Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Why Truckers May be the Key to National Concealed Carry Reciprocity

Discussion in 'Political/Religious Topics' started by grizcty, Feb 17, 2017.

  1. grizcty

    grizcty God, Guns, Glory Forum Contributor

    I can tell you first hand.
    As a trucker I have needed and used, a firearm many times.
    Luckily for me, I live in a free state! drive.gif

    Why Truckers May be the Key to National Concealed Carry Reciprocity
    by Jordan Michaels on February 16, 2017

    (Photo: Wikipedia)

    The road can be a dangerous place for truckers. Between road-raging drivers, sketchy rest stops, and would-be criminals, many truckers face multiple life threatening incidents throughout the course of their careers.

    A firearm is the obvious choice for self-defense, but many truckers hesitate to carry. The reason? The patchwork of concealed carry laws throughout the United States make it virtually impossible to carry a firearm across the country while remaining in compliance with the law.

    But some truckers carry anyway—and for good reason. A survey conducted by Overdrive Magazine found that 73 percent of truckers have been in a situation in which they were unarmed but wish they were armed.

    Seventy-six percent of respondents have felt themselves to be in danger while driving, delivering, or parking, and nearly a quarter have actually been attacked.

    Despite these high numbers, only 33 percent of survey respondents say they have a concealed carry permit that allows them to drive with a firearm. Some trucking companies don’t allow their drivers to carry firearms, but Overdrive highlights the difficulty truckers face if they have routes in all 48 states.

    Some states acknowledge other states’ concealed carry permits, but many do not. According to Overdrive, troopers have the right to search a commercial truck without cause, and if they find a firearm they may bring felony charges. Military bases and Native American tribal lands also strictly prohibit firearms, and don’t even think about bringing a firearm into Canada.

    Ignorance of the law isn’t an excuse. Truckers need to be well-versed in each state’s firearms laws and conduct themselves accordingly if they want to avoid fines and penalties.

    There are currently two bills in the U.S. Congress that could remedy this situation.

    The first is called Michael’s Law Amendment, named in honor of Michael Boeglin, an unarmed trucker who was fatally shot and burned in his truck in 2014 in Detroit. This bill would create a federal concealed carry permit designed to allow truckers to carry across state lines.

    The second bill—dubbed the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017—would allow anyone with a concealed carry permit in one state to travel to any other state with their firearm. Introduced by Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., proponents of this legislation point out that drivers licenses are honored in all 50 states—why not concealed handgun licenses?

    Truckers, perhaps more than any other demographic, understand the value of this legislation. While most people would only benefit from the CCRA three or four times a year, truckers would constantly be using their expanded right to self-defense.

    The bill is still a long way from passing, but it has the support of this nation’s road warriors: according to another Overdrive survey, more than eighty-five percent of truckers said they would support the CCRA.
    Crazy 8, TACAV, neophyte and 12 others like this.
  2. PAPA G

    PAPA G G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    From the article..."Some trucking companies don’t allow their drivers to carry firearms."

    Yeah those tie wearing, never drove a truck idiots need to ride along with truckers going through and to dangerous areas to understand what it's like on the road.
    Crazy 8, CountryBoy, TACAV and 9 others like this.


    SUBMOA G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    Those with a tie sitting behind their desk are more concerned with the companies liability then the safety of their drivers.
    Yes the truck is a vehicle. It is also my residence and my sole source of sanctuary at times. Under the 2nd and 4th amendment I should feel protected . Currently, I do not.
    CountryBoy, TACAV, TXplt and 8 others like this.
  4. ChaZam

    ChaZam G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    I don't know of any companies that allow a firearm to be carried in their commercial motor vehicles and DOT has their handcrafted rules against it too. What we need is constitutional carry recognized nationwide; not a hodge podge mixture of ill begotten unconstitutional laws "selling" citizens limited access to their 2nd amendment rights.
    blaster, neophyte, gsbuickman and 2 others like this.

