- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Constitutional carry is great and all, but with a CHP you get immunity as of 7/4/24
Posted on 3/12/24 at 1:35 pm to udtiger
Posted on 3/12/24 at 1:35 pm to udtiger
quote:
By its language, it does not extend to constitutional carry
Yeah, except what really matters is how the courts decide how that works. Something called equal protection, can't logically extend legal protections to CCW permit holders when you just passed a state law making those permits moot for in-state residents.
1
Posted on 3/12/24 at 1:36 pm to udtiger
quote:
Reup every 5 years with 4 hour refresher, range proficiency and paperwork.
Which state requires this?
Oklahoma, you take an 8 hour course with range time included, submit your fingerprints and background check information to the OSBI along with a passport photo and $100 fee, then pay the initial SDA license fee of $100 for 5-year SDAL or $200 for 10-year SDAL.
No refresher course required. Only an $85 renewal fee for background check on 5 year extension or $170 for ten year.
quote:
Also, reciprocity with just about every other permit state (there's not full reciprocity with all other constitutional carry states).
Reciprocity is the only reason I still have my SDAL after constitutional carry went live in OK. But, as you said, ALWAYS check very specific state laws when you plan to travel. Even check your routes carefully because there are cities in Colorado for example, that have very specific city ordinances that may differ from the guidelines laid out by the state with constraints or the lack thereof.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 1:42 pm to udtiger
SC just became the 29th state .... but the smart move, from a purely legal perspective, is to obtain and retain a CWP.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 1:44 pm to Clames
quote:
Something called equal protection, can't logically extend legal protections to CCW permit holders when you just passed a state law making those permits moot for in-state residents.
I don’t know that this dog hunts. Constitutional carry doesn’t eliminate the CCW permits as far as I’m aware.
Obtaining the CCW is required for the immunity set out in this bill.
I don’t see an equal protection argument.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 1:46 pm to udtiger
From the Post Exchange in Youngsville:
Posted on 3/12/24 at 2:12 pm to Kjnstkmn
any citizen that takes and passes an approved CC class and is legally allowed to carry should be granted the same civil immunity as the person who pays for a CHP.
YOU SHOULDN'T BE REQUIRED/FORCED TO PAY THE STATE for equal benefits under a law. It is discriminatory and that part should be tossed with the quickness.
Pay the state for civil immunity .. WTF.
YOU SHOULDN'T BE REQUIRED/FORCED TO PAY THE STATE for equal benefits under a law. It is discriminatory and that part should be tossed with the quickness.
Pay the state for civil immunity .. WTF.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 2:22 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
YOU SHOULDN'T BE REQUIRED/FORCED TO PAY THE STATE for equal benefits under a law.
I don’t think you understand what equal means. Someone who possesses a CC permit and someone who doesn’t are not similarly situated for the purpose of this law.
One can graduate from law school but you have to pass the bar exam and be admitted by the LA Supreme Court in order to practice law in Louisiana. Do you think law school graduates who didn’t take the bar exam have an equal protection claim?
This post was edited on 3/12/24 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 3/12/24 at 2:46 pm to udtiger
You will still not be able to carry in gun free zone, after any alcohol intake, in a bar or restaurant that has liquor sales so it makes it very cumbersome so why pay for it?
Besides, you’ll still get sued if you kill or wound someone. You will not be immune from liability if you break any of the rules and I suspect you’d still be liable anyway since lawyers know how to penetrate these so called “protections”
Besides, you’ll still get sued if you kill or wound someone. You will not be immune from liability if you break any of the rules and I suspect you’d still be liable anyway since lawyers know how to penetrate these so called “protections”
Posted on 3/12/24 at 3:17 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I don’t think you understand what equal means. Someone who possesses a CC permit and someone who doesn’t are not similarly situated for the purpose of this law.
Why are they not similarly situated?
In my scenario, Both are citizens eligible to carry, both have completed and passed the same CCW course, correct?. Both persons would have the same certificate and should be afforded the same protection under the law.
Oh wait, because one of those persons decides to PAY THE STATE a fee for a CHP that makes them special and entitled to a benefit under that law? It is bull shite and am certain it will be considered discrimatory, by one of those 2A
Or civil rights advocate law firms and they will challenge.
What makes the CHP holder more deserving than the non CHP holder? other than their willingness to submitt to the state thier Fingerprints and pay a fee/tax.
The non CHP holder should be able to produce a valid CCW-Training course certificate to the court and have the civil case dropped like a CHP holder.
Honestly, I seriously doubt the CHP permitt will prevent someone from suing... ridiculous
Your lawschool & lawyer scenario isn't an apples to apples argument.
This post was edited on 3/12/24 at 3:21 pm
Posted on 3/12/24 at 3:43 pm to udtiger
quote:
Requires 8 hour class, proficiency, fingerprinting and background check by state police.
Nope
Nope
Hell fricken no
Hell fricken no
And if you think this provides you some magical legal protection you are nuts.
I buy all my guns privately. I don’t want them knowing I have anything.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 3:51 pm to spacewrangler
quote:
Why are they not similarly situated?
One got the permit with the involved training and requirements, and one did not.
quote:
Both are citizens eligible to carry, both have completed and passed the same CCW course, correct?
Well, no. As of this coming July I can carry a gun with me under my jacket without any sort of permit or training, correct?
quote:
It is bull shite and am certain it will be considered discrimatory, by one of those 2A
Or civil rights advocate law firms and they will challenge.
Even the 5th Circuit is going to disagree with you.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 3:52 pm to Hayekian serf
quote:
And if you think this provides you some magical legal protection you are nuts.
Just so you know, civil and criminal immunity from liability in certain situations regarding justified use of force is as close to "magical" protection as exists in the United States.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 3:55 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:immunity from a civil suit if you legally shoot
You think that someone who gets a CHP should have a license to kill?
Posted on 3/12/24 at 3:57 pm to SlidellCajun
You can carry in a restaurant that serves alcohol
Posted on 3/12/24 at 4:02 pm to Indefatigable
Your lack of reading comprehension is outstanding.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 4:05 pm to udtiger
quote:
Concealed Handgun Permit
Requires 8 hour class, proficiency, fingerprinting and background check by state police.
Reup every 5 years with 4 hour refresher, range proficiency and paperwork.
Fees involved, but not prohibitive.
That is a big NO!
Posted on 3/12/24 at 4:19 pm to omegaman66
If the new proposal is called constitutional carry,what does that tell you about the current CHP? unconstitutional
Posted on 3/12/24 at 7:54 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I don’t see an equal protection argument.
You can't logically have the same scenario when a law abiding citizen is defending himself, but if he opts to pay $125 for the silly CCW, he gets civil immunity. Under the exact same circumstances but he doesn't pay the CCW toll, he doesn't get civil immunity. The citizen who doesn't pay the toll to exercise the SAME constitutional right is worse off. This is inherently unequal.
The state is offering a fixed price reprieve for $125 or you're at the mercy of a plaintiff lawyer for a criminal? No. If a citizen is exonerated, he should be immune regardless of whether he paid the toll the local regent.
Rights exist or they don't; the Second Amendment is not subject to a $125 surcharge.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 7:57 pm to choupiquesushi
quote:
immunity from a civil suit if you legally shoot
If the circumstances are deemed legal, what is the basis for a civil suit? What duty does a citizen owe to an attacker?
Otherwise the state is sanctioning negligence for the low, low price of $125
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News