< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit  (Read 2252 times)

Offline TwoSwords

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2013
  • Posts: 70
Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« on: February 11, 2016, 08:56:01 PM »
In case your interested, I got an answer from MN directly.

Subject: Your MN Permit to Carry Question
Dear Mr. X:
Thank you for your email in which you ask why NE gun permits are not recognized in Minnesota. The reason is that NE has adopted the federal standards for issuing permits to carry that do not have any restrictions regarding alcohol use or confinement for chemical dependency. Minnesota requires proof of successful treatment if one is so confined or committed. See Minn. Stat. § 624.713, subd. 1(5). Consequently, NE and MN laws are not similar and reciprocity is not be allowed. See Minn. Stat. § 624.714, subd. 16. If MN’s 2015 reciprocity review analysis was in error, please let us know. We appreciated hearing from you.





Offline depserv

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 870
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2016, 08:34:34 AM »
Things like this are why national reciprocity is necessary: too many states treat bearing arms as a privilege instead of the right that it is.
The liberal cult seeks destruction of the American Republic like water seeks low ground.

Offline BigRed

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2016
  • Location: Gering, NE
  • Posts: 16
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2016, 11:44:38 AM »
I agree with you 100%. Problem is that there are too many politicians that read into the current laws and understand what they want and it will go nowhere. Look at what happened here with LB289. Omaha and Lincoln politicians killed it because if their lame reasons. Then there is Chambers and his BS. Sorry to rant but that just upset me how it all went down.

Offline depserv

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 870
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2016, 02:54:15 PM »
I agree with you 100%. Problem is that there are too many politicians that read into the current laws and understand what they want and it will go nowhere. Look at what happened here with LB289. Omaha and Lincoln politicians killed it because if their lame reasons. Then there is Chambers and his BS. Sorry to rant but that just upset me how it all went down.
I was not very pleased with that to say the least, especially since my state senator, Kathy Campbell, who calls herself a Republican, stood with the Chambers gang.  This shows the importance in getting not only Democrats defeated but also making sure the Republican Party stops nominating RINOs, who have no loyalty to America and no backbone.  It just shouldn't be too much to expect those in the legislature to do what they swore an oath to do when they took office.
The liberal cult seeks destruction of the American Republic like water seeks low ground.

Offline bullit

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2016, 05:15:10 PM »
Subject: Your MN Permit to Carry Question
Dear Mr. X:
Thank you for your email in which you ask why NE gun permits are not recognized in Minnesota. The reason is that NE has adopted the federal standards for issuing permits to carry that do not have any restrictions regarding alcohol use or confinement for chemical dependency. Minnesota requires proof of successful treatment if one is so confined or committed. See Minn. Stat. § 624.713, subd. 1(5). Consequently, NE and MN laws are not similar and reciprocity is not be allowed. See Minn. Stat. § 624.714, subd. 16. If MN’s 2015 reciprocity review analysis was in error, please let us know. We appreciated hearing from you.

It appears you received a rather idiotic answer from someone completely IGNORANT on the reasons and was thus provided an absolutely illogical and wrong answer.  Federal standards for issuing permits ??? HUH ????  Did I miss something?  I was unaware that the Feds issued carry permits.   The reasons are due to our training standards (didactic and range) and theirs ...  this is nothing new ....  really that simple.  Nebraska's CHP rules and regs are  crafted by NSP based upon the statutes passed by the Unicameral and signed into law.

Offline OnTheFly

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 2617
  • NFOA member #364
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2016, 01:15:12 AM »
Things like this are why national reciprocity is necessary: too many states treat bearing arms as a privilege instead of the right that it is.

Personally I don't like the idea of the Federal government getting involved with CC laws. A national CC law could not be obtained years ago, so the local activists had to get it passed on the state level. Several who started the NFOA were a big part of getting CC passed in Nebraska for example. If it couldn't be passed years ago on a national level, why would it be any more successful today? Regardless, even if it did go through, why would we want there to be one law under Federal? All it would take is a liberal majority to take it all away.

Fly
Si vis pacem, para bellum

Offline Mudinyeri

  • God, save us!
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 3965
  • Run for the Hills
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2016, 08:47:15 AM »
Federal standards for issuing permits ??? HUH ????  Did I miss something?  I was unaware that the Feds issued carry permits.   

Law enforcement officers are covered under an act known as LEOSA or the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act.  This entitles many sworn officers to travel through all fifty states AND the District of Columbia with their concealed carry handguns.

Offline depserv

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 870
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2016, 09:56:40 AM »
Personally I don't like the idea of the Federal government getting involved with CC laws. A national CC law could not be obtained years ago, so the local activists had to get it passed on the state level. Several who started the NFOA were a big part of getting CC passed in Nebraska for example. If it couldn't be passed years ago on a national level, why would it be any more successful today? Regardless, even if it did go through, why would we want there to be one law under Federal? All it would take is a liberal majority to take it all away.

Fly

You make a good case my friend, but what I would like to see is simply a federal law saying that states have to obey the law, as written in the 2nd Amendment, as well as the full faith and credit clause.  This would be like a law in Nebraska saying that local governments can't infringe on the right beyond what the state does (which patriots in the state failed to get passed lately due to the efforts of traitors).  A majority of traitors in government who would rewrite such a law would be just as likely to write a similarly illegal law whether or not one had been written by patriots earlier, just as illegal federal gun control laws have been written at the federal level already.  As the saying goes, the devil is in the details.  But Congress does have a lawful duty to stop states from disobeying the law.  This is what the Constitution says about it:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution...” Article VI, Clause 3, U. S. Constitution.

By my reading of that, all members of both the federal and state legislatures are in violation of the law by doing nothing while the Constitution is being trampled by criminal gangs that hold political power.  It just doesn't seem like doing their lawful duty should be too much to expect from them.

This problem would have been solved a long time ago by a Supreme Court that was willing to do its duty in defending the law.  But since that court has been politicized it looks like we have to find other means.   
The liberal cult seeks destruction of the American Republic like water seeks low ground.

Offline bullit

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2016, 01:07:29 PM »
mud ... we are not discussing LEOSA that I am aware of nor are LEOs carrying under LEOSA issued an actual Federal carry permit

Offline Mudinyeri

  • God, save us!
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 3965
  • Run for the Hills
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2016, 08:08:09 AM »
mud ... we are not discussing LEOSA that I am aware of nor are LEOs carrying under LEOSA issued an actual Federal carry permit

No, but that's the closest thing.

Offline SS_N_NE

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 429
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #10 on: February 15, 2016, 08:40:42 PM »
too many states treat bearing arms as a privilege instead of the right that it is.


Isn't that....NEBRASKA???

Offline depserv

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 870
Re: Reason for MN not accepting NE Permit
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2016, 09:50:43 AM »

Isn't that....NEBRASKA???
Yes my friend, Nebraska is a state that treats bearing arms as a privilege, even in spite of our state Constitution saying this:
 
"All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and all other lawful purposes, and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof."

As with the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, this written law makes those who treat the right as a privilege in our state a criminal gang, instead of a legitimate government.  Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to matter much what the law says when those who have no respect for the law have the power to put you in jail.  At least Nebraska is better than some states.  But those of us who would like our state to be run by loyal Americans instead of a criminal gang have our work cut out for us.  I'd like to see all the criminals put in jail, but I'd settle for them just obeying the law.   
The liberal cult seeks destruction of the American Republic like water seeks low ground.