National Reciprocity Action Needed

This is a discussion on National Reciprocity Action Needed within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by jwarren I am not so sure that this is intended to be a restrictive gun bill..... You could be right. However I ...

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 161
Like Tree43Likes

Thread: National Reciprocity Action Needed

  1. #16
    Member Array Varmiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Full Time Rv'er
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by jwarren View Post
    I am not so sure that this is intended to be a restrictive gun bill.....
    You could be right.

    However I have a couple of issues with it.

    1. Federal firearm legislation, of any sort is Unconstitutional.

    2. Anything coming out of the Federal government is going to be restrictive compared to AZ law. I live in AZ.

    Lastly, I firmly believe this isn’t going anywhere for previously stated reasons.

    Chris

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Member Array boerep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    I don't want the federal government to regulate ANYTHING. PASS

    I would like to have national carry. I do not want the Fed to decide. The Fed needs to be much smaller, and relinquish power back to the states, and the people.
    oneshot likes this.
    "Fail Your Way To Success"
    "A Goal without a Plan, is Just a Dream"
    "Age and treachery will win over Youth and Enthusiasm"

  4. #18
    Distinguished Member Array AKsrule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,387


    If you pass a NATIONAL LAW that applies to the STATES - who do you think will ENFORCE IT?
    oneshot likes this.
    -------
    -SIG , it's What's for Dinner-

    know your rights!
    http://www.handgunlaw.us

    "If I walk in the woods, I feel much more comfortable carrying a gun. What if you meet a bear in the woods that's going to attack you? You shoot it."
    {Bernhard Goetz}

  5. #19
    GM
    GM is offline
    VIP Member Array GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,866
    What the government gives the government can take. I do not think it is a good idea.
    oneshot likes this.
    "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security"

  6. #20
    Senior Member Array canav844's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    589
    Federal law needs to read that if you can legally own it then you can legally carry it, but no congress is passing that anytime soon it might mean acknowledging a right. This is however a step in the right direction, well less a step and more a slight lean, it forces states like MA and CA to start to come around to allowing others to carry, and without the extra tax and hassle of needing a dozen permits, you'd only need one to move around the country (out of state shall issue would still cash in on the tax). but it doesn't fix a patch work of where, when, what(I mean you NJ), how you may carry and use. But does clear up a little bit of who can carry. It is also a reasonable measure acknowledging a right, that is likely to pass, it's not as far reaching as it should be but it's a start. Federally recognize the acknowledgment of laws already on the books, and slowly remove restrictions on a state by state basis.

    I've lost track of how many states are making moves to allow Constitutional carry, but if it spreads in the next 5 years the way CCW spread over the past decade we could be well on our way toward being allowed to legally carry a firearm across much of the country.

    Glock Certified Armorer

  7. #21
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Varmiter View Post
    I don’t know why everyone is getting so excited about this, either way.

    In the previous congress (111th), the most destructive congress in recent history, there was not one restrictive gun law that even made it out of committee of either chamber. They all died.

    Does anyone think with the congress we have today there is a better chance of restrictive gun laws coming out of either chamber?

    This isn’t going anywhere.

    Chris
    Its not a restrictive gun law. Its a good idea, and one that is darn well needed for any of us who do interstate travel.
    This business of carrying multiple licenses from multiple states, all carefully selected to give the widest reciprocity, but still not being able to go to half a dozen places, is ridiculous. All the law that is proposed, and there is another thread here btw on it, is that the states recognize licenses issued by other states to their own residents. Sounds like a good idea.

  8. #22
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,658
    Quote Originally Posted by AKsrule View Post


    If you pass a NATIONAL LAW that applies to the STATES - who do you think will ENFORCE IT?
    Individual litigants and judges as always.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,349
    I'm not a lawyer, not a constitutional scholar... but isn't this already covered under Article 4 sections 1 & 2 of the Federal constitution?

    Article IV
    Section 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
    Aren't the carry permit laws (ar lack thereof) as en-"acted" by the states that currently have them, public acts, that deserve the full faith and credit of each of the other states? I know, or think I do, .... to which law do you give full faith and credit ... Az or IL? therein lies one problem.

    Section 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States
    A federal law which gives privileges to the several state's citizens to carry based on the laws of their state of residence, couldn't hurt, or could it... The majority here seem to think it could hurt. I kinda need convincing either way....
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  10. #24
    Senior Member Array press1280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    750
    The patchwork of reciprocity laws has to be brought together in some form. When states get involved in these agreements, the Feds get brought in as well. As a backup, assuming this happens, each and every state should still pass state laws for ConCarry and/or recognize all other state permits. That way, if the Feds do try somethingsneaky, then we can tell them to repeal this bill, and what's left in it's place does the job.
    "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

  11. #25
    Member Array chivvalry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    454
    Quote Originally Posted by DoctorBob View Post
    I think you naysayers are wrong. States should give full faith and credit to the relevant legislation of other states. If you can drive a car in 50 states, why can't you carry? OK - I would make an exception for people who go out of their way to get a license in a state in which they do not reside but otherwise if your state licenses you to carry it should be reciprocal with every other state.

    Article IV, section 1 of the Constituion has been interpreted to give full F&C to judgements but not necessarily to laws. This was not always the case. We now have a Supreme court that is stacked with conservatives who would like to go back to the "origins" method of interpreting the constitution. If you don't pass something like HB 822 now and get it through this SCOTUS. You will miss an opportunity.

    I wrote my rep!
    I concur!
    "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
    You are not paranoid if They are actually out to get you, however, They probably are not and you probably are.

  12. #26
    Member Array Varmiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Full Time Rv'er
    Posts
    153
    DoctorBob and chivvalry,

    Yes, we do have a conservative stacked SC.

    However.....lets just look back at McDonald.

    Both Justices Roberts and Scalia are well known incrementalists. That means they will not side with a decision that makes sweeping changes. Just look at McDonald. A victory that came at a BIG price.

    Justice Thomas’ opinion SHOULD have been the majority opinion, but would not have been accepted by Roberts or Scalia. Consequently, we were left with the terribly watered down (insert crappy) majority opinion of Justice Alito.

    By his opinion, Alito basically gave us a 5-4 victory rather than a 6-3 defeat.

    So think twice about what you think the current makeup of the SC will do. We have two, although conservative, justices who may not necessarily see things as we do.

    Chris

  13. #27
    Member Array sixsccw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    145
    Just read 822 -
    A mountain of work has to be done before you can expect Congress to even toy with passing a bill this simplistic.
    There are now such immense differences between how the states view firearm ownership and legislate its regulation; what will be gained from trying to pass a bill that's oblivious to those differences?
    State reciprocity is a worthy goal, one well worth working towards - but there is SOOO much work that has to be accomplished first before such a bill can be equitable.
    "I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you ---- with me, I'll kill you all."

    Marine Corps General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders

  14. #28
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,658
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    I'm not a lawyer, not a constitutional scholar... but isn't this already covered under Article 4 sections 1 & 2 of the Federal constitution?
    If it were, would we be having this discussion? We live in the legal world we are in, not the one we wish we were in.

    Aren't the carry permit laws (ar lack thereof) as en-"acted" by the states that currently have them, public acts, that deserve the full faith and credit of each of the other states? I know, or think I do, .... to which law do you give full faith and credit ... Az or IL? therein lies one problem.
    Yes and no. The reciprocity issue really has little to do with full faith and credit business which speaks to the acts of the judiciary in the various states. That's why a Nevada divorce is a still a divorce in NY. Because a divorce is something done by the courts of the states and not the legislatures.

    A federal law which gives privileges to the several state's citizens to carry based on the laws of their state of residence, couldn't hurt, or could it... The majority here seem to think it could hurt. I kinda need convincing either way....
    Some here are die hard state's rights conservatives who still think the ante-bellum order should be in effect today. They reject much of the jurisprudence of the last 150 years. Certainly they reject the jurisprudence of the last 60 years. They don't want the Federal government telling the states that they must do anything at all, and national reciprocity as proposed in the law under discussion would be the Feds telling the states that they must recognize licenses issued by other states.

    Its funny to me that so many stand up and put their hand over their heart and recite the pledge of allegiance but never catch on to the meaning of the phrase, "one nation indivisible."

  15. #29
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,658
    Quote Originally Posted by sixsccw View Post
    Just read 822 -
    A mountain of work has to be done before you can expect Congress to even toy with passing a bill this simplistic.
    There are now such immense differences between how the states view firearm ownership and legislate its regulation; what will be gained from trying to pass a bill that's oblivious to those differences?
    State reciprocity is a worthy goal, one well worth working towards - but there is SOOO much work that has to be accomplished first before such a bill can be equitable.
    I don't know. The bill is pretty straight forward. It directs the states to do something they are already doing under LEOSA.

  16. #30
    Member Array sixsccw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    145
    Hopyard - maybe I'm looking too far ahead.
    But look at the way it is now - Jersey is a "may-issue-but-don't-even-THINK-about-asking" state. Been that way forever. While PA is the "send-the-money-Monday-CCW-by-Friday" state. How can we introduce 822 in a country where states like this coexist? It just seems like a TON of standarization has to occur before this bill can be considered.
    "I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you ---- with me, I'll kill you all."

    Marine Corps General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... 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. National Reciprocity part Deux
    By swinokur in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: February 27th, 2011, 12:12 PM
  2. CSPAN LIVE VID of the US Senate on National Reciprocity
    By dlclarkii in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: July 23rd, 2009, 01:31 AM
  3. National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Bill Introduced
    By alelks in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 24th, 2009, 11:27 PM
  4. SC: H. 3212 action needed by Senate (Reciprocity bill)
    By SCGunGuy in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: May 29th, 2008, 09:10 PM
  5. National Reciprocity for Concealed Carry
    By ArmedAviator in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 16th, 2008, 11:25 AM

Search tags for this page

2011 national ccw carry
,
activism nationwide reciprocity 2011
,
check gun serial number
,
dod police concealed carry texas 2011
,
hb 822 congress
,
hb 822 national
,

hb 822 right to carry

,
hb822 discussion
,
medical ohio reciprocity tennessee criteria or standards -emergency
,

national reciprocity

,

national reciprocity 2011

,
national reciprocity bill 2011
,
national reciprocity bill 2011 vote date
,
national reciprocity not necessary
,
why is reciprocity needed
Click on a term to search for related topics.