National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill Drawn Up for Next Congress

Wendell said:
“I think that would be a mistake,” Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr. said at a Manhattan Republican Party event Wednesday night. The bill, introduced Jan. 3 by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC), predictably has the backing of the NRA — but faces fierce opposition from New York’s law-enforcement community. “It’s going to be like the wild, wild West. There could be a lot of shootouts, and not only with cops. If this person who comes [to New York] gets into a dispute, an argument with someone else, their first reaction might be to pull out a firearm and use it in the confrontation,” one police source said.
http://nypost.com/2017/02/23/da-blasts-bill-allowing-conceal-carry-in-all-50-states/
Click to expand...

When I read this, the first thought that pops into my mind was when gay marriage was the hot button issue. There were claims that if it became legal, there would be a frenzy of new marriage laws to allow people to marry giraffes, buicks, toaster ovens, etc. People need to whip up hysteria, because it will raise money. It has nothing to do with the laws and everything to do with fund raising.

On the other hand, it's just as easy to point to a state like NH that recently made constitutional carry legal. Where's the OK corral happening in NH? You know people gunned down over parking spaces or for buying the last roll of toilet paper in the convenience store?
 
Wendell said:
“I think that would be a mistake,” Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr. said at a Manhattan Republican Party event Wednesday night. The bill, introduced Jan. 3 by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC), predictably has the backing of the NRA — but faces fierce opposition from New York’s law-enforcement community. “It’s going to be like the wild, wild West. There could be a lot of shootouts, and not only with cops. If this person who comes [to New York] gets into a dispute, an argument with someone else, their first reaction might be to pull out a firearm and use it in the confrontation,” one police source said.
http://nypost.com/2017/02/23/da-blasts-bill-allowing-conceal-carry-in-all-50-states/
Click to expand...

why do these a--holes say the same thing? Why don't they look at that "safe" haven shooting gallery called Chicago?
 
Bill in Congress to Let Visitors to NYC Walk Around with Concealed Guns Concerns NYPD

"I don't think there is any reason for anybody to bring a gun into New York City," NYPD Commissioner James O'Neill said. "Gun violence in New York City, it is low," he added. "Last year, we had under 1,000 shootings. That happens as a result of the hard work not only of the men and women in the NYPD, but everybody in this city. We don't need any more guns in this city." When asked what message he would give to lawmakers across the country who may have to vote on this bill, O'Neill said, "The message is, look at New York as a model and be guided by what we do." New York has some of the nation's toughest gun laws. Licenses to carry a concealed handgun are hard to get. Applicants must demonstrate a valid reason to pack heat.
http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/criminal-justice/2017/02/28/bill-in-congress-to-let-visitors-to-nyc-walk-around-with-concealed-guns-concerns-nypd-commissioner.html
 
Cornyn Introduces National Reciprocity Bill to Senate
Differs from House bill on nonresident gun-carry permits

BY: Stephen Gutowski March 1, 2017
http://freebeacon.com/issues/cornyn-introduces-national-reciprocity-bill-senate/

Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) on Monday introduced legislation that would require states to recognize gun-carry permits from other states.

The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 aims to make concealed carry permits more like driver's licenses, proponents argue. Instead of a patchwork of reciprocity deals from state to state, Cornyn's bill would make most state-issued permits universally accepted.

"This bill strengthens both the constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and the power of states to implement laws best-suited for the folks who live there," Cornyn said in a statement. "This legislation is an important affirmation of our Second Amendment rights and has been a top priority of law-abiding gun owners in Texas for a long time."

Currently, each state and jurisdiction decides which states' concealed carry permits it will honor. Often this takes place on a rolling basis and changes from year to year and administration to administration. Some states, like Virginia, honor permits from every state. Other jurisdictions, like Washington, D.C., don't honor permits from anywhere else.

Gun rights activists have decried the current system as confusing and hazardous for law-abiding gun owners. "The current patchwork of state and local gun laws is confusing and can cause the most conscientious and law-abiding gun owner to run afoul of the law when they are traveling or temporarily living away from home," said Chris Cox, head of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, in a statement. "Law-abiding citizens should be able to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense while traveling across state lines."

Rep. Richard Hudson (R., N.C.), who introduced similar legislation in the House in January, praised Cornyn's bill.

"Senator Cornyn has long been a champion for our Second Amendment rights and I'm pleased to see him continue his strong leadership on national concealed carry reciprocity," Hudson said in a statement. "With a groundswell of support from Americans across the country and a pro-Second Amendment president, I believe we can make national concealed carry reciprocity a reality."

The two pieces of legislation appear to differ on one point, however. Hudson told the Washington Free Beacon in January that his legislation would require a state to honor all nonresident permits from other states, even if it is held by one of its own residents. In other words, this provision would allow someone who lived in a state like Hawaii, which issued zero concealed carry permits last year, to legally carry in Hawaii by obtaining a nonresident permit from another state.

Cornyn's bill does not include this provision, according to his aides. Under Cornyn's bill, if individuals are allowed to carry in their home states then they are eligible to carry in other states. Individuals will not be free to obtain concealed carry permits from other states to use in their home state.

"The legislation allows a person to use a nonresident permit to carry in their home state so long as their own state recognizes the permit as valid," one Cornyn aide said.

Both bills are now awaiting hearings.
 
Wendell said:
"I don't think there is any reason for anybody to bring a gun into New York City," NYPD Commissioner James O'Neill said. "Gun violence in New York City, it is low," he added. "Last year, we had under 1,000 shootings. That happens as a result of the hard work not only of the men and women in the NYPD, but everybody in this city. We don't need any more guns in this city." When asked what message he would give to lawmakers across the country who may have to vote on this bill, O'Neill said, "The message is, look at New York as a model and be guided by what we do." New York has some of the nation's toughest gun laws. Licenses to carry a concealed handgun are hard to get. Applicants must demonstrate a valid reason to pack heat.
http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/criminal-justice/2017/02/28/bill-in-congress-to-let-visitors-to-nyc-walk-around-with-concealed-guns-concerns-nypd-commissioner.html
Click to expand...

Is NYC less or more safe than NH, VT, or ME where Constitutional Carry exists?

Edit - (Violent Crime rates per 100,000 - 2014 data):

VT - 99.3 (ranks #1 among states)
ME - 127.8 (ranks #2 among states)
NH - 196.1 (ranks #4 among states)
http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-most-dangerous-states-in-the-u-s.html

NYC - 596.7
https://www.baruch.cuny.edu/nycdata/public_safety/crime-selectcities.htm

Just sayin'. Mr. O'Neill might want to do some research before flapping his gums.

"Gun Violence" may be low, b/c there aren't any guns, but violent crimes are NOT LOW.

I am sure that there are likely low incidents of accidents involving pick-up trucks as well. Because, there aren't many pick-ups!! But that has no bearing on whether or not there are a lot of overall motor vehicle accidents!!
 
Last edited:
With any luck they either change the senate bill to address this or add an amendment. If it goes through while basically screwing people from commie states like CA. NY and HI they will be forever screwed since this will likely never be revisited.
 
MachineHead said:
Looks like the push by the NRA has begun. I saw this commercial the other day on TV.

http://youtu.be/SFuOB4-18Ww
Click to expand...

bring it on. the only way to break out of this "death of a thousand cuts" the Dems are waging on Trump, is a strong offense. Let them whine about transgender bathrooms (something almost nobody cares about) while he rams thru carry legislation that 100 million americans DO care about. Whack them upside their heads with THAT, and hear the empty echos reverberate across the land.
 
Concern is, obviously, actions "given" by Feds can be taken away by same (realizing that this is already enumerated in 2A) with a new administration.
 
edseas2 said:
Concern is, obviously, actions "given" by Feds can be taken away by same (realizing that this is already enumerated in 2A) with a new administration.
Click to expand...

It is usually tougher to remove laws already on the books though, harder to get momentum to do it, political concerns where even those who might have been against it are now for it seeing it did no damage or gave them something they like now. ETC. (See Obamacare). But even if they do give it, and then take it away we are no worse off than we are now, its just a return to what we have at the moment.
 
I'd feel much better if the Trumpster ends up replacing another 2 SJC Judges with "youngsters" in their late 40's, early 50's because one never knows how they will vote until they do and this may provide a longterm
"cushion" to protect 2A (remembering how Hillary said that SJC got it wrong). Very concerned that the Dems wouldn't bring us back to where we are at present as their ultimate goals are much "worse" (empowering UN to
oversee gun rights in USA for instance): http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/15/un-arms-trade-treaty-gives-away-rights-of-american/
 
Last edited:
Is it possible to prosecute politicians and their appointees as traitors if their actions are against the constitution?
 
