Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 77

Thread: National CCW reciprocy billmay become real

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    79

    Post imported post

    http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/20...dcgunrecip.txt

    Article says it all: Call your reps and ask they to join!



    class="forumText"WASHINGTON -- Americans with state-issued concealed weapons permits would be allowed to carry guns wherever they travel in the country under a bill introduced Monday by 3rd District Rep. John Boozman, R-Rogers.

    The measure would eliminate a mishmash of concealed weapons regulations that vary from state to state, Boozman contends. All states would be forced to recognize concealed handgun permits from elsewhere.

    Gun control advocates oppose the bill. They say that gun permit standards in some states are so weak that other jurisdictions deserve the right to refuse those license holders.

    Boozman said the bill ensures Second Amendment rights.

    "I've always felt like you can have a gun, openly display it, and there not be a problem," he said. That some states reject licensed permits from other states "infringes on the Constitution."

    Nearly 62,000 Arkansans have concealed gun permits.

    Arkansas permit holders are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in 27 states, including every neighboring state.

    Arkansas recognizes permits issued in 30 states.

    Fourteen states do not recognize permits issued elsewhere.

    "You have friends who are used to having a gun in their car and things like that, then inadvertently being over the state line or out of state and being concerned they were running afoul of state law," Boozman said.

    Boozman's bill would require even Illinois and Wisconsin, which do not have right-to-carry laws, to recognize licenses issued in other states.

    A bipartisan group of 33 House members are co-sponsors of the bill, Boozman said.

    He acknowledged that it may be difficult to gain enough support for the legislation, and said there is anti-gun sentiment in the Democratic-led Congress. But he cited statistics that indicate crime decreases in states with concealed guns laws.

    According to a study cited by the National Rifle Association, violent crime declined each year from 1977 to 1994 in jurisdictions where a concealed gun law was in effect.

    Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said his organization is not anti-gun, but it opposes the bill because of its impact on states.

    "There are already too many states that have too weak a system of approving people for concealed-carry permits," Hamm said. "I don't think the majority of states want to rely on the systems of other states to let someone carry a loaded, concealed handgun across state borders."

    For instance, Florida's standards are so low that some death-row inmates there have permits, he said.

    Arkansas at one time had minimum reciprocity requirements, said state police spokesman Bill Sadler. Those regulations mandated that other states' training standards must be equal to or stronger than Arkansas' minimum requirements for a permit holder.

    The General Assembly since has stripped those requirements, Sadler said.

    Sadler said he would not comment on the merits of Boozman's bill until he had seen the proposed legislation.

    Boozman said he feels strongly that Americans should be allowed to carry guns.

    "I grew up in Arkansas, and it was not uncommon to see people in high school with gun racks in the back of their trucks, who would go squirrel hunting after school was over," Boozman said. "To be honest, it's something I always felt like there wasn't any question we could do these things."

    His 26-year-old daughter, Kristen Boozman, has an Arkansas concealed weapons permit, as do other family members, he said. The congressman himself does not.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Florida death row inmates have valid carry permits? I noticed this guy didn't give any source for this claim. In any case, it doesn't do them any good, or society any harm, if they do have them, given that they're already on death row. Duh.

    -ljp

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Graham, Texas
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    Very Good point. And who's to say they didn't have them before hand? As many studies have apparently shown, people who have been through the requirements to obtain a permit are typically let likely to commit a crime, but as with anything there can be exceptions. I hope this passes.

    Legba wrote:
    Florida death row inmates have valid carry permits? I noticed this guy didn't give any source for this claim. In any case, it doesn't do them any good, or society any harm, if they do have them, given that they're already on death row. Duh.

    -ljp

  4. #4
    Regular Member ATCer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Iraq
    Posts
    89

    Post imported post

    DopaVash wrote:
    Very Good point. And who's to say they didn't have them before hand? As many studies have apparently shown, people who have been through the requirements to obtain a permit are typically let likely to commit a crime, but as with anything there can be exceptions. I hope this passes.

