National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

[aray]

An absolutely excellent bill has been introduced into the House this week by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL). The bill, HR 822, would allow for national reciprocity with all other states that permit CCW if you have a CCW permit in your home state. It's not going to help residents of the two no-carry states and won't help much in the eight may-carry states (including where I live Maryland), but for the bulk of the country (40 states) it will be a Very Good Thing indeed.

They're hoping to attach it to a piece of must-pass legislation, e.g. the continuing resolution extension or something similar. I strongly urge you all to contact your Congressional representative and ask them to support HR 822.

The NRA has been busy working with the folks on Capitol Hill. Current text of the bill is as follows:

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

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

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:
‘‘§ 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.

[Dietrich]

Thanks for posting,Ray and I will be giving my elected officials an email.Do you have any insight as to the chances of passage?

[PaiN]

Thank you Ray, I hope you don't mind if spread this information around locally.

[jocko]

I think they almost got this bill passed a year ago but it died in the senate by I think only one vote difference. It might have a decent chance this time. they definitely need to simplfy this carry thing. I wish just the states would straighten this out themselves but they seem reluctant to do so. I hate to see the government stepping in and doing what each state should be doing. I really want the government out of my life.

[MrToad]

The simplification is a logical step. Imagine if drivers licenses didn't offer reciprocity. I'm pretty sure driving a car isn't a Constitutional right...

[windsearcher]

I would really love to see this happen!! Would make it so much easier for me to travel up and down the East Coast!!

[Longitude Zero]

This needs to pass for the states that have citizens with CCW. The others...I am glad I don't nor ever will live there.

[JohnR]

I hope there aren't any unintended consequences to this, such as federal funding based on whether a State licenses concealed carry or not. As soon as you let the Federal camel's nose into the tent, he ends up all the way inside.

[jocko]

exactly what I feel, I want the federal guvernment out of my life. These states ghave been slwoly working it out amoungst themselves.

[OldLincoln]

I am a strong supporter of States Rights, but some things really are needed to be universal across all states. When a passenger of a missed or canceled connection flight is automatically violating a state law because of a CCW in the luggage is just plain wrong. The states aren't even looking at this one. If the Feds want to regulate guns they would do it regardless of other laws.

I like the example of drivers licenses. Apply the CCW issues to that and it goes South in a hurry. Each state has their own driving laws, but allow you to drive with another state's license. Same should apply with CCW.

[Jeremiah/Az]

You know Cal. & New York will fight this tooth & nail & they have a lot of votes, even if it does not apply to them. I'll bet this gets Bloomberg's panties in a wad!

[aray]

Thanks for posting,Ray and I will be giving my elected officials an email.Do you have any insight as to the chances of passage?

The bill is in the House Judiciary Committee at the moment. They're off this week. I'm told it probably won't get heard for a couple of weeks at best.

I'm also told that the authors of this are serious. They are knowledgable and intend for this to pass judicial review. And, it has a severability clause (unlike the stupid Health Care Bill - HA!) so if parts are struck down the rest remains.

If you read the bill carefully you'll note that it permits *residents* of states to carry in any other state that offers CCW permits at the highest level that state offers. That means those of you who have a home resident state permit can carry in *any other state* except the two no-issue states (Illinois and Wisconsin). Yes, that means you can carry even in Maryland since *some* people (politically connected and very rare "good and substantial" cases) can get permits here in my state. That includes New Jersey. That includes New York. Indeed it includes all eight "may issue" states.

What it *won't* do is help residents of a state that cannot get a permit in their own home state. So, for example, the rest of you will be able to carry in Maryland but as a Maryland state resident with a non-resident Florida permit I cannot. It does not force states to change their laws concerning their own citizens. It just forces them to recognize other states' resident permits.

So you see this is very much like a driver's license. Congress can't make Maryland issue me a license as an individual but it can force Maryland to recognize a license issued in Texas, for example.

In previous years, earlier versions of the bill (and versions that were not crafted as well as it is this year!) failed in the Senate by two votes. But that was prior to the November elections so chances are improved. Even so, it might face a veto by Obama. I think everyone agrees the key to success is if they can attach it to a must-pass piece of legislation, such as the continuing resolution or a budget bill. Then Obama would be forced to sign it. Happens to presidents all the time.

This is an amazing bill. Support it. Call your Congressman and urge them to support HR-822.


Thank you Ray, I hope you don't mind if spread this information around locally.

By all means. The more folks know about this the better for us all.

[aray]

You know Cal. & New York will fight this tooth & nail & they have a lot of votes, even if it does not apply to them. I'll bet this gets Bloomberg's panties in a wad!

It certainly applies at the state level. Dunno about NYC. States are still allowed to restrict *where* guns can be carried, as long as it applies to everyone. For example if a state says you can't carry in a restaurant that serves alcohol even if you're not drinking, this bill does not overrule such restrictions. However if *anyone* can carry unrestricted in NYC, then NYC must allow residents who hold CCW permits in their own home state to do the same. (I'm just not familiar with NYC laws and if they allow *any* CCW or if the city is no-issue to all.)

Of course no doubt Bloomberg will instruct his police and his prosecutors to arrest and put on trial the first guy through the pipeline. I wouldn't want to be that guy. Even if you win, after years of legal fees, you'll be bankrupt, no doubt as Bloomberg intends. Pretty big deterrent. Now being the guy *after* that is all successfully resolved ... that's another matter!

Anyway, the NRA is doing good stuff in Congress. For me here in Maryland, we're still having to bank on the Second Amendment Foundation and their court challenges to restrictive state carry laws. Proper tool for the proper job...

[jocko]

I think ifit got to obama,he wold sign it to. That would be to hot to not do it with election coming on. If the house and sentae pass it, my feelins is that it will make it through the whitehouse.
Hopefully his political career is on borrowed time anyhow..

[gkstemple]

I'd rather the States could have agreed to do this themselves, and many have, but some are being, to use an old-fahsioned legal term, POOPHEADS about it. There are plenty of horror stories about air travelers being arested due to Airline Scheduling/Rerouting issues (no fault of the traveler) (as well as others transporting firearms in Federal-Law-Legal manner) and the toll will continue to mount until there is nationwide recognition. We've had enough. Unfortunately, only Big Brother can enforce "Y'all WILL play nice".

IL and WI will not be impacted, as they do NOT (as of now) allow their subjects concealed carry.

It would be nice of Residents there to inundate their Federal Legislators with requests that they support the bill, as their friends in other states (that's the rest of us!) would greatly benefit as they cross state borders in their daily lives. It's fodder for another thread, but they should also inundate their State Legislaors with phone calls, emails, personal visits and -- dare I say it -- Demonstrations in the Capitol Building to get action on bills already introduced to allow concealed carry in their state(s)!

Major opposition is expected from Federal Legislators whose states recognize no carry licenses/permits except their own. With some exceptions, those states are clustered in the Northeast section of the US and are "may issue" states.

Residents there (especially those lucky enough to have those rare permits) should let their Congress-critters know how much this law would simplify their daily lives and how much safer it would make them.

Since I live very close to one of those states, their Congressman from the district nearest me will find out by email and phone that I will spend more money in his state if the bill passes and why I wil continue to avoid doing so if it does not.

Your email and phone call to your Congressional representative could be the ONE that tips the vote.

Thanks.

Gary

[jocko]

Illinois is getting very close to passing a ccw. It will happen there maybe not this year or next but it will happen..

[aray]

Illinois is getting very close to passing a ccw. It will happen there maybe not this year or next but it will happen..

And when it does let's hope that it is not like Maryland, a "may issue" state that requires documentation of a "good and substantial" reason before you can get a permit. Trouble is the Maryland State Police's official policy is that individual self defense is neither "good" nor "substantial".

[aray]

FYI I'm told the bill is not attached to the House Continuing Resolution. While the Senate version is, most likely it will not be on any joint CR coming out of conference. So most likely we're looking at a stand-alone bill or attached to some other piece of legislation.

[mr surveyor]

don't get too excited about this bill. Sure it's intent is to make the question of reciprocity go away...semantics at best. Yes, it's a PITA to have to research a bit to find which states currently honor your state's permit, and would make it mandatory for the others to suddenly accept your permit, but it will NOT take away the fact that each state still has it's own rules. These include what you carry, how many you carry, how you carry, where you can and can not carry, and in some states includes what ammo you can carry. The amount of research as to how to stay legal ain't going away.

