FreeFalling, I pretty well agree with you, except on the area's of use of force, and bullshit entrapment charges. Mainly where it comes to travel.
Example, if traveling through another state, I do think there should be a base line of this is how you can carry a firearm, and this is when you can use it for self defense. Traveling being strictly defined as well. That with a national recognition of concealed carry license, for traveling purposes, would be reasonable in today's society and laws.
But fully agree that states should be the regulatory arm on firearms, with exception to travel.
Well, there's FOPA but you're talking about carrying it on your person for defensive purposes. I do think licenses to carry firearms should be given the same interstate recognition as marriage and driver's licenses. I do see problems with a national standard for use of force in self-protection, so I think it's got to be similar to driving i.e. in some states you can make a right on red and a left on red and in others you can't and when you're traveling through it's your responsibility to know the difference.
Agree again. Ill take a little more homework, a little more training, a little more paperwork (for State control) vs. federal oversight.
And sometimes federal oversight comes with both. Law enforcement from any jurisdiction can carry virtually anywhere in the US under federal law, but it's on us to know when state law precludes us from carrying and what the laws on use of force are. We also have mandatory qualifications; that's expected while we're in active service but continues (at least annually, and quite possibly more often) once we retire in order to stay qualified under LEOSA. In contrast, you can get a PA license to carry that's valid for 5 years for less than the cost of a dinner out, it's valid in some thirty or more states and there's no training requirement.
I'm onboard with you there. Yes, certain Federal protection/ guarantees are ideal and I totally agree with the notion. I guess my argument was more of an imperfect black and white. I view the transfer of power between the two as a slippery and steep slope. In a perfect world a limited amount of basic Federally-guaranteed rights would be ideal. I'd love to think my concealed carry in FL carries the same weight with the same restrictions as the other 49 states. I'm in total agreement with you there. Push coming to shove in a binary world, I'll take the State over the Federal gov't on most issues though.
I like Florida's licensing scheme because it isn't just a license to carry firearms; it's weapons...period. That's not the case in many states, and so would require some accommodating if accepted nationwide.
All that said, I don't mind checking local laws (magazine capacity, use of force, etc.) in exchange for the ability to carry virtually everywhere for the rest of my life.
The biggest problem with LEOSA is that civilian license holders are excluded. There should absolutely be reciprocity between the states.
I do see where some of the argument comes from, though. For one, self-defense laws are both more widely varied and complex than traffic laws. The penalties and potential consequences are likewise more serious. This is one of the reasons--licensing fees being another--that medical, nursing and paramedic licenses aren't automatically given reciprocity from state-to-state. In some cases, it's purely about the money (nursing, I'm looking at you); in others there is both a monetary and competency motivation (Florida paramedic license, that's you).
