National Reciprocity part Deux

This is a discussion on National Reciprocity part Deux within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; this might even pass No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money: HR 822: Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill Introduced (Updated)...

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 85

Thread: National Reciprocity part Deux

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    931

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    980
    But then the states that are big on issuing non-resident permits will loose a nice revenue stream.

    Oh well.

    It would be nice to not have to play the "which states honor my permit, and how do I get from here to there" game.
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    The first effort I could not get behind.

    This version though is drafted well being straight forward in manner allowing states continued right to maintain their own conditions without introducing a federal assignment or condition of licensure.

    Best of all there is really nothing in this for antis to get bent about as it doesn't enable any one to carry anywhere as outside their resident state who by BOTH resident state AND visiting state statute they could not otherwise do so, while as within current FEDERAL firearm laws.

    This is perfect.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  5. #4
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    However now you have allowed the federal government to regulate states business.... it is a fine line. Not to mention they take it over, regulate the heck out of it and if they can make the law, they can take it away too.. I dont like the federal government having their hands in ANYTHING outside of what they are supposed to be doing ( national security/foreign relations) and can't do that right either.

  6. #5
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570
    I think I know what they are trying to say, but wow, this is awkward wording---

    "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"

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array joker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,047
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    However now you have allowed the federal government to regulate states business.... it is a fine line. Not to mention they take it over, regulate the heck out of it and if they can make the law, they can take it away too.. I dont like the federal government having their hands in ANYTHING outside of what they are supposed to be doing ( national security/foreign relations) and can't do that right either.
    Agreed. On the other hand, The Constitution of The United States applies to all Americans...
    NRA Life Member


    With great power comes great responsibility.-Stan Lee

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member
    Array fastk9dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Location: Location:
    Posts
    1,554
    Hrmm, if something like this passed, I wonder what happens to the states that don't issue or issue restricted CCWs. Now you'd have out of staters being able to carry but not their own residents. Sounds like a whole new set of lawsuits.
    "I got a lot of problems with you people!" - Frank Costanza

  9. #8
    Member Array enk5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Akron, Ohio
    Posts
    200
    How would this work for California,and other "May Issue" States?

  10. #9
    Member Array jwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by enk5 View Post
    How would this work for California,and other "May Issue" States?
    That will be what keeps it from passing.

  11. #10
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,137
    I could live with this. The only individuals this would hurt would be Vermont residents, which do not have a permit system at all. Alaska and Arizon do still issue permits to those who want one. I imagine states that do a heavy business in non-resident permits won't be too happy with it though. It virtually puts an end to the need for non-resident permits.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array press1280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    750
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    I could live with this. The only individuals this would hurt would be Vermont residents, which do not have a permit system at all. Alaska and Arizon do still issue permits to those who want one. I imagine states that do a heavy business in non-resident permits won't be too happy with it though. It virtually puts an end to the need for non-resident permits.
    VT residents will simply need to get a non-resident permit for travel. The non-resident issuing states will probably get hurt, but will still be in business because of the may/non-issue states(until the courts determine the 2A means carry in public). FL may get hurt because its more than UT or AZ's permit.
    "The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
    Nunn v. State GA 1848

  13. #12
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    VT residents will simply need to get a non-resident permit for travel. The non-resident issuing states will probably get hurt, but will still be in business because of the may/non-issue states(until the courts determine the 2A means carry in public). FL may get hurt because its more than UT or AZ's permit.
    I'm not sure that would be allowed with the wording presently in there.

    "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 "

    No mention in this bill exists referencing the validity of non-resident permits. At least I didn't see it in there.

    Its well intentioned and could be helpful, but I think VT would have to start issuing or there folks wouldn't be able to rely on this proposed law as currently drafted. (Assuming I'm reading it correctly.)

    (Added a moment later, boy, right now such a law would really help me out with my summer travel plans.)

  14. #13
    Member Array CowboyKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    I'm not sure that would be allowed with the wording presently in there.

    "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 "

    No mention in this bill exists referencing the validity of non-resident permits. At least I didn't see it in there.

    Its well intentioned and could be helpful, but I think VT would have to start issuing or there folks wouldn't be able to rely on this proposed law as currently drafted. (Assuming I'm reading it correctly.)

    (Added a moment later, boy, right now such a law would really help me out with my summer travel plans.)
    I think you may have missed the part I underinws below:

    ...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.
    I believe any permit that will allow you to carry in your home state will do.

    Ken

  15. #14
    Member Array sentioch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    394
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    However now you have allowed the federal government to regulate states business.... it is a fine line. Not to mention they take it over, regulate the heck out of it and if they can make the law, they can take it away too.. I dont like the federal government having their hands in ANYTHING outside of what they are supposed to be doing ( national security/foreign relations) and can't do that right either.
    You've got it completely backwards my friend...

    The 2nd amendment of the constitution of the united states of america clearly states:

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
    As it stands, states have taken it upon themselves to REVOKE this right from citizens. It is not different than if states had passed a law saying that you need a permit and a background check in order to be allowed to make "free speech."

    So no, it's not "giving the federal government the power to make laws that apply in every state"....that was a power that the federal govt had since the day the country was founded. Rather it is recognizing that states have already violated federal law by passing contradictory laws that overstep their boundaries to take away our basic constitutional rights...and trying to set the matter right.
    "In a world of compromise, some don't." -HK

  16. #15
    Member Array joe26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    77
    I am trying to figure out if in NJ non-residents will be allowed to carry, but as a resident i will not. Even if I was to get a Non-res permit from lets say FL?

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Craigslist Dangers - Part Deux
    By Tally XD in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 6th, 2010, 10:54 AM
  2. Glockaide Part Deux
    By Danimal in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 8th, 2009, 07:31 PM
  3. Wish me luck (part deux)
    By Concealed_23 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: March 17th, 2006, 11:25 PM
  4. Warning Part Deux
    By WorldPax in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: January 12th, 2006, 11:21 AM
  5. Tell...Don't Tell, Part Deux
    By Tom357 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 1st, 2005, 08:51 PM

Search tags for this page

h.r. 822 national reciprocity fed control

,

how is hr822 doing in washington dc

,

how would national reciprocity law work in california

,

hr 822 concealed carry reciprocity bill introduced co sponsor

,

if national reciprocity bill passes will states remove their concealed carry permits

,

last state to honor driver license reciprosity?

,

leosa is closest thing to national gun permit

,

national reciprocity duty to inform

,

national reciprocity is a state or constitutional issue?

,

national reciprocity law introduced into the house

,

national right to carry reciprocity 822 problem

,

s&w .40 120004

,

what happened to hr822 in committee

,

what happened with hr 822

Click on a term to search for related topics.