Was it appropriate for Virginia to change its concealed carry reciprocity rules?

SSG(P) (Join to see) - Treason? Really? I am very interested to hear how you could define this as "treason."

First, let's substitute "gun control" with any of the following words: "Medicine," "Architecture," or "Law." If a doctor or an architect want to work across state lines, they must meet the certifications of each of those states. Should a lawyer in New Mexico try a case in Arkansas, he better have passed the bar in both states. Virginia refuses to recognize certifications from certain other states. So what? This happens all the time in technical professions. There is no helmet law for motorcyclists in Colorado. But, if you cross the state line into Nebraska, you'd better have a hard hat on your grape.

Converse to your suggestion of treason, I say this is a perfect example of the 10th Amendment in action. You may not like Virginia's law. While it may be an example of "bench politics," it's certainly legal. To toss out the tag "treason" is an irresponsible use of that word.

I'm guessing when it's convenient for you, you're all about states' powers, but when it's not, it's treason.

I think it was a poor choice for the state, but far from treason.

I think it is a state issue.
I'm surprised that the legislature granted executive powers to the Attorney General to make this kind of call, but it is up to Virginia to fix it.
As to the issue itself, I don't really see a problem with Virginia having it's own requirements for a CC permit. I think it should have a high standard and required training. This does not infringe on someone's right to bear arms, it just means their are requirements for carrying those arms around concealed.

I'm in VA. It's part of his "vested Power."

Legislatively, he's allowed to do it. Doesn't make it correct. But it is within his scope of Power (of Office).

I disagree with it. I think he's wrong. But that doesn't mean make it Treason. It just means he (ab)used the Power he had at his disposal, within the confines of the Law, as written. This is why Letter of the Law and Spirit of the Law must be "mirrored" as closely as possibly, to prevent the perversion of intent.

It makes complete sense that a State would not accept a license from another State with lower standards. Kansas has no requirements. It's for the Safety of Virginians that they would not allow untrained individuals to carry when they do not meet the State of Virginia's requirements.

Makes sense to me. If the legislature of VA has passed laws that says VA residents must meet certain requirements to carry concealed, they must have felt they were important to ensure the safety of its residents. So why wouldnt you demand that a visitor meet those same requirements to carry in VA?

Absolutely not, a concealed carry permit, should be recognized just like a driver's license or a marriage license. That being said, the AG stating that it was based on states that have lower criteria for obtaining a CCW permit is an out right lie. For instance, WI it is both more difficult, and time consuming process to get a CCW. NC also has a considerably higher criteria for CCW.

Treason? Hardly. Constitutional? Debatable.

Politicians are like children, always testing limits. We the People are the parents. We set the limits on government in the Constitution but haven't been doing a very good job enforcing them.

So what happens when you don't teach your children to behave? Brats...

As a Virginian I do not agree on any level with what the AG just did. Many states have had long standing agreements with one another allowing a legal conceal carry permit holder to carry conceal in their perspective states and vice versa. In Virginia to obtain your conceal carry you MUST complete the application for the permit, pay the cost for the permit, undergo finger printing and full back ground check, have proof of hand gun safety and use in the form of a copy of your DD214 or the completion of s certified gun safety / use course recognized by the state of VA. I just adversely with one stroke say NO to all will do allot of harm in my opinion as an example; Traveling police officers or Military personnel will most likely loose their right to carry and travel from state to state where the agreements ounce existed as a backlash other states may follow suite in spite of the AG's sweeping reaction. Stats and history have proven time and time again that a disarmed people are a target waiting to be victimized verses those that are allowed to carry and defend their family's and friends. REMEMBER THIS! The police in 98% of 911 calls arrive just in time to hang the yellow crime scene tape which means for you that your time to defend has come and gone.