From the NRA...
"H.R. 822, introduced in the U.S. House by Representatives Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), would allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed firearm in any state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes. A state's laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders..."
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets ... &issue=003
Current support seen here...
http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... ional.html
and here...
http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... r-822.html

GlockLobster wrote:From the NRA...
"H.R. 822, introduced in the U.S. House by Representatives Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), would allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed firearm in any state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes. A state's laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders..."
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets ... &issue=003
Current support seen here...
http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... ional.html
and here...
http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... r-822.html

The only way this will work is if CC requirements are standardized, otherwise states are not going to go along with this.

That will have the effect of killing CCW in any may issue state. Since Cali doesn't recognize any permits the will simply stop issuing them if they have to recognize ones from other states. I feel sorry for anyone living in that state and actually managed to get an LEO to sign off on your permit.

MetalSlugIV wrote:That will have the effect of killing CCW in any may issue state. Since Cali doesn't recognize any permits the will simply stop issuing them if they have to recognize ones from other states. I feel sorry for anyone living in that state and actually managed to get an LEO to sign off on your permit.

I see that as a step forward.

1) Get the national reciprocity passed.
2) Make no noise as CA or NJ or NY kills all CCW.
3) File a suit, cite Heller's statement that the right to keep AND BEAR arms is individual, cite McDonald's statement that Heller applies to states and cities.
4) Appeal up the chain.
5) National right to carry is repeated by scotus, when they yell "We fucking said it in Heller and Mcdonald!"

There is no instant gratification in this, it's going to be a process.

I would prefer a sweeping national CCW law. Kind of like with driver's licenses. Each state must meet some proscribed requirements and can implement them how they choose but is required to be a shall issue state. Then force other states to honor those licenses. This will make most right wingers happy and established a good precedent. Since the feds can forces states to honor an unpopular (to some) licence scheme they can also force states to issue and honor marriage licences for same sex couples. Law is all about precedent.

I don't wanna be like my nephew, trying to grab all the cookies and become unable to fit the hand out the mouth of the cookie jar. Last I knew, he still hasn't chosen to make two trips into the cookie jar, he picks the thing up and turns it upside down.

If it takes two steps to get national reciprocity - get the law and then get the states - then okay. That only takes focus on one area at a time, first on the national congress to get something passed that doesn't smell like a mandatory recognition of the 2A, and then the congress and the majority of the states can be largely left alone while focus is a courtroom suit only on a few states that are overly restrictive. Secure one half of the goal and then secure the other.

To make it like a licensing scheme where each state must meet requirements invites opposition from both sides. Complaints from places like alaska and pennsylvania and vermont against the addition of federal rules and regulations on them, and complaints from new york and jersey and california against "blood in the streets". And on general principle lots of places in the middle will be pissed off and oppositional as well. Yeah, have fun with that plan.

JayFromPA wrote:

MetalSlugIV wrote:That will have the effect of killing CCW in any may issue state. Since Cali doesn't recognize any permits the will simply stop issuing them if they have to recognize ones from other states. I feel sorry for anyone living in that state and actually managed to get an LEO to sign off on your permit.

I see that as a step forward.

1) Get the national reciprocity passed.
2) Make no noise as CA or NJ or NY kills all CCW.
3) File a suit, cite Heller's statement that the right to keep AND BEAR arms is individual, cite McDonald's statement that Heller applies to states and cities.
4) Appeal up the chain.
5) National right to carry is repeated by scotus, when they yell "We fucking said it in Heller and Mcdonald!"

There is no instant gratification in this, it's going to be a process.

I think you've nailed it. I support this.

It's unconstitutional. Prohibiting a person carrying a concealed firearm is not an infringement on their 2d Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The federal government cannot, constitutionally, require that any one state allow people to carry concealed firearms. Or, for that matter, that a state recognize and uphold the laws of a different state within its own borders. There is reciprocity between states in such matters as a drivers license, but these are intrastate agreements, not federal law. If states agree to reciprocity, fine. But, the federal governmet has no right, and no business, dictating to one state that it must recognize and uphold the concealed carry laws/requirements of another.

Alfred P. Doolittle wrote:It's unconstitutional. Prohibiting a person carrying a concealed firearm is not an infringement on their 2d Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The federal government cannot, constitutionally, require that any one state allow people to carry concealed firearms. Or, for that matter, that a state recognize and uphold the laws of a different state within its own borders. There is reciprocity between states in such matters as a drivers license, but these are intrastate agreements, not federal law. If states agree to reciprocity, fine. But, the federal governmet has no right, and no business, dictating to one state that it must recognize and uphold the concealed carry laws/requirements of another.

Uhhh...
Have you read through the constitution?
The privileges and immunities clause of article four of the main body?
The privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment?
The full faith and credit clause of article four of the main body?

There definitely IS power in the federal government, placed there by the raw constitution and reinforced by the 14th amendment, to force a state to recognize what another state allows. Take the driver license, for example. Some 16 year old in Idaho can certainly hop in the car and legally drive right next door to Oregon. That kid has a full license, and Oregon is required to recognize that, even though Oregon doesn't give full licenses to their kids until 18. Sucks to be a kid in Oregon, but them's the breaks.

JayFromPA wrote:

Alfred P. Doolittle wrote:It's unconstitutional. Prohibiting a person carrying a concealed firearm is not an infringement on their 2d Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The federal government cannot, constitutionally, require that any one state allow people to carry concealed firearms. Or, for that matter, that a state recognize and uphold the laws of a different state within its own borders. There is reciprocity between states in such matters as a drivers license, but these are intrastate agreements, not federal law. If states agree to reciprocity, fine. But, the federal governmet has no right, and no business, dictating to one state that it must recognize and uphold the concealed carry laws/requirements of another.

Uhhh...
Have you read through the constitution?
The privileges and immunities clause of article four of the main body?
The privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment?
The full faith and credit clause of article four of the main body?

There definitely IS power in the federal government, placed there by the raw constitution and reinforced by the 14th amendment, to force a state to recognize what another state allows. Take the driver license, for example. Some 16 year old in Idaho can certainly hop in the car and legally drive right next door to Oregon. That kid has a full license, and Oregon is required to recognize that, even though Oregon doesn't give full licenses to their kids until 18. Sucks to be a kid in Oregon, but them's the breaks.

Absolutely correct you are in citing Article IV and the 14th Amendment. And I mispoke in using the term "unconstitutional". What I meant is that these are things that have not been interpreted by the Supreme Courst as falling within the perview of Article IV or the 14th Amendment, therefore not falling within the powers of the federal government to dictate. Abridging individual ownership of firearms is prohibited by the individual states due to Article IV. The carrying of a concealed firearm is not a guaranteed constitutional right, despite what the NRA would say. Therefore, one state opting not to recognize the CCW of another state does not fall under the Priveleges and Immunities Clause or the Full Faith and Credit Clause, neither Article IV nor the 14th Amendment. At least until otherwise interpreted by the US Supreme Court. The essense of the clause is that a state cannot limit the rights of other citizens under its jurisdiction beyond those of its own citizens, nor beyond the rights of the Constitution. As for the drivers license issue, this is due to intrastate compacts that all 50 states participate in. Driving is not considered a "right" so much as a privelege. States are free to impose whatever restrictions are deemed necessary to the public safety for the prcess to obtain one. That is why when you move to another state, you have to obtain a license within their jurisdiciton within a proscribed amount of time, and your license from the other state is no longer valid according to the laws of the new state of residence.