Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66

Thread: URGENT ALERT: House Vote Coming Soon on CCW Reciprocity Bill

  1. #1
    Regular Member NewZealandAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Greater Salt Lake City Metro area far south suburb of Provo in UTAH
    Posts
    349

    URGENT ALERT: House Vote Coming Soon on CCW Reciprocity Bill

    Even though the NRA assures 100 % that we have nothing to fear about HR-822, I think there are real concerns to be addressed and fixed.

    http://gunowners.org/a111411.htm

    The House of Representatives is expected to take up concealed carry reciprocity legislation tomorrow (Tuesday, Nov. 15). H.R. 822, sponsored by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), will allow many people who possess a concealed carry permit in one state to carry in other states as well.

    While well-intentioned, there are several concerns with this legislation. In an effort to address these issues, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) introduced separate legislation (H.R. 2900), which has the support of GOA.

    Please read on to learn more about specific problems with H.R. 822 (the bill coming to the floor tomorrow) and the differences between it and H.R. 2900.

    And then, it is vitally important for all gun owners to contact their Representatives and urge them to cosponsor H.R. 2900.

    ACTION: Urge your Representative to help fix H.R. 822 and to cosponsor the Broun legislation.
    (Dion Wood). MY FREEDOM PAGE[/COLOR] with valuable links to ALTERNATIVE MEDIA, Internet Radio shows and other sites to restore our FREEDOM & LIBERTYhttp://www.QRZ.com/db/KB9QFH TELEPHONE: +1(800)808-KIWI that's +1(800)808-5494 Tollfree. "NewZealander By Birth, American By The Grace Of God." See also http://www.facebook.com/NewZealandAmerican & http://RTR.org/NewZealandAmerican “IN MEMORY OF OUR GOD, OUR RELIGION, AND FREEDOM, AND OUR PEACE, OUR WIVES, AND OUR CHILDREN" (The Title Of LIBERTY)

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Englewood, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    654

    Vote..

    How about voting Yes...!!! and leave this issue up to each person to carry or not?

    It does say "We the People" in one of those old documents.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    If I'm not mistaken the "fix" is that HR2900 uses the 2A as it's constitutional authority instead of the commerce clause like HR822. This I think I could support. I cannot support the current language of HR822.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I am a bit dim at times, and continue to be amazed at the efforts to enact legislation that 'reinforces' a constitutional right. It seems to me that folks tend to advocate for more legislation to 'expand' our 2A right first vs. advocating the elimination of existing unconstitutional laws that infringe upon our 2A right.

    First the 2A....then, a law that restricts the 2A....then, a law to counter the law that restricts the 2A is needed....then, a law to counter the law that countered the law that restricts the 2A is needed....

    My simple thinking. The 2A....done.
    I agree 100%. I believe that HR822 is definitely bad mojo.

    The only problem I have with HR2900 is in my fantasy world were the government has no power to infringe upon the 2A. Then, a bill like this would be like saying the government has power that it doesn't. Kind of like how SCOTUS grabbed power back in the day. I wish I could remember the case. I'll look for it. It had something to do with an official being appointed and a new president being elected that didn't like that official. He asked the court to rule and the court ruled in a sneaky way that gave them more power than they were understood to have at the time.

    Anyway, In our real world though, HR2900 is seemingly a better alternative to what we've actually got.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I am a bit dim at times, and continue to be amazed at the efforts to enact legislation that 'reinforces' a constitutional right. It seems to me that folks tend to advocate for more legislation to 'expand' our 2A right first vs. advocating the elimination of existing unconstitutional laws that infringe upon our 2A right.

    First the 2A....then, a law that restricts the 2A....then, a law to counter the law that restricts the 2A is needed....then, a law to counter the law that countered the law that restricts the 2A is needed....

    My simple thinking. The 2A....done.
    +1
    Perfectly said!

  6. #6
    Regular Member Brimstone Baritone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Leeds, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    786
    @Brass Magnet: You're thinking of Marbury v. Madison which, from what I have been able to tell, was a poorly written decision designed to usurp power that they didn't otherwise have. Basically, a ruling looking for a case to apply to.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Brimstone Baritone View Post
    @Brass Magnet: You're thinking of Marbury v. Madison which, from what I have been able to tell, was a poorly written decision designed to usurp power that they didn't otherwise have. Basically, a ruling looking for a case to apply to.
    That's the one! Thanks! If someone reads that case my previous post will almost make sense!

