Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/29/2011 11:09:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/29/2011 11:09:38 PM EDT by KnightofTheOldeCode]
Action needed on H.R. 822, National Right-To-Carry bill

by Jim Irvine

H.R. 822, the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 would make concealed handgun licenses valid in in all states that allow concealed carry, similar to how your drivers license works. Bill sponsor Clifford Stearns (R-FL) has been building support for his bill and now it's time for some grassroots involvement.

Action needed:

H.R. 822 currently has 244 co-sponsors, including 210 Republicans and 34 Democrats. Has your Congressman co-sponsored this legislation?

If you are not sure, you can find out here:

http://www.capwiz.com/buckeyefirearms/issues/bills/?bill=46737631

If your Congressman has not co-sponsored H.R. 822, contact their office and request that they sign on. We need more co-sponsors to show support and help bring this important legislation up for a vote.

If your Congressman has already co-sponsored H.R. 822, contact their office and thank them for their support. Also ask that they continue to encourage their fellow law makers to join the effort and to let leadership know they want to vote on this legislation before the end of the year.

Many states already honor any valid concealed weapons license. States like Indiana, Montana and New Mexico simply honor other states licenses. Most states have a reciprocity system, where agreements are reached between states that allow residents to carry in the opposite state. Ohio is one such state, and with the new agreement between Ohio and Louisiana, residents of these two states can finally travel armed in each others' state.

Some states refuse to honor any other states' license. New York and California are such states. They issue licenses to political friends and celebrities, but not to regular citizens.

Ohio has many agreements, but is missing Georgia making a drive to Florida difficult. Indiana and Pennsylvania have different requirements and thus no agreement has been signed. This makes life difficult for those who live near the border and frequently travel or even work across state lines.

You do not need to do research to know your driver's license or marriage license is still valid when you cross state lines. A license issued in one state is valid in others. There is no reason that a concealed handgun license should be any different.

As with driving, all persons must still comply with the state they are in, regardless of what state issued their license. Such laws can vary significantly and it is the responsibility of the gun owner to know and comply with the law of any state they travel in or through.

Jim Irvine Is the Buckeye Firearms Association Chairman.
Link Posted: 9/29/2011 11:20:08 PM EDT
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

Link Posted: 9/29/2011 11:28:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/29/2011 11:28:56 PM EDT by ARDestructo]
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.
Link Posted: 9/29/2011 11:37:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris
Link Posted: 9/29/2011 11:52:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


Exactly. Say goodbye to shall issue and welcome in again "may" issue. Also, look at the wait times for NFA and FFL applications. Do we really want to wait 6 months for a carry permit?
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 12:01:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BossMaverick:
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


Exactly. Say goodbye to shall issue and welcome in again "may" issue. Also, look at the wait times for NFA and FFL applications. Do we really want to wait 6 months for a carry permit?


You guys are thinking about Boxer's "Common-Sense Concealed Firearms Act of 2011", which is a different bill.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 12:49:55 AM EDT
snip


You guys are thinking about Boxer's "Common-Sense Concealed Firearms Act of 2011", which is a different bill.


Please educate us then about the new one.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 2:06:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


I still can't figure out WHY people line up to get permission to excercise what is ALREADY a GOD GIVEN RIGHT?

And then they act all happy about it.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 2:44:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


Actually it depends on which county one resides in in NY. In my county, "I like guns and want to carry them everywhere" is a valid reason.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 2:56:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BossMaverick:
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


Exactly. Say goodbye to shall issue and welcome in again "may" issue. Also, look at the wait times for NFA and FFL applications. Do we really want to wait 6 months for a carry permit?





In Wayne County, that's about average.

My last renewal took 6 months.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 3:00:13 AM EDT
No thanks. The feds need not be involved in CC.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 3:14:38 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mi650:
Originally Posted By BossMaverick:
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


Exactly. Say goodbye to shall issue and welcome in again "may" issue. Also, look at the wait times for NFA and FFL applications. Do we really want to wait 6 months for a carry permit?





In Wayne County, that's about average.

My last renewal took 6 months.


I'm sorry. In the states I've lived in, there are laws that the county only has so much time to get it done.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 3:55:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By P400:

Actually it depends on which county one resides in in NY. In my county, "I like guns and want to carry them everywhere" is a valid reason.


Except NYC or any nearby state...
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 3:58:37 AM EDT
Do not want
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 4:05:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2011 4:06:37 AM EDT by E-Mag]

Originally Posted By the_outrider27:
Originally Posted By BossMaverick:
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


Exactly. Say goodbye to shall issue and welcome in again "may" issue. Also, look at the wait times for NFA and FFL applications. Do we really want to wait 6 months for a carry permit?


You guys are thinking about Boxer's "Common-Sense Concealed Firearms Act of 2011", which is a different bill.
While 822 is not bad now. I fear for the way it could turn I wish that I could carry in every state but do not want the feds involved. Once the camel gets it nose under the tent you have no clue what it will do.

Link Posted: 9/30/2011 4:11:29 AM EDT
What does the bill actually say?

If it had language allowing the Feds to set CCW standards, then yeah, it'd be a bad bill and should be killed, and would be.

But it doesn't. It just mandates reciprocity. That isn't going to happen without something like HR 822.

If this was some new, unheralded intrusion of federal power into states rights, I'd be opposed, too. But it isn't. The Feds have already claimed and used this power for a bunch of things we don't want, and we haven't stopped them. They have the power now. Why not have it used for a good cause for once?

Killing HR822 is not going to roll back Federal power one little bit.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 4:18:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2011 4:20:05 AM EDT by Badlatitude]
Originally Posted By ChrisGarrett:
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.

+1

This bill is opening Pandora's box. Not a musical box. The bad kind.


Is this the bill where Feinstein and Boxer want the Feds to dictate and/or create the minimum (read 'hard to get') qualifications for getting this National CCW?

This bill might be one of those that bills that looks good on its face, but turns into something that's not so good in the end.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Right now, it's not too hard to acquire one in many States, but in places like Cali and NY, you have to show a valid reason for wanting one and 'I like guns' or 'I want to defend myself' aren't good enough.

Chris


I dont understand why people are complaining. Its a bill saying your permit is good all over the country like a drivers license.
I hope it passes. Im on the Ny border and its a real pain in the ass. Hell from our old house there was no way to get to it without going through NY ... Thats not a good enough reason to get a westchester permit tho
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 4:24:16 AM EDT
This isn't Boxer's bill, but because she's proposed her own version, we know she's ok with this as a compromise if she gets to dictate the standards to the states... or if she thinks she can add those standards later.

The real danger of HR822 isn't what's in it but the fact that short-sighted second amendment activists would support federal laws overriding state CCW law. Once that's upheld in the supreme court (defended by us, paid for by the NRA), they can tack on whatever restrictions and "reasonable standards" for issue that they want.

We're already making enormous progress in CCW reciprocity WITHOUT involving the feds. How many states allowed CCW ten years ago, much less recognized licenses from other states? Most shall-issue states have wide if not universal recognition. Allowing the feds in can only hurt us.

Link Posted: 9/30/2011 5:12:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 5:16:08 AM EDT
I'm sorry, CCW or not, I do not want the federal government mandating to the states anymore.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 5:22:30 AM EDT
If it would actually HELP gun owners, then it will NEVER get through the Senate, let alone get Signed, and might not even make it through the House.

If it HURTS gun owners, then it may or may not get through the House, and will be rubber stamped by the Senate, and Okenyan. MORE laws, especially at a Federal level are NOT what we need. It's opening a can of worms, that we really shouldn't.

Either way, nothing good will come of it, and Fuck the NRA.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 5:26:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.



Link Posted: 9/30/2011 5:41:20 AM EDT
I thought we were supposed to be against bills like this? State's rights and all that jazz ....
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 5:45:41 AM EDT
If this passes, do I show my drivers license in other states? How would it work? We don't issue permits to carry a gun.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:21:11 AM EDT
DO NOT WANT.

Too dangerous to put this in the hands of the fed. They will corrupt it once it's been passed.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:25:12 AM EDT
How about the supreme court rule that the 2nd amendment cannot be infringed, and all local/state/federal laws infringing are illegal?

Liberals got where they want to be via the court, why can't we?
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:29:39 AM EDT
NO MORE FEDERAL GUN LAWS

Every little bit they "give" they wind up "taking" more in the long run.


Fed.gov is NOT to be trusted on the 2A, all I want from them is a confirmation that "shall NOT be infringed" means what it says.

Inviting them into as of yet unexplored areas, is a recipe for a hard, dry, anal penetration by Uncle Sam. I do not want.


Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:32:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.



This!!!!


KEEP THE FUCKING FEDS OUT OF CCW.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:33:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By caexpat:
What does the bill actually say?

If it had language allowing the Feds to set CCW standards, then yeah, it'd be a bad bill and should be killed, and would be.

But it doesn't. It just mandates reciprocity. That isn't going to happen without something like HR 822.

If this was some new, unheralded intrusion of federal power into states rights, I'd be opposed, too. But it isn't. The Feds have already claimed and used this power for a bunch of things we don't want, and we haven't stopped them. They have the power now. Why not have it used for a good cause for once?

Killing HR822 is not going to roll back Federal power one little bit.