Concealed Carry Reciprocity Effort Gains Steam in Congress

In March, we reported on the details of NRA-backed concealed carry reciprocity legislation pending in Congress. The momentum behind those bills continues to build, with each attracting dozens of co-sponsors.

Sen. John Cornyn’s Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act now boasts 37 co-sponsors. And 194 of his House colleagues have signed onto Rep. Richard Hudson’s Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017.

Concealed carry reciprocity legislation recognizes that Americans’ Second Amendment right to bear arms doesn’t end at their states’ borders. While most states already recognize this and have provisions allowing for reciprocity for concealed carry permits from other jurisdiction, a minority of antigun states have made a point of arresting out-of-state residents who carry or transport otherwise lawfully owned firearms in their jurisdictions.

This sort of “zero tolerance” enforcement has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with punishing people who believe in the Second Amendment. There is nothing legitimate about a state using its police powers to suppress the constitutional rights of fellow Americans.

That’s why your NRA has for years supported legislation to ensure that people who are federally eligible to possess firearms and who have state-sanctioned ability to carry concealed don’t lose their eligibility to do so simply because they cross state lines. This legislation would ensure that states would have to treat lawful concealed carriers from other states the same as lawful in-state concealed carriers. States would maintain their prerogatives over their own licensing regimes and the rules of behavior that govern concealed carry within their borders.

Gun control proponents have weakly argued that this legislation makes the most lenient concealed carry standards the de facto national standard. What that argument fails to account for, however, is that criminals who carry unlawfully with evil intent have no standards whatsoever. These bills are not for them. They are for law-abiding and self-regulating Americans who take pains to carry lawfully. And lawful concealed carriers have proven themselves to behave responsibly year after year in every U.S. jurisdiction.

Every expansion of concealed carry rights over the last 30 years has been met with the same tired rhetoric from gun control proponents about how it will result in a return to the Wild West and “blood in the streets.” But with some 15 million concealed carry permittees in the U.S. and untold thousands more lawfully carrying in the 12 states that no longer require a permit for concealed carry, those predictions simply have not materialized. And the handful of cases gun control proponents desperately point to simply prove the rule.

If your senators or representative have not co-sponsored the bills introduced by Sen. Cornyn and Rep. Hudson, please contact them today and respectfully ask that they do so.

We are closer than ever to making national reciprocity a reality, but the effort needs your help to succeed!

Please contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative and urge them to cosponsor and support passage of S.446-- the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017-- in the Senate, and H.R.38 -- the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017-- in the House. You can contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative by phone at (202) 224-3121.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170609/concealed-carry-reciprocity-effort-gains-steam-in-congress
 
Reptile said:
Concealed Carry Reciprocity Effort Gains Steam in Congress

In March, we reported on the details of NRA-backed concealed carry reciprocity legislation pending in Congress. The momentum behind those bills continues to build, with each attracting dozens of co-sponsors.

Sen. John Cornyn’s Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act now boasts 37 co-sponsors. And 194 of his House colleagues have signed onto Rep. Richard Hudson’s Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017.

Concealed carry reciprocity legislation recognizes that Americans’ Second Amendment right to bear arms doesn’t end at their states’ borders. While most states already recognize this and have provisions allowing for reciprocity for concealed carry permits from other jurisdiction, a minority of antigun states have made a point of arresting out-of-state residents who carry or transport otherwise lawfully owned firearms in their jurisdictions.

This sort of “zero tolerance” enforcement has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with punishing people who believe in the Second Amendment. There is nothing legitimate about a state using its police powers to suppress the constitutional rights of fellow Americans.

That’s why your NRA has for years supported legislation to ensure that people who are federally eligible to possess firearms and who have state-sanctioned ability to carry concealed don’t lose their eligibility to do so simply because they cross state lines. This legislation would ensure that states would have to treat lawful concealed carriers from other states the same as lawful in-state concealed carriers. States would maintain their prerogatives over their own licensing regimes and the rules of behavior that govern concealed carry within their borders.

Gun control proponents have weakly argued that this legislation makes the most lenient concealed carry standards the de facto national standard. What that argument fails to account for, however, is that criminals who carry unlawfully with evil intent have no standards whatsoever. These bills are not for them. They are for law-abiding and self-regulating Americans who take pains to carry lawfully. And lawful concealed carriers have proven themselves to behave responsibly year after year in every U.S. jurisdiction.

