actually hunt the guy down like Rambo. That guy was stupid, and lucky. He could have got a lot of people hurt. If I am unlucky enough to find myself in a shooter situation like that, my first response is to hit the floor and head for the nearest exit. The screams of the people left behind would not distract me.

I am the first person to say anybody who carries should be trained and responsible. I for one have never had formal training but was taught firearm safety by my father and older siblings and started shooting at a really young age. That being said I do not think it should be required to have a CCL. I live in state that has constitutional carry for a little while and have lived near one that has had one for years and we don't have Rambos or the guy that Bronson plays in the 2 states.

I don't think being a bad shot should take away your right to defend yourself.

 

[TheBar]

Do gun shows really allow private sales or are they done out in the parking lot?

As I said I don't approve but like Tulecreeper in AR see this list: in many states residents can legally sell to another resident without proof of identity. The only exception is if the seller has an FFL license or if the buyer is known to the seller to be ineligible. Which is why private sellers don't even want to know your name. They might recognize your name from the local news There are FFL dealers at any sizable gun show so you never know if they require a background check.

I have noticed at MS gun shows they do shine it up before handing it over, IE they wipe their prints off it You do have to show the gun to the police when leaving but no serial numbers are recorded or your name asked or drivers license is checked, they only look at it to deter shoplifting.

Any gun I bought that way would only use it for target practice not self defense. It would be my luck a ballistics test would show that gun was used in a homicide 10 years ago. I would have no record of when or where I got the gun. And if I ever sell one of those guns I'm going to shine it up for the buyer too

 

[Steven L]

That is true, up to a point. As long as those state laws do not violate the 2nd Amendment as adjudicated by the SCOTUS. Some states are attempting to side-step the ruling, even though they know it will eventually be tossed out as unconstitutional, just to throw a wrench into the works.

I am very pro-2nd. I am also very pro-taking some kind of training to be able to carry. As a retired LEO, I am required to qualify annually with a local LE agency in order to maintain my LEOSA card. If I have to go through it, everybody else should also.

Agreeed, and I was remiss to not make that caveat clear in my initial comments to you.

I am with you fully as far as 2A goes, and especially as goes proper and continued training goes too. I served for many year up here as a FSI for the MNDNR teaching basic firearms safety, and served as the SRO many autumn weekends when my local private range opens itself up in October to the public for deer season sight-ins.

My stress always to any I converse with when the topic of ownership or carry come up is the absolute need for safety training and familliarization training of every firearm one chooses to own and carry.

Be that EDC, target shooting, home defense, comp shooting or hunting. GET TRAINED, STAY TRAINED and PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE!

 

[Steven L]

I have to respectfully disagree. I do agree with the fact that everyone should get training on firearms safety either formally or informally before they carry but I do not believe it should be mandatory because every free person should have the right to defend themselves with or without training. People who have never been LEO can obtain the LEOSA card so no matter how much they train they will never have the same privileges as someone with that card.

You are certainly correct from a standpoint of self-defense here as far as securing the liberties of your person, and to some extent your property or belongings as well I'm sure.

But having gone through training of this caliber (pun intended) one big takeaway that few will deny is the fact that you're not simply learning the act of how to defend yourself with a firearm. Any truly excellent training in this area first builds a midset of situational awareness and proactive thinking, which should alwys be the first line of defense you will utilize while carrying.

What you come away with which is of far greater value is the knowledge as well as (hopefully) the proper midset to recognize, be forewarned and then ward off those potentially dangerous situations, which will then preclude or at least drastically reduce the odds of you having to pull your piece in the first place.

Avoidance of any violent conflict is always the preferred and best self-defense method one can use to keep themselves safe.

 

[Babe2201]

You are certainly correct from a standpoint of self-defense here as far as securing the liberties of your person, and to some extent your property or belongings as well I'm sure.

But having gone through training of this caliber (pun intended) one big takeaway that few will deny is the fact that you're not simply learning the act of how to defend yourself with a firearm. Any truly excellent training in this area first builds a midset of situational awareness and proactive thinking, which should alwys be the first line of defense you will utilize while carrying.

What you come away with which is of far greater value is the knowledge as well as (hopefully) the proper midset to recognize, be forewarned and then ward off those potentially dangerous situations, which will then preclude or at least drastically reduce the odds of you having to pull your piece in the first place.

Avoidance of any violent conflict is always the preferred and best self-defense method one can use to keep themselves safe.

I cannot agree with you more on all of your points. Like I have stated I do believe that everyone should be properly trained. I just don't think it should be required. I have heard some people argue that it should be the same as a driver's license which i disagree because driving is a privilege.

 

[Steven L]

I'

...Any gun I bought that way would only use it for target practice not self defense. It would be my luck a ballistics test would show that gun was used in a homicide 10 years ago...

Every firearm I've purchased over my years have the same single modification I've made common to each of them, unless I personally have know the seller for a very, very long time.

They all have gotten a new barrel swapped in and the old one is destroyed. Granted, I've only done that 3 times in my life, but the peace of mind gained from the cost of that expense was well worth it.

 

[Steven L]

...I have heard some people argue that it should be the same as a driver's license which i disagree because driving is a privilege.

**Stepping up on my soap box**

How amazing that there are so many out there who can't find the ability to properly discern what you've just shared there... what the difference is between a privilege and a right.

Everytime I hear that point proffered in an argument favoring a "gun" license in a similar manner to driver's license as a requirement of ownership, I immediately ask them to point me to the passages in our Constitution which specifically and by name grant our citizenry the right to operate a conveyance of any type for use in transportation.