    SUBMOA G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    I have been a-z through the cmv dot handbook and can find no mention of firearms any where within.
    PAPA G likes this.
  6. ChaZam

    ChaZam G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    SUBMOA and PAPA G like this.
  7. neophyte

    neophyte Wonderment :) Forum Contributor

    ChaZam: Sir, excellent find :)

    transportation of firearms
    Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

    prev | next
    Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.

    (Added Pub. L. 99–360, § 1(a), July 8, 1986, 100 Stat. 766.)
    ChaZam likes this.
  8. Kmcdowell

    Kmcdowell G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    Omaha NE
    When I was much younger I spent time riding and driving with a friend of mine who delivered gasoline and fuel oil to Casey's General Stores back when they only had about 75 stores in Iowa. There were many times when were were offloading a tank full of gasoline in the middle of the night and extremely vulnerable to whomever might want to take a whack at us. I never thought of it at the time, but in today's environment, it has to be on the mind of a truck driver every time he or she tries to catch some sleep in a rest area or is offloading cargo in the middle of the night. You never know who is lurking in the shadows looking for an opportunity.

    I am a strong proponent of national CCW reciprocity. If I am qualified to carry a gun in my home state and have passed a course to prove it, it should be good nationwide. I know some will disagree with me due to the clarity of the second amendment, but I think anyone who has a nationwide CCW permit should at least have a certain amount of training to demonstrate they are qualified to carry and operate a firearm.
    Crazy 8, neophyte and ChaZam like this.
  9. TXplt

    TXplt Gun Toting Boeing Driver Forum Contributor

    The thought one has to be permitted to carry (keep and bear) is as constitutional as requiring a permit to attend church or type these very words on the internet. I think we lose a great deal when we get away from this basic concept of an affirmed right.

    Which is then exploited by statists to incrementally and further truncate the 2A. Once the camel's nose is under we get the virtual bans on carry in places like NY, NJ, MD and certain counties in CA.

    I look at a CHL as a sort of 'get out of jail free' card. I'm going to carry; getting the card simply minimizes the potential negative consequences if discovered (in some cases to zero).

    Would I LIKE folks to be trained ? Sure. To be honest I'm not certain that any type of formal training or certification has any positive safety benefit (folks do things for years that don't require a license--safely--and then someone passes a law to require one and we howl that it is now 'unsafe' to do what they've been doing all along WITHOUT a license which seems absurd). But I think it nice that someone has a basic level of competency. This doesn't require a license (many of us train here to high levels of proficiency as part of what we view as responsible).

    In any case, neither of our opinions matters very much in that requiring a license is a truncation of a basic constitutional right. And requires 2/3 of both houses of congress to introduce the change along with 3/4 of the state legislatures to agree. Until this happens the 2A stands on exactly what it says--which is that our right to carry shall not be infringed. We might not like the fact that any idiot can bang away at a keyboard, use foul or poor language (or grammar) when he speaks, or that the media is unkind to our President either in what they print. Would we ban them from printing the 'fake news' we all know they print via law ? Slippery slope.

    There is great harm in allowing a constitutional right to be arbitrarily truncated by passing OTHER laws doing so and this is the danger in requiring a license to carry. So while I might like someone to be trained I will oppose a law forcing this. It's bad enough we have to have a permit to exercise a basic constitutional right--let's not make it worse by making the permit harder to get.

    And if I DO have a permit (from any state) it should be recognized by other states--just like the full faith and credit clause.
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2017
    Crazy 8, neophyte, Kmcdowell and 3 others like this.
  10. TACAV

    TACAV G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor


    The tie sitters place more value in the truck and it's cargo than the human being operating it and getting said cargo where it needs to be.:rolleyes:

    What is that one trucking company that has the

    "Our most valuable resource sits 63′ ahead"

    decals plastered all over the back of the trailers? I wonder if they allow their drivers to defend themselves?
    neophyte, ChaZam, TXplt and 1 other person like this.
  11. ChaZam

    ChaZam G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    The vast majority of them do not ...
    neophyte and TACAV like this.
  12. CountryBoy

    CountryBoy G&G Evangelist

    Where to begin? I would like to see all states honor each others permits, but I really hate to see the federal government MAKE it happen by passing a law. We are all the time stating how the federal government is too far overreaching and how power needs to be returned back to the states. I agree with all states honoring permits too.

