Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 110

Thread: National call to action S.845

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southern, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Please call your U.S. Senators ASAP!

    As you may recall, earlier this year Senator John Thune (SD) introduced S.845, the "Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009". If enacted, S.845 would allow individuals who have a concealed carry permit the ability to carry a firearm in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. As things stand now, some states refuse to honor concealed weapons permits from other states. This bill will go a long ways towards ensuringyour safety when you are on the road.

    Senator Thune plans to modify the text of S.845 and offer it as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill that is currently being debated on the Senate floor. He needs your help to get enough votes to pass his amendment and get it included in the Defense bill.

    Senator Thune may offer his amendment as soon as today. Please call your Senators IMMEDIATELY and urge them to support this amendment. Your message to them and their staff can be as simple as, "I am from (hometown, home state) and I ask that the Senator votes in support of Senator Thune's conceal carry amendment to the Defense bill."
    Contact information for those of us in MS.

    Senator Thad Cochran
    Phone: 202-224-5054

    Senator Roger F. Wicker
    Phone: 202-224-6253

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran Freeflight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Yorktown VA, ,
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    Did it Yesterday!!!



    Come on guys lets roll...


    And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants"

    Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939

    Free Flight

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Not quite...

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...mp;tab=summary

    4/21/2009--Introduced.

    Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 - Amends the federal criminal code to provide for reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms in states that allow their residents to carry such firearms by persons who are not prohibited by federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm and who are: (1) carrying a valid state license or permit for carrying a concealed firearm; or (2) otherwise entitled to carry a concealed firearm in their state of residence.
    Maybe better than what we have now, but it's not the golden apple either.

    TFred



  4. #4
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Someone needs to take a closer look at this bill.

    Does it or does it not cover non-resident permit holders? For example, would a Utah or Florida permit-holder who lives in a third state be covered?

    According to the summary paragraph of the full text of the bill, the answer would seem to be "no":

    A BILL

    To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to allow citizens who have concealed carry permits from the State in which they reside to carry concealed firearms in another State that grants concealed carry permits, if the individual complies with the laws of the State.
    But if you read the actual paragraphs (1) and (2) of the bill, it seems to be the intent to cover (1) permit holders of any state and (2) residents of states who do not require permits to carry concealed.

    Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof:

    (1) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of any State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit in any State that allows its residents to carry concealed firearms, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.

    (2) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is otherwise than as described in paragraph (1) entitled to carry a concealed firearm in and pursuant to the law of the State in which the person resides, may carry a concealed firearm in accordance with the laws of the State in which the person resides in any State that allows its residents to carry concealed firearms, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.’.
    It sounds to me like the resident requirement only applies to those who live in states that do not issue or require permits to carry concealed.

    Need some legal eyes on this one!

    TFred

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    60

    Post imported post

    Heh, so California would freak right the **** out if this was passed, and all us Nevadans decided to take LA vacations.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Washoe County, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    256

    Post imported post

    Zed Snardbody wrote:
    Heh, so California would freak right the @#$% out if this was passed, and all us Nevadans decided to take LA vacations.
    This sounds good to me!

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    60

    Post imported post

    The only down side to this passing is it would end my impossible quest!

    I decided last year that the one impossible thing I would try and do is get a non resident California CCW.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    kent, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    474

    Post imported post

    I dont understand what the requirments would be then for people who live in states that do not require you to take some sort of NRA or Police Instructor type course where there is a minimal hour requirement say like 12 hours in Ohio.



  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575

    Post imported post

    It should be just like drivers licenses, each state has slightly different requirements for a drivers license but every state honers every other states drivers license. Each driver is expected to obay the driving laws of each state, there are differences.


    Orphan
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    kent, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    474

    Post imported post

    I do not remember what state it is but there is a state out west that just requires you to fill out paperwork,which I think is pretty cool,since I Would rather not have some Police instructor or the NRA to CC why do I need someone else to tell me that I am safe to CC.ITS just a way for them to get money out of your pocket and to make a fed law that regulates OC and then straight up on the ban of RKBA.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645

    Post imported post


    subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.’.

    So Cali just make a law banning firearms carry everywhere

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    60

    Post imported post

    Shush. Don't give them ideas damnit.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Castle Rock, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    392

    Post imported post

    Sec. 2 of this amendment was authored to cover Vermont & Alaska, ensuring that citizens of those states are not denied the same "privileges" of carrying concealed since their states do not issue concealed carry permits.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Maybe I am missing something here. The OP said the bill would cover "all 50 states" AND D.C.

    However the text of the bill says the reciprocity would apply to "states which allow their residents to carry concealed firearms". It says nothing about "No-Issue" states nor the District of Columbia.

    If it DID include the District of Columbia it could be titled " and District of Columbia Safer Streets Act". Can you imagine how fast crime would go down in D.C. if the goblins couldn't tell if they were dealing with an armed Virginian and not the shorn sheep that D.C. residents still - despite Heller - are?

  15. #15
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie wrote:
    Maybe I am missing something here. The OP said the bill would cover "all 50 states" AND D.C.

    However the text of the bill says the reciprocity would apply to "states which allow their residents to carry concealed firearms". It says nothing about "No-Issue" states nor the District of Columbia.

    If it DID include the District of Columbia it could be titled " and District of Columbia Safer Streets Act". Can you imagine how fast crime would go down in D.C. if the goblins couldn't tell if they were dealing with an armed Virginian and not the shorn sheep that D.C. residents still - despite Heller - are?
    I think it was the OP that was missing the details...

    TFred


  16. #16
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea, and that this is the completely wrong approach to fix the nationwide carry problem? :?
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  17. #17
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    SGT Jensen wrote:
    Am I the only one who thinks this is a terrible idea, and that this is the completely wrong approach to fix the nationwide carry problem? :?
    Where the States are concerned maybe. But Congress has absolute authority over the District and can overrule the idiots who hold office in that low-rent Lichtenstein any time. And it would be absolutely Constitutional.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran GlockMeisterG21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pewaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    637

    Post imported post

    Sucks that this won't apply to WI or IL residents. Kinda BS how people from out of state can CC in my home state and I can't. /sigh
    “The 1911 pistol remains the service pistol of choice in the eyes of those who understand the problem. Back when we audited the FBI academy in 1947, I was told that I ought not to use my pistol in their training program because it was not fair. Maybe the first thing one should demand of his sidearm is that it be unfair.” — Col. Jeff Cooper, GUNS & AMMO, January 2002

  19. #19
    Regular Member thx997303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lehi, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,716

    Post imported post

    Honestly, I think that repealing unconstitutional laws would be a much better way to do it then making more laws.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    GlockMeisterG21 wrote:
    Sucks that this won't apply to WI or IL residents. Kinda BS how people from out of state can CC in my home state and I can't. /sigh
    +10,000 The people of both WI & IL would still be screwed!

    lets use the state of MI for example, they already have a situationsimilar tothis bill . In MI, anyone that is permitted to carry in their home state with a permit of some sort(except VT & AK) can carry concealed or openly in MI.
    But us folks from WI are prohibited because our state does not have any permit requirements to be able carry. Some states you need a permit to O-C and that would be accepted in MI, but because we in WI do not need to ask for permission to carry a firearm on plain view, we are then not allowed to carry in MI at all. Lets not forget about IL, and CA too. Well for CA, the celebrities could carry, but not the common folk.


    I am against this bill!
    if it were to make every state a "Shall Issue" state for CCW, and allow anyone legal to own a firearm able to O-C in every state. I would be all over it in a good way. There is nothing I would like more then to be able to walk around in Chicago and actually know I could protect myself.


  21. #21
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    From http://blog.vcdl.org/index.php?/archives/605-VA-ALERT-Federal-Reciprocity-bill-is-moving!.html

    ************************************************** *****************
    1. URGENT ACTION ITEM: Federal reciprocity bill is moving
    ************************************************** *****************

    Gun Owners of America is reporting that federal Senate bill S. 845, which would establish concealed carry reciprocity between the states, could get a vote as early as MONDAY!

    The vote could be on the wording being attached as an amendment to a Department of Defense authorization bill, H.R. 2647.

    It is based on the "full faith and credit" in the Constitution and would allow you to carry in any state that allows citizens to carry concealed as long as your home state would let you carry concealed!

    Here is the operative language that would effect us in Virginia:

    `(1) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of any State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit in any State that allows its residents to carry concealed firearms, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.

    --

    Paragraph #2 is similar, but takes care of Vermont and Alaska, where permits aren't required to carry concealed.

    It does not cover Illinois or Wisconsin, as neither have any legal way for citizens to carry concealed handguns.

    To send an email to Senators Warner and Webb using GOA's web site, click here:

    http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/a...ertid=13750856

    Let's get cracking! Imagine being able to carry in NY, NJ, MA, MD(!), HI, DC (DC does have a "concealed carry" law on the books, but it's not used much at all), CA, etc.! Be still my beating heart...

  22. #22
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    I still believe there is a serious problem with the bill as written because the summary at the top indicates the permit must be issued by the state of residence, but the text in the body of the bill says it may be from "any state".

    Someone needs to have them either fix the summary, or fix the text to match. Of course it would weaken the bill substantially to require a resident permit, as opposed to a permit from any state.

    This discrepancy is just the kind of thing a liberal court would use to restrict the application of this bill to only resident permit holders.

    TFred


  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia, , USA
    Posts
    311

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    From http://blog.vcdl.org/index.php?/archives/605-VA-ALERT-Federal-Reciprocity-bill-is-moving!.html

    ************************************************** *****************
    1. URGENT ACTION ITEM: Federal reciprocity bill is moving
    ************************************************** *****************

    Gun Owners of America is reporting that federal Senate bill S. 845, which would establish concealed carry reciprocity between the states, could get a vote as early as MONDAY!

    The vote could be on the wording being attached as an amendment to a Department of Defense authorization bill, H.R. 2647.

    It is based on the "full faith and credit" in the Constitution and would allow you to carry in any state that allows citizens to carry concealed as long as your home state would let you carry concealed!

    Here is the operative language that would effect us in Virginia:

    `(1) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of any State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit in any State that allows its residents to carry concealed firearms, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.

    --

    Paragraph #2 is similar, but takes care of Vermont and Alaska, where permits aren't required to carry concealed.

    It does not cover Illinois or Wisconsin, as neither have any legal way for citizens to carry concealed handguns.

    To send an email to Senators Warner and Webb using GOA's web site, click here:

    http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/a...ertid=13750856

    Let's get cracking! Imagine being able to carry in NY, NJ, MA, MD(!), HI, DC (DC does have a "concealed carry" law on the books, but it's not used much at all), CA, etc.! Be still my beating heart...
    I'm going to be watching this closely and will be contacting my representatives.

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    Im all for this just because I'd like to see what would happen if it passes. I think it would be good for Wisconsin and Illinois as well as far as getting permit laws passed. I think the most important thing to realize is that we have a window of opportunity to pass pro-RKBA legislation, this may not come again for a long time. I think pushing this and stuff like reopening the MG registry and bill allowing for interstate purchase of handguns is viable right now. The divided majority on guns seems to favor legislation we prefer and since they are railroading a lot of legislation through we would be smart to take advantage of that.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Washoe County, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    256

    Post imported post

    I for one would be delighted if this passed so I could carry when I'm next door in California. The best thing to happen to California ever in terms of carry rights might be for the residents of every other state to be allowed to carry there.

    This could end up being the lynchpin to cause California to flip from may to shall issue when the hue and cry of the citizenry over everyone else but residents being allowed to carry becomes unbearable.

    It could also pressure all the other states to fall in line with shall issue for the same reason.

    I'm sad that it wouldn't be good for carry in any of the 50 states but maybe that's the calculated compromise they had to consider to get legislative support for this bold rights initiative.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •