State-by-State Gun Laws

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
milon said:
I was wondering if there was a site that gave gun laws in a simple format state by state.
Click to expand...
See here.

"Here are the gun laws for all 50 states in the U.S."

milon said:
One that would say if you can carry your gun from another state.
Click to expand...
That should not be an issue as long as you are bringing the gun back to your home state and do not leave it in a different state while you're not there. But it can confuse things if you bring a gun into a state that is not legal in the state you're going to. Traveling through such a state technically is legal, but still best not to. Often the local cops don't understand interstate gun laws.

If you have a CCW from your home state, then see here.

But CA will not recognize any out of state CCWs.

In CA, remember what Federal Judge Benitez said:

"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law."
-Judge Roger Benitez

-Don- Reno, NV
 
Ray-IN said:
. And they walk among us_ carrying.
Click to expand...
I recall a couple of times when I worked from the City & County of SF where a cop accidently shot & killed himself. Here is one such case. The other one was an older case, cannot find on the web, but happened at a SF police station with a cop who had many years of service.

I couldn't find it in a search, perhaps too old, perhaps was even before the Web.

But during the search, I discover the number of cops who accidently shot themselves is ridiculously high.

But in every case, they broke rule number one.

-Don- Reno, NV
 
RedForeman said:
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.
Click to expand...
I’ll have to disagree with you. I am retired military. I was required to shoot an M16 at a target once a year to stay qualified on that weapon. I was in the military for 24 years. It takes about 1-2 hours to qualify once a year. So I had 24-48 hours worth of training. When I was active duty there were many career fields that did not require arms qualification. The military is a microcosm of the rest of the U.S. population. Anything you find in the “outside” world you can find in the military. There are some very responsibly folks in the armed forces and there are are some very very crazy folks in that same armed forces.
 
DonTom said:
I recall a couple of times when I worked from the City & County of SF where a cop accidently shot & killed himself. Here is one such case. The other one was an older case, cannot find on the web, but happened at a SF police station with a cop who had many years of service.
Click to expand...

I can not specify cases but in my quarter century with the State Police we have a few officers who shot themselves. The only one I can recall the name of lived.. But I'm not sure it was an accident.
Though that's how it was written up.
 
John From Detroit said:
I can not specify cases but in my quarter century with the State Police we have a few officers who shot themselves. The only one I can recall the name of lived.. But I'm not sure it was an accident.
Though that's how it was written up.
Click to expand...
There’s also n reports of military shooting themselves and bystanders.
 
Oldgator73 said:
There’s also n reports of military shooting themselves and bystanders.
Click to expand...
Happened to a family friend who was in the military. story is kind of funny.
Long lecture on gun safety..; Well the instructor wrapped up and one of the recruits decided to show off doing a fancy "Western" (Movie) Twirl of his gun.. BANG and six recruits got shot. Non life threatening wounds (Save for the one involved who did the shooting.. I suspect the Drill instructors were a major threat for him). All the victims recovered.. Suspect the shooter was in serious pain however.. for a long time.
 
Interesting comments going on here.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm for 2A, I carry, we travel with our "hardware", my wife and both had our original concealed carry from Indiana, now constitutional state, I check at every state park at every location about the rules for open and conceal carry while inside the park and follow their rules. So, don't get me wrong ... I'm on "this" side of the fence.

Now my comment...

I often wondered... well.... If "THEY" really wanted to control and take away our personal weapons, rather than creating a bunch of laws for who can and who cannot not own or carry one.... if they "REALLY" wanted to do something ... why not just stop the manufacture of ammunition for sale to the public? No ammunition, nothing to fire from those weapons.... so, it doesn't matter if anyone has one or not?

Well, anyway, that's what I've always wondered about regarding this great debate? If I understand it right, 2A says we have the right to bear arms. But does it say we have the right to buy the ammunition? So.... anyway .... if "they" wanted to stop the madness, wouldn't it be easier to simply stop the production of the ammunition.

OK ... I may have just opened a HUGE can of worms. I'm not intending to, I'm just making an observation?
 
DutchmenSport said:
No ammunition, nothing to fire from those weapons
Click to expand...
Those type of cases have already been to the SCOTUS. It is considered unconstitutional to stop usage of constitutional rights by such means.

Besides the fact that many reload their own ammo.