Yes, the 5th Amendment does grant us the freedom to travel (or more accurately stated bars the Federal government from restricting our ability to travel freely) except perhaps in the most extreme circumstances of national security.

But that says nothing to us having a right to own any sort of vehicle whose intended design and purpose is to afford us an opportunity to exercise that freedom of movement we all possess, or bar us from ownership of such a contraption.

And that is exactly why our Founders were so very wise in how carefully they constructed 2A all those years ago, and chose to be precise in specificity and employed "to bear arms" in the manner they worded it. Because they knew full well and took to heart the lesson King George had just taught them a few precious years earlier.

That being the fact that having rights is of little value to the person who is being prevented from defending themselves from any form of governance, which intends in words or shows intent in action to deprive that person from exercising them fully.

**Stepping down off my soap box**

 

[Steven L]

Unfortunately there seems to be no middle ground. Both sides of the 2nd amendment discussion are all or nothing.

Likely because as 2A is worded, an exceedingly strong case can be augued that bearing arms as a right can be interpreted all and restricting that right to bear can be interpreted as nothing.

 

[Steven L]

Nobody asked me, but I think current and former police and military should get a full exemption from any weapon regulations, even at the risk they may have some sort of ptsd or the like, that could make them a less stable candidate in the universe of possible gun owners. It's a risk I'll gladly take following what they went through to qualify for that exemption.

The problem with this obviously is that people change as they go though life, and I've known of plenty (and personally known of some) LEOs both former and serving who have shown themselves to no longer be candidates to be exempted as you've stated here, let alone continue to serve in their public capacity as LEOs.

And one can point to the fact that many who have passed both military and law-enforcement screenings never should have passed, and later exposed that fact in their actions while serving or later in life once retired from service.

Facts back this up for any who'd care to research them. Rates for many personal and psychological issues plauge our military and our police ranks at far higher levels when you look at alcholism, suicide, divorce, spousal and girlfriend abuse, and other instances of destructive behavior.

How they screened positively however many years ago isn't a good enough yardstick to for me to be comfortable with what you've proposed here.

I'm finding myself in agreement with Tulecreeper here that annual testing for proficeincy would be the way to go, for EVERYBODY.

Just as I believe the same for the issuance of driver's licenses on an annual basis as well.

 

[RedForeman]

I don't get this fear of random Rambo new gun owners out and about. It's never really something I've given a lot of thought to, or noticed for that matter. Usually those are the guys that either get arrested for brandishing, or get themselves shot doing it. If not that, their gun gets stolen out of their mall crawler pickup in their own driveway overnight because they were too dumb/irresponsible to secure it. Then they don't carry any more.

It does remind me of a recent visit to BrandSmart (discount appliance big box store in a socially declining area) to pick up a tv or something. It was during the Christmas shopping season. I observed at least a half dozen men carrying, half of those with open carry holsters. None of them were acting any different than anyone else. Nothing about them gave me the impression they were going to rob the place, nor were looking to engage in a shootout. I minded my own business, and they did theirs. It was surprising to see, but nothing came of it. Had I caught the slightest whiff of anything amiss, we would have just left immediately. I happened to be carrying that day as well, and that's just something I don't want to be involved in.

I don't think being a bad shot should take away your right to defend yourself.

At least in my mind, that isn't the point a few have made. More a case of understanding safe handling and responsibility that comes with carrying a firearm, and showing that you do periodically. Far as accuracy is concerned, I see the standard being they can prove all shots go downrange and zero negligent discharges. I get it, but disagree on the premise. You're either already a responsible person or not. No gun class will fix that. It's theater intended to make a certain voting block feel safe, just like TSA screening at the airport.

Facts back this up for any who'd care to research them. Rates for many personal and psychological issues plauge our military and our police ranks at far higher levels when you look at alcholism, suicide, divorce, spousal and girlfriend abuse, and other instances of destructive behavior.

I totally get that. I also would say the likelihood of mental illness or some other disqualifier is equally likely in the general population. Personally, I think someone who's survived years in the service, police or military, has paid the dues to carry a firearm wherever they want. They're still subject to disqualification if it's established in court that they are a threat to themselves or others. Unfortunately that is reactive and not proactive. I'll take that risk, and understand why some others may not.

 

[milon]

Hi Everyone.

I've searched our forum and did not find this topic already posted. There were some comments and replies that were marginally helpful. So, here goes...

Does anyone know of any useful websites that summarize or give ACCURATE guidance on the gun laws in each state. As we are preparing to begin our fulltiming across multiple states, I want to be educated on what we can and cannot do in each state. In general, I keep my firearm(s) in a locked keyed and biometric safe that is bolted to the RV. I don't carry outside the RV. It's intended to be for home defense only.

So, I don't have any plans to take it out on the range regularly except for occasional practice with the wife and kids in places like Texas and other gun-friendly-and-responsible states.

So, any advice on Texas Gun Laws?

I'm hoping for "summarized" sites so that I don't have to read the full gun laws of each state.

Thanks in advance.

I was wondering if there was a site that gave gun laws in a simple format state by state. One that would say if you can carry your gun from another state. I'd like to take along a couple of target weapons when I visit kids in CA and Texas. They have ranges. We went to one in Austin but it was pretty expensive to rent a gun, pay for using the range and bying their ammo. Plus I'd rather have my own weapon that is a little more accurate than one that everybody used.