• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill

Tomthumb

Default rank <500 posts
Survivalist
45   0
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
410
Reaction score
142
Location
Acworth
November 17, 2011
Gun Owners of America


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill
Passes House
Troubling Amendment Added



The House passed national concealed carry reciprocity legislation on Wednesday evening by a vote of 272-154.



The bill, H.R. 822, is intended to allow persons who hold a concealed carry permit from one state to also carry anywhere in the country, with the exception of Illinois and Washington, D.C.



Though the bill passed by a wide margin, it was not without controversy on the pro-gun side of the debate. In previous alerts, GOA has pointed out several flaws in the legislation:



It forces Vermont residents (who do not need a permit to carry) to either obtain an out-of-state permit or to push their state to pass a more restrictive concealed carry law than it now enjoys;
By requiring permits for reciprocity, the bill undermines efforts at the state level to pass constitutional carry (i.e., Vermont-style carry);
In restrictive “may issue” states, the bill allows for non-residents to carry firearms in the state while most residents would still be prohibited, and;
The bill is yet another example of Congress distorting of the Constitution’s Commerce Clause.


Representative Justin Amash (R-MI), who voted against the bill, addressed this last point in a statement, calling H.R. 822 “an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing.”



Another freshman Representative, Rob Woodall (R-GA), noted that the right to carry a concealed firearm is already protected by the Second Amendment.



“If the Second Amendment protects my rights to carry my concealed weapon from state to state to state, I don’t need another federal law,” Rep. Woodall said. He went on to remind his colleagues of the original intent of the right to keep and bear arms.



“I don’t believe the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights to allow me to shoot targets [or] hunt for deer and turkey. I think the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights so that I could defend my freedom against an overbearing federal government.”



Anti-gun Amendment Passes



One extremely troubling amendment to the bill was slipped in on a voice vote. Sponsored by Republican David Reichert (“C” rated by GOA), the amendment instructs the Government Accounting Office to:



“Conduct a study of the ability of State and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of licenses or permits, issued by other States, to carry a concealed firearm.”



Nowhere in the Constitution is there even a hint of authority for the federal government to “study” the exercising of a right. Even worse, you can be sure that anti-gunners will use any excuse, including this study, to push for some type of national carry license.



The bill now heads to the Senate, where GOA is already working with key Senators to address ALL of the problems with the bill. GOA is also working with Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) on legislation, H.R. 2900, that takes a constitutional approach to concealed carry recognition.



You can click here to send you own Representative a message urging him or her to become a cosponsor of H.R. 2900.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable.
Please foward this e-mail to friends and family

Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
703-321-8585
www.gunowners.org
Contact Form

If this alert was forwarded to you, you can subscribe to receive alerts directly by clicking here.
 
Its anti gun dressed in progun clothing.

And its a violation of the tenth amendment.

The 2nd amendment is like the other 9 billof rights a prohibition upon the federal government. Regulation is left to the states and their constitution.
 
Wow.I'm still digesting it and at first glance it sounds good, but when I look harder not sure about the implications.
It would be good from one standpoint though- SC would be legal to carry in with GA weapons license; but that convenience may not be a good trade off for the potential for anti gun agenda.Need more info.
 
Last edited:
.

The 2nd amendment is like the other 9 billof rights a prohibition upon the federal government. Regulation is left to the states and their constitution.
Not sure about this statement, the States can't regulate freedom of speech, freedom of the press etc. so they really can't regulate the 2nd either, just saying the state can't over-ride your Federal constitutional rights. I'm not familia with Congressman Woodall from Ga. but what says is right. Also, will say the state can regulate things such as automobiles, drivers license, hunting/game laws but not your basic rights issued by the founding fathers.
 
Last edited:
Not sure about this statement, the States can't regulate freedom of speech, freedom of the press etc. so they really can't regulate the 2nd either, just saying the state can't over-ride your Federal constitutional rights. I'm not familia with Congressman Woodall from Ga. but what says is right. Also, will say the state can regulate things such as automobiles, drivers license, hunting/game laws but not your basic rights issued by the founding fathers.
Ok first misconception: rights were not issued by the founding fathers. They were endowed by your creator.

Secondly the states have constitutions that specifically protect your rights. Some states do not protect the right to bear arms and henceforth the issue withgun control legislation in those places I.e. Ca, ny, Il, etc.

The lines have been blurred since the 14th amendment was passed and the supremacy clause has been pointed to routinely as justification of federal supremacy over states rights.

The founders knew what they were doing when they set it up this way. You don't like it in one place you can vote with your feet and move someplace where you do. Govt is supposed to reflect self determination of its people and reflect their values not dictate them.

You cannot have your cajke and eat it too. It's serving two masters....
 
You can argue Constitutional theory all you want. The Feds have been ignoring the Constitution for decades and particularly the past three years. Keep them out of the states granting weapons permits. Georgia laws are not perfect, but more lenient than most. National reciprocity is not worth our laws to be dumbed down to satisfy folks in NY, Calif., and DC.
 
Ok first misconception: rights were not issued by the founding fathers. They were endowed by your creator.

Secondly the states have constitutions that specifically protect your rights. Some states do not protect the right to bear arms and henceforth the issue withgun control legislation in those places I.e. Ca, ny, Il, etc.

The lines have been blurred since the 14th amendment was passed and the supremacy clause has been pointed to routinely as justification of federal supremacy over states rights.

The founders knew what they were doing when they set it up this way. You don't like it in one place you can vote with your feet and move someplace where you do. Govt is supposed to reflect self determination of its people and reflect their values not dictate them.

You cannot have your cajke and eat it too. It's serving two masters....
I was responding to your statement, that said ( regulation of your rights is left up to the states and their constitutions ), which is not correct, they cannot over-ride your constitutional rights, they may want to and try to limit your rights but have never succeeded, in the end thats why we have a Supreme Court in place.
 
Ok first misconception: rights were not issued by the founding fathers. They were endowed by your creator.

Secondly the states have constitutions that specifically protect your rights. Some states do not protect the right to bear arms and henceforth the issue withgun control legislation in those places I.e. Ca, ny, Il, etc.

The lines have been blurred since the 14th amendment was passed and the supremacy clause has been pointed to routinely as justification of federal supremacy over states rights.

The founders knew what they were doing when they set it up this way. You don't like it in one place you can vote with your feet and move someplace where you do. Govt is supposed to reflect self determination of its people and reflect their values not dictate them.

You cannot have your cajke and eat it too. It's serving two masters....

this. i don't want the feds having further control over my guns (although I lost them all while fishing the hooch).
 
Back
Top Bottom