Reciprocity gets out of committee - not sure if dupe

[MachineHead]

There's probably a solid argument that, while not normally applicable to silly gun licenses, that the full faith and credit clause in the constitution permits this. We already do it with shit like marriage licenses, etc. A "gun license" as a legal proceeding is functionally not any different.

-Mike

I can see Maura trying to get cert on grounds of “state’s rights” wrt to magazine capacity and out of state permits for MA residents who have Boston LTC restrictions on carrying. Come to think of it, the idiots from NY, MD, and CA would join in on her suit.

 

[ProGun]

I get where you and committee people are coming from. No commas are the problem. I don't read it as guaranteed to be read by courts as open as that, and that language is definitely not dispositive of your position. The discussion in the hearings you're talking about has to do with, I think, states that actually recognize some non-res licenses. In PA, for example, which recognizes many states' non-res licenses, a resident who doesn't get a PA license can "shop around" for a state that is recognized (non-res) by PA, and will issue. Probably even more an issue in Michigan. I do not think a NH license would pull that off in MA under this language. I wouldn't want to be that test case, and I wouldn't advise someone to be. Someone answering committee questions does not magically change statutory interpretation (legislative history is the last item looked at if 'plain language' rules fail).

You:
and who is carrying 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 (or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides)

Possible:
and who (is carrying 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) or (is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides)

The latter makes sense if the sentence is intended to capture con carry states without need of 'optional' license.

I don't like this bill for con law reasons, but its wording is in serious need of surgery. I'm surprised it made it this far without someone cleaning that up.

PA will not recognize a non-res permit for a PA resident. Believe they have made that known the past couple years. It was a known hack...PA residents were getting a FL CWP and carrying in PA on that. They put a stop to that.

 

[42!]

PA will not recognize a non-res permit for a PA resident. Believe they have made that known the past couple years. It was a known hack...PA residents were getting a FL CWP and carrying in PA on that. They put a stop to that.

This is currently true, I believe, everywhere. H.R. 38 as currently written would change this. And yes, I am sure there will be states that challenge this. I actually hope they do so it would not have to be dealt with when someone gets charged.

Will it pass? Who the heck knows.

 

[spt_1955]

Just read the bill and found this interesting :

“(2) A person possessing or carrying a concealed handgun in a State under subsection (a) may do so in any of the following areas in the State that are open to the public:

“(A) A unit of the National Park System.
“(B) A unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
“(C) Public land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management.
“(D) Land administered and managed by the Army Corps of Engineers.
“(E) Land administered and managed by the Bureau of Reclamation.”.

TO me this means that Concealed Carry would now be legal at the Cape Cod Canal.

 

[strangenh]

PA will not recognize a non-res permit for a PA resident. Believe they have made that known the past couple years. It was a known hack...PA residents were getting a FL CWP and carrying in PA on that. They put a stop to that.

Exactly. Thus the questions.

 

[strangenh]

Which could easily be spun as racist and classist city officials discriminating against poor people and minorities in minority majority cities with vast income inequality. Gun control is openly racist. Call officials on it and make them have to defend the indefensible.

And? I mean, this has been the case for a century+. You're not the first to bring that up. That tack has yet to go (tho we did do it with con carry in NH, and maybe it did help a little there, but only a very little).

 

[GlockJock]

I'm at 2:47:00 in the video. It's amazing what the opponents don't know about the current law.

I'm hardly amazed at anything anyone on the "Left" thinks, says, does, etc etc...We actually have a CONGRESS comprised of people whose LEADERS just a few years back told us that we really really really needed to "pass a bill in order to see what's in it.."

Just sayin'

 

[GlockJock]

I can see Maura trying to get cert on grounds of “state’s rights” wrt to magazine capacity and out of state permits for MA residents who have Boston LTC restrictions on carrying. Come to think of it, the idiots from NY, MD, and CA would join in on her suit.

I can even see that effin' dimpled filthbag going so far as to proclaim "I don't give a F*CK what Congress nor anyone else says! If someone wants to bring a gun into my state, just tell them to HOLD IT".... (and then rolling over and consulting with her wife in a pillow-talk law briefing/legal aside.. while law abiding citizens twist in the wind awaiting the SCOTUS to address her - and other wingnuts in power from sea to moonbat sea's-complete and total challenge, defiance/"resistance" to the Law of the Land.

Just sayin'

 

[Waher]

I can even see that effin' dimpled filthbag going so far as to proclaim "I don't give a F*CK what Congress nor anyone else says! If someone wants to bring a gun into my state, just tell them to HOLD IT".... (and then rolling over and consulting with her wife in a pillow-talk law briefing/legal aside.. while law abiding citizens twist in the wind awaiting the SCOTUS to address her - and other wingnuts in power from sea to moonbat sea's-complete and total challenge, defiance/"resistance" to the Law of the Land.

Just sayin'

When Maj Toure holds a large lawful carry event with Donna Major & Comm2A discussing lawful minority firearm ownership, do you really think deranged Maura is going to dare arresting anyone at the event?

 

[spt_1955]

One important part of this bill is the affect it will have on states where you can't get a carry permit, and can't carry without it (this would include MA in places where all you can get is a sporting license). The bill as currently written would allow you to get a non-res carry license in a free state, and your state of residence would have to honor it.

And before you say not that's not what it says, do some research. This was pointed out very early on and the author of the bill confirmed that it does indeed allow this. http://freebeacon.com/issues/national-reciprocity-bill-will-apply-non-resident-gun-carry-permits/

I respectfully disagree. That article is from January 2017 and the bill has gone through review and "mark up" proceedings. The bill as sent to the House yesterday states "......and who is carrying 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 or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides,...."

ALso people are talking about "I can get a Utah non-resident... blah blah blah..." Far as I know you cannot get a Utah non resident unless you have a permit from your resident state. I had to send them my MA LTC.

 

[evalance]

HR38 is getting hijack guys


ALERT HR 38 Reciprocity at RISK (HINT: fix-NICS) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyl4IGGsqVQ&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=02K_hXmyzQ5--drp-6 REPLY Dear, representative De-couple bill H.R. 38 National Reciprocity and the Fix NICS Act of 2017 The Fix NICS Act of 2017 has been rammed through without a hearing, and the text of the bill was not available to the public until after it was passed by the committee. Legislation so unpopular that it must be hidden from the public and quietly attached to a popular piece of legislation, these are two very different pieces of legislation which have no business being combined, do not allow this rider to pass, call for a separation of these two bills. Do not combine H.R. 38 National Reciprocity and the Fix NICS Act of 2017

 

[MachineHead]

HR38 is getting hijack guys


ALERT HR 38 Reciprocity at RISK (HINT: fix-NICS) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyl4IGGsqVQ&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=02K_hXmyzQ5--drp-6 REPLY Dear, representative De-couple bill H.R. 38 National Reciprocity and the Fix NICS Act of 2017 The Fix NICS Act of 2017 has been rammed through without a hearing, and the text of the bill was not available to the public until after it was passed by the committee. Legislation so unpopular that it must be hidden from the public and quietly attached to a popular piece of legislation, these are two very different pieces of legislation which have no business being combined, do not allow this rider to pass, call for a separation of these two bills. Do not combine H.R. 38 National Reciprocity and the Fix NICS Act of 2017

Well, ain’t that a motherF-ing convenient situation. I’ll say it now and forever - the anti2A clowns can never be trusted.

 

[Rekonn]

HR38 is getting hijack guys


ALERT HR 38 Reciprocity at RISK (HINT: fix-NICS) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyl4IGGsqVQ&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=02K_hXmyzQ5--drp-6 REPLY Dear, representative De-couple bill H.R. 38 National Reciprocity and the Fix NICS Act of 2017 The Fix NICS Act of 2017 has been rammed through without a hearing, and the text of the bill was not available to the public until after it was passed by the committee. Legislation so unpopular that it must be hidden from the public and quietly attached to a popular piece of legislation, these are two very different pieces of legislation which have no business being combined, do not allow this rider to pass, call for a separation of these two bills. Do not combine H.R. 38 National Reciprocity and the Fix NICS Act of 2017

This deserves it's own thread!

 

[Kevin_NH]

While I'd love to see national reciprocity, I'm not looking forward to the subsequent court challenges.

The bill as sent to the House yesterday states "......and who is carrying 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 or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides,...."
Also people are talking about "I can get a Utah non-resident... blah blah blah..." Far as I know you cannot get a Utah non resident unless you have a permit from your resident state. I had to send them my MA LTC.

Utah permit issuance's interaction with reciprocity is complicated, see here: https://bci.utah.gov/concealed-firearm/reciprocity-with-other-states/
When I initially applied for my Utah permit, I lived in a state which did not recognize Utah, so was not required to submit a CHL from my home state.

If you really want to go down a rabbit hole, consider the complication of using a restricted MA LTC-A to obtain a Utah carry permit (Utah doesn't care about restrictions, or even expiration, of your home state permit; all that matters is that you have a valid CHL in your home state at the time of your Utah application/processing; after that your new Utah permit is valid until the Utah renewal date (unless you become a Federal PP, or move and fail to tell Utah BCI).

 

[42!]

I respectfully disagree. That article is from January 2017 and the bill has gone through review and "mark up" proceedings. The bill as sent to the House yesterday states "......and who is carrying 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 or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides,...."

ALso people are talking about "I can get a Utah non-resident... blah blah blah..." Far as I know you cannot get a Utah non resident unless you have a permit from your resident state. I had to send them my MA LTC.

Niether NH or Utah non-res require an LTC in the person's home state. I know this with 100% certainty.

The relavent language didn't change, but I was using the post markup, current version. And please watch the committee markup video, it clearly, repeatedly references this as the intent. You don't have to take my word for it.