If you like it, it is just another reason to hate it.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:33:45 AM EDT
They should just make the CCW a freaken icon on drivers licenses. They should have done it from the get go. State by state is nonsense. I had to take an NRA saftey course, pass an FBI fucking background check. Why shouldnt I be allowed to carry where ever I damn well please.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:34:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By phatmax:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.



This!!!!


KEEP THE FUCKING FEDS OUT OF CCW.


Who do you think does the background check before you are granted a CCW

Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:35:28 AM EDT
some of ya'll need to take your tin hats off, learn to read or go join brady campain already.

This bill has my support, along with my senator's and congressman's
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:39:48 AM EDT
We NEED this!

I reside in communist NJ which is a shall issue state, which means that they have CCW on the books but they SHALL not issue them to anybody that is not a Judge or anything like that.
Further more they dont recognize any other states CCW.

Passing this act would create a loop hole and allow me to use my already acquired FL CCW license to carry and feel safe n my own my own state (which I feel I need to carry in my home state a lot more then I do in PA )
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:39:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Badlatitude:
Originally Posted By phatmax:
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.



This!!!!


KEEP THE FUCKING FEDS OUT OF CCW.


Who do you think does the background check before you are granted a CCW



This is NOT the same as the FEDS having the say over you being issued your CCW. Goddamn, are you really that thick?
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:40:11 AM EDT
Part of me wants reciprocity in all 50 states, the other part of me enjoys saying "FUCK YOU" when I choose not to purchase a good or service that originates in NY, NJ, MD, IL, AL, HI, MA, RI and soon to be CA (if the Governor signs the no OC bill)
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:41:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Pav56C:
We NEED this!

I reside in communist NJ which is a shall issue state, which means that they have CCW on the books but they SHALL not issue them to anybody that is not a Judge or anything like that.
Further more they dont recognize any other states CCW.

Passing this act would create a loop hole and allow me to use my already acquired FL CCW license to carry and feel safe n my own my own state (which I feel I need to carry in my home state a lot more then I do in PA )


No.

Sorry.

Fail.

Work within your state to change your laws. It might not be instant, but it is the best way. Actually put some effort forth in restoring your own rights instead of risking everyone else's rights for a quick fix.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 6:48:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.



+1
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:04:10 AM EDT
You know, finding the text of this bill was not hard, and I suggest that the naysayers actually take a minute and read it:

HR 822 IH

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 822

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 18, 2011

Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. SHULER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.

(2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.

(5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.

(6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.

(7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.

(8) The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.

(9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.

SEC. 3. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:

‘Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that––

‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or

‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’.


(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:

‘926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.’.

(c) Severability- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment made by this section, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this section and the application of such provision or amendment to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(d) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

This bill is very large, and loading it may cause your web browser to perform sluggishly, or even freeze. This is especially true for old and/or bad browsers. As an alternative you can download the PDF of the bill or read the text on THOMAS.

Continue on to the bill...




There is nothing in there, nothing at all, that will apply federal control or oversight to how any state issues permits.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:06:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
I do not want anymore federal regulation.

I would hope the states would honor the 2nd, but I also know we do not line in Utopia.



Exactly. I don't want the feds messing with the right to carry.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:07:13 AM EDT
I'm against this. Shouldn't need a permit for a right.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:08:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2011 7:08:42 AM EDT by klinc]

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
You know, finding the text of this bill was not hard, and I suggest that the naysayers actually take a minute and read it:



There is nothing in there, nothing at all, that will apply federal control or oversight to how any state issues permits.


You shutup with your facts and all...
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:10:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
You know, finding the text of this bill was not hard, and I suggest that the naysayers actually take a minute and read it:

HR 822 IH

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 822

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 18, 2011

Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. SHULER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––­––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.

(2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.

(5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.

(6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.

(7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.

(8) The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.

(9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.

SEC. 3. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:

‘Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that––

‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or

‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’.


(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:

‘926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.’.

(c) Severability- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment made by this section, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this section and the application of such provision or amendment to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(d) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

This bill is very large, and loading it may cause your web browser to perform sluggishly, or even freeze. This is especially true for old and/or bad browsers. As an alternative you can download the PDF of the bill or read the text on THOMAS.

Continue on to the bill...




There is nothing in there, nothing at all, that will apply federal control or oversight to how any state issues permits.


This is an outrage! How dare you post facts? We're in a good ol' fashioned hyperbolic rantfest here! We can't talk about what it says... we're too worried about what we think it might say to take time to stop and read!

You with your big-city facts and thinkin' and stuff...
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:12:34 AM EDT
This bill would make states lose their right to set requirements for which other state permits they accept. People will be able to get a permit in a state with no training requirements and then their home state will be forced to accept it as legal. Not a good thing.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:22:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 1srelluc:
No thanks. The feds need not be involved in CC.

yUP....
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:27:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By castiel:
This bill would make states lose their right to set requirements for which other state permits they accept. People will be able to get a permit in a state with no training requirements and then their home state will be forced to accept it as legal. Not a good thing.


