How can we get a federal concealed carry for our service members and veterans?

Problem is that Virginia has just STOPPED reciprocity. Reason being - each state has different guidelines and they may not be as strict.

Illinois never has. They want your money for THEIR class and fees.

Well aware of the fact that IL does not honor any out of state CCL's they finally gave in and allowed al IL CCL, last I checked it's $150 for residents and $300 for non-res. Just one of the reasons I no longer live in IL. I now live in GA, where they are trying to pass constitutional carry.

Full hooah Major Hall

CPT David Cocchiarella - Captain, your coffee shop sounds pleasant, but what I had suggested is that we be allowed the opportunity to be able to train for and carry on the same level as federal law enforcement. Remember I said train for, and that by no means guarantees the granting of such license to all. Secondly, there should be a federal concealed carry license that allows us to be able to carry within the normal permit levels of the law in all 50 states. We are being targeted. I haven't checked your profile to know if you're still in or out, but I do know what is going on. In Ohio the assaults of service members, especially USAF has increased immensely. In Seattle, the Fort Lewis fence was cut by two Arabs that were attempting to probe security, and then they attempted to get through the front gate several months ago. The attacks that don't end in fatalities are not reported on the news, and scarcely anybody knows about them. Many times it is an attack as simple as an airman leaves the wire to go home off base and they are assaulted, shot at, or someone jumps into their car. I have friends in many different police departments, and they get called out just to get probed by people that are not of our national origin. I hate having to play PC, but we'll just say middle-east, and north African.

So back to the coffee shop, because of the nature of the business you are "open to the public" which means you DE-laminate the argument of private property. In a recent case of people protesting at the Mall of America after the Ferguson verdict, they were charged with criminal trespass. It was found that the nature of the business was at least quasi-public and therefore trespass didn't occur because the businesses were open to the public. The media only reported on the ambiguity of the order to disperse not meaning to leave. What's the relevance? When you open the door to the public and you ban the private citizen from defending themselves, if something happens the burden of protection and the responsibility falls on you. If something happens to them on the way to or from the car where they disarmed to go to your shop, the burden of responsibility falls upon you as well.

You wouldn't ask a police officer that was the first day on the job to disarm would you? So why not be in favor for military veterans that go out and get extensive extra training in order to obtain license to carry on par with a LEO carry everywhere? I will add that there are airline pilots that have FFDO (federal flight deck officer) status and are considered on par that have been so under-skilled that they have shot through the airplane during a flight by negligent discharge. I sure as hell would bestow a federal officer level of trust to carry on a soldier before I would a pilot (and I am both). I guaranty you that your FFDO pilot didn't disarm before coming in your coffee shop, but you might not have noticed anything other than the epaulets.

CPT David Cocchiarella - Sir, you wrote that I said "Your original comment was repealing laws that you say infringe on your 2nd amendment rights." Either you misunderstood, misread, misinterpreted, or chose to see other words. What I DID write is the following."repeal of existing State laws and Federal regulations that "infringe" on our right to "keep and bear arms". I chose my words with care. You see I don't believe we have "2nd amendment rights". Nor did those who framed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, those men understood our rights to pre-exist our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. They understood the purpose of the Constitution was to define and limit the powers and scope of the Federal government, and to outline it's relationship with the People, the States, and the rest of the world, and not to limit the rights of the people. Lastly, to ensure the government didn't infringe on those inherent liberties, they formulated the Bill of rights to specifically remind the government what it could not do TO us.

On your next point, I agree wholeheartedly, when you state that the 2nd Amendment doesn't give anybody the right to carry. The second Amendment says "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" It is not a limitation on the people, but on infringements OF the people, BY the government. Those who wrote the 2nd Amendment understood we had the preexisting, and inherent right to keep and bear arms, concealed, or otherwise.

And yes, I do want trained, responsible people, service members, or otherwise carrying guns in our children's schools. I find it infinitely superior to the idea of even ONE gunman with mass-murderous intent doing so unopposed with our children as sitting ducks.
Lastly, don't we allow those same privates to carry firearms 24 hours a day in combat zones with very little of the incidence you seem to fear so much? And yes, they should be able to carry on post, to ensure they aren't the same sitting ducks as our children are in school, or as were those at Ft. Hood when Maj Hassan engaged in his murderous rampage unopposed for so long, killing 13, and wounding another 30 before a good guy showed up with a gun.

As always Respectful regards.

COL John Hudson - excellently stated Sir!