 

[Horrible]

This bill is absolutely far from perfect, but the cost of seeing Chuck, Nancy, Maura, Cuomo, the Moms, Everyclown, Giffords, et al. lose their shit is priceless.

However, even if it passes, I see these idiots taking this law to court.

Honestly, even that is a win. Would rather see them spend money on taking our side to court fighting a pro-2A law than putting more money toward fighting for their commie anti-2A unconstitutional crap lawrs

 

[Buck F]

You can get a non-resident CT permit fairly easily. CT is a shall issue, they will issue you a permit UNLESS they have reason not to. You'll have to take a course, pay some fees and probably wait about 12 weeks, but the process is pretty straight forward and if you're not a felon, known drug abuser or other disqualified individual they'll issue it.

Thanks for that info, I think I’m gonna apply for CT and then I’ll be good in all of New England. RI non-res isn’t hard either, there are a couple of towns that act in a shall-issue manner if you have an LTC in your home state. It’s much easier for a non-res to get a RI LTC than a RI res.

 

[Buck F]

My concern is the language “...in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms.” It wouldn’t be a stretch for a State like MA to use this as an excuse to ban MA residents from carrying so the national law doesn’t apply to them.

 

[MachineHead]

My concern is the language “...in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms.” It wouldn’t be a stretch for a State like MA to use this as an excuse to ban MA residents from carrying so the national law doesn’t apply to them.

Cure that with a little “the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is hereby also established as a protected civil right which shall only be suspended by due process in a court of
Law...” or similar phrasing and you’re good to go.

 

[Kevin_NH]

My concern is the language “...in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms.” It wouldn’t be a stretch for a State like MA to use this as an excuse to ban MA residents from carrying so the national law doesn’t apply to them.

Massachusetts is welcome to try -- forbidding CCW entirely worked out so well for Illinois antis.

Illinois would likely be one of the earliest challenges to national reciprocity; IL law currently has no provision for reciprocity, only residents of Hawaii, New Mexico, South Carolina and Virginia can even apply as a non-resident.

 

[42!]

My concern is the language “...in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms.” It wouldn’t be a stretch for a State like MA to use this as an excuse to ban MA residents from carrying so the national law doesn’t apply to them.

I was looking for the context of this but I can't seem to find this language in HR38 or S446, where is it from?
Regardless, a complete ban would be a clear 2a violation. So the only 2 choices are a restrictive permit or con carry, both are covered in the bill.

 

[Waher]

Whatever passes the antigun AG cabal will file suit and some HI clown playing pretend as a judge will scrawl a nationwide injunction in crayon.

 

[namedpipes]

Everybody tosses around the term "Constitutional Carry" and doesn't ever stop to think what that means.

The Second Amendment states that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.

It's as simple as that.

 

[JohnZ]

Seems like this, if passed, would weaken the may issue argument that CoP knows the people in his community since everyone in the US can now carry in his community.

Would the fact that constitutional carry state people don't have to pay for a permit to carry in ma and ma people do support a 14A argument?

 

[Buck F]

I was looking for the context of this but I can't seem to find this language in HR38 or S446, where is it from?
Regardless, a complete ban would be a clear 2a violation. So the only 2 choices are a restrictive permit or con carry, both are covered in the bill.

New Jersey seems to have banned carry, that means others can.

 

[42!]

New Jersey seems to have banned carry, that means others can.

Help me out, cite the law, or provide a link. Not doubting you, just want to read it myself.
And under this bill they'd still have to honor out of state permits.

 

[Waher]

NJ and HI are the two states where even in rural counties it is impossible for everyday citizens to obtain a carry permit. The good thing about this bill is that it will allow those residents to obtain permits out of state and carry in their home state on those non-resident permits. If you are capable of obtaining a permit in any state then your home state must honor the permit. No different than getting married out of state and having the marriage license recognized.

 

[usp45ct]

NJ and HI are the two states where even in rural counties it is impossible for everyday citizens to obtain a carry permit. The good thing about this bill is that it will allow those residents to obtain permits out of state and carry in their home state on those non-resident permits. If you are capable of obtaining a permit in any state then your home state must honor the permit. No different than getting married out of state and having the marriage license recognized.

And which state will issue you a permit when your home state will not?

 

[Green_Manelishi]

I wonder how many who support this over-reach were/are supporters of gay marriage, "health care", abortion, no prayer in schools, etc. Bet your bottom dollar the SCrOTUS will be consulted.

 

[Waher]

I wonder how many who support this over-reach were/are supporters of gay marriage, "health care", abortion, no prayer in schools, etc. Bet your bottom dollar the SCrOTUS will be consulted.

It's about making the scumbag left live up to their own rules. If they want to play little games fine. We will play them to and they won't like it. For far too long it's been heads they win, tails we lose, let's play by those rules because it's 'honorable'. Breitbart when he was alive and now Trump have said, f*** YOU #WAR!, and flipped the damn game table over on the left rather than play by the rules rigged against them.