Congress Moves ahead on Gun Legislation

kgoam810.com ^ | 27 July, 2011 | NA

[marktwain]

Hemera Technologies/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON ) -- It’s already written in the Constitution's Second Amendment, and now Congress is addressing new legislation that will revise regulations regarding citizens' right to bear arms.

If passed, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity bill would increase the number of legally-owned handguns on American streets and lower the conceal-and-carry restrictions on those weapons.

The new bill would make it legal across all states for out-of-state visitors to conceal and carry firearms, so long as they are permitted to do so in their home states. This would essentially make the conceal-and-carry laws of California, Illinois, and New York obsolete.

[marktwain]

"The new bill would make it legal across all states for out-of-state visitors to conceal and carry firearms, so long as they are permitted to do so in their home states."

The significant sentence. No permits required, once you get constitutional carry in your state.

[AnAmericanAbroad]

A positive step forward.

Personally, I’d like to see a federal “shall-issue” CCW.

[Spktyr]

Not a chance in hell it will pass this Senate. Or that the Obamination will sign it.

[MikeSteelBe]

“Personally, I’d like to see a federal “shall-issue” CCW.”

We already have that. It’s called the 2nd Amendment.

[Sooth2222]

...and the odds that the Senate might pass this and Obama would sign it into law?

This sounds like something else that might need to wait until 2013.

[Dead Corpse]

Exactly. The rest of this is unnecessary window dressing.

[MikeSteelBe]

I would say that any laws denying our right to bear arms are unconstitutional treason.

[W. W. SMITH]

When a drivers license is issued it has codes on it allowing or requiring certain things. Just add to the process a background check and if clear a code on the license that would enable an individual to walk in, buy a gun and walk out with it.

The only ones needing permits would be those with criminal records. The permits would be “may issue” not “shall issue” by the county Sheriff. Good only in county of residence, or only deer season or rifle only, but never concealed carry.

The political left always wants to put the onus on the law abiding . The above would put the onus on those with past history of crime.

[Jack Hammer]

Nice idea, but...

the phrase “a snowball’s chance in hell” comes to mind.

[marktwain]

...and the odds that the Senate might pass this and Obama would sign it into law? This sounds like something else that might need to wait until 2013.

The Senate passed this a little more than a year ago with 58 votes, as I recall. It needed 60 to become an amendment to a bill that Obama really wanted. That is how we did away with the ban on carrying in national parks. That was when we had several less Republicans in the Senate.

[BCR #226]

To hell with shall issue. I have a problem with someone else dictating my ability to defend myself and my family. I want what the Founding Fathers intended. Constitutional Carry nationwide.

NO asking permission of the Government that has shown recently that they want to do the American people HARM through project Gunwalker. Why the hell should we care about the law if our own Government doesn’t? If they are above the law, so should it be for every American.

[Dead Corpse]

And I would agree with you. Other than Constitutional Amendment, any gun control “law” is a violation of USC Title 18 Section 242.

[docbnj]

This does no good for NJ residents, who can’t get CCW permits in their own state.

[MrB]

“Personally, I’d like to see a federal “shall-issue” CCW.”

We already have that. It’s called the 2nd Amendment.

dittobump

[ArrogantBustard]

This would essentially make the conceal-and-carry laws of California, Illinois, and New York obsolete.

No problem ... said laws are already repugnant to the Constitution.

[Cboldt]

-- The significant sentence. No permits required, once you get constitutional carry in your state. --

I believe that the news report misstates the proposed law.

National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 - Amends the federal criminal code to authorize a person who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in one state, and who is not prohibited from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm under federal law, to carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) in another state in accordance with the restrictions of that state.

[Dead Corpse]

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human Right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. - L. Neil Smith. The Atlanta Declaration

[Cboldt]

There have been a number of these proposed state-reciprocity laws, both in the House and Senate. I assume these are for show, and not for go.

See in the 111th Congress:
H.R.197 - National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009
H.R.1620 - Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act of 2009
S.371 - Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009
S.845 - Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009.

The bill referred to in the article is H.R.822 - National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011, introduced on February 18, 2011.

[Seamus Mc Gillicuddy]

So,if a NJ resident has a Virginia Nonresident CCW, will it allow the NJ resident to carry in NJ? I’ve seen posts where it says it won’t, some clarification would be great.

[Cboldt]

-- So,if a NJ resident has a Virginia Nonresident CCW, will it allow the NJ resident to carry in NJ? I've seen posts where it says it won't, some clarification would be great. --

I don't think you'll find clarification in the proposed statutory language.

(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, 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.

(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.

(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.

Points of indefinite application:

• "a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses" Does this mean "shall issue" states only, or states that have a mechanism that allows permitting at the discretion of the issuing authority?
• "does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes." Similar issue as the point above - without a permit (and especially where there is no right to a permit), the default condition of all states that are not "constitutional carry" is to prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents.
• (c) and (d) might be construed as contradictory. In (c), an out of state permitee can circumvent restrictions that bind an in-state permittee, but under (d), there is a claim of "no preemption." This can be reconciled by finding that (d) only pertains to the permitting process, but I do not trust a state or federal court to find for a RKBA defendant, EVER.