In fact, look what CA tried to do and got knocked down by the feds (as usual).

-Don- Reno, NV
 
I’ve read this thread and appreciated the opinions and experiences expressed. The unsaid part, which was implied over and over, is personal responsibility. Ownership means you must be responsible, maintain the weapon, properly operate and handle the weapon and regularly use it to maintain proficiency. Being irresponsible with a weapon means you just don’t fully understand and appreciate ownership. I have an example.
I saw a guy in Walmart with his semiautomatic pistol with an extended magazine stuck in the front of pants. That may be technically legal in AZ but from my perspective it’s irresponsible and a bad decision. Who knows, he may have blown his junk off by now. It was just a disappointment. These are the guys who inspire (scare) others to want laws to protect them from someone like this. I hope this guy is the exception. Thanks for the info and experience shared.
 
Doc Roads said:
I’ve read this thread and appreciated the opinions and experiences expressed. The unsaid part, which was implied over and over, is personal responsibility. Ownership means you must be responsible, maintain the weapon, properly operate and handle the weapon and regularly use it to maintain proficiency. Being irresponsible with a weapon means you just don’t fully understand and appreciate ownership. I have an example.
I saw a guy in Walmart with his semiautomatic pistol with an extended magazine stuck in the front of pants. That may be technically legal in AZ but from my perspective it’s irresponsible and a bad decision. Who knows, he may have blown his junk off by now. It was just a disappointment. These are the guys who inspire (scare) others to want laws to protect them from someone like this. I hope this guy is the exception. Thanks for the info and experience shared.
Click to expand...
Well, I can assure you, that fellow is NOT an exception. They are everywhere.

I firmly believe that ownership and carrying should be treated much like automobiles.
Training, certification, licensing and insurance should all be mandatory.
David Brin: The Jefferson Rifle
And, as Forrest Gump was oft quoted, that's all I have to say about that.
 
LarsMac said:
Well, I can assure you, that fellow is NOT an exception. They are everywhere.

I firmly believe that ownership and carrying should be treated much like automobiles.
Training, certification, licensing and insurance should all be mandatory.
David Brin: The Jefferson Rifle
And, as Forrest Gump was oft quoted, that's all I have to say about that.
Click to expand...
Can you please tell us which amendment guarantees our right to drive. Unless there is one it makes your argument a moot point.
 
LarsMac said:
I firmly believe that ownership and carrying should be treated much like automobiles.
Click to expand...
Babe2201 said:
Can you please tell us which amendment guarantees our right to drive. Unless there is one it makes your argument a moot point.
Click to expand...
Of course there isn’t a Constitutional amendment that guarantees a right to own and drive a car. But your right to own a firearm can be taken away and your driving privileges can be taken away. I believe the right to own a weapon written into the Constitution was a huge mistake. The authors of the Constitution should have been time travelers so they could know how their decisions would negatively affect our unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
 
Oldgator73 said:
Of course there isn’t a Constitutional amendment that guarantees a right to own and drive a car. But your right to own a firearm can be taken away and your driving privileges can be taken away. I believe the right to own a weapon written into the Constitution was a huge mistake. The authors of the Constitution should have been time travelers so they could know how their decisions would negatively affect our unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Click to expand...
Yes the right can be taken away but it can't be taken away because you did not take a test now can it? As far as it being a mistake a lot of people believe that the right can help us have our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

A lot of things have changed since the 1A was written as well.
 
DonTom said:
Those type of cases have already been to the SCOTUS. It is considered unconstitutional to stop usage of constitutional rights by such means.

Besides the fact that many reload their own ammo.

In fact, look what CA tried to do and got knocked down by the feds (as usual).

-Don- Reno, NV
Click to expand...
Yes it has and it is a good thing. As far as loading our own I do and if they were able to stop the sale of ammo they would also more than likely stop the sale of the components to make it.
 
Babe2201 said:
Yes the right can be taken away but it can't be taken away because you did not take a test now can it? As far as it being a mistake a lot of people believe that the right can help us have our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

A lot of things have changed since the 1A was written as well.
Click to expand...
There are many countries that consider owning a weapon a privilege that also enjoy t life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 1,234 (members: 28, guests: 1,206)

Forum statistics

Threads
133,819
Posts
1,417,233
Members
139,419
Latest member
ramair455
Back
Top Bottom