National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill Drawn Up for Next Congress

[hv55maxx]

why is this thread full of people drooling over how to make a national LICENSE? or recipricol licensing? there should be no licensing period. are you in jail? no? then alright second amendment applies to you. are you in jail? yes? well you fu(ked up then. whats the old saying, what you tolerate, you validate? keep giving the libtards fodder to abuse. those pigs will eat sh!t all day long if you give it to em.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

why is this thread full of people drooling over how to make a national LICENSE? or recipricol licensing? there should be no licensing period.

We need to take small victories when we can get them. We are NOT going to get national constitutional carry - just ain't happenin.

It's like Lowell. Are residents better off because unconnected, unimportant people can now get an unrestricted LTC by jumping through a couple of hoops or should we have refused that deal and continued a scheme in which each ordinary applicant could spend a few thousand to file an almost certain to fail district court appeal? My guess is that those Lowellians with a restrictions:none in their wallet feel the situation has improved.

Simply put, we were able to get a deal that allows unimportant people to get unrestricted in Lowell for far less than the cost of a doomed legal appeal. If we held out for "shall issue, no essay or training beyond the statute required" we would still be hearing stories of the unconnected getting target permits in Lowell.

I know that if I am able to legally carry when visiting relatives in NY state I will consider it an improvement and not be overly upset that it is the result of having a license from MA.

 

[hv55maxx]

i understand and agree with the entire concept you mentioned Rob, and i too would like to see NY state suffer all of us miscreants carrying evil firearms over the border. But just like the libtards do, ask an inch take 10 effing miles, why start with "licensing" when you can throw ConCarry out there with majorities all around? who's gonna say no? we've lost our country to missed opportunities such as this and this should be a race to catch up.

 

[bigblue]

why is this thread full of people drooling over how to make a national LICENSE? or recipricol licensing? there should be no licensing period. are you in jail? no? then alright second amendment applies to you. are you in jail? yes? well you fu(ked up then. whats the old saying, what you tolerate, you validate? keep giving the libtards fodder to abuse. those pigs will eat sh!t all day long if you give it to em.

That's cute, let me know when your utopia catches up with the political reality of 2017. This country has taken huge strides for 2A in the last decade and we will continue to move forward but you aren't going to get Con Carry in 50 states by snapping your fingers: It takes hard work and ground-level support.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

why start with "licensing" when you can throw ConCarry out there with majorities all around? who's gonna say no?

A majority of the Republican dominated congress, that's who.

 

[wahsben]

Yes, but by supporting anything less the antis can point and say, see even gun owners support govt. control. Sadly our ancestors and us let the govt. take too much power and get away with too much.

That's cute, let me know when your utopia catches up with the political reality of 2017. This country has taken huge strides for 2A in the last decade and we will continue to move forward but you aren't going to get Con Carry in 50 states by snapping your fingers: It takes hard work and ground-level support.

- - - Updated - - -

This past election showed that people were tired of the majority of RINO's going along to get along with the democrats so maybe not.

A majority of the Republican dominated congress, that's who.

 

[firestorm]

i understand and agree with the entire concept you mentioned Rob, and i too would like to see NY state suffer all of us miscreants carrying evil firearms over the border. But just like the libtards do, ask an inch take 10 effing miles, why start with "licensing" when you can throw ConCarry out there with majorities all around? who's gonna say no? we've lost our country to missed opportunities such as this and this should be a race to catch up.

We don't have a majority of hardcore 2A people like ourselves. We could see national reciprocity in some form, but if we shoot for Full constitutional carry only we will get nothing. Democrats from down south might go for reciprocity, but there is no way to get enough support for no license carry everywhere. Its a process, get this and move from a position of strength.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, but by supporting anything less the antis can point and say, see even gun owners support govt. control. Sadly our ancestors and us let the govt. take too much power and get away with too much.



- - - Updated - - -

This past election showed that people were tired of the majority of RINO's going along to get along with the democrats so maybe not.

Except this isn't a go along to get along compromise, this isn't giving up rights we have to try and get back rights we used to have. This if done right will just force other states to accept your state carry license.

 

[wahsben]

If the rinos and dems keep flooding the country with people that don't support the RKBA we'll lose it all. Have you read this:http://www.ammoland.com/2016/12/stop...#axzz4UESc7tHE

We don't have a majority of hardcore 2A people like ourselves. We could see national reciprocity in some form, but if we shoot for Full constitutional carry only we will get nothing. Democrats from down south might go for reciprocity, but there is no way to get enough support for no license carry everywhere. Its a process, get this and move from a position of strength.

- - - Updated - - -



Except this isn't a go along to get along compromise, this isn't giving up rights we have to try and get back rights we used to have. This if done right will just force other states to accept your state carry license.