Not that I'm against national reciprocity, but I can see how the Fed can stick it's finger in the **** to plug a leak and end up busting the **** completely. If they get a foothold in where we can carry, even though thid bill is offered in good faith apparantly, it could ultimately result in a second phase to make carry laws homogenous across the nation. I can't imagine Texas carry laws having to be compromised by those of NY, NJ, CA, etc.

I smell the rats in the shadows.

surv

[jocko]

lets not knock this until it happens. It will be better than it presently is now and tweeking of the bill might have to be done. I said at the beginning I wish the states could have worked this out amuongst themselves, which many have and more would of insteadof the federal government again meddling in STATES affairs. Who knows maybe whent he time comes to vote on the bill the fokking democrtas will run out of state and hole up somewhere. That seems to be the norm with them anymore..

[tv_racin_fan]

I smell the rats in the shadows.

surv

I smell snakes...

[kramm]

I'm afraid that if the fed. gets into to this they will come up with regulations we don't want, maybe something to do with obtaining a permit in the first place. Could be all kinds of strings attached.

[jocko]

my exact reason for not wanting the government involved. Hell those bastards could just tack on a fee over your existing carry permit and then they have your in their records also as a gun owner. FOKK um.

[gkstemple]

If the Feds hadn't stepped in, we'd need at least road tax stickers on our vehicles for every state we drive into. Maybe even an expensive Non-resident Operators licence for each state also, if the state decided to require that.

How much is the add-on Federal fee for your State Driver License?

If you've ever bought a firearm from a FFL dealer, bought a hunting license, registered a firearm so you could bring it onto a military base, wrote to your state or federal legislators about firearms legislation, posted on any of the many firearms forums on the internet, identified your firearms on those posts AND you still think you are not on anyone's database as at least a probable firearm owner, then you must still believe in the tooth fairy too.

Many on this forum are lucky enough to live hundreds, or even upward of a thousand miles from a state where their permit is not recognized by another state that does allow (at least some) citizens to carry. Congratulations on your good fortune. Perhaps that explains a lot.

Others on this forum have the Not-in-MY-state-you-don't problem less than 5 miles from their front door.

If you think it's a PITA to have to remember where you can carry in your own state, try crossing into that "not-here" state, disarming yourself and securing weapon and ammo to suit their regulations as you go about your daily lives -- Even if you don't work IN that state, but pass thru it to get to work -- Even if you're taking a family member to urgent medical care . . . I'm gonna quit right here.

Gary

[jocko]

any federal mandate is not going to ver ride a state like Illinois or Wisconsin who has no ccw permits PERIOD

Do u work for the fedral government???

[kramm]

Theres really no comparison between a drivers license and the 2a.

[gkstemple]

any federal mandate is not going to ver ride a state like Illinois or Wisconsin who has no ccw permits PERIOD

Do u work for the fedral government???

1. Agreed. That's up to the residents there. This bill doesn't change that.

2. No, I don't work for the Feds. I barely even remember sleeping in a Holiday Inn, a long, long time ago -- or was that in a hollow log for a day --

Anyhow. . .

Thirteen US areas don’t recognize any state’s permit/license except their own: CA, CT, Guam, HI, MA, MD, NJ, NY, NYC (not even a NY permit!), OR, RI, PR, VI.

Twelve US States honor, or appear to honor, permits/licenses from ALL states: AK, AZ, IA, ID, IN, KY, MO, OK, SD, TN, UT, VT.

Five US areas do not issue concealed carry permits/licenses to their subjects: D.C., the states of IL and WI, the Pacific Islands of American Samoa and the Northern Marianas. It’s up to residents there to effect change.




Theres really no comparison between a drivers license and the 2a.

Agreed, to the point that a RIGHT should not require license. Unfortunately that is not the world we live in in most of the US today. There is movement in that direction, but it is Almighty Slow.

