• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

National Right to Carry

Rollbar

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
383
Location
Nevada
http://www.usacarry.com/national-ri...utm_campaign=USACN-3-14-2012&utm_medium=email


“National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012” introduced in U.S. Senate

by NRA-ILA on MARCH 14, 2012 in NATIONAL FIREARM NEWS, NEWS

“National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012” introduced in U.S. Senate
Today, March 13, U.S. Senators Mark Begich (D-Alaska) and Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) introduced S. 2188, the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012.” The bill is the Senate companion to H. R. 822,which was approved by the U. S. House last November by a vote of 272-154.

S. 2188, like H.R. 822, would allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed handgun in any other state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes. A state’s laws governing where concealed handguns may be carried would apply within its borders.

Today 49 states either issue carry permits or otherwise authorize law-abiding people to carry firearms outside the home for self-defense. 41 states have fair “shall issue” permit systems that allow any law-abiding person to get a permit.

In contrast to dire predictions from anti-gun groups, Right-to-Carry laws have been enormously successful. Interstate reciprocity will serve as a fundamental protection of the right to self-defense by providing people with the ability to protect themselves not only in their home states, but anywhere they travel where carry concealed carry is legal.

Contrary to the false claims of some, these bills would not create federal gun registration or gun owner licensing, nor would they allow any federal agency to establish a federal standard for a carry permit or impose gun control restrictions of any kind.

These bills would have no effect on permitless carry laws, currently on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Wyoming and Vermont, that allow concealed carry without a permit. In addition, Vermont residents would be able to take advantage of S. 2188 and H.R. 822 by obtaining a permit from one of the many states that offer non-resident permits.

Please contact your U.S. Senators today and urge them to cosponsor S. 2188. You can call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or send them an email by clicking here
 

ravir3511

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
13
Location
Sparks NV
This may be unpopular but

My one major issue with this and its companion house bill, is that it could potentially stop initiatives at the state level to fix state law. For example, it could stop any momentum within California to fix their may issue law to shall issue law, or even constitutional carry, as it is possible that Pro-2nd A residents of that state can now get a NV CCW and carry in CA, so what is the incentive for them to fix CA's law. The same holds true for NY, NJ, HI, MD, DC, etc etc. The residents of those states, now have a work around, and now potentially have no reason to lobby their individual states to respect the 2nd ammendment.

Am I saying this will happen? I don't know and personally I would welcome all visitors to NV to carry a means to defend themselves without the need for a permit (constitutional carry), however while we do have the permitting process is in place, then I feel that both bills should be amended to read a resident permit from your home state unless your state does not issue permits (VT, IL) then a non-resident permit is valid. I do see this as usurping soverignity of the states to subjucate their citizens with regards to residents of that state circumventing state law and obtaining permits from other states, as I've stated before fix your state laws instead of skirting them.

Which is why in my personal opinion I Like Nevada's language that if you are a resident of the state of NV then you must have a Nevada CCW to carry in Nevada. Flame on
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
My one major issue with this and its companion house bill, is that it could potentially stop initiatives at the state level to fix state law. For example, it could stop any momentum within California to fix their may issue law to shall issue law, or even constitutional carry, as it is possible that Pro-2nd A residents of that state can now get a NV CCW and carry in CA, so what is the incentive for them to fix CA's law. The same holds true for NY, NJ, HI, MD, DC, etc etc. The residents of those states, now have a work around, and now potentially have no reason to lobby their individual states to respect the 2nd ammendment.

Am I saying this will happen? I don't know and personally I would welcome all visitors to NV to carry a means to defend themselves without the need for a permit (constitutional carry), however while we do have the permitting process is in place, then I feel that both bills should be amended to read a resident permit from your home state unless your state does not issue permits (VT, IL) then a non-resident permit is valid. I do see this as usurping soverignity of the states to subjucate their citizens with regards to residents of that state circumventing state law and obtaining permits from other states, as I've stated before fix your state laws instead of skirting them.

Which is why in my personal opinion I Like Nevada's language that if you are a resident of the state of NV then you must have a Nevada CCW to carry in Nevada. Flame on

State residents are STILL under state statute, as opposed to national statute. In other words, it doesn't fix it for CA residents at all. CA residents would NOT be able to CC in CA with NV CCW.

In other words, from what I have read about the bills, the press release is misleading in that respect. (at least for HR822...)


2188 is the same.

"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"
 
Last edited:

WOD

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
224
Location
Onalaska WA
Sent! I think if this goes through, it will better serve everyone who travels, and assist people with traveling. If this passes, then we can pressure Amtrak to allow carry by law abiding citizens. I also agree, it is up the state residents to keep pressure on their elected officials to fix what's broken, and clarify vague definitions and or intentions of ill written law. I paid to have a drivers license, I paid to have a CPL, it would be nice to be able to use both in the whole USA.
 

WOD

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
224
Location
Onalaska WA
On another point, it may, in time, pave the way to a national constitutional carry act. The wheels of government move slowly, but this will be a good step forward, to create a data point to show, it didn't create a massive crime wave.
 

Merlin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
487
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Exactly my point in another thread. This law may not be the ideal of constitutional carry, but it is a helluva lot better than the current situation, an it gives us a datapoint to back our claims that all hell won't break loose. Baby steps!
Sent from my Windows Phone using Board Express
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
Though I think there are some problems with this bill, (there is a better one offered, Thune-Vitter reciprocity bill), it does go a long way toward getting us back to Constitutional law. We have reciprocal driver’s license because of the "Full Faith" clause in the US constitution which says states must accept the license of all other states. Marriage license is one example. Getting this one passed, flawed as it might be, is a step toward making it easier to get better laws passed nationally and on the local level.


TBG
 
Last edited:

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
Last edited:
Top