Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Carry Issues (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1341193)

mervstump 05-07-2011 18:51

National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011
 
This bill (HR 822) was introduced by Cliff Stearns in February of this year. It essentially requires that any state which allows concealed carry recognize concealed carry permits from all other states. There may be a few issues with it but on the whole it sounds good. I just checked the status of the bill and it currently has 200 co-sponsors so it just may have a chance. Write your congressman. BTW you can check the status of the bill (and find out if your congressman is a sponsor at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...112HR.lst:@@@X

Merv

TangoFoxtrot 05-08-2011 04:53

Already did! But I don't think it stands a chance in hell.

firefighter4215 05-08-2011 04:57

I'd like to see it pass, but hasn't this been introduced and failed several times in the past?

RussP 05-08-2011 05:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by mervstump (Post 17313588)
This bill (HR 822) was introduced by Cliff Stearns in February of this year. It essentially requires that any state which allows concealed carry recognize concealed carry permits from all other states. There may be a few issues with it but on the whole it sounds good. I just checked the status of the bill and it currently has 200 co-sponsors so it just may have a chance. Write your congressman. BTW you can check the status of the bill (and find out if your congressman is a sponsor at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...112HR.lst:@@@X

Merv

What do you see as the issues with it?

RussP 05-08-2011 06:08

H.R.822 -- National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 (Introduced in House - IH)

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.

glock30user 05-08-2011 06:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by RussP (Post 17315060)
What do you see as the issues with it?

As much as I would enjoy being to carry anywhere…it is a violation of states rights.

Darqnezz 05-08-2011 06:32

I like it.

firemedic1343 05-08-2011 06:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by glock30user (Post 17315104)
As much as I would enjoy being to carry anywhere…it is a violation of states rights.

Yeah, and blanket refusal of a persons right to bear arms is a violation of ones constitutional right.

snubfan 05-08-2011 06:41

This is a horrible thing and we do not want it to happen! Be careful what you wish for...let the states handle this.

HexHead 05-08-2011 06:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by glock30user (Post 17315104)
As much as I would enjoy being to carry anywhere…it is a violation of states rights.

How do you figure? State's have to recognize other state's drivers and marriage licenses.

joker42179 05-08-2011 06:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by HexHead (Post 17315205)
How do you figure? State's have to recognize other state's drivers and marriage licenses.



this.....

snubfan 05-08-2011 07:15

What about when the .gov starts throwing in a few "common sense" requirements or blanket restrictions. How would you like a national ten round mag limit or no carry of those "cop killer" hollow points? No church carry?(Which is a restiction in my state but not in all.) National age requirement of 23 to get a permit.(like Missouri, I believe) Just a few here to start but I'm sure we could come up with more.

If you want to push for something at the national level, push for National Constitutional Carry.

RussP 05-08-2011 07:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by snubfan (Post 17315293)
What about when the .gov starts throwing in a few "common sense" requirements or blanket restrictions. How would you like a national ten round mag limit or no carry of those "cop killer" hollow points? No church carry?(Which is a restiction in my state but not in all.) National age requirement of 23 to get a permit.(like Missouri, I believe) Just a few here to start but I'm sure we could come up with more.

It would not be if that would happen, but how soon.
Quote:

Originally Posted by snubfan (Post 17315293)
If you want to push for something at the national level, push for National Constitutional Carry.

Anything legislated can be amended. And, for certain, the Judicial Branch would be working overtime "interpreting" the law.

The Machinist 05-08-2011 07:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by glock30user (Post 17315104)
As much as I would enjoy being to carry anywhere…it is a violation of states rights.

That was my immediate thought, but then again, states don't have a right to strip the lawful among us of our right to carry concealed.

BailRecoveryAgent 05-08-2011 08:05

As much as I like the idea of national reciprocity, I'd also like the federal government to have less control over matters of the state. Like snubfan said, magazine and ammo restrictions and such would also likely be implimented by the govt again, and we all remember 1994-2004.

If there was language in the legislation that prevented the govt from implementing such nationwide restrictions, and just made the carriers abide by each individual states laws of which wording for is already in it, then I think it would be much better.

I like my Washington State gun laws and don't want to be forced to abide by California/Massachusets/NY/NJ type laws in my home state 51 weeks out of the year so that I can carry on vacation for one.

Dragoon44 05-08-2011 09:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by HexHead (Post 17315205)
How do you figure? State's have to recognize other state's drivers and marriage licenses.

States do not have to recognize drivers licenses from other states. They do so through a voluntary interstate compact not because of any federal law.

Though how "voluntary" it was is questionable since The federal Govt. threatened to withhold highway funds from any state that did not "voluntarily" join into the compact.

Dragoon44 05-08-2011 09:10

Issues like this reveal who really believes in rights and who just wants to get their way regardless of the cost.

The same people that bemoan an overreaching federal Govt. when that Govt. does something they don't like suddenly become ardent Federalists when that same govt. will give them what they want.

snubfan 05-08-2011 09:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by RussP (Post 17315452)
It would not be if that would happen, but how soon.Anything legislated can be amended. And, for certain, the Judicial Branch would be working overtime "interpreting" the law.

I should have explained myself better on my Constitutional carry comment. My understanding of the states that have it is that they basicly acknowledge the second amendment for what it is. It would be nice if every state and the fed could do the same but until then each state doing their own thing is working. A lot of good progress has been made at the state level with ccw in the last 15-20 years. Any involvement by the fed at this point would only screw that progress up IMHO.

kensteele 05-08-2011 11:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by HexHead (Post 17315205)
How do you figure? State's have to recognize other state's drivers and marriage licenses.

I believe that states got together and all decided to recognise each other's DL, so they did it on their own without have been told to by the Federal gvt.

If the states would all come together on the CCW permit, that would be great.

kensteele 05-08-2011 11:58

Currently I'm on the fence with this one, need to think about it a bit more. If I were selfish, I would say I get to carry exactly the way I want 95% of the time. If I were thinking about the gun community, way too many people under too many restrictions with the present system.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:30.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.