Federal right-to-carry legislation-Nationwide concealed carry reciprocity?

[THE CORONER]

HR-197: National Right to Carry Bill Introduced
January 25th, 2009 · 4 Comments
From the NRA:

U.S. Representatives Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), recently introduced H.R. 197– the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009″–a bill that would provide national recognition for valid state Right-to-Carry licensees.

The bill would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state, to carry a concealed firearm in any other state if the permit holder meets certain criteria. In states that issue permits, a state’s laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal standard would apply. The bill would not create a federal licensing system; it would simply require the states to recognize each other’s carry permits, just as they recognize drivers’ licenses.

Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) is expected to introduce the Senate companion bill in the near future. Rep. Stearns has introduced such legislation since 1995.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 197!

If you are not already a member, please join the NRA today!

 responses so far ↓
1 dean0 // Jan 26, 2009 at 10:44 am
Too bad that there has to be a NEW law to validate our RIGHTS

2 Steve L // Jan 28, 2009 at 4:30 pm
It is about time this becomes a law. I as a citizen of the United States of America appreciate this action.

3 Jeremy // Jan 28, 2009 at 5:58 pm
I hope the recognition of all,”Free-mans” second amendment rights are finally recognized. It’s a shame a person that is legal in his or her homestate can’t legally carry thier firearm accross state boundries when the criminal mind doesn’t care.

4 Mike // Mar 1, 2009 at 10:35 pm
This is a case of prudent people attempting to pass a prudent right to carry law from State to State. Wake Up D.C. and do what we are telling you

What's  your opinion on this proposed legislation?

[tombogan03884]

 I've already been on the elected officials about it. Pass it or find a REAL job.

[THE CORONER]

Yeah, I think the feds should mandate nationwide reciprocity.  Otherwise, traveling the country unarmed is out of the question.  I won't break the law to carry concealed.  I can see local jurisdictions messing with us anyways; like in Cleveland.  They got a bunch of anti-gunners there.  Hope it goes through.  I carry everyday, everywhere I'm legal to do so.  Therefore, I don't ever want to be "sniped" on some local non-preemptive chump charge.

[TAB]

Its a bad idea...

the only way I would ever be behind a nat'l CCW reciprocity law is, if all states have the same reqs, same  DQs and agree to it.  Trust me, we don't want the federal goverment steping in here... more so now then ever.

[fightingquaker13]

I've been involved in a bit of a discussion about this on the "down range" forum, but this is where the thread belongs. With your indulgence I'll repost a a bit of what another member and I had to say about this today, as I'd really like to hear some opinions. I am on the one hand, very supportive of this, but on the other fearful it would let the national DNC muck about with existing state laws.
Waiting for your .02 worth
fightingquaker13


The following is the corrspondence between tomboggan myself

E Mail I just sent B Hore:

You claimed you supported the 2nd amendment, If so you should be pushing the "national right to carry legislation being proposed. (From tomboggan)

I have some serious questions about this, having not read the bill. I very strogly support the idea in theory. My worry, and it might seem strange to those who have followed the ongoing debate betwen me and Tom on the state ccl thread, is that such a bill will potentially impose stricter federal controls than currently exist in the states. While Tom and I differ on whether a practical test should be part of a NEW!!! shall issue law, I think we are on the same page when it comes to leaving current law alone, so as not to give the antis an opportunity to start setting new restrictions and requirements. This may sound selfish coming from someone who lives in a "shall issue" state that enjoys 20 odd state reciprocity, but I still  fear giving Kennedy and Pelosi an oppotunity to poke their noses into existing state law. If anyone has any thoughts and or knowledge about sponsorship or text of the law, I'd love hear it.
Fightingquaker13

Fightingquaker, You seem to have lost the [  ]  between quote and comment. 

As I heard Senator Vitter explain it, the permit process would remain the same but ALL CCW states would be required to honor ALL CCW's (National reciprocity, rather than national CCW) Since no 2 states have the same laws the permit holder would be responsible for finding out the laws of the state he was going to.
Hear the same interview I heard here;
http://guntalk.libsyn.com/  03-01 part A

Check out this thread too: http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php/topic,5499.0/topicseen.html
(From tomboggan)

Let"s see if I can get the  [ ] thing right this time. This sounds good IF it doesn't get loaded up with anti amendments. I also have  a theoretical quandry. While the idea of a national shall issue permit (or its close enough equivelent, via mandatory reciprocity) is something I support, is this a violation of states rights and federalism.? After all conditions in New Jersey and North Dakota are different, should they be allowed to legislate accordingly? (Although I hear there is a dangerous SOB running around with MY assault rifle up there).   I'd be inclined to say  no since the second amendment is federal, but its not an insignificant concern. What about states like Vt. where there is no permit? Would this make it harder to get ccw passed in states like Illinois, New Jersey etc if they have to worry about a bunch of crazed maple syrup addicted, pro-Bartlett yahoos showing up wih unlicensed Howard Dean posters? I mean it is something we have to think about strategically. We can't let the perfect become the enemy of the good, and it seems like the states are doing a pretty good  about working out reciprocity. For me the goal is nation wide "shall issue" I just worry that we are potentially buying a lot of bad unforseen consequences in terms of making it harder to get anti leaning states to pass ccw laws. On the other hand fortune favors the bold. This isn't an opinion, just thinking out loud.
fightinquaker13

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

 Senator Vitter CLEARLY and REPEATED stated that the CCW holder would be required to obey the laws of the state HE WAS IN.regardless of where his permit was issued. In this instance it IS like driving, in Ca. U turns are perfectly legal, in NH they are not," I'm not from around here" will not get you out of the ticket. Alaska already issues permits to people who wish to carry in states that have reciprocity with them, Vermonters can not carry anywhere but Vt. or  Alaska, because they DO NOT issue CCW's. They are the only ones who would have to consider changing their law.
And as for TAB, He's a Fudd .

[bryand71]

I have to point this out, but we already have a CCW law for all the States. It is called the Second Amendment! Last time I checked, it stated the people have the right to keep and BEAR arms.

[tombogan03884]

 It also says it "shall not be infringed", you see how well THAT worked out. All because some dumb sh!t had a "better" idea.

[TAB]

I have to point this out, but we already have a CCW law for all the States. It is called the Second Amendment! Last time I checked, it stated the people have the right to keep and BEAR arms.

I tell you what, come to CA ccw, go up to an offer and say" the 2nd amendment is my CCCW"  when you win your court case, I will agree with you.


Actually anywhere where you don't have a valid CCW will do just as well.

[bryand71]

Ah, but there in lies the problem, the PEOPLE have gotten lazy and allowed the Politicians to tell us and make laws that aren't needed. But you already knew that.