Reciprocity Law

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by indygun, Nov 17, 2011.

  1. glens67

    glens67 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,016
    Location:
    Middleton, ID
    What NRA ILA Says

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=7106


    National Right-to-Carry Bill Under Attack

    Friday, September 23, 2011

    As we reported last week, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security recently held a hearing on H.R. 822, the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011."

    This critically important bill, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and cosponsored by more than 240 of their colleagues, would enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.

    There is currently only one remaining state (Illinois) that has no clear legal way for individuals to carry concealed firearms for self-defense. Forty states have permit systems that make it possible for any law-abiding person to obtain a permit, while most of the others have discretionary permit systems. (Vermont has never required a permit.)

    H.R. 822 would mark a major step forward for gun owners' rights by significantly expanding where those permits are recognized. Dozens of states have passed Right-to-Carry laws over the past 25 years because the right to self-defense does not end when one leaves home. However, interstate recognition of those permits is not uniform and creates great confusion and potential problems for travelers. While many states have broad reciprocity, others have very restrictive reciprocity laws. Still others deny recognition completely.

    H.R. 822 would solve this problem by requiring that lawfully issued carry permits be recognized, while protecting the ability of the various states to determine the areas where carrying is prohibited within their boundaries.

    Unfortunately, but predictably, H.R. 822 continues to be attacked in some quarters, namely the anti-gun media, like the New York Times and the Washington Post; anti-gun organizations, like the Brady Campaign, and New York City Mayor Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns; and, regrettably, even some so-called pro-gun organizations.

    Opponents of the legislation claim that it tramples on each "states' rights." But states don't have rights, only powers. And while many anti-gun lawmakers who've long pushed national gun bans, national bans on private gun sales, national waiting periods and other federal restrictions have suddenly become born-again advocates of "states' rights" to oppose this bill, several provisions of the Constitution give Congress the authority to enact interstate carry. Congress also has the power to protect the rights of citizens, nationwide, under the 14th Amendment (please see related article from last week's Grassroots Alert).

    Next, despite what a handful of "pro-gun" activists say, the bill would not create a federal licensing system, nor would it establish a minimum federal standard for the carry permit. Rather, it would require the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they recognize driver's licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards. Unfortunately, these self-proclaimed "gun rights" supporters, who have no active lobbying presence in any legislature, have an agenda that has very little to do with promoting the interests of gun owners. Here are the FACTS about a few of their claims:

    Myth: H.R. 822 would involve the federal bureaucracy in setting standards for carry permits, resulting in "need" requirements, higher fees, waiting periods, national gun owner registration, or worse.

    FACT: H.R. 822 doesn't require—or even authorize—any such action by any federal agency. In fact, since it would amend the Gun Control Act, it would fall under a limitation within that law that authorizes "only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out" the GCA's provisions. No federal rules or regulations would be needed to implement H.R. 822, which simply overrides certain state laws.

    Myth: H.R. 822 would destroy permitless carry systems such as those in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

    FACT: H.R. 822 would have absolutely no effect on how the permitless carry states' laws work within those states. For residents of Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming, where permits are not required but remain available under state law, H.R. 822 would make those permits valid in all states that issue permits to their own residents. Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.

    Myth: If H.R. 822 moved through the legislative process, it would be subject to anti-gun amendments.

    TRUTH: By this logic, neither NRA, nor any other pro-gun group, should ever promote any pro-gun reform legislation. But inaction isn't an option for those of us who want to make positive changes for gun owners. Instead, we know that by careful vote counting and strategic use of legislative procedure, anti-gun amendments can be avoided or defeated.

    H.R. 822 is a good bill for gun owners. Don't listen to false and misleading accusations. Read the bill yourself and read our fact sheet to get the facts. Then, please contact your member of Congress and urge him or her to support the earliest possible consideration of H.R. 822 this year.

    You can find contact information for your U.S. Representative by using the "Write Your Representatives" tool at www.NRAILA.org. You may also contact your Representative by phone at (202) 225-3121.



    Glen
  2. glens67

    glens67 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,016
    Location:
    Middleton, ID
    Up date Reciprocity Law

    U.S. House of Representatives Adopts Right-to-Carry Reciprocity—
    All Anti-Gun Amendments Defeated!

    Friday, November 18, 2011

    On Wednesday, Nov. 16, the ongoing effort to fully vindicate the fundamental, individual right to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense took a major step forward with House passage of H.R. 822, the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.” The bill, sponsored by Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), which has 245 cosponsors, was approved by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 272-154.

    Several amendments were offered to undermine the bill’s protections. Every one of these amendments was soundly defeated by an overwhelming bipartisan vote, and included:

    Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s (D-Texas) amendment to establish a national database of permit holders (defeated 284-139);
    Rep. Jackson Lee’s amendment to require permit holders to notify law enforcement officials in other states of their intention to carry a firearm in those states (defeated 299-123);
    Rep. Steve Cohen’s (D-Tenn.) amendment to exclude permit holders under 21 years of age (defeated 276-150);
    Rep. Alcee Hastings’ (D-Fla.) amendment, intended to exclude permit holders whose states do not require permit applicants to apply in person (defeated 277-148);
    Rep. Carolyn McCarthy’s (D-N.Y.) amendment to apply the bill only to states in which the state legislature votes to accept it (defeated 274-147);
    Rep. Rob Woodall’s (R-Ga.) amendment to allow states to create their own agreements which would exempt them from the bill (defeated 283-140);
    Rep. Hank Johnson’s (D-Ga.) amendment to apply the bill only to permit holders who were required to participate in a live-fire exercise to be eligible for their permits (defeated 281-144); and,
    Rep. David Cicilline’s (D-R.I.) amendment to create a patchwork of recognition (and resistance) by applying the bill only between states where the attorneys general, state police chiefs, and secretaries of state have affirmed that their states’ carry laws are similar (defeated 277-146).
    Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee provided crucial support to H.R. 822’s progress over the last several months, opened debate on the bill by describing in plain terms what it does. “This legislation requires states that currently allow people to carry concealed firearms to recognize other states’ valid concealed carry permits, much like states recognize driver’s licenses issued by other states,” Rep. Smith said. Anticipating the claim that H.R. 822 would override state carry laws—a claim that would be made over and over by House members opposed to the bill—Smith added, “The bill recognizes the right of states to determine eligibility requirements for their own residents [and] laws and regulations regarding how, when, and where a concealed firearm can be carried that apply to a resident will apply equally to a nonresident.” Rep. Smith concluded his opening remarks by expressing the central motive behind the bill, saying that the “fundamental right to bear arms . . . should not be constrained by state boundary lines.”

    As the author of the bill, Rep. Stearns expanded upon Chairman Smith’s arguments, saying “t’s long overdue that we take action to enhance the fundamental right of self-defense for all law-abiding citizens of this country. The right—the simple right—to defend yourself and your loved ones from a criminal is fundamental. And it's not extinguished when you simply cross a state border. . . . . nder this legislation, lawfully issued carry permits will be recognized in all states that also issue carry permits. There are now 49 states that issue these permits. Most of these states also recognize permits issued from at least some other states, while some states recognize all valid permits issued by any state. But herein, simply, lies the problem. The non-uniformity of the laws regarding reciprocity makes it difficult for law-abiding permit holders to know for sure if they are obeying the law as they travel from state to state. While preserving the power of the states to set the rules on where concealed firearms can be carried, this legislation…will simply make it easier for law-abiding permit holders to know that they are simply in compliance with the law when they carry a firearm as they travel this wonderful country of ours.”

    Rep. Stearns also put to rest several self-serving claims recently made by a small number of groups which claim to support the Second Amendment, but never seem to find a viable pro-Second Amendment bill they can support. These groups regularly oppose important pro-gun reform legislation, either complaining that it does not achieve all of gun owners’ goals in a single stroke, or expressing a paranoid fear that the legislation contains a hidden, insidious mechanism that will lead to the destruction of our right to keep and bear arms.

    “This bill does not set up a federal carry permit system or establish any federal regulations of concealed-carry permits,” Rep. Stearns said. “That power remains with the states. Additionally, this legislation does not include any new federal gun laws, nor does it call for additional federal regulation of gun ownership. In fact, it does not allow for new federal regulation, for it amends the part of the Gun Control Act that allows only such regulation as is necessary, and in this case none.”

    Some of the other House members speaking in favor were Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), John Kline (R-Minn.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), and Dennis Ross (R-Fla.), each of whom reiterated that H.R. 822 does not establish a national licensing scheme or federal carry permit system, or any other federal regulation relating to carry permits or gun ownership.


    Since the House debate, some of the same critics have focused their complaints on an amendment by Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) that would require a study of law enforcement officials’ ability to check the validity of out-of-state permits. The amendment was adopted by voice vote. It is important to note that any member of Congress can request a General Accounting Office study of any issue at any time, with or without legislation. More importantly, this study will have no effect on the provisions of H.R. 822. Certainly it wouldn't force the states to use "biometric identifiers" on permits, an idea that so far exists only in the minds of these naysayers.

    Special thanks also go to Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who rose time and again to defend H.R. 822 against the anti-gun amendments its opponents put forward. Additional thanks go to Reps. Steve Austria (R-Ohio); Howard Coble (R-N.C.); Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.); Jason Altmire (R-Penn.); Dan Boren (D-Okla.); Mike Ross (D-Ark.); Trent Franks (R-Ariz.); Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.); Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.); Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.); Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.); Candice Miller (R-Mich.); Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.); and Don Young (R-Alaska) for speaking in support of H.R. 822 during the debate, and to Rep. Rich Nugent (R-Fla.) for managing the Rule which provided for consideration of the bill.

    This critical legislation now moves to the Senate. Please contact your Senators and urge them to bring H.R. 822 up for a vote at the earliest possible opportunity!






    Copyright 2011, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
    This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
    11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 800-392-8683
    Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy


    Glen
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr CC Permit Reciprocity Jan 5, 2012

Share This Page