Both carrying a concealed firearm and driving a vehicle are acts involving some degree of hazzard. Individual states set the rules for both activities, and there is not total uniformity between the various states on exactly how a permit/license is obtained for either activity. It doesn't seem like too much of a stretch that if they can universally accept in good faith another state's word that an individual is cleared by them to drive, then they should accept in good faith that they are cleared to carry a concealed firearm.

JMO.

[gagnejs8]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-822


See if one of your home state politicians is on this committee and email them!

[aray]

And here's another link to the list of co-sponsors for H.R. 822: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:HR00822:@@@N

If your representative is not on this list, I urge you to call or email them and ask that they not just vote for the bill, but they co-sponsor it as well. That will add support to the bill and get it ready for ...

This bill won't pass the Senate by itself (anti-2A members will fillibuster). But it can be attached as an amendment to other legislation, if the House Leadership sees enough support in their own chamber (hence the co-sponsors).

I wouldn't worry too much about strings. You can see the plain text of the bill itself. It's pretty straightforward and the NRA has been involved in helping craft the language of the bill.

And I agree with Gary's comments above. For those of you fortunate to live in regions of the country where there is no threat to the 2A and to CCW, God bless you. But other areas of the country and fellow US citizens are not so fortunate. This is one baby step, but an important one nevertheless, to advance the 2A to all locations.

FYI the latest title of H.R. 822 is "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011". It is currently in the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. But your Congressional member does not have to be on that committee to co-sponsor the bill.

[aray]

Latest update: I'm told there is movement to try to attach this to the bill raising the debt ceiling limit. Since they'll have to address that one way or the other by early July, now is the time to call your Congresscritter and ask them to become a co-sponsor. The more that do, the more likely this bill will be attached as an amendment to the must-pass debt bill.

[earle8888]

WOW!!!!!
I will have to ponder!!!
The very mention of Government,(federal), my hackles go UP!
The old line" I'm from the government and I'm here to help you" still rings in my head.
That said, the battle over states rights, and any fed legislation to over-ride they're authority for standards and requirements for CCW would be Biblical in scope!

[Bill K]

Writing my Connecticut representatives has been a complete waste of my time (and I've tried many times over many years). The responses, when I've gotten them, have all been form letters/emails "personalized" with my name. The only productive way to communicate to them is at the voting booth.

Bill K.

[aray]

Yeah, I'm a big states rights sorta guy too, but as has been posted previously in this thread you can look at this like a driver's license. What a mess if we had to get separate DLs for each state into which we drive, or if some states didn't recognize other states' DLs. I think the federal government does have a role (although very limited to be sure) in ensuring inter-state recognition of certain activities.

Some have expressed concern that it would mess up states that already have good CCW laws, but if you look at the language it is carefully and narrowly scripted. The NRA helped to draft the language of this bill. It's not retrograde motion. What it will do, for example, is allow those of you who have resident CCW permits in your own state to carry in my own state of Maryland, because the law says a state has to recognize other states' resident CCW permits up to the level that the original state issues permits for itself.

So it is not going to override a state's right to be a NO issue state (e.g. Illinois) - they would still be a no issue state. But in MAY issue states (like MD) if they allow *anyone* to carry then they must recognize the permits of other states as well (something MD does not now do).

Note this won't help me out at all, since MD is not required to change its own laws & regulations about how and when it issues resident permits (which in this case means mostly the politically connected, or people who carry cash or drugs for business). But it would help anyone who visits states such as MD.

[jdlott74]

Thanks for posting,Ray and I will be giving my elected officials an email.Do you have any insight as to the chances of passage?

It will be interesting to see if it passes. Let's hope it isn't put in with someone else.

Course, my husband has both NC and TX. Prefer TX so much better. All you have to do in NC is HIT the target ANYWHERE to qualify. Such a FREAKING joke. TX is so much harder. Course NC is ASS BACKWARDS about everything anyway.

[ltxi]

WOW!!!!!
I will have to ponder!!!
The very mention of Government,(federal), my hackles go UP!
The old line" I'm from the government and I'm here to help you" still rings in my head.
That said, the battle over states rights, and any fed legislation to over-ride they're authority for standards and requirements for CCW would be Biblical in scope!