    Legba wrote:
    Florida death row inmates have valid carry permits? I noticed this guy didn't give any source for this claim. In any case, it doesn't do them any good, or society any harm, if they do have them, given that they're already on death row. Duh.

    -ljp
    Concur. While I do think that it is the state's business and not the federal government, it makes sense. My 2A rights are infringed by not allowing me to carry. Lets say I was from a state that isn't honored by Arkansas for CCW purposes. I can't very well conceal, and I sure as heck can't open carry (as it is illigal in AR). I think as long as the law is made to open the areas we can carry and not restrict them, it should be okay.

    Just my $.02

  5. #5
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    I am vehemently opposed to any "National CCW bill" or licensing measure that would "allow" citizens to carry in every state.

    My reason? It would signal to the whole country that we didn't already have that right initially and besides,we already have a national carry measure...

    AmendmentII.

    The only measure I would support that relates to this is a Constitutional Restoration ACT.Another law will do us no good and can be restricted even easier and further. Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it..
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    I hope that the bill is more complex than the article makes it. For example, there should be a provision to change or eliminate the "Gun-Free" School Zones act, or else out-of-state gun carriers would still have to dodge those half-mile-diameter school zones lest they be charged with violating that act.

    There's also the point that if this passes, it would prove that the government can regulate carry in the individual states. When anti-gunners get control of the country, they can easily can concealed altogether, then.

  7. #7
    Regular Member vt357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    490

    Post imported post

    I don't know how this bill is written - but it should not (and does not seem to be) a national concealed carry permit. It should just force all states to recognize other state's permits. The same way your drivers license is good everywhere - even though it is issued by your home state.

    As for Illinois and Wisconsin, in my personal opinion, since they do not have permits they should not have to recognize other permits. If it was illegal for an Illinois resident to drive a car in Illinois, then residents of other states shouldn't be allowed to drive there either. Now if the Heller case goes well, then the residents of Illinois, Wisconsin, and DC can sue saying that not being allowed to carry violates their constitutional rights.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    vt357 wrote:
    I don't know how this bill is written - but it should not (and does not seem to be) a national concealed carry permit. It should just force all states to recognize other state's permits. The same way your drivers license is good everywhere - even though it is issued by your home state.

    As for Illinois and Wisconsin, in my personal opinion, since they do not have permits they should not have to recognize other permits. If it was illegal for an Illinois resident to drive a car in Illinois, then residents of other states shouldn't be allowed to drive there either. Now if the Heller case goes well, then the residents of Illinois, Wisconsin, and DC can sue saying that not being allowed to carry violates their constitutional rights.
    The unintended consequence of this, though, is that states that are reluctant to give out carry permits may be inclined to ban carry altogether. New York, New Jersey, etc, may all turn into "no issue" states rather than "may issue".

    Another issue would be preemption. It doesn't make sense to have reciprocity across the nation when some states choose not to have reciprocity within their own state.

  9. #9
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    As long as CCW's don't become "property of the U.S. Government". The last thing I would want to see is a federally issued CCW.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    52

    Post imported post

    I for one have said for years that National Reciprocity will eventually come about. We should ask our reps to support the bill.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    The unintended consequence of this, though, is that states that are reluctant to give out carry permits may be inclined to ban carry altogether. New York, New Jersey, etc, may all turn into "no issue" states rather than "may issue".
    So citizens of those states would have to get a permit from one of the many states that offers non-resident permits.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Flintlock wrote:
    I am vehemently opposed to any "National CCW bill" or licensing measure that would "allow" citizens to carry in every state.

    My reason? It would signal to the whole country that we didn't already have that right initially and besides,we already have a national carry measure...

    AmendmentII.

    The only measure I would support that relates to this is a Constitutional Restoration ACT.Another law will do us no good and can be restricted even easier and further. Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it..
    I agree Flintlock. I do not understand how "bear arms" can mean that open carry is forbidden. Concealed carry might be a different story, but permits are government permission slips and we ought not set our rights upon a permission slip foundation.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    I understand Flintlock's position on this and it is indeed food for thought. On the other hand, I do like the concept of national reciprocity for the time being just like with driver's licenses. Driver training varies greatly across states and vehicles kill a lot more people than do guns. It just seems natural. Part of my perspective comes from the fact that MO recognizes CCW permits from any other state. We have not had any problems due to this.

    What is of concern is that we still have to try to figure out every state's CCW laws and prohibited places. And for IL and WI, which do not have CCW is there no prohibited place? This matter, given the patchwork of laws across the country, is not nearly as simple as just reciprocity.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  14. #14
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    I understand Flintlock's position on this and it is indeed food for thought. On the other hand, I do like the concept of national reciprocity for the time being just like with driver's licenses. Driver training varies greatly across states and vehicles kill a lot more people than do guns. It just seems natural. Part of my perspective comes from the fact that MO recognizes CCW permits from any other state. We have not had any problems due to this.

    What is of concern is that we still have to try to figure out every state's CCW laws and prohibited places. And for IL and WI, which do not have CCW is there no prohibited place? This matter, given the patchwork of laws across the country, is not nearly as simple as just reciprocity.
    If this becomes law I predict that the CCW/CHP/LTCFs will become more fodder for the REAL ID machine.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  15. #15
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279

    Post imported post

    What are the Bill numbers? Scheduled hearings? Scheduled readings? Written summaries...wording?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Thundar wrote:
    deepdiver wrote:
    I understand Flintlock's position on this and it is indeed food for thought. On the other hand, I do like the concept of national reciprocity for the time being just like with driver's licenses. Driver training varies greatly across states and vehicles kill a lot more people than do guns. It just seems natural. Part of my perspective comes from the fact that MO recognizes CCW permits from any other state. We have not had any problems due to this.

    What is of concern is that we still have to try to figure out every state's CCW laws and prohibited places. And for IL and WI, which do not have CCW is there no prohibited place? This matter, given the patchwork of laws across the country, is not nearly as simple as just reciprocity.
    If this becomes law I predict that the CCW/CHP/LTCFs will become more fodder for the REAL ID machine.
    Ah-ha! That's a good reason for the politicians behind it. Sure, your LTCF is reciprocal... but only if it matches the barcode we tattoo on your neck.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Thundar wrote:
    SNIP If this becomes law I predict that the CCW/CHP/LTCFs will become more fodder for the REAL ID machine.
    Scary, but makessense.

    Much as I like 2A rights, I think its a bad idea to have nat'l reciprocity. No sense asking Congress to misuse the Commerce Clause; they do it enough already. Let the states decide. Keep the fed's out of it.

    At some point, some politician will decide to score points and support by federalizing the state CCWs "because terrorists might get one and be able to buy more than one gun a month," or some such nonsense. Thensomebody will decide it really needs to be under the BATF and we will be stopped by BATF to check our NCCW. (Nat'l CCW)

    Who needs to register guns when you've got the gun owners registered?


    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    I'd support a constitutional amendment, I wouldn't support a law.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Huck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Evanston, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    647

    Post imported post

    I agree with Flintlock on this, and vt357 has a good point as well.

    Legba, Peter Hamm is the biggest liar this side of hell. He's always making claims without citing any sources.His claim that the Brady Bunch aint a anti-gun organization should've tipped you off.

    Here's more on him from Say Uncle.

    http://www.saysuncle.com/index.php?s=peter+hamm
    "You can teach 'em, but you cant learn 'em."

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    You guys bring up a lot of good points about potential abuse of such a law. I would suggest that one of the most likely immediate issues of reciprocity would be that all permits would be resident permits only like DLs. That would eliminate the ability of IL and WI residents from obtaining non-resident CC licenses to carry when they leave their state, and dramatically limit options for those in the may issue states. For people like me in a shall issue state who have to travel through no-issue states on a regular basis it would be great, at least in concept.

    I believe it is 44 states that protect the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense (among other things) in their state constitutions. I do not know how many of those reserve the right to regulate concealed carry, however, I know there are several and it may be most all of them. While I agree that the feds regulating CC reciprocity would be a further abuse of the commerce clause, I'm rather inclined towards supporting the abuse in our favor for once. We aren't fixing the commerce clause abuses until we get an overhaul and strict constitutional adherence at which time, this law would be void and the issue would be moot as we could OC in all 50 states and DC. Frankly if OC were ruled legal in all 50 states by SCOTUS but regulation of CC were reserved as in certain state constitutions and I had to jump through the hoops to have a CCW, I would still go get (maintain) one so I had both options and I would much prefer that CCW to have national reciprocity than what we have now.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  21. #21
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Who needs to register guns when you've got the gun owners registered?

    Exactly...I feel that the negatives FAR out-weight the positives in this situation. Kinda gives me that odd feeling that there is some sort of trap being set..
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    I think we as open carriers should support this bill. I know there's some specific statements about "abusing the commerce clause" but that isn't what's really going on. This is more of an enforcement of Article 4 of the US constitution, which states that states have to recognize each others acts, records, etc, and Congress may by appropriate legislation enforce the provision.

    Here's what the bill will NOT do:

    1) It will not federalize the CCW process of any state. It states that for CONCEALED carry, all states must recognize each other's licenses. That's really it.

    2) It will not "allow the federal government to regulate concealed carry". They already do to an certain extent, and bills to completely ban concealed carry and all gun carry have been introduced repeatedly by Congressman with no forward movement.

    3) It creates no further federal crimes, and actually has a history of protecting gun owners. The language of this bill is similar to the FOPA transportation provisions of 1986. Which has protected gun owners from successful prosecutions in New Jersey and New York for transporting guns across those states locked in a case, in trunk, seperate from ammunition. The arguments that are being made against this bill are similar to the anti-gun arguments made by those who opposed the original FOPA transport provisions. Please don't repeat the same rhetoric that the anti-gunners use.

    4) There are two principal weaknesses: It doesn't protect open carry where allowed. First, for example, I only have a Washington CPL. I visit a state such as Minnesota which allows both concealed and open carry only with license. My Washington CPL, since Minnesota doesn't have an reciprocity agreement with Washington, only covers me for CONCEALED carry. I have to get a MN or a UT permit, but regardless.

    5) There's only one real target for this bill: States that have no reciprocity at all. California, Hawaii, New Jersey, Massachusetts, New York, Maryland and DC would be the most benefited by this law in terms of citizens arming themselves.

    This bill deserves our support. It may be imperfect, but it creates no new federal crimes, and gives us the camel's nose under the tent.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    Lonnie Wilson wrote:
    This bill deserves our support. It may be imperfect, but it creates no new federal crimes, and gives us the camel's nose under the tent.
    +1

    I agree that a strict application of the second amendment would be better, but politics is the art of the possible, and small steps forward are better than holding out for the big change that never comes.

    Also, it's a good idea to support legislation that antis oppose, just to keep them too busy to propose and push legislation of their own.

    From a personal perspective, I travel for business quite a bit, often to CA, WI, MA and NY, none of which recognize my permit for concealed carry, and open carry isn't practical for my business meetings even where it's allowed. This federal reciprocity bill would solve my problem.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tennessee, ,
    Posts
    695

    Post imported post

    Lonnie Wilson wrote:
    This bill deserves our support. It may be imperfect, but it creates no new federal crimes, and gives us the camel's nose under the tent.

    IF this law makes it far enough to be considered to be passed without adding some type of anti 2A slant, as I fear it most likely would, I would agree. All too often, a once good bill can turn into a noose after ammendment.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Peoria, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    125

    Post imported post

    Superlite27 wrote:
    What are the Bill numbers? Scheduled hearings? Scheduled readings? Written summaries...wording?
    The Bill number is HR 5782. I have links & full text of bill here:

    http://dustinsgunblog.blogspot.com/2...led-carry.html

    So far it has been assigned to Judiciary Committee. Not yet scheduled:

    ALL ACTIONS:

    4/14/2008:
    Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •