Revive the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act

This is a discussion on Revive the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by TX expat Except it's not a good idea. It's a bad one. And I'll be all for "nationwide" carry when the federal ...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 75
Like Tree65Likes

Thread: Revive the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act

  1. #16
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    Quote Originally Posted by TX expat View Post
    Except it's not a good idea. It's a bad one.

    And I'll be all for "nationwide" carry when the federal government steps in and tells ALL the states that concealed carry is a right guaranteed under the Second Amendment. No qualifications. No hinderances.

    Until they do that, I will continue to believe that it's a bad idea. You can continue to think it's a good idea all you want...
    re: Then we will get nothing in the way of national reciprocity. Moreover, I can (having read so much
    stuff here over the years) confidently predict that if the Federal government tried to step in and
    tell the states that they must have constitutional carry, ALL of the state's rights folks would jump up
    and down and scream and shout; only this time around the state's rights advocates would be
    living in NJ instead of GA.

    We live in a practical world. Let's get what is gettable as a practical matter because utopia
    ain't gonna happen.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    14,581
    I think they should require passports for interstate travel also. Al least for Hoppy.

    "All you "pro 2A" folks who don't want nationwide carry permissible."

    It's not that we don't want it, and we should have nationwide carry as per 2A, but somehow having the feds get involved would muck things up.
    91wm6, Bark'n, RETSUPT99 and 2 others like this.
    Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone. Oh, to be young again.
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  4. #18
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    re: Then we will get nothing in the way of national reciprocity. Moreover, I can (having read so much
    stuff here over the years) confidently predict that if the Federal government tried to step in and
    tell the states that they must have constitutional carry, ALL of the state's rights folks would jump up
    and down and scream and shout; only this time around the state's rights advocates would be
    living in NJ instead of GA.

    We live in a practical world. Let's get what is gettable as a practical matter because utopia
    ain't gonna happen
    .
    re: part in bold: That, Hop, is exactly why I don't agree with your views. You think we should just take whatever they'll give us and quite honestly, you don't seem to spent much time thinking about the repercussions. And to deny the potential negative repercussions is just turning your back on reality, IMO.

    As long as the federal government is going to explicitly state that carry laws are a state's issue, then they are going to have to butt out of it on a national level. If they want to push the BoR agenda, they won't get any argument from me about it being a 'states right' issue. Unless they are going about it that way, it'll just open us up to federal regulations and oversight.
    NRA Life Member

    "I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady

  5. #19
    Member Array 91wm6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    300
    Hop it's more than naive at this point to expect the federal government, AKA The Obama Administration, to enforce my right to carry, say a Glock 17, in Illinois , California, and New York. You use LEOSA as an example but remember this. As far as the feds are concerned, they are the lords and the american people their subjects. They(lords) expect LEO's to be their enforcers when it comes down to "regulating" us. In other words they trust them. I do agree that our founding fathers meant for us to carry firearms anywhere within the borders of the US, unfortunately we have WAY more important issues to fix first.

  6. #20
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    Its ugly watchin' folks cut'n off their noses to spite their face.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  7. #21
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,647
    ^^^this from the guy that's ready to usher in the newest flavor of AWB topped with mag cap limits...

    Oh the irony...
    OD*, Bark'n and thephanatik like this.
    NRA Life Member

    "I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady

  8. #22
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    14,581
    I don't know. Haven't seen their faces. Maybe they need to cut off their noses.
    Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone. Oh, to be young again.
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  9. #23
    New Member Array jorge141020's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    2
    You guys make good points about federal regulation being in control of our right to carry and I respect your opinions. To explain why I'm in favor of national reciprocity, I live in the eastern panhandle of WV. Sandwiched (less than 20 mins.) between MD and VA. It's not uncommon for me to travel within all three states in a single day. My wife and I both work in MD, we live in WV and we shop in VA (because VA stores are closest to our rural home). Just today for example, I went to work in MD, unarmed because they do not have reciprocity with WV, drove directly to the Gander Mountain in VA to buy some ammo, then went home in WV. Because MD doesn't recognize my WV permit, I spent the entire day unarmed. Now, I'm fine on the weekends when I don't have to work because I stay in WV and VA where there is reciprocity, unless I visit family (who all live in MD). Anyway, I don't want to get too long winded, I just wanted to explain myself. But you guys do make very valid points and I respect your views. What's good for the goose isn't always good for the gander. Personally, I'm hoping the Woolard case will ultimately remove the good and substantial reason clause from the MD permit requirments, then I'd be all set.

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Arrrrrrr ayyyyyeeeeeee AGain! Just because you folks don't travel and think the US should work
    exactly as it did in 1860 is no excuse for messing with my (and everyone else's) potentially greatly improved ability
    to carry across the land.

    Been on this board for years. Its always the same bunch, ready to pour cold water on a good idea out of
    fear.

    LEOSA has been good. FOPA has been good. National reciprocity would be great.

    No one is suggesting that Uncle issue the licenses and NO ONE EVER HAS. The only thing being suggested is
    that every state honor licenses issued by other jurisdictions. Its a great idea and way past time.

    Duh, do they question your marriage when you go to another state? Do they stop you from driving?

    I don't get it. All you "pro 2A" folks who don't want nationwide carry permissible.

    You were for gun owner rights before you were against them? Or were against them before you were for them?

    Look, I know some of you want licensing to disappear entirely but realistically that won't happen.
    So, take a good deal when you can get it, if you can get it.
    Hop, I have great respect for you and I agree with you on many issues. This is not one of them.

    Just because the feds haven't yet tried to muck with LEOSA and other measures doesn't mean that some new whippersnappers in Washington won't do so in the future. And besides, as has been pointed out, law enforcement is, at least currently, still on the good side of the fed. Gun owners are already on the wrong side of this argument as far as the current administration is concerned. Obama probably won't push his gun agenda too far, at least for now, but only because he knows he doesn't have enough support for it. However if the American people see too many more shootings this could change. And if the power to control carry laws has been granted to the federal gov't then he or a future administration could take stronger action, and congress may at that time not have the votes to stop it.

    I am not a conspiracy theorist and I'm not being paranoid. However this is a real possible scenario. So, as I stated in my post above, my vote goes to keeping carry laws in the hands of the states.

    I certainly respect your right to have the opinion you do, as I have the right to have the opinion I do.

  11. #25
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    Quote Originally Posted by SmokinFool View Post
    Hop, I have great respect for you and I agree with you on many issues.
    Thank you.

    This is not one of them.

    Just because the feds haven't yet tried to muck with LEOSA and other measures doesn't mean that some new whippersnappers in Washington won't do so in the future.
    National reciprocity does not involve the Feds doing anything but insisting that the states recognize
    each others permits. That insistence could be well based on 2A and on the right we all have to travel
    among the states.

    The opposition I've seen has been based on 2 issues: 1_ fear of some future act by the Feds which they might do anyway, reciprocity or not if Congress were inclined 2_State's rights. Well, state's right to what? Impede
    travel? Possibly if National Reciprocity were passed The Supremes would have to rule
    on a dispute balancing -2A or 10; but that would be OK. It would help clear the air
    on several important issues.

    IMO National Reciprocity is a very pro 2A position unless you are looking for the utopian solution
    of pure 2A with the widest latitude given to individuals. History has shown us that won't happen.
    So again, let's go for something that will benefit a guy like jorge (OP) who has a sticky situation; and
    as long time participants will know, I have almost the same situation when I pass through that region
    of the country---and worse, hit a brick wall at the Jersey border.

    I'd rather be able to take a 642 or an LCP than nothing, and nothing is all I'm able to take now.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  12. #26
    Distinguished Member Array shadowwalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Ghost Ridge USA
    Posts
    1,256
    Holy flying monkeys Batman

  13. #27
    Member Array SwordMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    235
    I signed it! Of course I don't want the government infringing on my 2nd amendment rights...but they do anyway! So, wouldn't you rather have a national carry permit rather than a state one?

  14. #28
    Member Array drbald1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    347
    Hop, I think I agree with you. However, the deep cynical voice inside reminds me of my recent round of tomfoolery with FEMA (getting an exemption from flood insurance - they determined my risk using a FLAT map rather than a TOPO map!) and I hate the thought of that same bureaucratic nonsense added to the morass of 2A restrictions.

    So I want to agree that a law forcing states to recognize CCDW like a driver's license is a good thing. But I'm afraid instead of getting more rights, we'll see restrictions not only on CCDW's, but on driver's licenses as well. In principle, I like it a lot. It's hard to have faith in the practical application of such legislation.

    I'll also admit to being a little selfish. KY is a fantastic state in which to own a firearm. I don't want to lose any of that to accommodate someone from IL. Selfish? Yup. Legitimate concern....I think it might be.
    Last edited by drbald1; January 17th, 2013 at 10:48 PM. Reason: speling are gud

  15. #29
    Member Array DannyB1954's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pahrump Nv 89060
    Posts
    119
    It would depend entirely on how the law was written. As the drivers license example was used, one state must respect the other state's licence, but the Federal Government has no right to take away your drivers license.

    I personally like the idea the the Second Amendment is your concealed carry permit everywhere. The right to bear arms should not limit one to keeping their arms in their home, car, business, or even one particular State.

  16. #30
    Member Array DZUS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    81
    Thanks anyway, but no thanks.

    Somewhere along the line, the Feinsteins and the Ayers-s would find a way to use this as a nation-wide lever to unilaterally remove the concealed carry right that many, but not all states currently recognize. The "dark side" loves to concentrate authority, which eventually concentrates power.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

2013 national right to carry reciprocity act
,
national carry reciprocity 2013
,

national right to carry 2013

,
national right to carry act 2013 progress
,
national right to carry reciprocity act
,

national right to carry reciprocity act 2013

,
national right to carry reciprocity act senate 2013
,

national right to carry reciprocity act status

,
reciprocity-chart for maryland drivers license
,
right to carry reciprocity act 2013
,
sites supporting the nation ccw reciprocity act
,
status of reciprocity act
Click on a term to search for related topics.