• 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.

Dangers of HR 822? You decide

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
I need your thoughts on this bill. I am sorry to start another thread on this issue but wanted to seperate the other side.




Some well-meaning, but in my opinion very misguided pro-gunners are working to pass a bill that could turn into a Trojan Horse for more gun control.

Of course, I'm talking about H.R. 822, the so-called "National Reciprocity Act," which could open the flood gates of gun control.

I'm calling it the National CCW Registration Act.

While the idea that all states should recognize a concealed weapons permit is sound public policy, the use of the anti-gun federal bureaucracy to implement it is simply foolish.

Once the Federal Government is in the business of setting the standards for concealed carry permits, it's only a matter of time before they start using that power to restrict our rights.

Now you may hear arguments that this bill doesn't do that, and maybe that's true ... for now.

Even worse, once this bill starts moving, anyone can amend the bill with anything ... and no legislation can bind a future Congress in any way. And that doesn't count what Obamacrats in the Department of Justice might dream up as the "regulations" to carry out the legislative "intent."

I know many of you are frustrated that you can carry in some states but not others -- I'm frustrated, too.

I carry concealed every day, everywhere I go, and have worked to expand the ability of citizens to carry in dozens of states.

I believe I should be able to carry concealed -- without a permit -- in all 50 states. That's what "bear arms" means. Believe me, that's a long-term policy goal for the National Association for Gun Rights.

But mark my words, H.R. 822, the National CCW Registration Act, will become nothing more than a Trojan Horse for even more federal gun control.

I understand that many who support this bill sincerely just want their right to carry respected -- but cannot due to the fact that their state or another won't do the right thing.

But the devil is truly in the details... and the details are where H.R. 822 gets sticky.

This bill isn't just about the right to carry for self defense -- it's a battle over the role of government and the ability to restrict our Second Amendment rights.

Once gun owners let the Obamacrats start mandating whether states recognize permit reciprocity, they will want to mandate what it takes to get and keep those permits.

We're talking about:

•More onerous standards to acquire a permit, so that only FBI agents can pass muster (look at New York's permit system);
•Higher fees;
•More training requirements;
•A demonstration of "Need" for a permit;
•More frequent renewal periods;
•Federally-mandated waiting periods;
•A national database of all permit holders, accessible by Attorney General Eric Holder;
•An extensive, federally-created list of Criminal Safezones, where only criminals will carry and where law-abiding gun owners are vulnerable;
•The list of potential problems is endless.
Not to mention this legislation would shred the Constitutional Carry provisions that are on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

It doesn't stop with just concealed carry. They'll co-opt the bill to expand the national Brady Registration Check system to block military veterans with PTSD or individuals with misdemeanor convictions from even OWNING firearms -- much less use them for self defense.

I don't believe the intentions of the bill sponsors are intrinsically bad -- they're just naive and misguided.

Many statists in Washington will co-opt H.R. 822 as part of their grab for more federal power and less individual liberty.

Even now, the statists in Congress are trying to adopt a National ID card, complete with biometric data that they've forced the states to conform to their mandated drivers license "standards." The National Association for Gun Rights has been part of a group of liberty-minded organizations that have passed state legislation forbidding cooperation with the federal National ID.

While many in the institutional gun control lobby will tell you this is a step forward for CCW permit holders, make no mistake, the National CCW Registration Act is a misguided attempt to protect our rights.

It's like asking the fox to guard the hen house.

They will use this bill as the foundation to create a federal database of CCW permit holders. And then they can link it everywhere the Feds have database connections -- state police, doctors and insurance companies under Obamacare, and Medicaid/Medicare.

I'm sorry, but I refuse to entrust my liberty and privacy to a "trust us, they won't do that "approach to dealing with Obama, the gun-grabbers or frankly most politicians of either party in Washington.

I need you to make some noise, right now!

Not tomorrow. Not later today. RIGHT NOW.

A Trojan Horse gun control bill like H.R. 822 is exactly the kind of legislation that will get support on both sides of the aisle in Washington D.C. And remember, the Democrat-controlled Senate has to pass it before it gets to Obama ... so this bill will only get worse.

That's why you and I have to make noise, now!
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
I am actually in complete agreemwnt with you. This issue should be left to the states. That way one or two bad state laws don't ruin it for everyone. One bad federal law and we're all screwed.
 

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
I thought that the end goal is Constitutional Carry nationwide. Where the 2nd Ammendment is proctected by the 14th Ammendment. And this bill it one step in the long journey. Your fear that it will be turned into something bad. With Democratic majoriites maybe, I have a strong feeling that the Republicans will take the Senate and the White House. Four years of that and we will be several steps past H.R. 822.
 

oak1971

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
1,937
Location
Wisconsin, USA
I thought that the end goal is Constitutional Carry nationwide. Where the 2nd Ammendment is proctected by the 14th Ammendment. And this bill it one step in the long journey. Your fear that it will be turned into something bad. With Democratic majoriites maybe, I have a strong feeling that the Republicans will take the Senate and the White House. Four years of that and we will be several steps past H.R. 822.

You want to gamble your rights away on who wins the next election? That is the most retarded thing I have heard today. :banghead:
 

kcgunfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,002
Location
KC
Can you please take each of the examples below, and give us the proper cite in the current bill (or amendments to that bill) that provides for these to happen?

If the issue is that these further restrictions might be added to the bill, then you might have a point, and it would be good to refuse to support it at that point. But, can you please explain what's wrong with the bill in its current form?

If we take your suggested approach to law making, then you should refuse to support anything, including a Constitutional Carry bill, because that could get amendments to implement the below also.

I think that a discussion can be held, without all of the scare mongering. I also think there are valid reasons to object to this legislation (I haven't decided whether or not to support it myself.)

This bill is pretty much a lock for the House. And, it's more likely to pass in the Senate than you might think it is. Refer to this attempt, in 2009, where a similar effort failed in the Senate, 59 to 39 (amendments take 60 votes.)

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8140491&page=1

•More onerous standards to acquire a permit, so that only FBI agents can pass muster (look at New York's permit system);
•Higher fees;
•More training requirements;
•A demonstration of "Need" for a permit;
•More frequent renewal periods;
•Federally-mandated waiting periods;
•A national database of all permit holders, accessible by Attorney General Eric Holder;
•An extensive, federally-created list of Criminal Safezones, where only criminals will carry and where law-abiding gun owners are vulnerable;
•The list of potential problems is endless.
Not to mention this legislation would shred the Constitutional Carry provisions that are on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.
 

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
750
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
Does the OP have a concealed carry permit? Doesn't that permit embody nearly all the projected horrors?

Now I ask you, how has concealed carry worked out for (or against) the advancement of the Second Amendment?

I would perhaps have fought tooth and nail (years ago) against the idea of a 'permit' from my state just to exercise a fundamental right. I still strongly object to the whole concept of 'mother may I' when it comes to our Rights, mind you. But the reality is that Americans are getting their Second Amendment Rights back, bit by bit and the antis are losing the argument. I see Constitutional Carry as an inevitable consequence of suffering through licensed concealed carry. People get their permit, realize that they shouldn't have to jump through regulatory hoops, organize politically, let their elected officials know just how they feel about asking 'permission' and eventually a critical mass of pro-freedom forces results in Constitutional Carry. Arizona wasn't a fluke. New Hampshire, Utah, and many other states are poised to follow.

The genius of National Reciprocity is that it will force the may-issue (and no-issue) states over to the shall-issue camp and then there is absolutely no turning back from that point forward.

Bonus is that the antis will argue at the Supreme Court that National Reciprocity violates the 10th Amendment (imagine that!). Many of the conservative justices are pro-States Rights anyway and with the liberal anti-gun justices desperate to overturn National Reciprocity, we just may have a landmark (and sorely needed) 10th Amendment Decision (finally) striking down a Federal law!

By the time that happens, National Reciprocity will have been the law of the land for several years and the damage to the anti-gun camp will have been done. Amen!

Win either way!
 

IA_farmboy

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
494
Location
Linn County, Iowa, USA
I was following along until I got to this point.

Not to mention this legislation would shred the Constitutional Carry provisions that are on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

I might be able to see some of the other problems you list as happening but I do not see how HR 822 can do anything with constitutional carry. HR 822 requires a state to recognize every other state permits which becomes irrelevant in those states that do not require permits. The federal government might be able to impose conditions on permits that are considered a real and true "permit" under this law but that does not create a permit requirement in a state that does not already have one.


But mark my words, H.R. 822, the National CCW Registration Act, will become nothing more than a Trojan Horse for even more federal gun control.

With a supermajority of the House signed on as sponsors I just don't see that happening. Any attempt to twist the intent of the law is very likely to be met with considerable resistance from the sponsors. Even though the next election is more than a year away these people are in campaign mode and gun control legislation is a sure bet to lose their seat.

As much as I like the idea of this bill I'm torn on what to think about it. There is much good that can come from this but something about it makes me nervous. I agree with those that believe this law cannot pass with the current President and Senate. This is a campaign move to show a good stance on RKBA for the next election. If things go well this law, or something "better" (depending on how you define "better"), is likely to pass next year.

At this time I'm taking a wait and see stance.
 
M

McX

Guest
I carry concealed every day, everywhere I go,


Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Bad ju-ju!
 
Last edited:

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
As much as I like the idea of this bill I'm torn on what to think about it. There is much good that can come from this but something about it makes me nervous. I agree with those that believe this law cannot pass with the current President and Senate.

IA Farmboy and I have had our differences, but I echo his misgivings about this Bill. On the one hand, depending on the wording, it may be possible for residents of "may issue" states like NY and NJ to carry on a non-resident permit, but the potential for DOJ to make "regulations to reflect the intent of Congress" is a real and present danger that cannot be ignored.

This Bill is also a political bug-a-boo for the current temporary occupant of the White House. If it passes the Senate, and with a few "Blue Dog Democrats" it can actually pass the Senate, and he vetoes it in an election year, he has pretty much sealed his fate. On the other hand, if he vetoes it and then bows to the advice of Blue Dog Democrats and concedes that he is a 1 term president, and endorses Mrs. Clinton for the White House, he can easily veto it and Mrs. Clinton will pursue her UN Small Arms Treaty aspirations of disarming all citizens of the United States of America (if Americans are stupid enough to elect her - and, well.........). If that happens, our fate as US Citizens protected by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution will be resting in the hands of the US Senate. (Except that any action by the Senate that contravenes or contradicts the US Constitution, as amended, will be up for review by the US Supreme Court.)

So, in the final analysis, this Bill has great intentions, but comes with great risk.
 

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
I carry concealed every day, everywhere I go QUOTE]

Of course you meant to say that you carry your wallet concealed everywhere you go. Until a law abiding citizen of Wisconsin is issued a Wisconsin Permit to Carry a Concealed Weapon at some point after November 1, 2011, the carry of a concealed weapon in Wisconsin is a felony offense. Since you are a law abiding citizen, as reflected in your screen name, I am sure you meant that you carry your wallet concealed everywhere that you go.
 

kcgunfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,002
Location
KC
I carry concealed every day, everywhere I go QUOTE]

Of course you meant to say that you carry your wallet concealed everywhere you go. Until a law abiding citizen of Wisconsin is issued a Wisconsin Permit to Carry a Concealed Weapon at some point after November 1, 2011, the carry of a concealed weapon in Wisconsin is a felony offense. Since you are a law abiding citizen, as reflected in your screen name, I am sure you meant that you carry your wallet concealed everywhere that you go.

Or the OP decided to claim another's words as his own. That's called plagiarism for those at home. It's definitely frowned upon.
 

kcgunfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,002
Location
KC
Why don't you review the 10th text line of your post. If you're going to plagiarize, you will increase your credibility if you are familiar with the text you steal.

No where in my original post do I ever say "I carry concealed every day, everywhere I go" That was McX.
 

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
Why don't you review the 10th text line of your post. If you're going to plagiarize, you will increase your credibility if you are familiar with the text you steal.

tumblr_lklwmt7x0v1qastc3.gif
 

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h822/show

If the official description is ALL that the bill does then I wouldn't have an issue with it as it doesn't set up requirements for getting a permit and it specifically states that you have to obey the laws of the state you're in. But of course the devil is in the details and I still need to find the actual text of the bill.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
You are right

Yes you are right: It was a long e mail and in my cut and paste I omitted the writer. Thanks for the note. I'll find the e mail and put the writer's name McX. Next time I'll double check my cut and pastes.
 
Top