Defensive Carry banner

Cornyn introduces Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014

10K views 193 replies 59 participants last post by  Ghost1958 
#1 ·
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) today introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014, which would allow individuals with concealed carry privileges in their home state to exercise those rights in any other state that also has concealed carry laws. The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Sens. Thune (R-SD), Vitter (R-LA), Graham (R-SC), Boozman (R-AR), Inhofe (R-OK), Crapo (R-ID), Burr (R-NC), Cochran (R-MS), Johanns (R-NE), Enzi (R-WY), Moran (R-KS), Roberts (R-KS), and Portman (R-OH).

Cornyn introduces Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014
 
#10 ·
Having the federal government involved in this scares the hell out of me. I would say the same as you.

If things were as they should be, yes, my CPL would be good anywhere just like my driver's license. Full faith and credit. It shouldn't take more laws for that.

Keeping this at the state level is like a last line of defense. Getting the feds involved is putting power over my rights in the hands of a small group of people too far removed from local responsibility and accountability to have any hope they will PROTECT those rights instead of blowing them around with whatever the current political wind in Washington DC is.

I try and get a job done every day to keep our fighting men and women equipped with the tools they need, and whenever anyone from DC gets involved in the process things go downhill quickly.

Don't want their "help".
 
#4 ·
Yeah all I am seeing is the FOPA of 86 all over again that is my worry .. Photo caption Fictional character Photography



If that is all it does to the letter say " if you have a permit to carry you can carry anywhere " then maybe I will be cool. But you think the fifdome and kindome of HI/CA/NY/NJ etc etc will be happy if three serfe can get a permit from AZ/FL/UT and carry .

We shall see .. It would be nice if there were no tricks
 
#5 ·
If they want to get pro 2A then start introducing bills to repeal the NFA and other unconstitutional gun regulations. Undoing what they have illegally already done is the only constitutional thing they can do. Adding some other reg pro or anti is out of their authority granted by the 2A. Smoke and mirrors. Again
 
#8 ·
Yep they took out the 86 and 89 laws and de classed at least silencer from NFA that be good
 
  • Like
Reactions: gatorbait51
#6 ·
There are a number of states that would cry to high heaven if this went through and try to make it as difficult as possible. NY, CA, IL, MA, MD, and maybe CO come to mind.

I too am leery of things like this that sound good. Almost too good to be true. There's gotta be a catch in there somewhere. I know they tried this last year and it was close but no cigar. You know Dirty Harry Reid won't let it come up for a vote and obambam would veto it anyway.
 
#7 ·
Yep HI too dont forget they hate permit to carry oh you can get them but you would have to come into the station with a knife in your back and a bag o moeny for the sarfie in the other .


But my wooris is what other crap they thrown in there like what happen back in 86 ( Ie oh no gun tracking but oh no more FA guns..._
 
  • Like
Reactions: gatorbait51
#9 ·
Note that all co-sponsors are republicans?

They know it won't go through -- they also know that 2014 is an election year and perhaps some of them are running for reelection in pro 2nd amendment districts, so this would make them look good to their constituents even though it won't pass.

It's Washington. It's all politics.
 
#58 ·
That is what is happening in TEXAS, Rhino Rep. Sen. John Cornyn is trying to deflect from his true voting record and start the debate about something that will never get passed the White House.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gatorbait51
#12 ·
I didn't mean to pick on CO. I just know they still have a dem majority which can still cause issues. I'm sure the good people of CO will correct this at the next election possible to do so.

You are right too. The anti-gun crowd loves to use emotion to get more anti-gun laws passed. Forget logic. It's not in their vocabulary.
 
#13 ·
"Odds of this getting this through a Democrat-controlled Senate are iffy, but might stand a slightly better chance than they did last last year. Red state Democrats already being battered over their Obamacare 'votes don’t want to risk alienating a rapidly-growing shooting community during the mid-terms elections with a lame-duck President."
 
#14 ·
Let him and the 50 States come up with a bill covering all States you will be restricted to carrying it n a locked vault no ammo. And have to stop at each state border and declare it.
No thanks. He is just looking for a few votes.
 
#17 ·
Dang it, every time something like this comes up which would be really really really good for travelers, the usual complainers about the Federal Government pop up.

There would be tremendous benefit for travelers if it were ever actually enacted.

As for the right of Uncle to have such a bill, it is a proper exercise of the Federal Government's authority to protect your
2A rights against encroachment by the various states. Uncle isn't going to be the licensing authority, that remains in your own
state.

If you believe there should be no such thing as a license to carry, take that up with your state legislature, don't blame
the Senators who (even if motivated by partisan purposes) are attempting to make things better.

Oh, and it doesn't matter if a handful of states cry about it. That's not an excuse for Congress to do nothing.
 
#27 ·
I too, think its a ploy to get votes. I also dont like the idea of the Feds regulating CC.

Heck, they might get it in their heads to regulate that we only need "common sense guns"... like a brown bess musket, or the like.
Feds would not be regulating CC. They won't be issuing licenses. They won't be controlling who gets a license. That will still
be a state by state thing and nothing in the proposed legislation would change that.

I'm floored by people who are so distrustful of everything and everyone that they can't see when something good is
put on their plate.

"They might" and then again "they might not." You know, when you reach out to shake someones hand they might or they might not take it. Look at what was proposed (and yes it was proposed for partisan reasons not out of love), and consider
the good that would come from it.

In the other thread about the tragedy on I-81 in PA just north of Maryland border we have EXHIBIT 1 of why
national reciprocity is essential.

Let's be realistic about expectations. We aren't going to get nation wide "Constitutional Carry," and even if we did IMO it would be a disaster.

This proposal is good. It is good for anyone who has a license and who travels.

Let's not let irrational fear cause opposition to it.
 
#19 ·
Even IF it passes in the house and the senate, I find it highly likely that it will be killed by a veto. In all reality it will probably never even make it out of committee. Having said that, this is a bad idea IMO. The government has been doing such a good job with Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Healthcare, budgeting, spending, IRS ethics, Foreign affairs (Syria, North Korea, Iran), and the like, we should trust them with our right to carry too :rolleyes:
 
#20 ·
I'm mixed on this one. Ideally, national recognition of the 2nd Amendment would be a good thing. Pragmatically, there hasn't been a favorable piece of gun legislation to come out of Washington since the Second Amendment was written. The same does not hold true at the state level. The right to carry means nothing to us all states are compelled to comply with restrictions currently in place in, say New York, Maryland or Hawaii.
The result of passage of such legislation might very well be de facto restrictive may-issue nationwide. No, thanks.
 
#23 ·
In concept, outstanding; in reality, bad legislation. Too many unintended consequences.

Like the Environmental Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and many others of that ilk, the intent was fantastic, but the Courts, regulation creep by bureaucrats, and constant meddling by activist radical enviros have perverted what good there was into oppressive, freedom choking rules.

No, thank you. I am fine with local control.
 
#29 ·
In concept, outstanding; in reality, bad legislation. Too many unintended consequences.

Like the Environmental Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and many others of that ilk, the intent was fantastic, but the Courts, regulation creep by bureaucrats, and constant meddling by activist radical enviros have perverted what good there was into oppressive, freedom choking rules.

No, thank you. I am fine with local control.
Really? Like what--- Participants here complain of "freedom choking rules" and when a law is proposed that will bring more freedom it is knee jerk rejected. Wow.
 
#25 ·
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) today introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014, which would allow individuals with concealed carry privileges in their home state to exercise those rights in any other state that also has concealed carry laws. The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Sens. Thune (R-SD), Vitter (R-LA), Graham (R-SC), Boozman (R-AR), Inhofe (R-OK), Crapo (R-ID), Burr (R-NC), Cochran (R-MS), Johanns (R-NE), Enzi (R-WY), Moran (R-KS), Roberts (R-KS), and Portman (R-OH).

Cornyn introduces Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014
Watch them attach an assault-weapon ban to it at the last second the way they attached the machine-gun ban to FOPA.
 
#35 ·
Please don't lump CO in with the other states. While the urban areas are an issue people are starting to wake up. If all goes well the mistake gun laws from 2013 will be done away with in the courts or by future laws. Along the front range they did a nice job of getting rid of three anti-gun democrates and if all goes well more will fall in 2014 elections.
 
#43 ·
In CA once you have a carry license there are very few laws restricting it. We can carry anywhere but a Post Office, Government building, Court house, Bars, etc. We do have a ten round mag limit, But other than that its pretty straight foreword. The restrictions on carry can for the most part fit all on one type written sheet. If reciprocity works like a drivers license, and a traveler who is licensed in his home state wants to carry in CA, and will follow the laws of the state of CA, I see that as a good thing! Just like a drivers license, when you enter CA you are bound by CA traffic laws. When I travel out of CA I can drive as fast as the law allows But I can no longer turn right at a red light. [ its legal here in CA]. I just need to follow the laws of the state I'm in. The drivers license law made it illegal for states to restrict out of state drivers. its as simple as that. DR
 
#44 ·
In CA once you have a carry license there are very few laws restricting it. We can carry anywhere but a Post Office, Government building, Court house, Bars, etc. We do have a ten round mag limit, But other than that its pretty straight foreword. The restrictions on carry can for the most part fit all on one type written sheet. If reciprocity works like a drivers license, and a traveler who is licensed in his home state wants to carry in CA, and will follow the laws of the state of CA, I see that as a good thing! Just like a drivers license, when you enter CA you are bound by CA traffic laws. When I travel out of CA I can drive as fast as the law allows But I can no longer turn right at a red light. [ its legal here in CA]. I just need to follow the laws of the state I'm in. The drivers license law made it illegal for states to restrict out of state drivers. its as simple as that. DR
Which exactly they type of deal-breaker I am talking about. Not to worry, there are others. How many residents of California are licensed to carry?
 
#46 ·
On its face this looks good, right? I mean, yes, there shouldn't be a need for this law as it's part of the Supreme law of the land, but we live in a world of reality; any law that constrains government while we work on successfully defeating unconstitutional laws in the courts is good, right?

Problem: Cornyn is largely known as a pure politician. He's effective, but his first focus is on re-election and has been repeatedly manipulated by that fear. If he spent less time hobnobbing in DC he might realize his fears are usually unfounded, but I digress.

Problem: This law is predicated on the premise that states have a right to decide concealed carry laws. This law then usurps that authority by forcing them to abide by the conditions that they did not and could not have voted for from another state. This sets yet another bad precedent for states' rights.

A better solution may be this: Work in your state house to recognize concealed carry permits from other states instead. If you disagree with the entire concept of concealed carry, then work in your state house towards Vermontization as well... but reciprocity in your state will pass much sooner, and set a good precedent towards your end-goal. This reinforces states' rights, whereas a Federal solution only reinforces the abdication of them.
 
#50 ·
So we just let the courts hash it all out because we don't trust Congress? Since when have we been afraid to take on power and corruption? At least the courts are required to make reasonable and public arguments.

Hey, wait a minute...
 
  • Like
Reactions: gatorbait51
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top