    At the time, Jefferson disagreed with Marshall's reasoning in this case, saying that if this view of judicial power became accepted, it would be "placing us under the despotism of an oligarchy."
    Hmm...Jefferson/Nostradamus?
    Last edited by Brass Magnet; 11-15-2011 at 11:55 AM.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  8. #8
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass Magnet View Post
    I agree 100%. I believe that HR822 is definitely bad mojo.

    The only problem I have with HR2900 is in my fantasy world were the government has no power to infringe upon the 2A. Then, a bill like this would be like saying the government has power that it doesn't. Kind of like how SCOTUS grabbed power back in the day. I wish I could remember the case. I'll look for it. It had something to do with an official being appointed and a new president being elected that didn't like that official. He asked the court to rule and the court ruled in a sneaky way that gave them more power than they were understood to have at the time.

    Anyway, In our real world though, HR2900 is seemingly a better alternative to what we've actually got.
    I concur with your thoughts. I don't want to see HB822 or HB2900, but if I had to choose, I could possible handle HB2900.

  9. #9
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by NewZealandAmerican View Post
    Even though the NRA assures 100 % that we have nothing to fear about HR-822, I think there are real concerns to be addressed and fixed.

    http://gunowners.org/a111411.htm

    The House of Representatives is expected to take up concealed carry reciprocity legislation tomorrow (Tuesday, Nov. 15). H.R. 822, sponsored by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), will allow many people who possess a concealed carry permit in one state to carry in other states as well.

    While well-intentioned, there are several concerns with this legislation. In an effort to address these issues, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) introduced separate legislation (H.R. 2900), which has the support of GOA.

    Please read on to learn more about specific problems with H.R. 822 (the bill coming to the floor tomorrow) and the differences between it and H.R. 2900.

    And then, it is vitally important for all gun owners to contact their Representatives and urge them to cosponsor H.R. 2900.

    ACTION: Urge your Representative to help fix H.R. 822 and to cosponsor the Broun legislation.
    Thanks very much for bringing this matter to our attention and for providing the links.
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Thanks very much for bringing this matter to our attention and for providing the links.
    No MilProGuy, thank you.
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  11. #11
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Well, it looks like it passed, but still has a couple of procedures to overcome. Here is the link. It is H. Res 463. Click on Roll no. 842 for a list of those who voted for it and against it. It happened late this afternoon.

  12. #12
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
    No MilProGuy, thank you.
    Bored, my friend?
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    Well, it looks like it passed, but still has a couple of procedures to overcome. Here is the link. It is H. Res 463. Click on Roll no. 842 for a list of those who voted for it and against it. It happened late this afternoon.
    Hmmm... looks like Ron Paul supported it for consideration. Kind of surprising due to the 10A implications but I'll have to see what he does if it's actually brought up for a vote.
    Last edited by Brass Magnet; 11-15-2011 at 05:15 PM.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Bored, my friend?
    No, I just get a good laugh out of half of your posts. Most of the time you post here it is something along the lines of:

    "Thank you for posting on an internet forum."

    It doesn't really add anything productive, funny, or interesting in any way possible to the conversation, however it is a signature mark of yours and OCDO wouldn't be the same with out it. So when I see these posts by you, sometimes I need to say "Thank you" to YOU, MilProGuy...Thank you for being - you.

    This is how I envisioned us having this little dialogue...
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  15. #15
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    MilProGuy walking away into the night...shaking his head in disbelief and muttering to himself.
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


  16. #16
    Regular Member ken243's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clio, MI
    Posts
    141

    It passed!

    It passed. However, if you look at the amendments to this bill they pretty much negate the entire bill... hope they don't pass.

    Amendment No. 2—Rep. McCarthy (D-CA): This amendment would specify that the legislation can only go into effect in states that have passed legislation enacting the bill.

    Amendment No. 5—Rep. Conyers (D-MI): This amendment would effectively gut the bill by “preserving” state laws with respect to eligibility for concealed-carry.

    Amendment No. 6—Rep. Johnson (D-GA): This amendment would require the possession or carrying of a concealed handgun in a state to be subject to “any law of the state that limits the eligibility to possess or carry a concealed handgun to persons who have received firearm safety training that includes a live-fire exercise.’’

    Amendment No. 8—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a person intending to carry or possess a concealed handgun in a state to inform that state’s law enforcement of their intentions at least 24 hours prior

    Amendment No. 9—Rep. Cicilline (D-RI): This amendment would limit the bill from taking effect in a state until the State Attorney General, head of the State police, and the Secretary of State have jointly certified that the other state’s carry laws are substantially similar to its own licensing or permitting requirements.
    Last edited by ken243; 11-16-2011 at 05:20 PM.

  17. #17
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lebanon, VA
    Posts
    676
    Those amendments have not yet been voted upon by the House and all of them will likely be rejected by overwhelming margins.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Admitted to practice in West Virginia and Florida.

    Founder, Past President, Treasurer, and General Counsel, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
    Life Member, NRA

  18. #18
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by ken243 View Post
    It passed. However, if you look at the amendments to this bill they pretty much negate the entire bill... After reading the amendments I value this bill a little less than that of my bathroom tissue. The 2A rights took one step forward and 2 steps back today folks.

    Amendment No. 2—Rep. McCarthy (D-CA): This amendment would specify that the legislation can only go into effect in states that have passed legislation enacting the bill.

    Amendment No. 5—Rep. Conyers (D-MI): This amendment would effectively gut the bill by “preserving” state laws with respect to eligibility for concealed-carry.

    Amendment No. 6—Rep. Johnson (D-GA): This amendment would require the possession or carrying of a concealed handgun in a state to be subject to “any law of the state that limits the eligibility to possess or carry a concealed handgun to persons who have received firearm safety training that includes a live-fire exercise.’’

    Amendment No. 8—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a person intending to carry or possess a concealed handgun in a state to inform that state’s law enforcement of their intentions at least 24 hours prior

    Amendment No. 9—Rep. Cicilline (D-RI): This amendment would limit the bill from taking effect in a state until the State Attorney General, head of the State police, and the Secretary of State have jointly certified that the other state’s carry laws are substantially similar to its own licensing or permitting requirements.
    Quote Originally Posted by JimMullinsWVCDL View Post
    Those amendments have not yet been voted upon by the House and all of them will likely be rejected by overwhelming margins.
    It looks like they have debated 8 0f the 10 Amendments. From what I see, Amendment #4 makes me nervous, looks like it creates a national database of CCW permit holders. Here is the link for all 10 of the Amendments. Here is the link to follow the process in the House today.

    Since it hasn't been completely passed, these could change. Interesting.

  19. #19
    Regular Member ken243's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clio, MI
    Posts
    141
    My apologies. I thought those amedments already passed.

    None have passed thus far. Good news so far. Thanks for pointing that out...

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by ken243 View Post
    It passed. However, if you look at the amendments to this bill they pretty much negate the entire bill... hope they don't pass.

    Amendment No. 2—Rep. McCarthy (D-CA): This amendment would specify that the legislation can only go into effect in states that have passed legislation enacting the bill.
    Wouldn't this amendment alone pretty much make this bill pointless?
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  21. #21
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    This process exemplifies my point that the feds needed to stay out of the regulation of a state’s rights for CCW. What if this occurs with a more liberal House/Senate? Although it looks as if the amendments will be defeated, this is a prime example of why the states should continue to work out the reciprocity issue amongst themselves.

  22. #22
    Regular Member ken243's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clio, MI
    Posts
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    This process exemplifies my point that the feds needed to stay out of the regulation of a state’s rights for CCW. What if this occurs with a more liberal House/Senate? Although it looks as if the amendments will be defeated, this is a prime example of why the states should continue to work out the reciprocity issue amongst themselves.
    With the number of years "shall issue" has been in effect in many states I would say they had their chance. Many have worked this issue properly. But, many states like The People Republic of Kaliforicstan have not. They have nearly eliminated the 2A rights of their people. This bill is their saving grace. Those people can now get a Utah CPL and be able to protect their person and family without having to move from the state. The 2A applies to the United States not 49 or 48. This bill is moving things in the right direction. But, its still a long road ahead.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by ken243 View Post
    With the number of years "shall issue" has been in effect in many states I would say they had their chance. Many have worked this issue properly. But, many states like The People Republic of Kaliforicstan have not. They have nearly eliminated the 2A rights of their people. This bill is their saving grace. Those people can now get a Utah CPL and be able to protect their person and family without having to move from the state. The 2A applies to the United States not 49 or 48. This bill is moving things in the right direction. But, its still a long road ahead.
    Do you not think 'The People Republic of Kaliforicstan' would move to remove conceal and carry? Then what does this bill do for them? Even less.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645
    HR822 Has Passed the House!!
    Yea: 272, Nay: 154
    44 Democrats Voted in Favor
    7 Republicans Voted Against
    Last edited by Right Wing Wacko; 11-16-2011 at 06:01 PM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Right Wing Wacko View Post
    HR822 Has Passed the House!!
    Yea: 272, Nay: 154
    44 Democrats Voted in Favor
    7 Republicans Voted Against
    Alright!

    Now, it's on to the Senate!
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •