HuntingNet.com Forums

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)
-   Politics (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/politics-16/)
-   -   NRA pushing hard for a national reciprocity carry law (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/politics/413491-nra-pushing-hard-national-reciprocity-carry-law.html)

Oldtimr 05-02-2017 06:05 AM

NRA pushing hard for a national reciprocity carry law
 
Conservative Free Press


NRA Pushing Hard for National Reciprocity Bill
By admin - April 30, 2017

With the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court in safely conservative hands, the National Rifle Association is trading in their defensive posture of the last eight years for a renewed push for positive, Second Amendment-affirming policies that will broaden the gun rights of the American people. And one of the top items on their agenda is a national reciprocity bill that would allow concealed-carry permit holders from one state to travel to another without fear of prosecution.

At the annual NRA Liberty convention last week, President Trump reassured attendees that they didn’t need to worry about the federal government infringing on gun rights.

“No longer will federal agencies be coming after law-abiding gun owners,” Trump said. “No longer will the government be trying to undermine your rights and your freedoms as Americans. Instead, we will work with you, by your side.”



What a refreshing change of rhetoric from the last eight years!

But the NRA is hoping that the president’s pro-gun agenda won’t be limited to the negative – while it’s a great thing for the American people if Trump will simply STOP doing the things that Obama was pushing for, our current Republican leadership has the chance to do so much more. And the NRA wants them to make the most of that opportunity by pushing for national reciprocity.

“If 10 states made it a felony to read The New York Times, the media would run the story 24/7 until Congress fixed the assault on the First Amendment,” the gun lobby said in a recent advertisement. “But when 10 states criminalize the Second Amendment, the media says nothing.”

Even that, as powerful as it sounds, understates the truth. The media hasn’t just said “nothing,” it has gone out of its way to praise states like California, New York, and Illinois, where it is harder for law-abiding citizens to get a gun than to get illegal drugs. This, despite the fact, that many of these strict, anti-gun states harbor cities that are awash in gun-related murders.

Oh, but of course that’s the fault of neighboring states with loose gun laws…even though those states don’t have gun violence problems themselves. See, doesn’t it all make sense? See why we have to punish lawful, concealed-carry permit holders? They might take it upon themselves to drive up to Chicago and just start shooting up the place. It’s all so logical and sensible…

National reciprocity is not a radical idea. It’s nothing more or less than common sense. If Democrats weren’t so hell-bent on opposing any legislation that strengthens the Second Amendment, this bill would be a no-brainer. And if they want to start taking back the Midwestern blue states that Trump yanked from them last November, this wouldn’t be the worst place to begin.

muzzlestuffer 05-02-2017 07:07 AM

This is such a no Brainer I personally don't care what laws they have if I feel the need to carry I carry ! If you have to really use your weapon in that circumstance the least of your worries should be a unconstitutional law.they have a bunch of places here with the no guns signs here I just ignore them and carry anyway !

Oldtimr 05-02-2017 07:22 AM

If you get caught carrying in a state like MD, NY or NJ, you will be arrested. If you use your gun, no matter how justified the shooting was, you will be arrested and jailed. These states laws are a lot more than no firearms allowed inside signs and they vigorously enforce them. Some of these states have made the simple possession of hollow point ammo illegal. As retired law enforcement I can carry in any state of the union, but the federal law that authorizes that does not supersede the type of ammunition the states declare illegal so if I am in one of those states I would have to carry frangible ammo or some other non hollow point ammo. There are times I have to drive through those states to get to another state for a hunting trip. I do my best to watch my speed because I do not want to get pulled over and have to tell the officer I am armed because if they asked to see my ammo I could be toast. There must be consistency so people do not get caught up having to learn the firearms laws of every state. You can't comply with the law by changing ammo at the state line because the mere possession is illegal, it doesn't have to be in your gun.

younggun308 05-02-2017 10:02 AM

My only quibble with Concealed Carry Reciprocity as it currently has been proposed is it uses the Federal government to mandate to states how they should treat other states' gun laws---that may work to our advantage today, but will it when Democrats are in office down the road? Democrats may impose a ban on any reciprocity at all, even if the states agree to it on a bi-lateral basis!

I would rather there be a law saying no state can bar access to concealed carry; whether they choose to enact "Constitutional carry" or require a permit process that is reasonably affordable and not overly restrictive (nothing more than a background check and rudimentary gun safety instruction and evaluation, which could perhaps be skipped if the person already has some sort of safety certification). That way, Tennessee isn't obligated to allow someone from a state that doesn't do background checks to carry, since there's no way of knowing whether the person is a felon. But at the same time, no law-abiding citizen is barred from carrying in their own state.

That said, I fully understand we need to do something to expand Second Amendment rights, and the courts move awfully slow, even though lately the highest courts tend to side with us on concealed carry issues. I'm frankly impatiently awaiting for the SC to strike down the ridiculous "good cause" CC permit regulations in Maryland, DC, NYC, and elsewhere.

muzzlestuffer 05-02-2017 10:06 AM


Originally Posted by Oldtimr (Post 4302795)
If you get caught carrying in a state like MD, NY or NJ, you will be arrested. If you use your gun, no matter how justified the shooting was, you will be arrested and jailed. These states laws are a lot more than no firearms allowed inside signs and they vigorously enforce them. Some of these states have made the simple possession of hollow point ammo illegal. As retired law enforcement I can carry in any state of the union, but the federal law that authorizes that does not supersede the type of ammunition the states declare illegal so if I am in one of those states I would have to carry frangible ammo or some other non hollow point ammo. There are times I have to drive through those states to get to another state for a hunting trip. I do my best to watch my speed because I do not want to get pulled over and have to tell the officer I am armed because if they asked to see my ammo I could be toast. There must be consistency so people do not get caught up having to learn the firearms laws of every state. You can't comply with the law by changing ammo at the state line because the mere possession is illegal, it doesn't have to be in your gun.

I have ccw to cover most states and have a new York state permit and a few of my carry guns are registered there but if it's my life or a gun charge it's a no Brainer !

Oldtimr 05-02-2017 10:36 AM

I have to disagree Younggun. The 2nd amendment is not a states rights issue, it is a US constitutional issue and no state should be allowed to impede a citizen's right to carry. This excerpt from the 2nd amend is not complicated or hard to understand:" the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The left wants to play all kinds of games with interpretation of something that has plain meaning and all you have to do is look at the reason the founders created the amendment to begin with and it wasn't for hunting or target shooting, it was so citizens could protect themselves against despots, be they government despots or simply criminal elements. They came from a place where only the privileged class was allowed to own a weapon of any kind. Now we have court opinions from the left that have emasculated the amendment to a certain extent and will continue to attack it until it is meaningless. If you allow the respective states to create their own laws that usurp the 2nd amendment, which many of them have done there is not equal protection under the law as we all have a right to expect and have. Your solution will do nothing to prevent leftist run states from making it so hard to carry a weapon that many will either not do it or violate the law in order to do it. There must be consistency if it is done, you cannot have reciprocity if every state can add their own rules because no one will know the rules of all states. The federal government can set up the rules for issuance of a permit and require a must issue by a state if the person meets the requirements. We all know there are people who shouldn't be in possession of firearms, they have already proven that, problem is, those kinds of people will carry anyway without a permit probably with a stolen gun because they can't legally buy a gun. So long as respective states are allowed to add their own requirements, national reciprocity will not work. There is no state that can prevent me from carrying concealed, however, they can mandate what kind of ammo I can use and the capacity of ammo it will hold. This is nonsense, imagine 50 states all with their all rules to tell you what you can carry under a federal law. I am going long on this so I will leave it at this. There are some states that allow municipalities to pass their own ordinances and laws governing hunting in their boro, twp or county etc. You can imagine the confusion when you can do one thing on one side of a road but not on the other side because it is a different municipality. That is why in PA the only entity that can pass any laws or regulations governing hunting is the PA Game commission, our state law supersedes any lesser government entity, our hunters do not have to worry about accidentally doing something wrong because they didn't know all the rules that were passed by hundreds of government entities. That is a good analogy as to why a federal national reciprocity law should not be interfered with by the states who will only add confusion and try to minimize our 2nd amendment rights.

younggun308 05-02-2017 10:56 AM

I definitely see the argument and respect it; there's certainly already precedent in this country for limiting states rights on issues that are spelled out in the Constitution, whether in the Bill of Rights or in the Amendments---it is of course hypocritical for liberals to argue states don't have the right to regulate civil rights (of course the question is what actually qualifies as a civil rights' issue) but then say they have a right to regulate the possession, ownership, and bearing of arms.
My concern is at least initially pragmatic; Congressional action, apart from Constitutional amendments of course, does not stick as well as judicial rulings. What I mentioned earlier is a valid concern: a Republican Congress and President could mandate reciprocity, but a Democratic Congress and President could retaliate by shutting down reciprocity, altogether. Even if this ended up getting overturned in the courts, it would take years.
The other thing is that, the concealed carry reciprocity does not address the core problem: it is not a "will issue" mandate to the states. It doesn't even give law-abiding citizens from every state the right to carry in every other state in the Union. In fact, citizens of states where "Constitutional carry" is the law would not benefit from a national reciprocity law, because they don't technically have "permits."

Oldtimr 05-02-2017 11:07 AM

If this bill passes both houses and is signed into law, something I am not confident will happen, it could only be overturned by the same process as created it. I think if passed it would stick because I don't believe there would be enough votes in either house to overturn it because they would fear for re election.

younggun308 05-02-2017 11:14 AM

Like you say, the question is would it pass, in the first place. The Tuesday Group has gotten alarmingly comfortable acting like its own party---its members thinking delusionally that its days aren't numbered simply by virtue of the natural pendulum swing of American elections. They should realize that they're likely to lose their seats, anyway, and their best strategy is to cash in now, and have the good graces of the RNC on their side when they someday seek office in another capacity and need cash. I just don't understand why they act as though they're helping their re-election prospects by obstructing the Republican agenda so boldly.

muzzlestuffer 05-02-2017 11:18 AM


Originally Posted by Oldtimr (Post 4302825)
If this bill passes both houses and is signed into law, something I am not confident will happen, it could only be overturned by the same process as created it. I think if passed it would stick because I don't believe there would be enough votes in either house to overturn it because they would fear for re election.

I dont think it's not the states right or the federal governments right to give us "permission" to defend ones self it's a god given right to defend self and country.so I agree some people don't have these rights and they can be stopped at point of sale or when someone breaks the law you arrest and prosecute them


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:03 PM.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.