Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by firefighter1635, Nov 30, 2017.
So in essence you have multiplied reciprocity ....nice
In order for California to opt-out they would have to do away completly with their permit program and any potential legal method somebody could carry a concealed firearm. Doing so would also be in violation of US Supreme court decisions. The same decision that forced Illinois to start issuing permits back in 2013. So I think your fear here is unfounded. In fact it would likely have the opposite affect. Since non-resident permits also work for this bill California would have a financial and gun grabber political incentive to make it easier for applicants to get CA permits. Otherwise all their residents will go get permits from AZ, UT, or VA and carry in California anyway.
Have your read Title II of the bill that was passed? The Fix NICS portion doesn't expand who would be disqualified at all. It only gives greater incentives for government agencies to be in compliance with reporting people to the NICS system... oh and it commissions a study on bump stocks.
Now what will happen to the bill when it gets to the Senate is still a little scary.
I'm not sure how this (if it passes the Senate intact) would impact a non-resident CCW.
For example, if I had a current non-resident license in Vermont I could carry in Vermont but not in my home state of Illinois. But I believe the wording of the bill is something to the effect of "States must honor the permits of other state issued where the permit holder resides." (I'm going from memory, so that's not an exact quote) So would Illinois have to honor a permit issued to me by a State that I don't live in?
The verbiage is that they must honor "a permit issued by A STATE." Both from the way it is written, and based on the interviews with the bill's author; its SUPER clear that non-resident permits would be as valid as resident permits anywhere for anyone.
That's great news for us in Illinois! Thanks for clearing that up for me.
This is an example of why I quit supporting the NRA quite a while back.
They write up a rosy picture of the fix nics legislation as well as the reciprocity bill.
They are gun owners AARP, who sold out elderly Americans for Obamacare support. The effect of these two bills is a monstrous Trojan horse.
Dont support them.
If something sounds to good to be true, then it probably isn't good. I smell a rat in the woodpile
Up around my parts it was called something a bit more controversial than a rat in the woodpile.
Well, I was trying to politically correct. Guess I should apologize to the rat community
I would hope everyone (except the NRA) has heard about Schumer and Feinstein adding in their 'gun' bills? And this underhanded bit of politics allowed by our lovely Rino's...though haven't heard much about it lately. Maybe it will die in committee?
They haven't added anything to the house bill that was passed because it was in the house and they are both in the Senate. When HB38 gets to the Senate that will be something to keep an eye on.
Perhaps I'm confused. It happens with alarming regularity. The House passes their version. The Senate passes their version. Then they sit down together to finalize the bill that goes to the President for passing or vetoing..
That isn't how it works. In order for anything to land on the desk of the President for signature it must be approved by both the house and the Senate... in the exact same form.
Meaning that if any changes are made to this bill in the Senate it would have to go back to the House to be voted on again before it goes to the President's desk.
So yes, we should watch it like a hawk and yes getting it through the Senate without some BS happening will be very challenging but NO; it can't be edited and then end up on Trump's desk without going back having been voted on by the Senate and the House in the same text/bill.
Looks like we are saying the same thing (G) with different words..