UPDATE - Florida Non Resident IS VALID

[SeventhSon]

Good news for Florida Non-Res permit holders (and I am one), BUT I would still look into getting the LA permit also. I just dropped my paperwork off at LSP in Baton Rouge and spoke with two of the ladies there. GREAT PEOPLE!!! and I asked about the wait time. She told me they just sent back over 100 rejections (for problems with paperwork or background) and they are pretty much back to no backlog. She said that I should get my permit in 60-90 days. Now would be a good time to get that LA permit and be done with it. Just my $0.02

 

[spanky]

Wow, I've never participated in a pro-rights forum that was so quick to censure discussion and close off a thread.

To clarify, the thread was closed because relevant discussion had turned to mudslinging and name calling.

 

[Dogman]

This is my first post although I've been lurking for over a year. Tried to register a few days ago and something went wrong with the transaction. Anyway, I registered again today and it looks like it worked.

This whole thing with the Florida non-resident licenses really blind-sided me. I saw a reference on another forum and confirmed the LA State Police website message. I immediately shot off an e-mail to the governor's office expressing my displeasure at these actions.

When I did my training I had a choice between Lousiana and Florida licenses. I have a Florida license for one reason--Louisiana state resident licenses are not recognized in New Mexico and I go there on a regular basis. The icing on the cake was that Florida's licensing period is for 7 years and Lousiana's is for 4 years. I already am licensed in my home parish by the sheriff's department so there didn't seem any reason to pursue a Louisana license.

I'm glad this decision has been delayed/re-examined, whatever.

Since I obtained the Florida license, I've noticed the trend in some states only recognizing resident licenses. I had already decided it would be a good idea to get a Louisana license as well even though it is past the 12 months since my training and I'd have to pay for training again. This little episode has pointed to this being action that should not be postponed. I've already signed up for a new training class--hopefully I can get in next month. The state police website indicates a 120 days should be allowed from application date to issuance. I expect that may have to be extended even further if a whole new group of people now have to file new applications.

 

[dzelenka]

I don't know about Utah, but I would assume any such action with them would also not be in keeping with the current statutes also.

I, as much as anyone, don't want the Legislature digging around the program either and do not want to see any detrimental effects to the CC laws.

I do believe a fair compromise could be worked out that will limit the amount of "legislative exposure" and untimately satisfy both sides of this issue. That fair compromise would be a grandfathering in of those existing non-resident CC permit holders until the expiration date of their permit.

This way, the non-resident permit holders would get what they paid for and would then ultimately have to move into the La system for a continuation of their permit.

What do ya'll think? Would this be an acceptable solution that could get the change done without totally stirring the hornets nest?

LSA is looking into this option; however, it may become moot. Your current choices are to apply for a LA permit now and get it before the legislature goes into session or wait to see what the law ultimately looks like. I do not see how waiting would be the smart thing to do. If the compromise is not passed, you will go without a permit until your LA permit is issued (and I expect there will be quite a run on them). Whereas, starting the process now would guarantee that there would be no interruption in having a valid permit. There is not enough money involved to take the chance in my opinion.

As a personal observation, I would think that the legislature (driven by LSP recommendations) would not look favorably on the compromise as it leaves the FL non-resident permit issue open for up to 7 years. I do not believe that the legislature will think twice about letting the FL permit holders lose the $117 that a FL license costs.

Dan

 

[SeventhSon]

The state police website indicates a 120 days should be allowed from application date to issuance. I expect that may have to be extended even further if a whole new group of people now have to file new applications.

I posted this above but wanted to make sure you and others were aware of it. I went to the Baton Rouge office this afternoon and was quoted 60-90 days by the ladies who work there.

 

[George]

why not just get one in LA?

 

[CHOLMES]

Thanks Dan. I hope that's not the case. Many folks acted in good faith on the laws enacted by the Legislature. They did nothing wrong. To immediately take away that, at a financial cost, would not be fair.

Again, I think the compromise would benefit all concerned and avert an unnecessary fight among folks that are really on the same side. Simply recognizing the permits until they expire would not be overburdensome, it would allow the folks that acted in good faith in accordance with the law to "get what they paid for," would transition folks into the La system at varying rates and not cause any extra backlog.

I think this would be a better soultion than an "our way or the highway" attitude and would prevent unnecessary meddling into the CC statutes that will likely not benefit any of us.

Thanks for your input.

 

[geauxshootin]

I posted this above but wanted to make you and others were aware of it. I went to the Baton Rouge office this afternoon and was quoted 60-90 days but the lady who works there.

Good heads up!
The Key as Dan pointed out and as you have done is to get the LA applications done and turned in.

I agree with Dan on the Legistaure's care for money spent in FL. It is not necessarily a negative that they may think that way.

Just caution all to be very careful about what you jump on the soapbox about now. Politics, as it has been said already, can cause things to happen that were not intended or desired. Lets try to work together through organizations like the LSA and others and let a few strong voices be heard.

