-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
House passes concealed reciprocity bill!
- Thread starter araomd
- Start date
Good to see pro gun legislation passing....is it too soon to hope for SAFE ACT?
I think
karlvv30
is right based on the first article linked. Its like remember how for the longest time SC wouldn't honor GA permit because you don't need any trainer in GA but you do in SC? It would basically eliminate issue and force SC to honor the GA permit. So it might not effect states like NJ who dont honor anyones permit. Not sure, have to do more research.
If Karl is right and they're making this big a deal out of this "win", I wouldn't hold my breath.
Well crap. I should have just read the bill. The answer is in the very first line.
"To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a means by which nonresidents of a State whose residents may carry concealed firearms may also do so in the State."
To me, this is basically window dressing for the 2A movement and does very little at all. Unless, this means if anyone at all is allowed to carry in the state.
"To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a means by which nonresidents of a State whose residents may carry concealed firearms may also do so in the State."
To me, this is basically window dressing for the 2A movement and does very little at all. Unless, this means if anyone at all is allowed to carry in the state.
Thats not the way I read it.
"Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), author of the concealed carry bill, noted that "almost half the states" already allow concealed-carry permit holders to bring guns across their borders, but his bill would extend that privilege nationally."
So if you have a GA Carry license, it would be honored nationally.
Emailed Johnny & David.
What was the verdict ofthe NICs provision. Was there verbage included that only allowed using NCIC to track known felons for attempting to purchase guns. I for one believe gun possession a right solely based on the constitution & hate the bureaucratic process of re-allowing rights after being taxed (permit) but have to cover my but none the less.
What was the verdict ofthe NICs provision. Was there verbage included that only allowed using NCIC to track known felons for attempting to purchase guns. I for one believe gun possession a right solely based on the constitution & hate the bureaucratic process of re-allowing rights after being taxed (permit) but have to cover my but none the less.
This is taken off of NRA-ILA: "The bill, H.R. 38, ensures that those Americans who can legally carry a concealed firearm in one state will legally be able to do so in every other state. It eliminates the confusing patchwork of state laws that have ensnared otherwise law-abiding gun owners, and have forced law enforcement to waste their precious time and resources enforcing laws that don’t do anything to reduce violent crime. "
So it looks like you get blanketed national coverage. I havent found anything that excludes certain states and even NY rep was upset saying the states would have to change their laws and criteria to conform to the national reciprocity.
Saw this online. What do y’all think?
“I voted no on #HR38 because I support the right to keep and bear arms.
H R 38 includes two separate bills: the Fix NICS Act of 2017 and the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017.
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is used to enforce federal laws prohibiting broad classes of people from purchasing guns—including people who have never been convicted of any crime. People can be added to NICS and have their right to purchase a gun permanently denied without any judicial oversight, and if someone is added inaccurately, correcting NICS records can require fighting a bureaucratic appeals system with massive backlogs, or hiring an attorney to sue the government.
The problems with NICS have been recognized by this very Congress. The House has passed, and I have supported, two separate measures this session (#HR1181 and #HJRes40) to end the VA’s and the Social Security Administration’s practice of forwarding records of veterans and social security recipients to NICS just because they have had someone appointed to handle their financial affairs.
Despite this, congressional leadership is now pushing the “Fix NICS” Act, which provides incentives and hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for states, federal agencies, and courts to “ensure maximum coordination and automated reporting” of records to NICS.
Actually fixing NICS’ violations of due process and the Second Amendment would require limiting the categories of people who have their Second Amendment rights revoked under the law, adding sufficient process before each person has their records forwarded to NICS, and creating an effective and enforceable process for correcting errors in NICS records. Instead, this bill just bolsters the existing, flawed system.
Other pro-gun advocates have also recognized the problems with “Fix NICS.” Rep. Thomas Massie, chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus, voted against the bill, noting that it “throws millions of dollars at a faulty program and [] will result in more law-abiding citizens being deprived of their right to keep and bear arms.” The National Association for Gun Rights strongly opposed the bill, saying that it “will only assure that more law-abiding gun owners become ‘prohibited persons’ as states dump more records into NICS of non-adjudicated individuals, who have received no due process rights, no right to counsel, and have had no day in court.” And Gun Owners of America referred to “Fix NICS” as “gun-control-lite."
To get this anti-gun bill through the House, leadership combined it with the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which requires states to allow out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms if they are allowed to do so in their home state. Unfortunately, this bill is fatally flawed as well.
Its worst problem is that it relies on the Commerce Clause as the basis for federal authority to require concealed carry reciprocity. Carrying a weapon over state lines is not inherently “interstate or foreign commerce,” so this is an inaccurate reading of the Commerce Clause, and it is a misguided strategy for pro-gun advocates. The Commerce Clause has consistently been used as a basis to restrict gun rights at the federal level, and that practice will continue unless we reject this erroneous interpretation. Instead, H R 38 endorses the use of the Commerce Clause to regulate entirely noncommercial gun possession.
Relying on the Commerce Clause is also entirely unnecessary. The Second Amendment itself serves as a basis for federal protection of gun rights, and conservative law professors have suggested the Full Faith and Credit Clause as an additional alternative basis for federal concealed carry reciprocity legislation.
In return for all the anti-gun provisions in the bill, it expands concealed carry reciprocity to just ten remaining states that don’t already have it. This is not an acceptable trade-off.
I have a concealed carry permit from Michigan, and I travel frequently to Washington, D.C., which does not recognize my permit, so I would benefit from concealed carry reciprocity. But H R 38 undermines the right to keep and bear arms, and I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The bill bolsters NICS without addressing any of its grave constitutional flaws, and it endorses a dangerous constitutional precedent that has been used, and will continue to be used, to restrict gun rights.”
It passed 231-198.
“I voted no on #HR38 because I support the right to keep and bear arms.
H R 38 includes two separate bills: the Fix NICS Act of 2017 and the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017.
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is used to enforce federal laws prohibiting broad classes of people from purchasing guns—including people who have never been convicted of any crime. People can be added to NICS and have their right to purchase a gun permanently denied without any judicial oversight, and if someone is added inaccurately, correcting NICS records can require fighting a bureaucratic appeals system with massive backlogs, or hiring an attorney to sue the government.
The problems with NICS have been recognized by this very Congress. The House has passed, and I have supported, two separate measures this session (#HR1181 and #HJRes40) to end the VA’s and the Social Security Administration’s practice of forwarding records of veterans and social security recipients to NICS just because they have had someone appointed to handle their financial affairs.
Despite this, congressional leadership is now pushing the “Fix NICS” Act, which provides incentives and hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for states, federal agencies, and courts to “ensure maximum coordination and automated reporting” of records to NICS.
Actually fixing NICS’ violations of due process and the Second Amendment would require limiting the categories of people who have their Second Amendment rights revoked under the law, adding sufficient process before each person has their records forwarded to NICS, and creating an effective and enforceable process for correcting errors in NICS records. Instead, this bill just bolsters the existing, flawed system.
Other pro-gun advocates have also recognized the problems with “Fix NICS.” Rep. Thomas Massie, chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus, voted against the bill, noting that it “throws millions of dollars at a faulty program and [] will result in more law-abiding citizens being deprived of their right to keep and bear arms.” The National Association for Gun Rights strongly opposed the bill, saying that it “will only assure that more law-abiding gun owners become ‘prohibited persons’ as states dump more records into NICS of non-adjudicated individuals, who have received no due process rights, no right to counsel, and have had no day in court.” And Gun Owners of America referred to “Fix NICS” as “gun-control-lite."
To get this anti-gun bill through the House, leadership combined it with the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which requires states to allow out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms if they are allowed to do so in their home state. Unfortunately, this bill is fatally flawed as well.
Its worst problem is that it relies on the Commerce Clause as the basis for federal authority to require concealed carry reciprocity. Carrying a weapon over state lines is not inherently “interstate or foreign commerce,” so this is an inaccurate reading of the Commerce Clause, and it is a misguided strategy for pro-gun advocates. The Commerce Clause has consistently been used as a basis to restrict gun rights at the federal level, and that practice will continue unless we reject this erroneous interpretation. Instead, H R 38 endorses the use of the Commerce Clause to regulate entirely noncommercial gun possession.
Relying on the Commerce Clause is also entirely unnecessary. The Second Amendment itself serves as a basis for federal protection of gun rights, and conservative law professors have suggested the Full Faith and Credit Clause as an additional alternative basis for federal concealed carry reciprocity legislation.
In return for all the anti-gun provisions in the bill, it expands concealed carry reciprocity to just ten remaining states that don’t already have it. This is not an acceptable trade-off.
I have a concealed carry permit from Michigan, and I travel frequently to Washington, D.C., which does not recognize my permit, so I would benefit from concealed carry reciprocity. But H R 38 undermines the right to keep and bear arms, and I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The bill bolsters NICS without addressing any of its grave constitutional flaws, and it endorses a dangerous constitutional precedent that has been used, and will continue to be used, to restrict gun rights.”
It passed 231-198.
