Springfield XD Forum banner

Legal concealed carry, without a license - what do you think?

12K views 111 replies 45 participants last post by  Powerman 
#1 ·
The state of West Virginia may soon become one of the few states to allow the carry of a concealed handgun without a permit, and without any training. Although the age requirement for the current required permit is 21, the proposed law, which is making headway in the legislature, drops the age limit to 18. In short, turn 18 and you are legally able to carry a concealed handgun. (Open carry has been legal in WV for several years.) A news story can be found at Bill could nix concealed permits The Herald-Dispatch

The plan is to keep the current permitting process in place, so that citizens will be able to obtain a permit that is recognized in other states via reciprocity agreements. That said, I heard an attorney on a local talk show say today that the new law would eliminate the current permitting process, surely resulting in the elimination of reciprocity agreements with other states. I believe he is misinformed.

So what do you think? Is concealed carry essentially without restriction a good idea?

As much as I support the 2nd Amendment and individual rights of the citizenry, I'm having a hard time signing up for this one. The thought of my 17.5 year old son being able to stick a gun in his pocket in 6 months is disconcerting, at best. Sure, he'd be old enough to join the military, but they won't issue him a weapon without training.

Thoughts? LEOs, what do you think?
 
See less See more
#7 · (Edited)
Please stop posting things you know nothing about. Federal law does not require anyone to be 21 to own, possess, carry, or buy a handgun from a non FFL.

And the second part of your post is simply your opinion being asserted as fact. A handful of states already allow 18 year old adults to carry a concealed handgun, and the world has not ended yet. Get your facts straight.

You're saying that an 18 year old is mature enough to carry a handgun openly, but the minute his shirt falls over it, it becomes an act requiring a higher level of responsibility only gained through age? That makes a lot of sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tcox4freedom
#4 ·
If it's so disconcerting why not take your son for some training? You support the training, get him some since you feel he will obtain a gun and carry the night of his 18th birthday. Be proactive, not reactive. Just my opinion.
 
#8 ·
I am for this law. 18 year olds have fought and died for our country for hundreds of years, and we don't even trust them to buy a beer or exercise their rights to the fullest extent? If you are an adult, you are an adult.

My take on it is that I acted like an adult and was treated as one when I was 18, as did my father, his before him, and all past generations. Maybe kids these days are idiots because the liberal-progressive anything goes society has told them that they are not really responsible for their actions until they are out of college. Allow adults their rights, and swiftly punish those who abuse their rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob2 and bigmoguls
#14 ·
No worries... I did not mean to come off so harsh. It's just that we should all refrain from "I think's," or "I heard's" when it comes to legal issues. Plus, gun rights issues are a hot button for me and a lot of others on here.
 
#12 ·
I am all for this law. I would carry without a permit if possible. That being said I have taken 3 CCW classes. All of these have been the basic class to obtain a CCW permit. The first was for myself in MO to obtain my MO permit, the second was voluntary with my dad, my brother, and my SIL, and the third was to obtain my OH permit after I moved. Even though all of these were basic classes, I learned new information in each one.

Yes carrying a gun either openly or concealed is a huge responsibility, but if an 18 year old is old enough to die for our country, they should be responsible enough to see the need for training in order to carry safely and responsibly.
 
#17 ·
Yeah I wish states would push for an all 50 reciprocity more than the typical screw the liberals, were doing away with our current gun laws.

I never saw the point in these types of laws where no education and experience are required to conceal carry. To me it would be better to have your local law enforcement teach a class for CCW and firearms safety for free once a month.

WV isn't that bad either on gun laws to start with.
 
#18 ·
I just think about all the big brawls that went on at parties we had between the age of 18 and 21. Can't imagine if somebody pulled out a gun they were carrying out of nowhere. Especially over something stupid that 18 to 21 year olds fight about, like girls... mostly
 
#19 ·
If I understand, WV currently allows open carry. So I assume many 18 yr olds have been around guns for awhile & therefore probably have respect & training. So offering concealed carry isn't a far stretch.

But talking the general theory behind allowing an 18 yr old to carry concealed with no permit or training, than I'm opposed. Unfortunately, too many states have dual working parents and kids are self-raised. Way too many that are immature. To allow THESE kids to carry -no permit, no parent permission, no training would be a huge mistake.

