House Weighs Bill to Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines - Page 3

House Weighs Bill to Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines

This is a discussion on House Weighs Bill to Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; 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 ...

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 257
Like Tree81Likes

Thread: House Weighs Bill to Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines

  1. #31
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,925
    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.
    Some people actually believe, that if this bill were to pass that they could actually enjoy the same constitutional rights that most other citizens enjoy...but this is clearly not the intent.

    This bill would give you the ability to carry in another state...but not your own if your state prohibited it.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/


  2. #32
    GM [OP]
    GM is offline
    VIP Member Array GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,866
    I never thought is would say this, but I hope the gun control groups win and stop this bill.



    "... It cuts across Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives -- even President Obama's base is strongly in favor of this legislation," LaPierre said ..."
    Does it not tell you anything? Remember, what the government gives the government can take.
    "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security"

  3. #33
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,414
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Some people actually believe, that if this bill were to pass that they could actually enjoy the same constitutional rights that most other citizens enjoy...but this is clearly not the intent.

    This bill would give you the ability to carry in another state...but not your own if your state prohibited it.
    You can't carry now in your own state if your own state prohibits it...

    But, if Iowa has a permitting system, and as a resident of that state, I can carry in that state, I could also carry in Illinois, which no one but you and others under LEOSA can do while traveling in or through that state.

    Now, I feel that if I were a resident of Illinois, and learned that other state's residents can carry a weapon to defend themselves in the most crime ridden city in the upper mid west, but I cannot... I would join with others and change the law that does not allow me to carry in my own state. I would do this even if I were a died in the wool liberal...

    Of course, Illinois, and other states with heavy restrictions on carry should "get with the program" anyway... but they are slow to turn...

    Personally, I think the Constitutional statement "...shall not be infringed." should not allow states to dictate that a person can or cannot carry a weapon for self defense... and that there should be no restriction within 1000' of a school, and so on... But there are 2 sides to the state's rights argument. And states can reasonably argue that the federal government should stay out of the state's business entirely.

    Thank you for your response, I did not know that LEOSA was so "open to interpretation."

    Ideally, I'd like to see every state and municipality just uphold the 2nd amendment as it was written (and intended as it was based on state constitutions of the time)... that we all have the God given (or natural) right to defend ourselves by the bearing of arms.

    lacking that, I would settle for national reciprocity.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  4. #34
    New Member Array Hokieforlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Blacksburg VA
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Some people actually believe, that if this bill were to pass that they could actually enjoy the same constitutional rights that most other citizens enjoy...but this is clearly not the intent.

    This bill would give you the ability to carry in another state...but not your own if your state prohibited it.
    Hmm the way that I read it was that you can CC in your own state and any other state that allows CC if you have a license from your state of residence. But you cannot carry in a state that does not allow any form of carry i.e. Illinois.

  5. #35
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,925
    Hmm the way that I read it was that you can CC in your own state and any other state that allows CC if you have a license from your state of residence. But you cannot carry in a state that does not allow any form of carry i.e. Illinois.
    Nope. Read it again.

    See how easy it is to come to a different conclusion?
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  6. #36
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,925
    Ideally, I'd like to see every state and municipality just uphold the 2nd amendment as it was written (and intended as it was based on state constitutions of the time)... that we all have the God given (or natural) right to defend ourselves by the bearing of arms.
    I'm with you on that.

    That would be way to easy though...
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  7. #37
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,414
    Quote Originally Posted by GM View Post
    I never thought is would say this, but I hope the gun control groups win and stop this bill.





    Does it not tell you anything? Remember, what the government gives the government can take.
    Yep, and the gov'ts already done that... with automatic weapons, SBRs, Sawed off shotguns and the like... but If they take away national reciprocity after granting it, then we are no worse off than we are right now, and it is incumbent on the states to agree with one another, (or not) as they do now...
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  8. #38
    VIP Member Array livewire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    2,052
    It amazes me how many of you are deriding this who obviously haven't researched it.

    LEOSA is essentially a nationally-recognized permit. Well, sorta. At any rate, it's confusing, and very much open to interpretation. It's also not really relevant to this discussion.

    HR822 would force any state who issues ANY KIND of CCW permit or license to recognize any other state's license. I would expect that by the time it passed, it would be modified to say that any state has to recognize any resident permit. I don't think the final version would have any impact on nonresident permits. My Arizona permit wouldn't be included in forced recognition, for example.

    As the current text stands, ANY permit must be recognized by ANY state with it's own licensing program. It leaves Vermont to twist, since they don't have a permitting system in place. It also means that if you live in a may-issue state with a policy of denial without "connections" like NY, CA, or HI, you could get a FL or AZ permit and carry there. I doubt that will get through, but you never know.

    If this were a national permit, I would agree with most of you. It would infringe on state's rights, and citizen's rights for that matter. If it were to supersede the locally-issued permits, then it would be in the Fed's lap to change or remove that permitting system later. That's not what we have here.

  9. #39
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,414
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Nope. Read it again.

    See how easy it is to come to a different conclusion?
    Hokie's right, and so's livewire... I misread... IL does not allow permits for citizen carry concealed... so this law would not force IL to reciprocate... Bah... national reciprocity is national reciprocity.... I think all states should refuse to honor Illinois driver's licenses.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  10. #40
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    yes it is:

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

  11. #41
    GM [OP]
    GM is offline
    VIP Member Array GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Yep, and the gov'ts already done that... with automatic weapons, SBRs, Sawed off shotguns and the like... but If they take away national reciprocity after granting it, then we are no worse off than we are right now, and it is incumbent on the states to agree with one another, (or not) as they do now...
    A very interesting point of view
    "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security"

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array livewire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    2,052
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Hokie's right, and so's livewire... I misread... IL does not allow permits for citizen carry concealed... so this law would not force IL to reciprocate... Bah... national reciprocity is national reciprocity.... I think all states should refuse to honor Illinois driver's licenses.
    The difference is that IL issues driver's licenses. Every state does... but if one state decided that nobody could drive, then I wouldn't expect to be able to do so either if I visited their state.

    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    yes it is:
    tl;dr

    Maybe snip that, or bold the relevant sections?

  13. #43
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Quote Originally Posted by livewire9880 View Post
    The difference is that IL issues driver's licenses. Every state does... but if one state decided that nobody could drive, then I wouldn't expect to be able to do so either if I visited their state.



    tl;dr

    Maybe snip that, or bold the relevant sections?
    It is article 1 section 8 of the constitution outlining congresses duties.....

  14. #44
    VIP Member Array livewire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    2,052
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    It is article 1 section 8 of the constitution outlining congresses duties.....
    still, what part of that tells me that the government can require me to purchase an product I don't want to purchase?

  15. #45
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Quote Originally Posted by livewire9880 View Post
    still, what part of that tells me that the government can require me to purchase an product I don't want to purchase?
    Exactly, same thing with national reciprocity ;)

    You have the right to keep and bear arms in all of those states.... this is going to be a slippery slope

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 123456713 ... 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

bill allowing concealed carry across state lines

,

bodyguard 380

,
can i now carry over state lines ltc
,
carry guns through state lines
,

concealed carry

,

defensive carry

,
did the bill pass to carry guns across state lines
,
federal carry across state lines
,
feds seek to control concealed weapons
,

gun permits valid across state lines

,
house gun permit bill
,

house weighs bill to make gun permits valid across state lines

,

kimber solo carry

,
new york state hollow points gun permit
,
state vs federal government issues
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors