-=> Quoting Daniel DiGriz to John Perz on 26 Jul 96  09:41 <=-
 Re: Interstate CCW agreements 
 JP> Looks to me like it would be perfectly Constitutional for
 JP> Congress to pass such a law.  And it wouldn't force Texans
 JP> to obey some
 JP> Massachusetts law while in Texas.  That's a different case
 JP> entirely. 
 DD> You seem to be saying that it would not require a Texan in Texas to
 DD> obey a Massachusetts law, but that's exactly what reciprocity is. For
 DD> example, if MA passed a law saying that homosexual marriages must be
 DD> honored, then by such a precedent, TX must honor the marriages of
 DD> homosexuals who go to Texas. Am I wrong? 
Yes. Of course, the "homosexual marriage" case has yet to be tested. The 
federal government thinks it has passed a law defining a marriage as 
between one man and one woman, but no court challenge has occured yet.
But you're talking apples and oranges in any case. If the law says states 
will have to honor other states' CCW permits, they'll still be allowed to 
make their own "reasonable" laws about what you can do if you have a 
permit. Massachusetts may say that your license only allows you to carry 
a specified gun (some states do, I don't know if MA is one), but while 
you are in Texas you could carry any weapon of the same general type. 
(Not certain how the reverse would work.) If TX has to accept MA permits, 
they can't force TX to enforce MA rules which prohibit something. TX 
might be forced to accept things which MA considers legal, but they could 
ignore any prohibitions they want.
But I really suspect they won't even have to accept what MA considers 
legal. If MA allows you to carry in a bar, TX could still prohibit it as 
long as they warn people about their law (which they do).
Honoring their permits/licenses is not the same as honoring their laws. 
It's that simple.
Steve
... You may fire when you are ready, Gridley. - Admiral Dewey
--- GEcho 1.00
---------------