H.R.822>National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

[jcerillo70 16]

Whats the quote im looking for,,, "if you love something let it go, if it comes back, it's yours. If it doesn't, it never was."

IT CAME BACK

[mrjam2jab 9]

Note at bottom: Rep. Stearns has introduced similar legislation since 1995.

 

 

I think he has introduced it every year since...

[jcerillo70 16]

So what happens Tuesday after the hearing? (Optimistically)

[mrjam2jab 9]

So what happens Tuesday after the hearing? (Optimistically)

 

 

A lot of steps before an official vote...

[ianargent 7]

One interesting thing is that every one of the "yes" is still in Congress, and at least 2 of the "no" votes were replaced by pro-2A senators. And it will be very hard for a "yes" vote.to change their minds.

[Rifleman1 32]

Quote

 

‘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.

 

So what is this saying? If this passes and I have a FL permit, that I cannot carry in my state of residence, being NJ?

 

NJ has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms and also does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes with a State permit.

[Rifleman1 32]

Under that bill, a NJ resident with a Fla CCW couldn't carry in NJ, but could carry in NYC. Now wouldn't that be interesting!

 

That is how I'm reading it too.

 

http://thomas.loc.go...?c112:H.R.822:# I can't get the link to work.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

They should dispense with the bs and just try to pass a National Carry Act and just give Federal Permission to carry firearms.

[ianargent 7]

That would open a couple of cans of worms I don't think we want opened. Better to force the states to go to a Shall-Issue regime by a combination of action in the Courts and Congress; then let that evolve to Constitutional Carry.

[Mexican_Hippie 3]

I asked my Congressmen to vote against this bill.

 

The Fed Gov has no business nor Constitutional authority to regulate anything related to firearms. That's up to the states. Besides, there's already two Constitutional amendments that say exactly this and are ignored daily. The 2nd amendment says "shall not be infringed" and then they shove the 14th amendment down our throats in the Southern states (illegally) but turn around and ignore it completely when it comes to exercising it. Ridiculous.

 

What makes you think a regulation will fix reciprocity and not grant more undue power to the Fed? It's a pipe dream and WILL be just one more law they corrupt and use against us in DC.

 

This law is a bad idea.

[djg0770 481]

I asked my Congressmen to vote against this bill.

 

The Fed Gov has no business nor Constitutional authority to regulate anything related to firearms. That's up to the states. Besides, there's already two Constitutional amendments that say exactly this and are ignored daily. The 2nd amendment says "shall not be infringed" and then they shove the 14th amendment down our throats in the Southern states (illegally) but turn around and ignore it completely when it comes to exercising it. Ridiculous.

 

What makes you think a regulation will fix reciprocity and not grant more undue power to the Fed? It's a pipe dream and WILL be just one more law they corrupt and use against us in DC.

 

This law is a bad idea.

 

YUP.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

Do I want to see carry in NJ? Hell Yes. Would approval of this bill set a bad precedent? Yes. This is another power grab by the federal government. Keep the feds out of guns.

[mrjam2jab 9]

So what is this saying? If this passes and I have a FL permit, that I cannot carry in my state of residence, being NJ?

 

NJ has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms and also does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes with a State permit.

 

 

As a NJ resident you would need a NJ permit to carry in NJ...Your FL permit would allow you to carry in every other state except IL...and DC but that's not a state.

[ianargent 7]

This is being done under the authority of the 14th amendment to allow Congress to enforce the provisions of the 2nd Amendment - namely:

 

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 

Hence, the 10th amendment does not apply as this is a power delegated to Congress explicitly.

 

This is not a regulation of firearms, it is an anti-regulation. Nothing is taken from the people, and the only thing taken from the states is their (unconstitutional) restrictions on carry by out-of-state visitors. It doesn't help in-state residents, yet, but half a loaf is better than none. And there's several chances yet at forcing shall-issue judicially or legislatively. It doesn't even set a precedent, as the law that Congress used to force states to issue to retired LEOs did that (and shows a model by which Congress can force states to issue to all, incidentally). There is no Federal Firearms Permit, and there won't and can't be by this bill - since it leaves the permitting process in the hands of the states.

[compujas 21]

How different is this from national driver's license reciprocity? Driver's licenses used to be incredibly easy to forge, and because of that we now have digital licenses and the like that are far more difficult to forge. Not to mention we have computer databases that allow LEOs to look up a driver's information instantly. I would see the same kind of thing happening for CCW cards, which I don't see a problem with. There is no reason that a license to appropriately handle a deadly weapon in public (vehicle) should be treated any differently than a license to appropriately handle a deadly weapon in public (firearm).

[Mexican_Hippie 3]

This is being done under the authority of the 14th amendment to allow Congress to enforce the provisions of the 2nd Amendment - namely:

 

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 

Hence, the 10th amendment does not apply as this is a power delegated to Congress explicitly.

 

This is not a regulation of firearms, it is an anti-regulation. Nothing is taken from the people, and the only thing taken from the states is their (unconstitutional) restrictions on carry by out-of-state visitors. It doesn't help in-state residents, yet, but half a loaf is better than none. And there's several chances yet at forcing shall-issue judicially or legislatively. It doesn't even set a precedent, as the law that Congress used to force states to issue to retired LEOs did that (and shows a model by which Congress can force states to issue to all, incidentally). There is no Federal Firearms Permit, and there won't and can't be by this bill - since it leaves the permitting process in the hands of the states.

 

It's a new law which IS a new regulation. It's also redundant because of the 14th amendment. The 2nd amendment already exists, we don't need additional laws. What we need is rule of law and enforcement of the laws we already have and (gasp) enforcement of the Constitution. If they can pass this "common sense" regulation they can pass tack on requirements. New laws are nothing more than new opportunities for corruption and power grabbing. We should be seeking to repeal laws not add new ones (ie NFA, machine gun junk from '86, etc.).

 

"Common sense" = "Gun Control" = Violation of the Constitution

[Mexican_Hippie 3]

How different is this from national driver's license reciprocity? Driver's licenses used to be incredibly easy to forge, and because of that we now have digital licenses and the like that are far more difficult to forge. Not to mention we have computer databases that allow LEOs to look up a driver's information instantly. I would see the same kind of thing happening for CCW cards, which I don't see a problem with. There is no reason that a license to appropriately handle a deadly weapon in public (vehicle) should be treated any differently than a license to appropriately handle a deadly weapon in public (firearm).

 

Because driving is a privilege and owning/carrying arms is a right specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights. (according to existing law)

 

The rights to life and liberty are inalienable, God given. No government can morally remove the right to defend yourself. Our Constitution doesn't give us these rights, it just seeks to protect them from the government.

[ianargent 7]

The law implements (a small part of) the 2A, since certain states won't do it on their own. A regulation would require a bureaucracy to enforce, which this doesn't. It's like the recent Florida law that adds penalties for violations of state preemption. In this case, the federal government has preempted the states' ability to (unconstitutionally) restrict reciprocity. The penalty (for the states) is that they can't prosecute otherwise law-abiding citizens for exercise of their right to bear arms. That is the power granted to Congress under the 5th clause of the 14th Amendment, to "enforce by appropriate legislation."

 

If there was a Department of Reciprocity under the BATFE being created by this, but then I'd worry. But as it is, there is no expansion of Federal authority. This is a "and this time we mean it!" law, but sometimes you need that.

[vladtepes 1,060]

while I understand the points of this that will help I also see the problems.. suffice to say the following.. the Federal government can't keep their OWN **** straight.. so why don't they get THEIR **** straight (like stop sending guns to militant Mexican drug cartels).... and once they prove that they have their own **** together.. then MAYBE they can start suggesting to states what they should be doing.. the operative word being suggest..

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Can I carry yet?

[njpilot 671]

Can I carry yet?

 

 

Maybe, soon.

 

http://constitutionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/hr-822-v-hr-2900/

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Maybe, soon.

 

http://constitutionw...-822-v-hr-2900/

 

Are we there yet??

 

Good read, thanks for posting that.

 

Harry

[jcerillo70 16]

H.R 2900

 

<a name="summary">SUMMARY AS OF:

9/13/2011--Introduced.

 

Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act of 2011 - Amends the federal criminal code to provide for reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms in different states by persons who are not prohibited by federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm and who are: (1) carrying a valid state license or permit for carrying a concealed firearm, or (2) otherwise entitled to carry a concealed firearm in their state of residence.

 

 

Hmm. I wonder if this would make our FL CCW's good in NJ?

They only have 4 co sponsors though...

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Maybe, soon.

 

http://constitutionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/hr-822-v-hr-2900/

 

Okay, just let me know when I can. Thanks

[halbautomatisch 60]

H.R 2900

 

 

Hmm. I wonder if this would make our FL CCW's good in NJ?

They only have 4 co sponsors though...

HR 2900 would

 

HR 822 would not

[jcerillo70 16]

HR 2900 would

 

HR 822 would not

 

So the name of the game is grassroots activism to get the support of the nations politicians?

 

The good news is that The NJ CCA and the NJ2AS can muster up enough soldiers to make the calls and mail hit where it needs to

[quikz 34]

Everything bout this is Just Dandy.

 

Except for jus ONE itty bitty thing...........

 

Its gotta be signed off by Obama.

 

Unless......

 

This Bill(s) are 'attached' to a favorite 'pet' of the month bill.

 

 

 

That's my understanding anyways.

[ianargent 7]

Depends on how many it passes by - in the Senate the equivalent to this bill failed by 1 vote; which put it within 7 of a veto override...

[jcerillo70 16]

Unless......

 

This Bill(s) are 'attached' to a favorite 'pet' of the month bill.

 

 

The bills being processed along side of 822 are...

 

Full Committee Markup of: H.R. 2471,“To amend section 2710 of title 18, United States Code, to clarify that a video tape service provider may obtain a consumer's informed, written consent on an ongoing basis and that consent may be obtained through the Internet”;

H.R. 2870, the “Adam Walsh Reauthorization Act of 2011”;

H.R. 1254, the “Synthetic Drug Control Act of 2011”;

H.R. 10, the “Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2011”;

H.R. 822, the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011”; and,

H.R. 3012, the “Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act”

So with that being said Senator Quikz

[KpdPipes 388]

Everything bout this is Just Dandy.

 

Except for jus ONE itty bitty thing...........

 

Its gotta be signed off by Obama.

 

Unless......

 

This Bill(s) are 'attached' to a favorite 'pet' of the month bill.

 

 

 

That's my understanding anyways.

Frankly, there's one other thing that's worse than Obama... and it's the SAME problem with LEOSA The Federal Govt is overiding Local State Laws. While i'll take advantage of the law, as I expect anyone here would if HR 822 passes, The feds trampling States rights isnt so wonderful... it's GREAT when it comes to something we like...now what happens when it's something we DONT LIKE??? Slippery Slope, Camel's nose under the tent Flap..ect ect. ect. Think about it.

[StarWarsGeek45 5]

They should dispense with the bs and just try to pass a National Carry Act and just give Federal Permission to carry firearms.

 

They already did, back in 1790.