 

[firestorm]

If the rinos and dems keep flooding the country with people that don't support the RKBA we'll lose it all. Have you read this:http://www.ammoland.com/2016/12/stop...#axzz4UESc7tHE

Yup, and nobody here is asking for a federal permit. Having federal law forcing states to accept other states licenses takes away states rights (That aren't respected anyway) but does not give the feds any more control than they already have. If liberals take control and repeal the law then we are back where we started, but not worse off. Also take a look at how difficult it seems to be to repeal stuff, once its in it takes a lot of effort to get rid of things.

Can you give me an example of how this law, forcing state reciprocity will be worse than what we have now, which is no coverage in other states unless the states allow it?

 

[endus]

No one is willing to vote for the type of candidates that could get constitutional carry done. I am not saying this as a criticism (well, trying not to) but our elections are about the lesser of two evils. There is no will at the national level to vote for candidates who will substantially shake up the status quo. (Before anyone says it, even if you like him Trump is not a hardcore libertarian.)

Until that will exists we should try to improve the current system as much as we can. We are all living our lives in reality, not in some fantasy of what we would like it to be like.

I do wonder whether this may increase the prevalence of licensing systems where they do not exist or are relatively weak today, though.

How about repealing the FOPA? Now that would be something I would be very down with. It would be a great investment opportunity. I would buy as many lowers as I could, secure in the knowledge that it would almost certainly be reinstated by the next administration.

 

[mbullism]

This was F'd up in small steps over time... that's the only way it's getting "fixed" (read: "better")

 

[drgrant]

True, but nothing compared to the current situation of tens of thousands in legal fees and probably prison time in places like NY and NJ.

I certainly agree with that part, but my point is that they will still make it painful, and it will still be easy to rap someone with a disabling
felony (for example, some guy from NH that happens to drive into NY state with a so called "large capacity" magazine will still not have
any immunity. ) and they will probably come up with a bunch of other things to try to make the law unusable or get people on technicalities because they're not 100% within the protections of whatever this bill will offer. I doubt the protections are going to be wide and sweeping.

- - - Updated - - -

i understand and agree with the entire concept you mentioned Rob, and i too would like to see NY state suffer all of us miscreants carrying evil firearms over the border. But just like the libtards do, ask an inch take 10 effing miles, why start with "licensing" when you can throw ConCarry out there with majorities all around? who's gonna say no? we've lost our country to missed opportunities such as this and this should be a race to catch up.

Go buy some powerball tickets, your odds are better of winning that then ConCarry bill even getting out of committee in the house or senate.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Cops everywhere tend to get all pissy when they know that a lowly citizen is carrying a gun. I've mentioned it on here before, but the guy I took my first CC class from in Tennessee told us that it was state law that we had to notify a cop that we were carrying when we got pulled over. This was pre-internet, so researching laws sucked. I took him at his word. I was in my early 20's and tended to speed a wee little bit. I had exactly one experience of getting pulled over and notifying the cop that went reasonably well. I was doing the whole bit: turn on the interior light, have my DL and my CCL out in my hand while my hands were at 10 and 2. Tell the cop calmly that I was legally armed through the open window. A large percentage of the time it ended with "get out of the car, boy. I'm going to disarm you for your safety and mine. Then you've got a yokel with room temperature IQ fumbling around trying to retrieve an unfamiliar gun from your holster. You also get the fun of hoping some other yahoo driving by doesn't see a cop obviously pulling a gun off somebody and decide that today is the day he can be a hero. You run into cops that are jealous because you carry a nicer gun than they can afford and deliberately or ignorantly **** it up while trying to clear it. It's a giant PITA and actually dangerous for the person who is lawfully armed. I guarantee you that the cops in anti-gun states will make some of the Tennessee cops look like sweethearts if nationwide reciprocity went through.

The other fun one on top of that stuff is "we need to run the serial number on your gun to make sure it isn't stolen". Subjecting you to even more inconvenience and embarrassment.

-Mike

 

[AHM]

Concealed Means Concealed Dept.

... that little scenario doesn't pass the sniff test.

That's great, but that doesn't stop people from being harassed. These anti gun states don't care about paying out on lawsuits, and the average person that gets stuck in these traps isn't even going to be willing to go through with it.

What this world needs are some crack 2A lawyers who've managed to find a way to turn federal civil rights suits into a profit center.

There's also a bunch of other horseshit that they WILL get away with like "disarming someone temporarily for officer safety" etc... there are a myriad of things they can design as a nuisance during a stop to deter lawful activities.

Since 1968 Terry v. Ohio has granted cops nationwide the right to frisk (and disarm) someone they believe is armed and presently dangerous. The more attitude you emit, the greater the chance they'll think to check for a piece.

 

[firestorm]

Since 1968 Terry v. Ohio has granted cops nationwide the right to frisk (and disarm) someone they believe is armed and presently dangerous. The more attitude you emit, the greater the chance they'll think to check for a piece.