CPT (Servicemember) - The Firearm Owners Protection act of 1986 prohibits Federal firearms databases....
"The Act also forbade the U.S. Government agency from keeping a registry directly linking non-National Firearms Act firearms to their owners, the specific language of this law (Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 926)

No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established"

So, Respectfully, no registry sir, and for good reason.

Recent ruling in VA disqualifies me from ever carrying firearm in that state due to attending VA for treatment.

SGM, if you read it carefully, the six year restriction is an ARMY thing, regular LEOs, and the other services; i.e. AF, do not have the 6 year requirement.

The ARMY spent 18 months studying the new amendment, and then decided that a 31B wasn't qualified for it until after that 6 years. Good to know we have unqualified MPs in combat roles!

I am Former Air Force "Security Police", with 12 years in, six years active and six years active reserve, I was required to have a minimum of 10 years in an actual Law Enforcement position to get MY LEOSA, which I got in July 2015. It required many hoops to jump through, and FBI Fingerprinting and complete FBI, background investigation, then I had to qualify on my weapon with the county Sheriff's Dept. that I live in. My LEOSA ID is good for five years and the Sheriff's Firearms Certification is done yearly. The whole thing did cost several hundred dollars to accomplish, but knowing I am FULLY legal in all 50 states is very reassuring and it was well worth the time, trouble and expense. I would be fine with the Law including ALL Veterans with ALL of the same standards, handgun training, background checks etc. that are involved. I feel we need more good Guys with guns out there on our streets I do think that the (Air Force) ten years requirement is a bit too much however.

I think it still works that way sergeant.

I'll have to respectfully disagree. It's not rhetoric when a person goes to make a criminal act against another and they have no equivalent way to defend themselves. Joes carry live weapons every day on the FOB, and it's not come to a wild west shootout despite the occasional drinking that happens from special mouthwash. The spirit of what you're saying is that you have no faith in the training and conduct of our service members, and that they would be competent if trained properly to conceal a weapon while in public. I'd place my bet on my brothers and sisters before I would place it on a rent-a-cop that couldn't hack it or a police officer that couldn't get in.

Sp4 Byron Skinner. Respectfully CPL I have some factual issues here My assumption was that we were talking on about CONUS. I assume what you call a FOB we called a Fire Base or a Lagger and yes weapons are carried at all times and depending the situation sometimes loaded magazines were also put in the weapons, but never a round in the chamber. Looking back only casually of the US military in the 20th. Century there is no reported case of an armed civilian group attacking a Military instillation. The Blue on Blue you are referring to doesn't make any sense. My personal experience is that when this starts to happen there is platoon intervention or just a plane old fight and fights were not uncommon in the Army I was in. Te presence of a fire arm on rather side of the issue escalates a run of the mill fight into a murder. Your comment in that I do not have faith in the military weapons training, your are correct. Outside of the combat arms after Basic many solders never fire a military weapon again. Re. Jeccisa Lynch Ambush 2003. The age group of first enlisted is on the 17-20 year old range, and lets face it the Military doesn't recruit from the middle social ecomonic groups and up. Many solders are forced to enter the Military to solve behavior issues that may land the individual in jail. I know this is not the purpose of the MIlitary but with over half of the states with a $10.00 Hr. and up minimum wage Military pay is not competitive. This will lower the quality of potential that the recruiter sees.

SPC Byron Skinner - Again you mentioned combat arms. So that includes those 9mm and .45s? Also realize that they have already shown the ability to follow rules of engagement. So training them on more should be fairly straight forward.
BTW those soldiers today may be carrying with a round in the chamber when at the FOB. They most likely were during certain times at your firebase.

Sp4 Byron Skinner. Good MOrning PO2 Burke. A couple of assumptions you are making are simply note correct. Combat Arms truing is aggression, pure and simple. I went through Infantry Training and never once did somebody say not to fire on a target. In combat in Vietnam, I was in two engagements that were awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (the blue one in the gold frame) I know a bit about combat. Having armed, trained and combat experienced combat arms troops on a CONUS base is just asking four trouble. These guys and soon gals are tightly wound. Having firearms in their possession would be a fatal mistake. I don't know much about the USAF or USN's weapons training. I understand that when the USN consolidated all of its Entry level training at the Great Lakes Training Center they discontinued marksmanship training. The Marines have the best wit about two weeks of Boot Camp dedicated to weapons training where the Army Basic Training for other then combat arms is a week to include qualification firing. It is ironic but the troops with the most training and experience with weapons are the one who should face the most restrictions on a CONUS base. Chambered rounds, the only general exception was night ambushes where we always ket a round in the chamber. Even prementer guard duty at a Fire Base or Lagger we didn't have chambered rounds, just to much of a freak accident of blue on blue possible.