 

[CHOLMES]

George:

That is an option. However, currently there is also the option to get the FL permit which many choose to do. I know of one guy that got his FL permit just a day ago and one that will get his any day now. I'm sure there are many others similarly situated.

The point is that they followed the existing law. The fair thing to do would be to simply honor their permit until it expires. What's wrong with that idea?

Thanks

 

[geauxshootin]

CHOLMES -
Understand your point and do not disagree that it may be an option, but it has to end somewhere and without taking a chance of starting an argument at the capital that may cause the loss or degreading of current laws.

 

[dzelenka]

Like I said, LSA is examining the possibility. I don't think it is unreasonable, but it may be viewed as impractical. I am certain that a lot will depend on what NRA is willing to push for. I know that NRA was looking at some CCH reform legislation that expands where you can carry. They may be willing to give in to the LSP in return for assistance with the NRA agenda. Personally, and I am not speaking as LSA President on this, I would rather reduce the prohibited areas than hang tough on the non-resident issue. You are taking a chance that you will be left without a valid permit if you don't apply for your LA permit in the near future. If the $117 is worth that to you, so be it. I personally would write off the money in exchange for the certainty that I will have a valid permit at all times. I think most of the FL permit holders will, reluctantly or not, make the same choice. If they do, your support for a compromise bill will wane. Once again, these are my views and not the LSA's. LSA will work through its lobbyist to see what is legislatively possible. It will also work with NRA to make sure that LA gunowners get any positive CCW reform possible.

I have your email and will keep you apprised of any developments as I become aware of them. Stay in touch.

Dan

PS Are you an LSA member? What about the rest of you guys? Join us. There is strength in numbers.

 

[CHOLMES]

Geaux: That's my point. If there is going to be apush for a total ban with no grandfathering, there is going to be a commotion. I for one would be up there to fight that. However, if a good compromise bill can be crafted to appease all of us, we can help avert a free-for-all at the Legislature that can help keep them from messing with other parts of the CC statutes.

Somebody once said united we stand, divided.......

I'm just trying to get info so perhaps a consensus can be worked out ahead of time to present a good compromise bill that makes everyone a little bit happy.

 

[geauxshootin]

+1 on Dan's comments

the grandfather period has already started, use the time wisely.

 

[SeventhSon]

the grandfather period has already started, use the time wisely.

Agreed, those of us with Non-Res permits wanted a grace-period and now we got it. Get on it and get that LA permit. It's not like I WANTED to spend almost $300 to get the LA permit, but it is what it is. I'm glad I have the extra time to still be able to carry AND get current while doing it.

 

[Mouthpiece]

PS Are you an LSA member? What about the rest of you guys? Join us. There is strength in numbers.

Good point. It's only $10. I just joined.

 

[CHOLMES]

Those on here that are informed know about all of this. Most in the general public have no clue. I only heard about the recent action banning the Fl permits yesterday. If that action was still in effect, I had been illegally carrying for a a couple weeks with no notice.

Yes, the simple solution is to just double up and get the La permit. However, that is not the fair solution and should not be the only solution. There's ways to make this work to benefit all concerned and not jeapordize any loss of CC rights.

Thanks for all the input.

 

[dzelenka]

Geaux: That's my point. If there is going to be apush for a total ban with no grandfathering, there is going to be a commotion. I for one would be up there to fight that. However, if a good compromise bill can be crafted to appease all of us, we can help avert a free-for-all at the Legislature that can help keep them from messing with other parts of the CC statutes.

Somebody once said united we stand, divided.......

I'm just trying to get info so perhaps a consensus can be worked out ahead of time to present a good compromise bill that makes everyone a little bit happy.

There won't be a fight. If NRA approves the bill, its passage through committee will be a foregone conclusion. I also believe that this issue will be self resolving. Unless you have a strong advocate for your compromise, like the committee chairman, well before the session begins, the smart money would be on getting a LA license just in case. Once someone gets his LA license, he will probably not be a vocal supporter of the compromise. No support during the session would doom a compromise amendment. And getting a committee chairman, a former sheriff in the House and Harry Lee's ex partner in the Senate, to go against the LSP on this issue will not be easy.

What I am saying is that you need to do all of your homework now. If you do not have this completely scripted 90 days before the session begins, get your LA license because your odds of being without a valid permit for some period of time will go up exponentially.

Again, I am not saying that your compromise solution doesn't have merit or is not reasonable and fair, but this is politics. And, as Clint Eastwood said "Fair ain't got nothin to do with it." (Unforgiven).

Dan

 

[spanky]

I would rather reduce the prohibited areas than hang tough on the non-resident issue.

+1 million

 

[JBP55]

+1 on Dan's comments

the grandfather period has already started, use the time wisely.

Plus 1.

 

[Bradye]

I email Rep Schroder and Sgt Reavis called me at about 3:30. Very nice guy with some valid points. He said he's going to suggest the change to occur on Jan 1, 2011. I cant remember who but he's meeting with lawmakers on Monday.