"Stop CCR"

I note that Everytown for Gun Safety has a movement to "STOP CCR" (Concealed Carry Reciprocity - see below) and they are campaigning against it.

They don't recognize that everyone with a "CHL" (Concealed Handgun License, also known by other terms in various states) has been thoroughly vetted to prevent anyone with a felony conviction  from being allowed to own, let alone carry, a firearm. 

Some states also deny CCR for individuals who are convicted of misdemeanor offenses, usually limited to domestic violence.   Note that these misdemeanors may not involve conviction in a court of law ... the mere charge may be sufficient.

Most responsible gun owners are "uncomfortable" with firearms ownership by people who cannot control their emotions; that's why they do not speak against local laws which block domestic abusers, for instance, from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

Still ... if their local state does not consider them a risk to Public Safety ... why should their neighboring states look upon us with dubious eye?

Concealed Carry Reciprocity | Everytown for Gun Safety: “Concealed Carry Reciprocity” (CCR)—S.446 and H.R. 38—is a chaotic and dangerous policy that would gut every state’s gun laws and make our communities less safe. Right now, every state sets its own rules for who can carry a hidden, loaded handgun in public. There is no national standard for who can carry hidden, loaded handguns in public, and rather than create a uniform standard, CCR would effectively turn the weakest state’s laws into nationwide laws.

The point of CCR (Reciprocity) is to protect legal, responsible gun owners from harassment when they travel between states.    This is a particularly important issue for people who travel between states and who may not be familiar with the nuances of laws endemic in the states through which they travel.   We have seen instances of people engaged in interstate travel who are stopped by local police for a minor traffic offense and subsequently are arrested for violation of a law which forbids activities which are legal in their home state.

But EVERYTOWN doesn't accept the "excuse" of ignorance of interstate laws, and instead has taken unto themselves to point out the supposed danger to citizens by armed passers-by

Firearms owners who travel between states do have the responsibility to be aware of the gun laws of every state they enter;  "Ignorance is No Excuse" is the term you're looking for.  There are several internet resources which are available for the traveler to determine how (for instance) their firearm must be stored in their vehicle during travel.

But it's even more complicated than that,



Some states recognize and honor the CHL (Concealed Carry) license of adjacent states.
Others do not, and may require that the firearm must be unloaded and not immediately accessible to the driver.  Others require that firearms must be unloaded, locked in a trunk or a hard-sided case, and even ammunition and magazines stored separately in locked containers.

At this time, I live in Oregon and I'm reluctant to visit my grandchildren in California or Washington (both adjacent states) because ... depending upon which grandchildren I'm visiting, it's virtually impossible for me to travel with a firearm regardless of the "inaccessibility" conditions I strive to accommodate.

In my mind, I'm resentful of the dichotomy of state laws because they are not only burdensome but often vague.   In a sense, the variety of state laws impinge not only on my Constitutional Rights to "Keep And Bear Arms",  but also my right to interstate travel without fear and trepidation.

One thing is for sure:  I ALWAYS obey the local speed limits during Interstate Travel!  

I would hate to spend years in prison because I was stopped by police for driving five miles per hour over the local speed limit, and they found a gun in my car.