    If a National Concealed Carry Recip doesn't pass, I would like to see something such as the Michaels Law Amendment pass. I do feel that Truckers need to be able to legally carry concealed, they deserve the same rights to protection for themselves as anyone else.

    The only issue with Truckers having these rights is, as stated above. Most companies do not allow firearms in their vehicles or on their premises. Also, a lot of the receivers will have the same policy (regarding on their premises). When I go somewhere with my CC and run into a place of business that doesn't all firearms, I can A. Choose to ignore the sign B. Choose to ignore the business and leave or C. I can go to my vehicle and disarm then return into the business. As a Trucker you don't have those options, you can either A. Choose to ignore the sign and proceed or B. toss your CC into the ditch and pick it up on the way out. (I realize B is stupid, but it is the other option)

    Problem is that even if the feds pass laws allowing Truckers to exercise their rights (I know you don't need laws to exercise rights, just work with me here) there are still numerous hurdles in the way that would require the breaking of rules.

    That leads to the old argument about business cant infringe upon our 2A rights by not allowing firearms on their property. While it may or may not be right that's the way it currently is.

    The next infringement argument is why we even have to have a license to exercise our right. Maybe I'm a fence sitter, but lets think about this. The class I took to get my license was mostly classroom. A lot of that consisted of familiarizing us with some of Oklahoma's laws regarding carrying a firearm. It dealt with some handgun safety. Then we wen outside in small groups and fired 30-40 rds into a bale of hay.

    I realize that is an infringement having to take a class. I realize everyone has to right to protect themselves. With recent issues and events around the world and right here at home in the US, there are lots and lots more people getting licenses. Most of us grew up around firearms and are familiar with firearm safety. A lot of the people getting licenses and firearms now are don't it for safety not for pleasure. A lot of those people didn't grow up around or have no real interest in firearms. Given that, I do feel a little safety training and make sure they can properly and safely point in the right direction and shoot. I see the license as a means of determining who has and who has not been through the training.

    As far as DOT regs, I talked to a retired Oklahoma State Trooper and he told me DOT doesn't have any laws against carrying in a DOT vehicle as long as you are legally licensed to carry. According to the attachment below, that pretty much backs him up on that.

    Overall, yes, I agree that a Trucker or any one us individuals should have the freedom to exercise our rights but what is the real answer to the problem. Even with Michaels Amendment and/or NCC Laws there still will be rules that have to be broken. I have carried when and where I wasn't supposed to, but a person shouldn't have to do that in order to exercise their rights.

    Hmmm, I just saw this. The way I read it you can already carry intrastate or interstate travel, on your person.


    Here is the link where I found this.
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2017
    Kmcdowell likes this.
  13. ChaZam

    ChaZam G&G Evangelist Forum Contributor

    ^^^ And those infringements that have been going on for many years that were specifically prohibited by Amendment #2 just keep on rearing their ugly head and the SCOTUS and many other courts are too gutless to smack them down. That lack of guts on the part of the courts is what has spawned this cottage industry of selling and licensing limited access to the 2nd Amendment in a myriad of different formats by the 50 states etc that many think could somehow be fixed by another law involving reciprocity would cure...

    If the the many thousands of multiple "INFRINGEMENTS" were nullified by a court with backbone the various licenses and the need for some form of conjured up reciprocity would be a non issue. Creating another layer of infringements is not the cure for the problems associated with infringements.
    CountryBoy likes this.