Must really boil your blood that our state "lets" people carry without a permit
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:39:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2011 7:40:56 AM EDT by the_naked_prophet]
Originally Posted By klinc:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
You know, finding the text of this bill was not hard, and I suggest that the naysayers actually take a minute and read it:



There is nothing in there, nothing at all, that will apply federal control or oversight to how any state issues permits.


You shutup with your facts and all...


Nobody said there was anything bad in the bill, except establishing that the feds have authority over state CCW. THAT is the dangerous part. If we use our money, time, and energy to defend this in the USSC against CA, NJ, NY, etc., then all we'll have done is establish the constitutionality for when they decide later to add "reasonable" restrictions on how to get a CCW; ie, proof of need, difficult and frequent qualifications, registration of guns to be carried, etc.

This bill won't help the poster above who can't get a CCW in his state of NJ, because it only provides for recognition of a CCW from your home state, no FL CCW recognition for you.

THIS BILL WILL HELP ALMOST NOBODY! We are making great progress both in issuance and recognition of CCW, no need to get the feds involved.

Let me repeat myself:

THIS BILL IS FUCKING USELESS! WE GIVE UP EVERYTHING AND GAIN ALMOST NOTHING IN RETURN!



Any benefit from this bill is transitory and minor. In return we permanently grand authority to the feds. How is that a good thing? For a few of you to gain some small, temporary benefit, you would throw away the freedom that those of us in free states have worked so hard to earn? And you talk about Obama throwing people under the bus.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:42:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By castiel:
This bill would make states lose their right to set requirements for which other state permits they accept. People will be able to get a permit in a state with no training requirements and then their home state will be forced to accept it as legal. Not a good thing.


There shouldn't be training requirements to exercise a constitutional right in the first place.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:45:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By the_naked_prophet:
Originally Posted By klinc:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
You know, finding the text of this bill was not hard, and I suggest that the naysayers actually take a minute and read it:



There is nothing in there, nothing at all, that will apply federal control or oversight to how any state issues permits.


You shutup with your facts and all...




THIS BILL IS FUCKING USELESS! WE GIVE UP EVERYTHING AND GAIN ALMOST NOTHING IN RETURN!




Not really, but maybe make it bigger font then I will agree with you.
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:46:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/30/2011 7:55:44 AM EDT by scotchymcdrinkerbean]
I think I'm going to start lobbying my Congressman and Senators to write a bill eliminating national reciprocity for CDLs, and to let those of us in states that don't license people to drive under a certain age refuse to recognize DLs issued by other states to younger folks.



ETA: Given that the feds already regulate interstate commerce, and every other darn thing they want, and the fact that they can, with a simple majority, ban magazines nationwide that hold over 10 rounds (or 6, if they want,) or just go ahead and lean on states that already allow CCW with threats to withhold funding if they don't tighten up standards and go to "may issue if great need demonstrated" or some such, (like the highway money was used for DWI standards and the like,) I think that those who harp about this "giving the feds more power!!!" really need to sit back and think objectively about things.

On a side note, I guess I'm really going to have to reconsider my ambivalence towards H.R. 218 (LEOSA,) since, while it does make me a sort of "super-citizen" special class, at least it is in effect and likely to remain so, while any further attempts to broaden carry rights on a nationwide scale seem doomed to defeat, what with the combined opposition from both the antis and many who would normally be considered "pros." (Heck, the opposition from the "pros" is doubly effective in defeating such things, as the antis get the added bonus of saying "Look!! Even the gun nuts don't agree with this insanity!!")
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:48:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By klinc:

Originally Posted By the_naked_prophet:
Originally Posted By klinc:

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
You know, finding the text of this bill was not hard, and I suggest that the naysayers actually take a minute and read it:



There is nothing in there, nothing at all, that will apply federal control or oversight to how any state issues permits.


You shutup with your facts and all...




THIS BILL IS FUCKING USELESS! WE GIVE UP EVERYTHING AND GAIN ALMOST NOTHING IN RETURN!




Not really, but maybe make it bigger font then I will agree with you.


I thought maybe you didn't see it. What is the benefit again? How does it help anybody?
Link Posted: 9/30/2011 7:49:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By scotchymcdrinkerbean:
I think I'm going to start lobbying my Congressman and Senators to write a bill eliminating national reciprocity for CDLs, and to let those of us in states that don't license people to drive under a certain age refuse to recognize DLs issued by other states to younger folks.


Don't forget marraige licenses. Move to a new state? Go go fill out the proper paperwork and pay the man. Walla! now married in your new state.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top