Every expansion of concealed carry rights over the last 30 years has been met with the same tired rhetoric from gun control proponents about how it will result in a return to the Wild West and “blood in the streets.” But with some 15 million concealed carry permittees in the U.S. and untold thousands more lawfully carrying in the 12 states that no longer require a permit for concealed carry, those predictions simply have not materialized. And the handful of cases gun control proponents desperately point to simply prove the rule.

If your senators or representative have not co-sponsored the bills introduced by Sen. Cornyn and Rep. Hudson, please contact them today and respectfully ask that they do so.

We are closer than ever to making national reciprocity a reality, but the effort needs your help to succeed!

Please contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative and urge them to cosponsor and support passage of S.446-- the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017-- in the Senate, and H.R.38 -- the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017-- in the House. You can contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative by phone at (202) 224-3121.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170609/concealed-carry-reciprocity-effort-gains-steam-in-congress
Click to expand...

This is all well and good, but is it still sitting in a committee with no hope of moving anywhere? It has been stalled with a ton of cosponsors for 4 months now and no movement except the occasional news story about how great it will be. I'd like to see a story where it gets to a vote, when is that going to happen?

ETA: 6 months sitting with no movement.
01/12/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Action By: House Judiciary
 
I'll say this again. Congress DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to pass this legislation. They simply don't. If you think they do, show me where.

All Congress & President Trump CAN DO is declare that ALL STATES MUST follow the law of the land already on the books and remind the States, using the word in the Constitution, ".that.... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Infringing means that as US citizens, who have been qualified by individual states to carry arms, should have the right to carry them within the confines of the 50 states without any qualifications. It really has nothing to do with type of qualification or hoops we had to jump through for our permits whether or not we are from VT or NJ. We have been vetted as far as our state is concerned and, as members of the United States, we shouldn't be summarily prohibited from crossing borders.

This action would be far from having the House and the Senate and then the President beat the states into submission using power they don't have to wield unless they assume that power. AND, too boot, you don't think that the states that balk against a ruling like this won't sue under "States Rights"?? Of course they will. All that will happen, then, is we'll have a smattering of states that simply don't follow the new law..........JUST LIKE STATES THAT DON'T FOLLOW FOPA NOW! Try to drive through NY or NJ or MA for that matter with a properly packed gun in your trunk and get pulled over and searched. Get ready to call your lawyer.

This is really easy. The Constitution is in full force and as members of the USA, states have to comply with them, that's all there is to it. They most certainly abide by the 1st amendment and the others, why not the 2nd? The Government can remind them of that. The NRA should understand that what the government gives they can take away. AS an excellent example, the government, illegally I might add, enacted a bogus AWB but fortunately put a sunset clause in it or we'd be still living under it. Look what happened, however, when it went away..........7 states (my count may be off) CONTINUE to support the AWB. How is it that that can be the case? Didn't the Feds order it to go away? Why and how, then, do vestiges of it remain to exist in a number of States? Why can't the Federal Government order the states to stand down? Why? Because they don't have that power.

This is so much more a complicated issue and states politicians will talk out of both sides of their mouths; if there's money to be had, they are all for Fed programs. If there is not, then States Rights trump everything. Make my head hurt.
 
A specific premption clause would clear up all the BS both in state and out. They could still require a license but they would have to use the same fed standard. And for those that say no to giving more power to the fed, they already have it and this would remove the state BS.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I257 using Tapatalk
 
Cabinetman said:
I'll say this again. Congress DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to pass this legislation. They simply don't. If you think they do, show me where.

All Congress & President Trump CAN DO is declare that ALL STATES MUST follow the law of the land already on the books and remind the States, using the word in the Constitution, ".that.... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Infringing means that as US citizens, who have been qualified by individual states to carry arms, should have the right to carry them within the confines of the 50 states without any qualifications. It really has nothing to do with type of qualification or hoops we had to jump through for our permits whether or not we are from VT or NJ. We have been vetted as far as our state is concerned and, as members of the United States, we shouldn't be summarily prohibited from crossing borders.

This action would be far from having the House and the Senate and then the President beat the states into submission using power they don't have to wield unless they assume that power. AND, too boot, you don't think that the states that balk against a ruling like this won't sue under "States Rights"?? Of course they will. All that will happen, then, is we'll have a smattering of states that simply don't follow the new law..........JUST LIKE STATES THAT DON'T FOLLOW FOPA NOW! Try to drive through NY or NJ or MA for that matter with a properly packed gun in your trunk and get pulled over and searched. Get ready to call your lawyer.