That plus as was said earlier there are too many morons (Read: too trusting citizens) who will quickly and happily announce to the cop without any prompting "I'M A CCW HOLDER, HERE IS MY LICENSE, I'M CARRYING NOW PLEASE TELL ME HOW TO PROCEED" Thinking they will get a good guy pat on the head from the cop.

Instead in those states they will get at best dragged out, disarmed, and hassled for a while. At worst they will get either arrested over something dumb like standard capacity mags, or catch a bullet because they were "armed and being aggressive, officer feared for his life and HAD to go home safe at the end of his shift."

 

[wahsben]

Getting the federal govt. involved even more is unlikely to work out as people think. Actually the liberals instead of repealing it will add on all kinds of common sense requirements because they know what's best for us.

Yup, and nobody here is asking for a federal permit. Having federal law forcing states to accept other states licenses takes away states rights (That aren't respected anyway) but does not give the feds any more control than they already have. If liberals take control and repeal the law then we are back where we started, but not worse off. Also take a look at how difficult it seems to be to repeal stuff, once its in it takes a lot of effort to get rid of things.

Can you give me an example of how this law, forcing state reciprocity will be worse than what we have now, which is no coverage in other states unless the states allow it?

 

[rwl1955]

states to honor concealed-carry laws
Adam Shaw

By Adam Shaw Published January 09, 2017 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print

Now Playing

Proposed bill eases burden of cross-state travel with guns

"Gun-rights groups have high hopes for a new bill looking to grant “national reciprocity” for Americans with concealed firearm permits, introduced just as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office.

The bill, put forward in the new Congress last week by Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., would allow gun owners with a state-issued concealed-carry license to have that license recognized in any other state that allows concealed carry. This also would apply to states that recognize so-called “constitutional carry” where a license is not required for a concealed handgun.

The goal, Hudson says, is to prevent gun owners from getting caught in a patchwork of state-by-state laws."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...high-hopes-for-national-reciprocity-bill.html

 

[RImike]

Does anyone have a link to the bills text?

 

[bigblue]

Getting the federal govt. involved even more is unlikely to work out as people think. Actually the liberals instead of repealing it will add on all kinds of common sense requirements because they know what's best for us.

This is my fear as well: That Dbags will take this bill and add "common sense" requirements for reciprocity like bg checks, waiting periods, baggage checks at state borders, CORI checks for traffic stops, etc...

 

[Len-2A Training]

This is my fear as well: That Dbags will take this bill and add "common sense" requirements for reciprocity like bg checks, waiting periods, baggage checks at state borders, CORI checks for traffic stops, etc...

Let me look at this logically.

- BG checks for what? CCW? They already do that before they issue a license.

- Waiting periods for what? To carry? Doesn't make sense.

- Wrt the above, "national concealed carry" is not national can buy anywhere! So the above is irrelevant.

- Baggage checks at state borders? Really??? Ever see the backups in rush hours? Nobody would get to work the same day! Just not possible.

- CORI checks for traffic stops? I don't know why people have "CORI" on the mind, CORI is a joke for employers, not real world BG check. Anytime you are stopped by the police they run a BOP and III . . . both show ANY charges and court activity in your lifetime, period (some states may not show juvie stuff however). TONS more comprehensive than a CORI. Already in place with or without any gun licenses, so irrelevant.

Please keep the arguments logical please rather than full of irrelevant "sky is falling" stuff?

 

[bigblue]

Let me look at this logically.

- BG checks for what? CCW? They already do that before they issue a license.

- Waiting periods for what? To carry? Doesn't make sense.

- Wrt the above, "national concealed carry" is not national can buy anywhere! So the above is irrelevant.

- Baggage checks at state borders? Really??? Ever see the backups in rush hours? Nobody would get to work the same day! Just not possible.

- CORI checks for traffic stops? I don't know why people have "CORI" on the mind, CORI is a joke for employers, not real world BG check. Anytime you are stopped by the police they run a BOP and III . . . both show ANY charges and court activity in your lifetime, period (some states may not show juvie stuff however). TONS more comprehensive than a CORI. Already in place with or without any gun licenses, so irrelevant.

Please keep the arguments logical please rather than full of irrelevant "sky is falling" stuff?

You seriously needs to google "facetious". You also have no grasp on what liberals will try next to restrict gun rights. None of this is irrelevant.

 

[RImike]

So I believe what I think is the intended bill here: http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/u...Carry-Reciprocity-Act-of-2017-Rep.-Hudson.pdf

 

[rwl1955]

You seriously needs to google "facetious". You also have no grasp on what liberals will try next to restrict gun rights. None of this is irrelevant.

*******
Liberal will try anything to restrict our rights but the question is will their attempts be a waste of time. As Len stated the posters concerns are the least of our worries.