Lastly I'm surprised at some of the training comments
 
#22 ·
Understand/agree on the legality just meant it as an example of young adults brawling and not being mature enough to think of the consequences before pulling guns. I'm a big advocate in the importance of gun training and the privilege of carrying a gun
 
#27 ·
I'm pro-training prior to CCW/CHL. People need to be aware of the laws, basic conflict resolution skills, and proper shooting technique before they're armed in public. It's for their (and our) own good. By all means let them take the class as much as needed to pass, but having a standard is not a bad thing.
 
#34 ·
I agree with this for the most part. I agree training is a very good idea, but as @Cuda66 said we are talking about a Constitutional right vs a privilege. I have no problem with having a training program set up, but it cannot be mandatory and still be a right. It then it becomes a privilege to those who can afford the training and in some states those who have the right connections to law enforcement.

I said earlier that I would carry without a permit but voluntarily seek out training. Both states I have lived in require training and have a permit process to CC but allow OC with no permit. The only difference is that since the gun is hidden it now requires a training class, a fee to the sheriff's department, and a background check for the same person to carry the same gun. If a person can OC what is different about CC that requires them to ask to excerise their rights. @mbquimby has/had a signiture after his posts that says something to the effect of when we have to ask to excerise a right, it ceases to be a right.
 
#35 ·
Lots of things concern me and give me pause. 16 year olds driving, 86 year olds driving, people who can't read street signs driving, the fact my responsible teen daughter could be suspended for taking two ibuprofen to school, the fact that some diseased mongrel could ask the same teen daughter to go on a date, bridges on windy days... I guess my point is that other people get to live their lives. I get to live mine. I get the freedom to live my life and direct my family the way I believe is roght and others get to do the same until they directly affect me or others in a way that does or is likely to bring harm.

Firearm ownership and possession is a right, full stop. I fully believe people should have training if they carry. I also fully believe that my beliefs should not dictate requirements attached to other people's rights. It is too precious to curtail.

Every day is a risk. Leaving the house brings risks, eating brings risk, posting on an internet forum has risks (hi NSA). People should be left pretty much alone to live their lives. If they hinder others abilities to live their lives or harm them illegally, they should be dealt with severely, swiftly and justly. It is not my call who should carry firearms and it definitely not be a bureaucrat's call.
 
#36 ·
Lots of things concern me and give me pause. 16 year olds driving, 86 year olds driving, people who can't read street signs driving, the fact my responsible teen daughter could be suspended for taking two ibuprofen to school, the fact that some diseased mongrel could ask the same teen daughter to go on a date, bridges on windy days... I guess my point is that other people get to live their lives. I get to live mine. I get the freedom to live my life and direct my family the way I believe is roght and others get to do the same until they directly affect me or others in a way that does or is likely to bring harm.

Firearm ownership and possession is a right, full stop. I fully believe people should have training if they carry. I also fully believe that my beliefs should not dictate requirements attached to other people's rights. It is too precious to curtail.

Every day is a risk. Leaving the house brings risks, eating brings risk, posting on an internet forum has risks (hi NSA). People should be left pretty much alone to live their lives. If they hinder others abilities to live their lives or harm them illegally, they should be dealt with severely, swiftly and justly. It is not my call who should carry firearms and it definitely not be a bureaucrat's call.

THIS^^^...ALL OF IT
 
#39 ·
Constitutional Carry: What's not to like?
 
#45 ·
IMO, this has already been decided, way back in the 1700's with the COnstitution and Bill of Rights. The fact that the government is involved at all chaps my butt to no end. ESPECIALLY the NFA act and the license fees.... that is out right extortion!!
 
#48 ·
We probably have a better chance if being attacked by antelope in the Walmart parking lot than an armed assailant. I love Wyoming too!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#49 ·
Anyone ever think that if they had a national constitutional carry law on the federal level, that it could work against us the first time they had enough votes to repeal it and succeeded. States would have to keep some guarantees in their constitution that guaranteed the rights of their citizens that trumped federal law.

I hope I'm wording my thought correctly. I don't trust anyone that thinks there needs to be some extra federal acknowledgement of the 2A. The feds didn't give us the 2A, they can't take it away. They can play their own games with anything they give us, no matter how unconstitutional they don't think it is.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top