House passes concealed reciprocity bill!

[fastfish66]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nate-from-dems-and-gun-control-advocates.html

IT'S ABOUT TIME,WE NEED TO BAND TOGETHER AND QUIT FIGHTING EACH OTHER. THERE'S ENOUGH BAD GUY'S TO PASS AROUND FOR EVERYONE.

 

[Bear44]

I would suggest they're not as 'free' as a person who doesn't have a criminal record following them around.

I'd be interested in how many people would agree that someone who has, say, tortured and murdered someone, (or possibly more than one), with no reasonable cause, should be entitled to walk out of prison and purchase a firearm.

Philosophically I see the point, practically, I doubt it would get majority support.

I think a lobby to allow true 2nd amendment freedom for someone to purchase quad 50's to put in their front yard should be pursued first.

Also to stir the pot. How many people feel that a person that has done that should be allowed to walk out of a prison at all?

 

[fastfish66]

http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/floor.aspx?day=20171206&today=20171206

Fascinating stuff for sure how our government works...nice to have the votes to push this through!

Luckily that other "NICs Fix" was not attached that I could tell.

Bravo, House of Representatives, bravo!

Maybe there's hope for this country after all!!!

Although still not a fan of the Federal Govt telling the States what they can and can't do but that's a debate for another day...

SOMEONE NEEDS TO TELL SOME OF THESE STATES WHAT TO DO.

 

[cullen1780]

Also to stir the pot. How many people feel that a person that has done that should be allowed to walk out of a prison at all?

That's the whole point.

 

[StuP]

Also to stir the pot. How many people feel that a person that has done that should be allowed to walk out of a prison at all?

Should they be incarcerated to start with ? There are cheaper options.

 

[Hayata]

Finally found where the two were combined.

http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171204/BILLS-115HR38-RCP115-45.xml

 

[MRH]

I would suggest they're not as 'free' as a person who doesn't have a criminal record following them around.

I'd be interested in how many people would agree that someone who has, say, tortured and murdered someone, (or possibly more than one), with no reasonable cause, should be entitled to walk out of prison and purchase a firearm.

Philosophically I see the point, practically, I doubt it would get majority support.

I think a lobby to allow true 2nd amendment freedom for someone to purchase quad 50's to put in their front yard should be pursued first.

If a person has paid their debt to society they should have all the inalienable rights of any other free person. As for violent criminals, if they can't be trusted to have guns or function within the laws of society, they should not be free in the first place. Repeat offenders should not be tolerated.

 

[Shortcut]

Finally found where the two were combined.

http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171204/BILLS-115HR38-RCP115-45.xml

That stinks. I was hoping they did not merge them

 

[MRH]

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.

Interesting. I have heard similar arguments being made by others who I know to be pro 2A.
It is also worth considering that any further intrusions (not necessarily infringements) on the 2A by the feds is a two sided coin. What may seem helpful today could turn disastrous tomorrow.

 

[StuP]

If a person has paid their debt to society they should have all the inalienable rights of any other free person. As for violent criminals, if they can't be trusted to have guns or function within the laws of society, they should not be free in the first place. Repeat offenders should not be tolerated.

Statistics show they can't be trusted with guns, they are freed, and are tolerated.

So, should we take the high road, or the pragmatic one ?