This is really easy. The Constitution is in full force and as members of the USA, states have to comply with them, that's all there is to it. They most certainly abide by the 1st amendment and the others, why not the 2nd? The Government can remind them of that. The NRA should understand that what the government gives they can take away. AS an excellent example, the government, illegally I might add, enacted a bogus AWB but fortunately put a sunset clause in it or we'd be still living under it. Look what happened, however, when it went away..........7 states (my count may be off) CONTINUE to support the AWB. How is it that that can be the case? Didn't the Feds order it to go away? Why and how, then, do vestiges of it remain to exist in a number of States? Why can't the Federal Government order the states to stand down? Why? Because they don't have that power.

This is so much more a complicated issue and states politicians will talk out of both sides of their mouths; if there's money to be had, they are all for Fed programs. If there is not, then States Rights trump everything. Make my head hurt.
Click to expand...

You complain about how the fed could order the states to support the second as written knowing it will never happen. Federal law is how the fed tells the states things, and this is the way we are going to get to a place where the anti's are on the back foot defending and trying to fight law after law. Right now you have righteous indignation, but that is going to get us laughed at by people who know how things work. We will not get our rights back in one fell swoop, they were taken piece by piece and thats how we get them back.

I'd love for the federal government to make a decree that the 2nd is supreme and all laws repealed until determined to be constitutional under the strictest scrutiny, but it is a fantasy. The antis work within the system to squeeze tighter a little at a time and make us constantly defend, if we can force good laws that remove restriction without giving the fed more power (As this does) they will have a harder time. We need to move the line so they are fighting to repeal our good laws, which is much harder than implementing their own bad ones.
 
Cabinetman said:
I'll say this again. Congress DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to pass this legislation. They simply don't. If you think they do, show me where.
Click to expand...

They also don't have the authority to pass drug prohibition laws, but here we are.

Remember that quaint time when they actually had to amend the Constitution in order to ban alcohol? Remember when the only valid federal laws restricting firearms or drugs were those that required tax stamps?
 
KBCraig said:
They also don't have the authority to pass drug prohibition laws, but here we are.

Remember that quaint time when they actually had to amend the Constitution in order to ban alcohol? Remember when the only valid federal laws restricting firearms or drugs were those that required tax stamps?
Click to expand...


Isn't the interstate commerce clause a wonderful thing? Talk about perverting something beyond it's original intentions. [rolleyes]
 
amm5061 said:
Isn't the interstate commerce clause a wonderful thing? Talk about perverting something beyond it's original intentions. [rolleyes]
Click to expand...

So are you saying that we should ignore the current political reality and refuse to use it to our own ends? We should be pure of purpose while the other side uses every possible dirty trick against us? That sort of thinking will get us nothing but more "Compromise" (Read: we give up some stuff and they agree not to push for more but don't give anything back)
 
This is a licensing issue (and I'll not delve into the argument of licensing a right) and Congress has every legal right to regulate licensing. Let em at it. See how long the license to carry mentality survives.
 
I'll say this again. Congress DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to pass this legislation.
Click to expand...
Since when has that stopped them?

Something to think about....

The more "mainstream" carry by ordinary people becomes, the more restrictions it will have. We have relatively few here in MA (mainly the schools one), because it flies largely under the radar - those who are not "gun people" for the most part don't think that "ordinaries" can carry in public. As a result, we have few restrictions, no binding signage, very little of the non-binding signage, no restaurant ban, and few checkpoints.

Compare this to recent "shall issue" states that have a laundry list of restricted zones (police stations, public assemblies, liquor licensed facilities, etc.) plus binding signage. All of those restrictions are in response to concern over the need to restrict how and where "ordinary unimportant people" may carry.

If we get federal reciprocity, we can expect an increase in states moving to regulate and limit the extent of that carry to protect the important people from the unimportant ones.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Up Next - Going after Police Trade-In guns.
2
Replies
34
Views
784
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
State Sen. Pushes Campus Carry for AZ College Students with Concealed Carry Permits
Replies
0
Views
59
Reptile
Reptile
Federal Judge Finds Pennsylvania Law Barring 18-20 Year-Olds from Concealed Carry Unconstitutional
Replies
1
Views
128
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
14
Views
534
Broc
Broc
All Eyes on Congress As Veterans’ Gun Rights Up For Grabs
Replies
0
Views
156
Reptile
Reptile
Back
Top Bottom