National Reciprocity Act (HR 822) Gaining Support

[Stschil]

Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA wrote the following Op Ed piece explaining HR 822

The National Right-to-Carry Act would solve this problem by requiring the various states that allow concealed carry to recognize each other’s permits — much in the same way they recognize each other’s driver’s licenses.

Concealed Carry | National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act | Your right to self-defense shouldn't end at state borders | The Daily Caller

 

[ThrottleJockey]

It's been discussed before, but this bill is a useless POS. Nothing more than an attempt to trick some into believing they are actually trying to do something for us. It has no teeth, bears no weight and does NOTHING. Here's one example of its uselessness:
In NY, my IN LTCH will still be useless even with national reciprocity as outlined in the bill due to the fact that we don't have our handguns registered and the state doesn't print the serial numbers of them on the back of our LTCH. In Chicago, useless because it didn't come with an FOID card......The author of the bill has even come foreward over the past couple of years in interviews and stated such...useless feelgood crap. The biggest problem with it is that it requires one to abide by the rules of the state they are in regardless of how ridiculous and restricting they are and if one state requires measures that no other state requires for licensing, then no one elses permit will be any good there....

 

[ThrottleJockey]

Here is the text of the bill, I had to check but it is the same dribble they've been pushing for 3-4 years now.

HR 822 IH
112th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 822
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 18, 2011


Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. SHULER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

• Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

• This Act may be cited as the ‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

• The Congress finds the following:
  
  • (1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.
    (2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
    (3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
    (4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.
    (5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.
    (6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.
    (7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.
    (8) The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.
    (9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
    (10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.

SEC. 3. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.

• 1
  (a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:

‘Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

• ‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that--
  
  • ‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
    ‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
  ‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.
  ‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.
  ‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’.
  (b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:
  
  • ‘926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.’.
  (c) Severability- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment made by this section, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this section and the application of such provision or amendment to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
  (d) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
  
  

 

[Stschil]

Maybe I just don't get legalese sometimes, but I see nothing in the text of the bill that says out-of-state permit holders have to abide by the permitting and registration statutes if the state they are visiting, just that that they have to follow it's carry restrictions.

SEC. 3. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
`Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

`(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that--
`(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
`(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
`(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.
`(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued to a resident of the State.
`(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.'.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

Maybe I just don't get legalese sometimes, but I see nothing in the text of the bill that says out-of-state permit holders have to abide by the permitting and registration statutes if the state they are visiting, just that that they have to follow it's carry restrictions.

Correct, it says one must abide by the laws of whatever state they are in...If NY law states that in order to carry a handgun, the serial number must be printed on the back of the license by the issuing authority....etc...NY DOES have this provision and you may only carry guns listed on your card. See where this goes? The bill is just feel good crap they are trying to pass so the NRAint can say "look what we did for YOU...." The bill still leaves reciprocity and recognition entirely up to the states.

 

[Stschil]

I guess I'm only seeing that if I have a valid permit from State A, I can carry in State B so long as State B has a Carry Statute and I follow it's prescribed carry manner, ie: OC/CC in States that only allow one or the other or in the case of CA, unloaded, and where State B says it's legal. ie: carry in Dunkin Doughnuts is prohibited because they have no firearms signs and the state has a law allowing such business locations to restrict.

IL is really not included because it does not have any provisions for it's residents to carry outside of their residence.

Perhaps a letter to my Rep asking for clarification language to be added is in order. It's been a while since he's heard from me (Not that my word carries any power)

 

[ThrottleJockey]

I guess I'm only seeing that if I have a valid permit from State A, I can carry in State B so long as State B has a Carry Statute and I follow it's prescribed carry manner, ie: OC/CC in States that only allow one or the other or in the case of CA, unloaded, and where State B says it's legal. ie: carry in Dunkin Doughnuts is prohibited because they have no firearms signs and the state has a law allowing such business locations to restrict.

IL is really not included because it does not have any provisions for it's residents to carry outside of their residence.

Perhaps a letter to my Rep asking for clarification language to be added is in order. It's been a while since he's heard from me (Not that my word carries any power)

You may be correct. I'll check and see if I still have a copy of the proposal from a few years ago for closer comparison.

 

[superjoe76]

The constitution gives everybody reciprocity. I wish politicians could see this and quit all of these stupid laws.

 

[jsharmon7]

The recent topic in the 2A subforum got me thinking about the BoR and applicability to states. If the 2A has been incorporated against the states after McDonald v. Chicago then I don't see why HR 822 is even necessary. "Shall not be infringed" is pretty clear cut to me.

 

[Stschil]

The recent topic in the 2A subforum got me thinking about the BoR and applicability to states. If the 2A has been incorporated against the states after McDonald v. Chicago then I don't see why HR 822 is even necessary. "Shall not be infringed" is pretty clear cut to me.

Unfortunately, SCOTUS skirted the issue and left enough ambiguity for the legal beagles in the Anti camp to latch on and continue their BS crusade. If the decision has been a clear cut SCOTUS opinion saying 2A applies to all Citizens and no State or other public office has the Constitutional Authority to create prohibitive restrictions, ala Illinois no carry anywhere except inside the home, I agree, no such legislative machinations would be needed. Instead, they merely reversed the decision of the 7th Circuit and remanded it back to the lower court for further review.

McDonald v. Chicago

 

[Prometheus]

The nra is purposefully continuing on with ambiguous language and silly arguments in order to leave itself future fundraising exploits.

No surprise there.

 

[Bill of Rights]

The recent topic in the 2A subforum got me thinking about the BoR and applicability to states. If the 2A has been incorporated against the states after McDonald v. Chicago then I don't see why HR 822 is even necessary. "Shall not be infringed" is pretty clear cut to me.

As the others said, SCOTUS' action only had the effect of affirming that one has a right to possess a firearm in his home. Mr. Gura is chipping away at the anti's arguments bit by bit, just as they chipped away at our lawful exercise of our rights bit by bit. The difference is that his approach is in keeping with the intent of the Founders and Framers. Implicit in Heller and McDonald is the point that if there are certain "sensitive" places where one CAN be prevented from carrying a firearm, then doing so in other places is not restricted. It's not the huge, immediate victory we'd all like to see, but it most certainly is a victory.

As for HR 822, yes, there will still be challenges to it, but so long as there is not a requirement that a state that does not allow carry must do so or a list of places that will be off limits if a state does not have such a list of their own, I don't have a problem with Congress saying, insofar as an affirmation of the individual rights of the citizens, whether exercised separately or in concert, that Full Faith and Credit means ALL of the public acts, etc. of the several states.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

Baby steps. The bad guys know how to use baby steps to work toward what they want. They propose way too much, then "compromise" for less now, then come back for more next year, and next year, and next year, until they have what they want. We have to do the same. They want to make the rules, let's use the rules against them..

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Agreed. Baby steps. We have the momentum regardless of our Useless-in-Chief wants so let's keep it rolling. If we push to hard it will reverse on us just like it did for the Antis after Clinton.