HR 822 National Reciprocity Bill

[meangene]

In case you haven't heard, there' a bill floating around to make reciprocity automatic across all 50 states. This has come up before, and failed; suggest you contact your representatives...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09 ... latestnews

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=7072

[jrswanson1]

Last time it was up, it was shot down by two votes in the Senate. That was prior to the last election. It should pass both houses this year. Here's to not having to disarm when I cross the northern border!

[jnojr]

I heard a rumor that House Republicans will try to stick this inside another bill that the Senate and Obama can't reject

[thekinetic]

This is good if it passes!

[jdonovan]

I'd argue that CCW is with modern interpretative, a reasonable 'bearing' of arms as provided by the 2nd. None of my other constitutional rights terminate as I cross state boundaries why should this one?

Heck my driving 'privileges' enjoy national recognition, even international for that matter.

[OakRidgeStars]

So here we are once again, going to our government masters with hat in hand, asking their permission to enjoy a right that's no longer a right because we allowed them to turn defensive carry into a privilege.

Besides, this bill is a non-starter.

[VBshooter]

All the more reason to scrutinize the piss out of any and all candidates for office and boot their ass out immediately if they so much as look at the Constitution wrong... It ain;t right having to ask permission.or have our lives regualted due to our excercising our rights..I am on the fence about this bill//If passed it gives the House and Senate something to screw with and additionally start to regulate to tears ...w

[meangene]

I agree we shouldn't have to ask for permission but we are where we are so we gotta take whatever we can at this point. I read somewhere that the bill already had close to 250 supporters in the house and some of those are dems. I think we could pull it off in the senate but it's going to be close.

[Kreutz]

Testifying before Congress on Tuesday, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey told the story of Marqus Hill, a man whose Pennsylvania gun permit was revoked after he was charged with attempted murder.

"Despite his record, he then used his Florida permit to carry a loaded gun in Philadelphia," Ramsey said. "He eventually shot a teenager thirteen times in the chest killing him on the street."

F'kin tool.

[widefat]

I'm torn -
A bill that normalizes carry, or a bill that gives the fed more centralized control over firearms.
I like the va gun laws - I would hate to see va give up it's sovereignty and become a part of a collective that includes
Cal, NY, Mass, Ill.

"Supporters say the measure would not create a federal licensing system,"

Yet.

[Jakeiscrazy]

I don't support it. It will just give others states something to complain about and try and force Virginia into tighter restrictions.

[fireman836]

I'm torn on this. We now have a federal reciprocity law for retired police officers. This would narrow the us and them gap.
If this passes you would still come under the the laws of the state you are visiting as to where you can carry and can't carry. States that do not have a cc law would have to follow the places specified in the fed law.
I would rather the states them selfs agree to accept everyone elses CHP as they do drivers licenses, but this would cover states like Maryland, NY, Ill, and DC. that refuse to recognise the 2nd Admendment.

[meangene]

Article IV, Section 2:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Look familiar?

[marcbdc]

What a quandary!

On the one hand, we inflate federal government control over the states. As firearm owners, we can legally fulfill the requirements for concealed carry once and have privileges throughout the country.

On the other hand, if we argue for states rights, first and foremost, the House bill turns a non-issue into federal law. This lessens state control as the federal government can later dictate who qualifies for concealed carry; the process might be more stringent than reasonable state law. I am not a lawyer, but would a violation (carrying in a forbidden establishment) then be prosecuted as a federal misdemeanor / felony?

--MarcBDC

[fireman836]

What a quandary!

Snip--

am not a lawyer, but would a violation (carrying in a forbidden establishment) then be prosecuted as a federal misdemeanor / felony?

--MarcBDC

IANAL and do not have a copy of the bill to read exact wording, but I would say the answer is no, it would still be a state level violation.

For example I live in Virginia with a VA CHP. If I go to North Carolina which currently has reciprocity with VA. I have to follow their rules on where I can and cannot carry different from VA. If I go somewhere illegal in NC while there I'm subject to the penalties in their law.

[Reverenddel]

You know, I quote Kreutz...

"Fkng...tool."

[fireman836]

You know, I quote Kreutz...

"Fkng...tool."

Huh?

[mrjam2jab]

I'm torn -
A bill that normalizes carry, or a bill that gives the fed more centralized control over firearms.
I like the va gun laws - I would hate to see va give up it's sovereignty and become a part of a collective that includes
Cal, NY, Mass, Ill.

"Supporters say the measure would not create a federal licensing system,"

Yet.

I'm torn on this. We now have a federal reciprocity law for retired police officers. This would narrow the us and them gap.
If this passes you would still come under the the laws of the state you are visiting as to where you can carry and can't carry. States that do not have a cc law would have to follow the places specified in the fed law.
I would rather the states them selfs agree to accept everyone elses CHP as they do drivers licenses, but this would cover states like Maryland, NY, Ill, and DC. that refuse to recognise the 2nd Admendment.

This bill would NOT effect IL. It will only allow you to carry in any state that has a Permit system in place.

IANAL and do not have a copy of the bill to read exact wording, but I would say the answer is no, it would still be a state level violation.

Here ya go:

HR 822

H.R.822 -- National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 (Introduced in House - IH)

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.

(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.

[gibbs1911]

In regards to H.R. 822 I love the idea of being able to carry my sidearm on me at all times whenever I choose or see fit (embodiment of the right to bear arms) but I am not blind. I know the actions of a few have made this impossible for the law abiding citizen to simply enjoy their right and freedom instead of having to fight for it tooth and nail. To be armed while traveling from state to state instead of having to lock both the gun and ammo in separate individual containers until I reach my finale destination in accordance with federal law, would be awesome (you can be victimized anywhere, not just in your home state. And I choose not to be a victim or to allow an innocent to be victimized when I have the ability to stop it) . Being enlisted in the U.S Navy usually means going home for a visit requires a lengthy drive across multiple states, when I'm in the U.S.A. However as a popular e-mail stated this bill has the look of a Trojan-horse for gun rights. With never-ending reforms, restrictions, national database implications, within the extreme a London style gun free (defenseless) victimized society further on down the road. So even though I like the idea of it I am apposed to H.R. 822

[mrjam2jab]

Thank you for your service.

Just wanted to point out...

In regards to H.R. 822 I love the idea of being able to carry my sidearm on me at all times whenever I choose or see fit (embodiment of the right to bear arms) but I am not blind. I know the actions of a few have made this impossible for the law abiding citizen to simply enjoy their right and freedom instead of having to fight for it tooth and nail. To be armed while traveling from state to state instead of having to lock both the gun and ammo in separate individual containers until I reach my finale destination in accordance with federal law, would be awesome (you can be victimized anywhere, not just in your home state. And I choose not to be a victim or to allow an innocent to be victimized when I have the ability to stop it) . Being enlisted in the U.S Navy usually means going home for a visit requires a lengthy drive across multiple states, when I'm in the U.S.A. However as a popular e-mail stated this bill has the look of a Trojan-horse for gun rights. With never-ending reforms, restrictions, national database implications, within the extreme a London style gun free (defenseless) victimized society further on down the road. So even though I like the idea of it I am apposed to H.R. 822

Federal law does not require separation of gun and ammo.