 

[bigblue]

So I believe what I think is the intended bill here: http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/u...Carry-Reciprocity-Act-of-2017-Rep.-Hudson.pdf

If that is what this is, passing it is a waste of time since it wouldn't over-ride any existing state laws:

"8 ‘‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any
9 State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided
10 in subsection (b))"

"This section shall not be construed to supersede
5 or limit the laws of any State that—
6 ‘‘(1) permit private persons or entities to pro-
7 hibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms
8 on their property; or
9 ‘‘(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of fire-
10 arms on any State or local government property, in-
11 stallation, building, base, or park."


What is the point of reciprocity if states can ignore it at will?

 

[Len-2A Training]

You seriously needs to google "facetious". You also have no grasp on what liberals will try next to restrict gun rights. None of this is irrelevant.

I certainly do have a grasp on what liberals will try next. I was in all those hearings where Cheryl Jacques and Angus (Barf - I actually was in a discussion with him and Chief Glidden) and even John Rosenthal (I did try talking with him, what a waste of time) proposed (and eventually got passed) the Gun Control Act of 1998, etc.

Yes, Linsky will try his insurance/gun bill, etc. But reality is that most of those moonbat activities by people like him and the above-mentioned people get no traction in the state house.

I address the moonbat things when they occur and things like this WILL be filed by them regardless of any reciprocity bill or not, they do it every session.

Now to the points I made:

- No elected official is going to sanction stopping all traffic crossing state borders for a gun search? Seriously it would stop employees from getting to work and impact the economy to such a degree that those politicians that voted for something like this would be driven out of office by "political pressure" from companies on both sides of the borders. Also no police department has the manpower to do this nor would they. I'm not certain that the courts would rule that this was Unconstitutional but it certainly should be.

- How do you require/do BG checks for crossing the border? No Fed court would stand for that. Even the Big Zero believes in "open borders" as do the Democrats, so closing the state borders would be political suicide. After all how could all the welfare rats migrate? (only somewhat tongue in check)

- As I stated, with more sophisticated software and wireless communication, running BG checks on car stops has been ongoing for years now. Nothing new, which means no real change even if put into a national concealed carry law.

All this said from both sides, realize that you have republican majorities in all 3 houses, and all politicians primary job is to get elected and re-elected, so they aren't going to do all those things you fear. I call that a political reality.

 

[bigblue]

*******
Liberal will try anything to restrict our rights but the question is will their attempts be a waste of time. As Len stated the posters concerns are the least of our worries.

The point of my post was to point out that you really don't know what they will try to tack on to a bill once it is passed. Len's myopic view based on the current situation is completely irrelevant to what they may try to do in the future. My post was intentionally absurd in an effort to point out some of these possibilities.

 

[MachineHead]

If that is what this is, passing it is a waste of time since it wouldn't over-ride any existing state laws:

"8 ‘‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any
9 State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided
10 in subsection (b))"

"This section shall not be construed to supersede
5 or limit the laws of any State that—
6 ‘‘(1) permit private persons or entities to pro-
7 hibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms
8 on their property; or
9 ‘‘(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of fire-
10 arms on any State or local government property, in-
11 stallation, building, base, or park."


What is the point of reciprocity if states can ignore it at will?

This really is useless, then. This bill needs teeth (withholding of federal funds for noncompliance) or it needs to strike out the above. Hopefully someone in the news with a bigger microphone than any of us have will call this out.

 

[firestorm]

This really is useless, then. This bill needs teeth (withholding of federal funds for noncompliance) or it needs to strike out the above. Hopefully someone in the news with a bigger microphone than any of us have will call this out.

It has teeth, although a bit weak, allowing you to sue for damages after the fact if wrongly arrested. The quoted section basically says that current state laws on things like where you can and cannot carry are not overriden by the new law. So in a lot of states you as a nonresident still cannot carry where signs have the force of law and say no guns, or where you aren't allowed to carry in a bar.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

What is the point of reciprocity if states can ignore it at will?

The law would give someone with a CCW in any state the same rights as the holder of a CCW in a state in which they are visiting.

Even "non-issue" states like HI and NJ have a CCW permit law on the books. Under the new federal law, if enacted, a MA LTC holder would have the same rights as a retired NJ cop who obtained a NJ carry permit (ie, general carry in public). Persons carrying in NJ would have to abide by the same restrictions as NJ permit holders (no hollow points) and persons carrying CT would have to abide by that state's capacity limit.

What the federal law does not do is override "CCW permit not valid zones" - which is most states means schools and, in some states, means police stations/posted places/sports arenas etc.

Compare that to what happens now if you are caught carrying in NJ with a MA, but no NJ, carry permit.

 

[strangenh]

I think someone may be stumbling on the meaning of "notwithstanding" - it means the opposite of what it looks like. It means, essentially, "despite."