"I'm from the (federal) government and I'm here to help you" is one of my favorite lines. This year will be my 50th year anniversary for that deal. Walked in that front door July 7th, 1961 and I'm still working on it.

[gkstemple]

Events below MIGHT result in two more states with some form of carry system. Stay tuned.

1. Lawsuit filed in IL (by NRA). Seems an IL resident with carry permits in TWO other states was nearly beaten to death IN IL, where she could not carry. Their proposed carry bill isn't Completely Dead (yet) for this legislative session either. Stay tuned for final results on this One-Two punch.

2. Wisconsin has Personal Protection Act proposals moving toward introduction, both constitutional and permit required. BTW, Open Carry is legal for WI Residents but usually attracts law enforcement attention and may result in a disturbing the peace charge if a citizen was frightened enough by seeing the handgun to call 911. Let's see if this is the year that Wisconsin FINALLY gets their PPA signed into law.

Gary

[ltxi]

IL is a significant "passing through" state by road along northern cross country. I'd really like to see them fix their carry issue. Until then, I'll do what I've always done.

[aray]

Hearings have begun in the House. Fox News reports on it here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/13/house-weighs-bill-to-make-gun-permits-valid-across-state-lines/

[pappy42]

I don't think that we need a law to grant us the right to keep and bear arms.

[MikeyKahr]

Pappy you're thinking too constitutionally.

Sent using Tapatalk

[aray]

Well for some of you this is all a moot point, if you live in a "good" state & never travel to a "bad" one. For others who travel more widely, or who are in states that have passed what we would all deem as unconstitutional laws, this bill helps. And FYI those states will arrest, prosecute, and convict those who break such laws. On a very practical matter the 2A isn't going to help much from a jail cell in certain locations. Finally, even if you live in a good state but make the mistake of traveling to a bad state (like mine for example) a firearms conviction here might well cause you to lose your license in your own home state.

This bill won't solve the whole problem, but it is one brick in a larger structure.

[wyntrout]

My daughter and family live in the People's Democratic Republic of Illinois, so that's where we go to see them and get together with my son who lives in Ohio. I have to leave my Constitutional Rights... and "Inalienable Rights" at the state border.

Only the criminals have rights there... to carry whatever weapons they desire as they ply their chosen "trade".:( I guess that's a big part of the "Social Justice" and wealth redistribution scheme.

It would be nice if the People would get rid of the corruption in Chicago and "Crook County", but wait, one of their "OWN" is the POTUS... and one of his big buddies is the D.A.!

Wynn:(

[sierrajb]

Totally agree with this bill! The license to bear should carry the same freedom as the license to drive. Good point!

[Scoundrel]

How are they addressing the "stated reason" that some states do not have reciprocity with others? I am talking specifically of the training requirement. Some states will not do reciprocity with another state because the "home state" has a training requirement, and the neighbor state does not. Some the home state feels that the neighbor state is handing out permits too easily, and does not honor them.

[OldLincoln]

I suspect they will do as usual and accept as a requirement the most restrictive state rules. Next I wonder what they'll do about carry guns. If you get reciprocal carry rights, seems a roadblock if you can't carry what's listed on your home state permit. So, naturally, they will say for anybody to have a permit they have to follow the most restrictive state's gun requirements.

Then of course they will want a federal $200 fee on top of the home state fee. So you can kiss goodby the permanent carry ticket for a 1-2 year limit with another $200 fed fee.

Perhaps Jocko is right about all this. Personally, I rarely travel out of CA so as long as I get by here I shouldn't complain. But it bugs me reading about the stuff others go through to take a trip.

[Scoundrel]

That does sound like slippery slope time.

[JFootin]

I'll bet Rick Perry will straiten this out when he becomes president.

[TheTman]

I got this letter in my inbox from nationalgunrights.org this morning regarding the bill:


Dear XXXXXXXX,

"I'm worried.

Some well-meaning, but in my opinion very misguided pro-gunners are working to pass a bill that could turn into a Trojan Horse for more gun control.

Of course, I'm talking about H.R. 822, the so-called "National Reciprocity Act," which could open the flood gates of gun control.

I'm calling it the National CCW Registration Act.

While the idea that all states should recognize a concealed weapons permit is sound public policy, the use of the anti-gun federal bureaucracy to implement it is simply foolish.

Once the Federal Government is in the business of setting the standards for concealed carry permits, it's only a matter of time before they start using that power to restrict our rights.

Now you may hear arguments that this bill doesn't do that, and maybe that's true ... for now.

Even worse, once this bill starts moving, anyone can amend the bill with anything ... and no legislation can bind a future Congress in any way. And that doesn't count what Obamacrats in the Department of Justice might dream up as the "regulations" to carry out the legislative "intent."

I know many of you are frustrated that you can carry in some states but not others -- I'm frustrated, too.

I carry concealed every day, everywhere I go, and have worked to expand the ability of citizens to carry in dozens of states.

I believe I should be able to carry concealed -- without a permit -- in all 50 states. That's what "bear arms" means. Believe me, that's a long-term policy goal for the National Association for Gun Rights.

But mark my words, H.R. 822, the National CCW Registration Act, will become nothing more than a Trojan Horse for even more federal gun control.

I understand that many who support this bill sincerely just want their right to carry respected -- but cannot due to the fact that their state or another won't do the right thing.

But the devil is truly in the details... and the details are where H.R. 822 gets sticky.

This bill isn't just about the right to carry for self defense -- it's a battle over the role of government and the ability to restrict our Second Amendment rights.

Once gun owners let the Obamacrats start mandating whether states recognize permit reciprocity, they will want to mandate what it takes to get and keep those permits.

We're talking about:


More onerous standards to acquire a permit, so that only FBI agents can pass muster (look at New York's permit system);
Higher fees;
More training requirements;
A demonstration of "Need" for a permit;
More frequent renewal periods;
Federally-mandated waiting periods;
A national database of all permit holders, accessible by Attorney General Eric Holder;
An extensive, federally-created list of Criminal Safezones, where only criminals will carry and where law-abiding gun owners are vulnerable;
The list of potential problems is endless.
Not to mention this legislation would shred the Constitutional Carry provisions that are on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

It doesn't stop with just concealed carry. They'll co-opt the bill to expand the national Brady Registration Check system to block military veterans with PTSD or individuals with misdemeanor convictions from even OWNING firearms -- much less use them for self defense.

I don't believe the intentions of the bill sponsors are intrinsically bad -- they're just naive and misguided.

Many statists in Washington will co-opt H.R. 822 as part of their grab for more federal power and less individual liberty.

Even now, the statists in Congress are trying to adopt a National ID card, complete with biometric data that they've forced the states to conform to their mandated drivers license "standards." The National Association for Gun Rights has been part of a group of liberty-minded organizations that have passed state legislation forbidding cooperation with the federal National ID.

While many in the institutional gun control lobby will tell you this is a step forward for CCW permit holders, make no mistake, the National CCW Registration Act is a misguided attempt to protect our rights.

It's like asking the fox to guard the hen house.

They will use this bill as the foundation to create a federal database of CCW permit holders. And then they can link it everywhere the Feds have database connections -- state police, doctors and insurance companies under Obamacare, and Medicaid/Medicare.

I'm sorry, but I refuse to entrust my liberty and privacy to a "trust us, they won't do that "approach to dealing with Obama, the gun-grabbers or frankly most politicians of either party in Washington.

I need you to make some noise, right now!

Not tomorrow. Not later today. RIGHT NOW."


They follow it with a way to contact your congress person and ask them to vote against it. I too thought it was a great idea at the time, but do we really want the federal govt. monkeying around with our CC permits?

[aray]

I disagree with the nationalgunrights.org email.

None of their fears are in the legislation. They're inventing hypothetical problems that don't exist. And if someone tried to make such amendments, the bill would fail with them. They'd never become law that way (such riders are called poison pills for a reason).

Anyone can amend any bill (in theory) with any of the unfounded fears cited above; you don't need this particular bill to do that, so the presence or absence of this bill is sorta irrelevant as far as their concerns are related.

In addition some of their stated fears contradict other Federal law, e.g. the FOPA.

Bottom line: we have a bill. It is a clean bill and will almost certainly pass the House as-is. If per chance it becomes law it will advance the cause of gun rights and reciprocity for lawful permit holders to travel to other states without fear of arrest. It's no more complex than that.

[JFootin]

I disagree with the nationalgunrights.org email.

None of their fears are in the legislation. They're inventing hypothetical problems that don't exist. And if someone tried to make such amendments, the bill would fail with them. They'd never become law that way (such riders are called poison pills for a reason).

Anyone can amend any bill (in theory) with any of the unfounded fears cited above; you don't need this particular bill to do that, so the presence or absence of this bill is sorta irrelevant as far as their concerns are related.

In addition some of their stated fears contradict other Federal law, e.g. the FOPA.

Bottom line: we have a bill. It is a clean bill and will almost certainly pass the House as-is. If per chance it becomes law it will advance the cause of gun rights and reciprocity for lawful permit holders to travel to other states without fear of arrest. It's no more complex than that.

+1. If all the gun rights issues got solved by some good legislation, they would be out of the money making business. Better to keep crying wolf and creating fear.

[muggsy]

I still don't understand why I need a permit to exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right.

[Scoundrel]

I still don't understand why I need a permit to exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right.

You don't need a permit to carry a rifle on your shoulder. You just need one to hide a pistol in your pocket.

[TheTman]

HR 822 is already getting "massaged" by the anti-gunners.
From NatioinalGunRights.org

"As I type this, all-out war has been declared on your gun rights in Washington, D.C. by the House Judiciary Committee.

Your National Association for Gun Rights has been warning you that H.R. 822 is a Trojan Horse.

Just today, Republicans helped pass an amendment that orders the Feds to investigate the “safety” of mail-in CCW permits from states like Florida, Utah and New Hampshire.

If you possess a NH, FL or UT permit, the Feds are going to investigate if these permits are “safe.”

So-called “pro-gun” Republicans even KILLED an amendment that would have allowed permit holders to defend themselves in the District of Columbia, one of the most dangerous cities in the country.

Over the past two days, amendments have been offered to require REAL ID-type government requirements on state CCW permits as well as giving Eric Holder the power to classify even more gun owners as “terrorists.”

And while these amendments may have failed in the House, Harry Reid’s Senate is sure to put the screws to gun owners.

The Senate DOES have the votes to impose a HOST of anti-gun amendments to H.R. 822 much like they have done with legislation in the past.

While the institutional gun lobby has put its full support behind H.R. 822, gun owners just cannot afford for them to play poker with our gun rights.

I have listed the phone numbers for every Republican on the Judiciary Committee below. Please make as many calls as you can expressing your displeasure with H.R. 822, but do it quickly before this monster gets even worse.

-- Dudley

Please call these numbers and demand that H.R. 822 be defeated at all costs:


Rep.Lamar SmithR-TX202-225-4236Rep.Trent FranksR-AZ202-225-4576Rep.Darrell IssaR-CA202-225-3906Rep.Benjamin QuayleR-AZ202-225-3361Rep.Tim GriffinR-AZ202-225-2506Rep.Dan LungrenR-CA202-225-5716Rep.Elton GalleglyR-CA202-225-5811Rep.Dennis RossR-FL202-225-1252Rep.Sandy AdamsR-FL202-225-2706 Rep.Mike PenceR-IN202-225-3021Rep.Steve KingR-IA202-225-4426Rep.Howard CobleR-NC202-225-3065Rep.Jim JordanR-OH202-225-2676Rep.Steve ChabotR-OH202-225-2216Rep.Tom MarinoR-PA202-225-3731Rep.Trey GowdyR-SC202-225-6030Rep.Louie GohmertR-TX202-225-3035Rep.Ted PoeR-TX202-225-6565Rep.Jason ChaffetzR-UT202-225-7751Rep.Bob GoodlatteR-VA202-225-5431Rep.Randy ForbesR-VA202-225-6365Rep.James Sensenbrenner, Jr.R-WI202-225-5101

[muggsy]

I still don't understand why I need a permit to exercise a constitutional right. Can anyone of you legal eagles straighten me out on this point?

[Thunder71]

You have to prove you're a good, law abiding citizen, I guess?