National Right To Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

If your topic has nothing to do with Spyderco, you can post it here.
User avatar
D1omedes
Member
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Houston, Texas, USA

#21

Post by D1omedes »

Doc, thanks a lot for the article. It pretty much sums up my suspicions regarding the scare tactic call I received. I appreciate the NRA for what it does but some of their tactics and choice of leadership really turns me off. ;)

Jordan, I'm actually relocating to TX next month. I'll be glad to finally be in a state that respects the rights of armed citizens. :D But that doesn't mean I'll stop being a Yankee. Texan by choice, New Yorker by the Grace of God ... that's how it goes, right Doc? :p
Jordan
Member
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:56 pm
Location: Austin, TX

#22

Post by Jordan »

Glad to hear it D1omedes. We'll have you fitted for a Stetson and some good boots in no time (both contributions from yankees who found out that Texas is a better place to be than the frozen north, by the way :p ). We don't mind New Yorkers down here (unless they are trying to sell salsa... evidently :p ).
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.
- Theodore Roosevelt

"I twisted the knife until I heard his heart-strings sing."

- Jim Bowie concerning Maj. Norris Wright
User avatar
psychophipps
Member
Posts: 480
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 9:19 am
Location: Texas, in the RGV

#23

Post by psychophipps »

Nice thought, but it'll never happen. Just like state's rights are slapping down ObamaCare, state's rights will slap this one down, too.

I find it very ironic that one of the states with the least stringent CCW laws (Oregon) is also one of the few states that has absolutely zero reciprocity with any other state on their books. Oh, their permit is Ok in other places, but they don't uphold the permit of even one other state. :rolleyes:
User avatar
Dr. Snubnose
Member
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: NewYork

#24

Post by Dr. Snubnose »

psychophipps wrote:Nice thought, but it'll never happen. Just like state's rights are slapping down ObamaCare, state's rights will slap this one down, too.

I find it very ironic that one of the states with the least stringent CCW laws (Oregon) is also one of the few states that has absolutely zero reciprocity with any other state on their books. Oh, their permit is Ok in other places, but they don't uphold the permit of even one other state. :rolleyes:
Interesting indeed!....And as much as I would like to see this happen, like you, I think is has a very small chance of becoming reality....Doc :D
"Always Judge a man by the way he treats someone who could be of no possible use to him"

*Custom Avatar with the Help of Daywalker*
User avatar
v8r
Member
Posts: 1936
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:04 pm
Location: Van, Texas,USA,Earth

#25

Post by v8r »

Just moved back from TX to GA. I have to admit I like how TX makes you qualify for a CCW......the fees kinda sucks and processing takes forever, but at least you know people can at least somewhat shoot.
All I had to do to get my license in GA was go to the court house, get finger printed, fill out some paperwork, and pay a small fee. No qualifying required. It does not seem like laws are near as cut and dry as they were in TX. Lots of gray left up to interpretation. At least TX gives you a book of the laws regarding carry.It seems GA does not.
V8R



Opinions are like belly buttons most people have one:p
User avatar
Rwb1500
Member
Posts: 1140
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:44 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

#26

Post by Rwb1500 »

I don't see the NRA helping anybody but themselves...

Read;

http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/135834 ... -bent.html
User avatar
DaBird
Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 1:37 am
Location: IL/Wis state line

#27

Post by DaBird »

Leatherneck wrote:I happen to live in the Democratic Republic of Illinois. It's just criminal how they view the citizens as incapable of protecting themselves. I am sitting here in a lawn chair hosting a rummage sale and exercising my right to at least carry a sidearm on my own property.

Our Chicago "Machine" takes arrogance to a whole new level in suggesting that we cannot be trusted to defend ourselves and that Illinois is the only State to "get it right".
I've made a few mistakes in my life but returning to Illinois after a 20+ year career in the Corps takes the cake!
Sad to say that I also live in the DR of Illinois.
A few more years and I move out of the state where I was born and raised.
Maybe "things will change" in that time but I highy doubt it.

My God Givin RIGHT to protect myself and my family while off my own property makes me a " Illegal " and yet my state gives more and more "Rights" to Illegal Aliens :mad:

A very sad thing for all us who live in Illinois :(
User avatar
D1omedes
Member
Posts: 1279
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Houston, Texas, USA

#28

Post by D1omedes »

Jordan wrote:Glad to hear it D1omedes. We'll have you fitted for a Stetson and some good boots in no time (both contributions from yankees who found out that Texas is a better place to be than the frozen north, by the way :p ). We don't mind New Yorkers down here (unless they are trying to sell salsa... evidently :p ).
Well, I'm not so sure how good I would look in Texan attire. I'll admit the hats are cool but I'm not a fan of the boots. Seem very uncomfortable.

Don't worry, I won't be selling salsa. Though I hear you Texans love it down there. My sis has been there for 6 years or so now. I can't wait for the BBQ. :D
User avatar
DaBird
Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 1:37 am
Location: IL/Wis state line

#29

Post by DaBird »

Rwb1500 wrote:I don't see the NRA helping anybody but themselves...

Read;

http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/135834 ... -bent.html
I did not read your link yet --- as a 25 year NRA Life Member , I will ask you;
Where do you think we would be WITHOUT the NRA fighting for ALL our firearm Rights for the last 50 years ???

The NRA is the MOST FEARED Pro-Firearm lobby group in D.C. by the Anti-Firearm lobbies and with good reason IMHO.
User avatar
Dr. Snubnose
Member
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: NewYork

Update

#30

Post by Dr. Snubnose »

On Tuesday, Sept. 13, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing on H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.

The bill, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and cosponsored by more than 240 of their colleagues, would enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.

Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) opened the hearing by saying the legislation is needed because state laws on right to carry reciprocity are "confusing, vary widely and can subject otherwise law-abiding citizens to frivolous prosecution." He also argued that permit holders' fundamental Second Amendment rights were at stake, noting that "this legislation recognizes that the right to bear arms does not stop at the state line." ...Doc :D
"Always Judge a man by the way he treats someone who could be of no possible use to him"

*Custom Avatar with the Help of Daywalker*
2cha
Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:11 am
Location: Philadelphia suburbs

#31

Post by 2cha »

Funny, I'm sure I bunch of the people signing onto the Bill are all about States' rights where it suits them, but are nonetheless quick to sign up for a stunt that eats further into the states' police powers. My guess is that even the current Supreme Court would also determine that such a law is unconstitutional under the 10th A.

I think it's a horrible idea. I'd like to be able to carry everywhere I go, but I sure as heck don't think that I want a race to the bottom in terms of qualifications for licensing. I already think it's too easy to get a permit in my home state. I sure as heck don't want to trust other states to do a good enough job.
Jordan
Member
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:56 pm
Location: Austin, TX

#32

Post by Jordan »

2cha wrote:Funny, I'm sure I bunch of the people signing onto the Bill are all about States' rights where it suits them, but are nonetheless quick to sign up for a stunt that eats further into the states' police powers. My guess is that even the current Supreme Court would also determine that such a law is unconstitutional under the 10th A.

I think it's a horrible idea. I'd like to be able to carry everywhere I go, but I sure as heck don't think that I want a race to the bottom in terms of qualifications for licensing. I already think it's too easy to get a permit in my home state. I sure as heck don't want to trust other states to do a good enough job.
While I disagree with the whole it being a horrible idea thing... you make a very good point. There isn't much consistency w/ regards concealed handgun licensing. Ultimately, the only cure for that which still allows unrestricted reciprocity is a nationwide standard of training. Personally, I think my home state has a pretty good system. A day or so of classroom training to get you up on the law concerning armed civilians and a range qualification to determine whether you have a baseline of competency. Add to that the need to re certify every few years and an application fee high enough to ensure that people have to work for the permit (but not so high as to keep people from being able to get one) and you have a pretty good set up (at least, in my own highly biased opinion :p ).

I think that if this act passes, it will make this type of national standard of training possible... ultimately I think it will make it necessary, even. So you never know bud, perhaps the things that you say make this a horrible idea can only be resolved by implementing it :D . On the other hand, maybe people will flock to whichever state has the most lenient nonresident permit application and we'll have a country full of irresponsibly armed civilians... hard to say.
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.
- Theodore Roosevelt

"I twisted the knife until I heard his heart-strings sing."

- Jim Bowie concerning Maj. Norris Wright
User avatar
Dr. Snubnose
Member
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: NewYork

#33

Post by Dr. Snubnose »

Jordan wrote:While I disagree with the whole it being a horrible idea thing... you make a very good point. There isn't much consistency w/ regards concealed handgun licensing. Ultimately, the only cure for that which still allows unrestricted reciprocity is a nationwide standard of training. Personally, I think my home state has a pretty good system. A day or so of classroom training to get you up on the law concerning armed civilians and a range qualification to determine whether you have a baseline of competency. Add to that the need to re certify every few years and an application fee high enough to ensure that people have to work for the permit (but not so high as to keep people from being able to get one) and you have a pretty good set up (at least, in my own highly biased opinion :p ).

I think that if this act passes, it will make this type of national standard of training possible... ultimately I think it will make it necessary, even. So you never know bud, perhaps the things that you say make this a horrible idea can only be resolved by implementing it :D . On the other hand, maybe people will flock to whichever state has the most lenient nonresident permit application and we'll have a country full of irresponsibly armed civilians... hard to say.
I too disagree with the whole thing being a horrible Idea. In my state you have to wait 6 months for a permit...extensive backgrounds checks, Mental health check, FBI check, employer, neighbors, spouse are checked for any problems with you having a license. Police Interview is a must, applications and fees. We used to have a required Pistol Safety Course, the state did away with it, (bad idea), We have no required qualification course (bad idea)....If you have a clean record and no problems with people, the chances you will be issued a permit is quite high. I would like to see a National set of standards for obtaining a pistol permit, that requires training, qualifications, Safety Course with an NRA certified Instructor. If such a thing could be instituted then I think it will turn out to be a great idea....Doc :D
"Always Judge a man by the way he treats someone who could be of no possible use to him"

*Custom Avatar with the Help of Daywalker*
Jordan
Member
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:56 pm
Location: Austin, TX

#34

Post by Jordan »

Dr. Snubnose wrote:I would like to see a National set of standards for obtaining a pistol permit, that requires training, qualifications, Safety Course with an NRA certified Instructor. If such a thing could be instituted then I think it will turn out to be a great idea....Doc :D
Agreed on all counts.
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.
- Theodore Roosevelt

"I twisted the knife until I heard his heart-strings sing."

- Jim Bowie concerning Maj. Norris Wright
2cha
Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:11 am
Location: Philadelphia suburbs

#35

Post by 2cha »

Dr. Snubnose wrote:I would like to see a National set of standards for obtaining a pistol permit, that requires training, qualifications, Safety Course with an NRA certified Instructor. If such a thing could be instituted then I think it will turn out to be a great idea....Doc :D
Yeah, I hear you, but I also think that this "solution" is part of my problem, and why I brought up the states' rights issue--I don't want the federal gov. in the gun business any more than it already is--this is fine with a gun friendly legislature, but not so good with a gun hating legislature. Remember the "Gun Free School Zone Act"--which in amended form severely restricts firearm possession and/or use w/in 1000 ft. of a school,... I honestly believe gun carriers will be better off in the long run if the door to fed involvement stays closed and we leave it up to the states and the courts to sort out the interstate carry issue. No doubt, this will take a long time, but better slow and steady than potential for unintended consequences.
User avatar
Dr. Snubnose
Member
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: NewYork

#36

Post by Dr. Snubnose »

2cha wrote:Yeah, I hear you, but I also think that this "solution" is part of my problem, and why I brought up the states' rights issue--I don't want the federal gov. in the gun business any more than it already is--this is fine with a gun friendly legislature, but not so good with a gun hating legislature. Remember the "Gun Free School Zone Act"--which in amended form severely restricts firearm possession and/or use w/in 1000 ft. of a school,... I honestly believe gun carriers will be better off in the long run if the door to fed involvement stays closed and we leave it up to the states and the courts to sort out the interstate carry issue. No doubt, this will take a long time, but better slow and steady than potential for unintended consequences.
2Cha: I understand where you are coming from and I personally feel the enactment of this bill will probably not happen...just look at all the confusion involved with H.R. 218, the “Law Enforcement Officers' Safety Act” The Law giving LEO's the right to carry from state to state is filled with so many grey areas that even LEO's are having a tough time figuring it out. The Federal Law for them as it is written has their heads a spinning...they run the risk of being arrested in other states for carrying on Federal property, for carrying anywhere in some states where the owner has signs posted restricting the carrying of a concealed firearm, retired LEO's have to show proof of qualifications in the past 12 months, though there agencies do not require them to qualify...there are restrictions from state to state on which ammo you can or cannot carry..and the list goes on and on....If the LEO's can't figure it out...what makes you think that the states or the feds are going to be able to enact such a bill, and let every Tom, Dick and Harry with a permit carry in their state...Just not going to happen...it's a shame, and wishful thinking on everyone's part, but I don't think we will see anything like this for many many years to come if at all.....Best thing the average Joe can do at this point is to apply for a Utah pistol permit, accepted in 34 states and you don't even have to live in Utah or take the coursework there to obtain one.....Doc :D
"Always Judge a man by the way he treats someone who could be of no possible use to him"

*Custom Avatar with the Help of Daywalker*
2cha
Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:11 am
Location: Philadelphia suburbs

#37

Post by 2cha »

Dr. Snubnose wrote:we will see anything like this for many many years to come if at all.....Best thing the average Joe can do at this point is to apply for a Utah pistol permit, accepted in 34 states and you don't even have to live in Utah or take the coursework there to obtain one.....Doc :D
True, FLA is good too, and they have serious IDs as opposed to the fake looking IDs issued by PA.

Have to watch out though. Some states reciprocity only extends to permits issued to residents. Additionally, discovered last night doing a little research on Gun Free School Zones Act, you can't legally carry a firearm within 1000 ft. of a k-12 school unless your permit is issued by the state in which the school sits. Even if you are an otherwise valid permit holder, you can't legally discharge your firearm, EVEN IN SELF DEFENSE, within 1000 ft. of a school. I kid you not.
drmurchindise
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: northeast ohio

#38

Post by drmurchindise »

it passed im guessing
"a knife is not truly yours until it tastes your blood"

"Iron sharpens iron and so man sharpens other man"
User avatar
Dr. Snubnose
Member
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: NewYork

Update

#39

Post by Dr. Snubnose »

National Right-to-Carry Bill Under Attack

Friday, September 23, 2011


As we reported last week, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security recently held a hearing on H.R. 822, the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011."

This critically important bill, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and cosponsored by more than 240 of their colleagues, would enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.

There is currently only one remaining state (Illinois) that has no clear legal way for individuals to carry concealed firearms for self-defense. Forty states have permit systems that make it possible for any law-abiding person to obtain a permit, while most of the others have discretionary permit systems. (Vermont has never required a permit.)

H.R. 822 would mark a major step forward for gun owners' rights by significantly expanding where those permits are recognized. Dozens of states have passed Right-to-Carry laws over the past 25 years because the right to self-defense does not end when one leaves home. However, interstate recognition of those permits is not uniform and creates great confusion and potential problems for travelers. While many states have broad reciprocity, others have very restrictive reciprocity laws. Still others deny recognition completely.

H.R. 822 would solve this problem by requiring that lawfully issued carry permits be recognized, while protecting the ability of the various states to determine the areas where carrying is prohibited within their boundaries.

Unfortunately, but predictably, H.R. 822 continues to be attacked in some quarters, namely the anti-gun media, like the New York Times and the Washington Post; anti-gun organizations, like the Brady Campaign, and New York City Mayor Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns; and, regrettably, even some so-called pro-gun organizations.

Opponents of the legislation claim that it tramples on each "states' rights." But states don't have rights, only powers. And while many anti-gun lawmakers who've long pushed national gun bans, national bans on private gun sales, national waiting periods and other federal restrictions have suddenly become born-again advocates of "states' rights" to oppose this bill, several provisions of the Constitution give Congress the authority to enact interstate carry. Congress also has the power to protect the rights of citizens, nationwide, under the 14th Amendment (please see related article from last week's Grassroots Alert).

Next, despite what a handful of "pro-gun" activists say, the bill would not create a federal licensing system, nor would it establish a minimum federal standard for the carry permit. Rather, it would require the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they recognize driver's licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards. Unfortunately, these self-proclaimed "gun rights" supporters, who have no active lobbying presence in any legislature, have an agenda that has very little to do with promoting the interests of gun owners. Here are the FACTS about a few of their claims:

Myth: H.R. 822 would involve the federal bureaucracy in setting standards for carry permits, resulting in "need" requirements, higher fees, waiting periods, national gun owner registration, or worse.

FACT: H.R. 822 doesn't require—or even authorize—any such action by any federal agency. In fact, since it would amend the Gun Control Act, it would fall under a limitation within that law that authorizes "only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out" the GCA's provisions. No federal rules or regulations would be needed to implement H.R. 822, which simply overrides certain state laws.

Myth: H.R. 822 would destroy permitless carry systems such as those in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

FACT: H.R. 822 would have absolutely no effect on how the permitless carry states' laws work within those states. For residents of Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming, where permits are not required but remain available under state law, H.R. 822 would make those permits valid in all states that issue permits to their own residents. Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.

Myth: If H.R. 822 moved through the legislative process, it would be subject to anti-gun amendments.

TRUTH: By this logic, neither NRA, nor any other pro-gun group, should ever promote any pro-gun reform legislation. But inaction isn't an option for those of us who want to make positive changes for gun owners. Instead, we know that by careful vote counting and strategic use of legislative procedure, anti-gun amendments can be avoided or defeated.

H.R. 822 is a good bill for gun owners. Don't listen to false and misleading accusations. Read the bill yourself and read our fact sheet to get the facts. Then, please contact your member of Congress and urge him or her to support the earliest possible consideration of H.R. 822 this year.

You can find contact information for your U.S. Representative by using the "Write Your Representatives" tool at http://www.NRAILA.org. You may also contact your Representative by phone at (202) 225-3121.



Copyright 2011, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 800-392-8683
Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy

Doc :D
"Always Judge a man by the way he treats someone who could be of no possible use to him"

*Custom Avatar with the Help of Daywalker*
User avatar
Dr. Snubnose
Member
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: NewYork

Update

#40

Post by Dr. Snubnose »

U.S. House Committee Advances
National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act


This week, the House Judiciary considered amendments to H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Bill, and defeated all anti-gun amendments offered in an effort to weaken or gut the legislation.

The legislation is an important pro-gun reform that will provide for the recognition of carry permits in all states that issue permits.

The bill, as originally written, was successfully amended at the outset of the markup with a substitute that added a number of important protections. Foremost, it amended the language so that visitors to states that have laws requiring licenses just for possession of a handgun, do not need a possession license, which is often unavailable.

reprinted from NRA legislative bulletin
Doc :D
"Always Judge a man by the way he treats someone who could be of no possible use to him"

*Custom Avatar with the Help of Daywalker*
Post Reply