National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act: Good or Bad? What do you think??

[Clay]

I see some people think this is great, other things its bad. I get emails from pro-gun places that think its bad, while the NRA says its great.

I dont know what to think, so what do you guys think about it?

 

[dross]

Two thoughts:

If concealed carry is a right, we don't need a law, we need a court ruling. This may be the way to get one.

If we want to argue against federal restrictions, it's hard to support a law that overrules state law. If they can say everyone can carry, can't they also revoke everyone's right to carry, overruling the states that want it? Can they later tack on a training requirement? A fee and a license administred by the ATF?

I know none of that is in this law, but does this open the door for some nasty stuff down the road?

Just thinkin' out loud.

 

[eldirector]

I like the concept of "national right to carry", but have the same misgivings as Dross.

I'd guess I'd rather lean towards States Rights, and leave it to the People of each state to lean on their local governments to recognize our/their rights.

The Feds have proven that they cannot be trusted.

 

[kludge]

I think it admits defeat. IOW, the Second Amendment is meaningless.

 

[dross]

In practice we've almost got national carry anyway. Let's see, where do I travel? I go to Oklahoma, Nebraska, Utah, Texas, New Mexico, Indiana, Kansas, occasionally to Florida. I like New Orleans and Nashville.

I avoid, New York and California whenever humanly possible. I do like Chicago, but I can get along without it.

I might as well have national carry.

 

[EvilElmo]

As I understand it the proposed law doesn't create a national carry system, it just says that if a state issues carry permits then they must honor the permits of other states. In effect our carry permits will work just like drivers licenses do - issued by your home state but accepted as valid everywhere (except Illinois).

 

[ATM]

I don't want a new law for everything I'm going to be "allowed" to do.

Just enforce the 2A and throw any states that violate it in jail.

YES... THROW THE WHOLE STATES IN JAIL!

That's what I said.

 

[dross]

As I understand it the proposed law doesn't create a national carry system, it just says that if a state issues carry permits then they must honor the permits of other states. In effect our carry permits will work just like drivers licenses do - issued by your home state but accepted as valid everywhere (except Illinois).

I think someone cleared this up once - I'm not sure other states MUST honor drivers licenses, it's just that they do.

I'm not certain, I just seem to remember something like that.

 

[ATM]

I'm not certain, I just seem to remember something like that.

Is that your big brain acting coy?

 

[dross]

Is that your big brain acting coy?

Not everything I write is a trap.

I really don't know.

 

[ATM]

Not everything I write is a trap.

I really don't know.

Admiral Ackbar would still advise caution.

 

[Hop]

Curios as to the can of worms this will open if passed. Gosh, I'd hate to have some not up to Indiana's standards, out of state licensed barber cut my hair.

 

[ViperJock]

As I understand it the proposed law doesn't create a national carry system, it just says that if a state issues carry permits then they must honor the permits of other states. In effect our carry permits will work just like drivers licenses do - issued by your home state but accepted as valid everywhere (except Illinois).

Correct, you just don't have to get multiple carry permits to figure out if you can carry in a certain state or not. If a state allows it at all, your home license will do.

A while ago a similar thread was posted and I stated that if this becomes the case, it will most likely require the "easier" states to buff up their license requirements to the more robust states. Expect classes etc to be required if this happens, IMO.

 

[812homes4u]

I have not heard all the details of it. Im all for anything that allows me to carry in more places. The last several weeks I have been working in Ohio. Lots of overnight trips. I would have liked to have been able to carry.

 

[Taylorz71]

Two thoughts:

If concealed carry is a right, we don't need a law, we need a court ruling. This may be the way to get one.

If we want to argue against federal restrictions, it's hard to support a law that overrules state law. If they can say everyone can carry, can't they also revoke everyone's right to carry, overruling the states that want it? Can they later tack on a training requirement? A fee and a license administred by the ATF?

I know none of that is in this law, but does this open the door for some nasty stuff down the road?

Just thinkin' out loud.

WOW, I was thinking the same thing. I am a big believer in giving our states back rights originally setup in our Republic, and also believe guns of any nature are a right that goes with our Constitution and Bill of Rights so states can't take this away. I would go so far as to say that not allowing guns is unconstitutional.

This seems good, but when you think about it does it open the door to take our 2nd ammendment right and others away later??

Also thinking out loud and love these discusions... so thanks for the post.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I like the concept of "national right to carry", but have the same misgivings as Dross.

I'd guess I'd rather lean towards States Rights, and leave it to the People of each state to lean on their local governments to recognize our/their rights.

The Feds have proven that they cannot be trusted.

This!

 

[parsimonious]

I have read this bill, and watched the video from the justice committee debate.

I don't see a problem with this law, except it kinda takes away a states right to say
who can or can't carry in their state.
Should a state be able to say that only residents can carry?
Should Indiana only allow Indiana residents to carry?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The way I understand it, the constitution preempts the states where it written as such. The 2A says the right...shall not be infringed. Now, I obviously view this in its purest reading, in that states cannot infringe on the right to keep and bear arms-period. Therefore in this case, there are no "states rights" when it comes to keep and bear...when they joined the union, they agreed to abide by the constitution and therefore "gave away" their right to "infringe".

 

[dross]

The way I understand it, the constitution preempts the states where it written as such. The 2A says the right...shall not be infringed. Now, I obviously view this in its purest reading, in that states cannot infringe on the right to keep and bear arms-period. Therefore in this case, there are no "states rights" when it comes to keep and bear...when they joined the union, they agreed to abide by the constitution and therefore "gave away" their right to "infringe".

The Supreme Court understands it differently than you do.

 

[sonofagun]

As I understand it the proposed law doesn't create a national carry system, it just says that if a state issues carry permits then they must honor the permits of other states. In effect our carry permits will work just like drivers licenses do - issued by your home state but accepted as valid everywhere (except Illinois).

As Dross says, this could very well be the federal camel's nose under the tent.