I heared recently that a new Bill was introduced in the Senate. I belive by a Senator in Va. Anyway the gist of the bill in to make CC permits like DL's, good in all states. Sounds great to me and if it is true we all need to contact our senators and tell them to support this Bill. Anyone heard of this, maybe someone Virgina. Im looking into it myself. I will post anything I find out.
New CC Bill in Senate
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Joined
·
2,192 Posts
Haven't heard anything about this but I like the idea...as long as it's a "Full faith and credit" type situation (like DL's) and NOT a federally administered CC license. I personally don't like the idea of a national concealed carry license simply because I think the federal government has too much power as it is (not to mention the fact that the thought of the ATF or FBI running such a program makes my blood run cold).
Joined
·
5,334 Posts
Virginia Senator Geogre Allen, former Governor, has indeed introduced legislation that would require all states to honor all permits. Here's a press release from the anti's:
http://www.gunguys.com/#post-1143
http://www.gunguys.com/#post-1143
Joined
·
6,539 Posts
Here is a link to Senator Allen's proposed legislation:
http://allen.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=LegislativeOffice.SponsoredLegislation
The number is S.3275
http://allen.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=LegislativeOffice.SponsoredLegislation
The number is S.3275
Joined
·
65 Posts
Yes it indeed would be nice if it were to happen. In one of the other forums here, folks have been showing their permits, and I started wondering, why do we have so many different types of permits?? I mean it is nice that each state is different, but you would think that they would come up with something simular. Hoefully we all can contact our senators and urge them to side with this senator and get this passed...
Joined
·
6,539 Posts
Contact Your Senators and Representative!
The companion bill in the House is H. R. 4547:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.04547:
I noted with some concern that the last action on the House version was 16 February 2006, so I sent an email to Mr. Gordon (one of the co-sponsors in the House and my Represenative), the text of which follows:
"Representative Gordon, I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your co-sponsorship and support of H. R. 4547, the bill to create a National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity law. I have noted with some concern on “Thomas,” however, that the last major action indicated for this bill was its referral to the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on 16 February 2006. Has any further action occurred on this bill?
I sincerely believe that concealed carry by law-abiding citizens increases the safety of all Americans, since it reduces the level of confidence with which criminal predators may approach their intended victims. Anecdotal accounts from criminals in prison indicate that they are far more deterred from crime by fear of encountering an armed citizen than they are by fear of encountering law enforcement officers. States which, unlike Tennessee, do not recognize the right of the law-abiding to carry means for self-defense essentially disarm potential victims for criminals and make their criminal activities easier.
Once again, I thank you for your co-sponsorship and support of this important legislation and respectfully request that you continue to do all in your power to make H. R. 4547 and its companion bill, S.3275, the law of the land. Thank you for all of your efforts on behalf of Tennesseans and all Americans!"
I sent similar notes to Senators Alexander and Frist asking them to co-sponsor and support the Senate version and noted who the current twelve co-sponsors are (I think it helps to let members of Congress know that one knows how to track their votes). I also sent a note to Senator Allen thanking him for his sponsorship of this legislation:
"Senator Allen, I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your authorship of S.3275. I shall be contacting Senators Alexander and Frist to encourage them to co-sponsor this important legislation. As a former resident of Staunton (where both of my sons were born), I maintain an active interest in the affairs of Virginia, and I am very pleased to note that a Virginian is leading the way on this national issue.
Again, thank you for your efforts to safeguard all Americans!"
Please send your thoughts to your members of Congress. November approaches!!
The companion bill in the House is H. R. 4547:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.04547:
I noted with some concern that the last action on the House version was 16 February 2006, so I sent an email to Mr. Gordon (one of the co-sponsors in the House and my Represenative), the text of which follows:
"Representative Gordon, I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your co-sponsorship and support of H. R. 4547, the bill to create a National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity law. I have noted with some concern on “Thomas,” however, that the last major action indicated for this bill was its referral to the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on 16 February 2006. Has any further action occurred on this bill?
I sincerely believe that concealed carry by law-abiding citizens increases the safety of all Americans, since it reduces the level of confidence with which criminal predators may approach their intended victims. Anecdotal accounts from criminals in prison indicate that they are far more deterred from crime by fear of encountering an armed citizen than they are by fear of encountering law enforcement officers. States which, unlike Tennessee, do not recognize the right of the law-abiding to carry means for self-defense essentially disarm potential victims for criminals and make their criminal activities easier.
Once again, I thank you for your co-sponsorship and support of this important legislation and respectfully request that you continue to do all in your power to make H. R. 4547 and its companion bill, S.3275, the law of the land. Thank you for all of your efforts on behalf of Tennesseans and all Americans!"
I sent similar notes to Senators Alexander and Frist asking them to co-sponsor and support the Senate version and noted who the current twelve co-sponsors are (I think it helps to let members of Congress know that one knows how to track their votes). I also sent a note to Senator Allen thanking him for his sponsorship of this legislation:
"Senator Allen, I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your authorship of S.3275. I shall be contacting Senators Alexander and Frist to encourage them to co-sponsor this important legislation. As a former resident of Staunton (where both of my sons were born), I maintain an active interest in the affairs of Virginia, and I am very pleased to note that a Virginian is leading the way on this national issue.
Again, thank you for your efforts to safeguard all Americans!"
Please send your thoughts to your members of Congress. November approaches!!
Senate Bill Text - FYI all
S 3275 IS
109th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 3275
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
May 26, 2006
Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. LOTT, Mrs. DOLE, Mr. VITTER, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. BURR, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. SUNUNU, and Mr. THUNE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. NATIONAL STANDARD FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS BY NONRESIDENTS.
(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
`Sec. 926D. National standard for the carrying of certain concealed firearms by nonresidents
`(a) Definition- In this section, the term `another State' means a State other than the State from which a person holds a license or permit described in subsection (b)(2).
`(b) Authorization- Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, and subject to subsection (c), a person may carry a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce in another State if the person--
`(1) is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm; and
`(2) is carrying a valid license or permit that--
`(A) is issued by a State; and
`(B) permits the person to carry a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device).
`(c) Licensing-
`(1) IN GENERAL- If another State issues licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms, a person may carry a concealed firearm in that State under this section under the same restrictions that apply to the carrying of a concealed firearm by a person to whom that State has issued such a license or permit.
`(2) NO LICENSES BY STATE- Except to the extent expressly permitted by State law, if another State does not issue licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms, a person may not carry a concealed firearm in that State under this section--
`(A) in a police station;
`(B) in a public detention facility;
`(C) in a courthouse;
`(D) in a public polling place;
`(E) at a meeting of a State, county, or municipal governing body;
`(F) in a school;
`(G) at a professional or school athletic event not related to firearms;
`(H) in a portion of an establishment licensed by that State to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises; or
`(I) inside the sterile or passenger area of an airport.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:
`926D. National standard for the carrying of certain concealed firearms by nonresidents.'.
enjoy:congrats:
S 3275 IS
109th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 3275
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
May 26, 2006
Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. LOTT, Mrs. DOLE, Mr. VITTER, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. BURR, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. SUNUNU, and Mr. THUNE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. NATIONAL STANDARD FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS BY NONRESIDENTS.
(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
`Sec. 926D. National standard for the carrying of certain concealed firearms by nonresidents
`(a) Definition- In this section, the term `another State' means a State other than the State from which a person holds a license or permit described in subsection (b)(2).
`(b) Authorization- Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, and subject to subsection (c), a person may carry a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce in another State if the person--
`(1) is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm; and
`(2) is carrying a valid license or permit that--
`(A) is issued by a State; and
`(B) permits the person to carry a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device).
`(c) Licensing-
`(1) IN GENERAL- If another State issues licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms, a person may carry a concealed firearm in that State under this section under the same restrictions that apply to the carrying of a concealed firearm by a person to whom that State has issued such a license or permit.
`(2) NO LICENSES BY STATE- Except to the extent expressly permitted by State law, if another State does not issue licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms, a person may not carry a concealed firearm in that State under this section--
`(A) in a police station;
`(B) in a public detention facility;
`(C) in a courthouse;
`(D) in a public polling place;
`(E) at a meeting of a State, county, or municipal governing body;
`(F) in a school;
`(G) at a professional or school athletic event not related to firearms;
`(H) in a portion of an establishment licensed by that State to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises; or
`(I) inside the sterile or passenger area of an airport.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:
`926D. National standard for the carrying of certain concealed firearms by nonresidents.'.
enjoy:congrats:
Joined
·
6,780 Posts
I can't get behind this.
It would be a federal law overriding a states right to self govern.
States that do not have CCW laws would under this bill be forced to adopt CCW laws with the as stated constraints, which some states with CCW laws already apply in part or full.
If this were to make the CCW license of one state honored by another which also supports CCW then that would make a lot of sense.
This though is not that and would in a real way override the peoples individual right to govern their own intrastate affairs.
- Janq
It would be a federal law overriding a states right to self govern.
States that do not have CCW laws would under this bill be forced to adopt CCW laws with the as stated constraints, which some states with CCW laws already apply in part or full.
If this were to make the CCW license of one state honored by another which also supports CCW then that would make a lot of sense.
This though is not that and would in a real way override the peoples individual right to govern their own intrastate affairs.
- Janq
Joined
·
6,539 Posts
Janq...
I understand your reluctance to intrude into a state's right to govern affairs that are properly theirs under the U.S. Constitution...goodness only knows there is far too little respect for (true) federalism, state authority, and limited national government these days. However, I think the argument for this legislation can be made upon the basis that those states which deny their citizens the right to carry are unconstitutionally violating the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ("No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [in this case, those recognized in the Second Amendment]), which makes this a proper sphere for the application of national authority. At least, that is the way I can justify my support for this bill despite my ordinarily strict-constructionist view of the Constitution. I certainly do, however, understand your concern.
I understand your reluctance to intrude into a state's right to govern affairs that are properly theirs under the U.S. Constitution...goodness only knows there is far too little respect for (true) federalism, state authority, and limited national government these days. However, I think the argument for this legislation can be made upon the basis that those states which deny their citizens the right to carry are unconstitutionally violating the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ("No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [in this case, those recognized in the Second Amendment]), which makes this a proper sphere for the application of national authority. At least, that is the way I can justify my support for this bill despite my ordinarily strict-constructionist view of the Constitution. I certainly do, however, understand your concern.
Could be Win/Lose
If we went to a standarized permit system, would all states assume the same "off limits" areas? I for one would not want to give up the sensible and gunfriendly Colorado laws to a "Happy Medium" arrangement, just to make all the states the same. I would rather have a wallet full of permits and know the laws of each state.
:hand1:
If we went to a standarized permit system, would all states assume the same "off limits" areas? I for one would not want to give up the sensible and gunfriendly Colorado laws to a "Happy Medium" arrangement, just to make all the states the same. I would rather have a wallet full of permits and know the laws of each state.
:hand1:
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Join the discussion
