Senate right-to-carry bill introduced

[doug]

SENATE VERSION OF
NATIONAL RIGHT-TO-CARRY BILL INTRODUCED

U.S. Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) recently introduced S. 388--the Senate version of H.R. 226, a national Right-to-Carry reciprocity bill that would provide national reciprocity for state carry licensees. This legislation would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state to carry a concealed firearm in any other state if they meet certain criteria. The bill would not create a federal licensing system; it would simply require the states to recognize each other's carry permits, just as they recognize drivers' licenses.

For more information on these bills, please visit http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactShe...ad.aspx?ID=189.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Senators and Representative and ask them to cosponsor and support S. 388 and H.R. 226! You can call your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.

[Frenchy]

Sure sounds like some thing nice! Wonder how it will go... There are states out there that are pretty odd about their laws.

[Sir Knight]

Originally Posted by doug

This legislation would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state to carry a concealed firearm in any other state if they meet certain criteria.

... That one phrase can pretty much kill the SPIRIT of the law even if it passes and with democrates in power, I have little belief that it will pass.

[DeltaII5]

1. It won't pass

2. It won't apply to PA permits.

There aren't many states were you can just walk in fill out an application and pay $XX.XX and you get your permit. Most states require a firearms safety class.

Didn't they try and do this awhile back? Can't remember off hand but remember this being floated around, maybe it was just people talking.

[theshadow]

I look on this in several different ways. I think it is the best way to get "universal" recognition, an dthe least intrusive way to have the Fererals, sorry Federals weigh in on it.... However that said. The language of meeting said criteria, who DICTATES (yes that's the proper word in this case) what that criteria is? I have no doubt in my mind I'd pass any criteria and testing they designate, but I see that as a further infringemetn by the government. PA is one of the most liberal states in terms of issueing you a permit, you go in, pay your money, pass a background check and you're issued. the Only two I know more liberal than that are Alaska and Vermont, where as long as you're not a prohibited person, you can carry with OUT the permission slip from the government (much more in line with the 2A). Now how long to you think our two good friends in Washington are going to stand up in the senate and say, we'll not stand for infeingments and agressive 'standards' in issuing carry permits? How fast will they cave to the creatures from CA or NY, who say only the eilite should carry?

While I like the premise of the 'recognize' all permits and licenses, by allowing them the wording of 'as long as it meets.....' totally defeats the rest of it.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by theshadow

I look on this in several different ways. I think it is the best way to get "universal" recognition, an dthe least intrusive way to have the Fererals, sorry Federals weigh in on it.... However that said. The language of meeting said criteria, who DICTATES (yes that's the proper word in this case) what that criteria is? I have no doubt in my mind I'd pass any criteria and testing they designate, but I see that as a further infringemetn by the government. PA is one of the most liberal states in terms of issueing you a permit, you go in, pay your money, pass a background check and you're issued. the Only two I know more liberal than that are Alaska and Vermont, where as long as you're not a prohibited person, you can carry with OUT the permission slip from the government (much more in line with the 2A). Now how long to you think our two good friends in Washington are going to stand up in the senate and say, we'll not stand for infeingments and agressive 'standards' in issuing carry permits? How fast will they cave to the creatures from CA or NY, who say only the eilite should carry?

While I like the premise of the 'recognize' all permits and licenses, by allowing them the wording of 'as long as it meets.....' totally defeats the rest of it.

Completely agree with this statement. States like PA which do not require hundreds of dollars, training, fingerprints, etc. to obtain an LTC have nowhere to go but down on this issue.

IMHO, states like NJ, MD, and NY are going to fight very hard against national reciprocity becoming a reality. If these states think they're going to lose on this issue in the legislature, they're going to attempt, under the "meet certain criteria" clause, to make said criteria so ridiculous that either:

a) the bill will get voted down, OR
b) it will become much more difficult for ANYONE in ANY state to obtain a license.

These states will attempt to use the "meet certain criteria" clause to create a federally controlled, nationwide standard for the LTC licensing process, which is in direct conflict with the spirit of this bill: to force states to recognize carry licenses issued from other states, no matter HOW or WHY they were issued.

Even if the bill does pass, the above states will likely break the law and just not recognize the permits anyway. It will take someone who's exercising their rights to get falsely arrested and acquitted before they start following the law.

Call me a pessimist, but the risk for Pennsylvanians doesn't seem worth the reward. I like the bill on paper, and if it were to pass unmodified into law, I'd be really happy. I'd like nothing more than to be able to carry when I'm traveling in NJ to visit family. I just don't see it happening, and if there's any chance of it happening the antis are going to try and use it as leverage to take away even more of the protection of our rights, potentially putting us in a worse situation then we are now (which right now in PA isn't all that bad).

[Rule10b5]

It's unconstitutional (as is the police carry legislation that passed a couple years ago). There is no provision in the Constitution that provides the Federal government with the authority to force states to recognize the license of any other state.

I invite you to prove me wrong

Edit to add: And why in the world would you want the Feds involved in concealed carry? Have you seen what a mess the TSA is? Or how hostile the BATFE is to our interests? This would be, in a practical sense, a complete disaster, even if it were not unconstitutional.

[Steve in PA]

Originally Posted by DeltaII5

1. It won't pass

2. It won't apply to PA permits.

There aren't many states were you can just walk in fill out an application and pay $XX.XX and you get your permit. Most states require a firearms safety class.

Didn't they try and do this awhile back? Can't remember off hand but remember this being floated around, maybe it was just people talking.

I agree. At least with the LEO HR218, even the smallest, podunk PD would have some kind of mandatory firearms training.

In the non-LEO world, if all it takes in State "A" is to walk in and walk out with your permit, State "B" which requires you to go through some educational course, qualify, etc isn't going to feel like being forced to accept State "A" ccw'ers.

[phillyd2]

Originally Posted by Rule10b5

It's unconstitutional (as is the police carry legislation that passed a couple years ago). There is no provision in the Constitution that provides the Federal government with the authority to force states to recognize the license of any other state.

I invite you to prove me wrong

Unconstitutional? Now that's funny. Well, actually its sad. The PA Permit to Carry laws are unconstitutional - see the very top of this page. We won't even get into the US Constitution 2nd. Amendment.

Anyway, check out the Section 1 of the Article 4 of the US Constitution which contains the "full faith and credit clause" that provides that each state must recognize the public acts (laws), records, and judicial proceeding of the other states.

[doug]

It would be nice to be able to travel freely around the country, from state to state, and legally be permitted to carry your firearm for personal protection. Our PA AG is making great progress with regards to CCW recoprocity, but I can't envision him ever securing agreements with every state in the union. There are some states, like New York and California, which will not issue NR permits, and will not enter recoprocity agreements with PA.

Here's the S.388 Text which Senator Thune has proposed. It's very short, and seems very clear cut to me. I don't see anything in there which will alter the PA CCW application process. Take the time and read the actual proposal, and if you still think it's bad, explain why.

I think it's a good bill, and I'd like to see it signed into law.