H.R. 822 and now H.R. 2900

[aguilar64 9]

Now that H.R. 822 was heard on the House Committee and opinions were heard, what’s next?

 

Has anyone heard about H.R. 2900?

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.2900:

[Krdshrk 3,877]

So basically it says if you can CCW in your own state you can CC anywhere except where prohibited by state law (schools, gov't buildings, etc)? Isn't that the same as 822?

[aguilar64 9]

IANAL, I was hoping someone would enlighten me/us

[CageFighter 236]

reminder......we are in NJ, so we'll ALWAYS be **** out of luck!

[MedicYeti 96]

reminder......we are in NJ, so we'll ALWAYS be **** out of luck!

 

my understanding of 822 is that it has been reworded and now makes any state with CCW laws will recognize any other states CCW. Example: NJ has CCW permit laws on the books so my non resident Utah card is good here. There is a state (I don't remember which one) that has no CCW laws at all. No CCW will be accepted there.

NJ will have 2 options.

1. Remove all CCW laws from the books.

2. Loosen up the laws and start making money on CCW cards. Otherwise NJ residents will get permits from ther states and carry here in NJ.

We shall see what happens.

[LorenzoS 100]

my understanding of 822 is that it has been reworded and now makes any state with CCW laws will recognize any other states CCW. Example: NJ has CCW permit laws on the books so my non resident Utah card is good here. There is a state (I don't remember which one) that has no CCW laws at all. No CCW will be accepted there.

NJ will have 2 options.

1. Remove all CCW laws from the books.

2. Loosen up the laws and start making money on CCW cards. Otherwise NJ residents will get permits from ther states and carry here in NJ.

We shall see what happens.

 

There is a 3rd option, the same strategy used by DC and Chicago after their losses in Heller and McDonald. That is to implement a set of administrative, bureaucratic and regulatory restrictions to make it effectively impossible to exercise your right. All while claiming this is regulation not prohibition. For example, DC made the zoning requirement for an FFL office so restrictive that there is almost no place in the city for an FFL to get a lease, thereby making it impossible for citizens to transfer a firearm. Or Chicago's famous regulation to require range training while banning ranges. And once one of those regulations is found improper in curt, modify it just enough to get past that court case and begin the next round of legal battle.

 

So if this passes, expect NJ to revamp the CCW regulations to ban CCW withing 1,000 feet of a government building, school or church which effectively excludes almost the entire area of a crowded city. Qualification requirements that are incredibly difficult, expensive and burdensome to pass, perhaps some type of expensive insurance rules, etc. etc. etc.

[Midwest 28]

There is a 3rd option, the same strategy used by DC and Chicago after their losses in Heller and McDonald. That is to implement a set of administrative, bureaucratic and regulatory restrictions to make it effectively impossible to exercise your right. All while claiming this is regulation not prohibition. For example, DC made the zoning requirement for an FFL office so restrictive that there is almost no place in the city for an FFL to get a lease, thereby making it impossible for citizens to transfer a firearm. Or Chicago's famous regulation to require range training while banning ranges. And once one of those regulations is found improper in curt, modify it just enough to get past that court case and begin the next round of legal battle.

 

So if this passes, expect NJ to revamp the CCW regulations to ban CCW withing 1,000 feet of a government building, school or church which effectively excludes almost the entire area of a crowded city. Qualification requirements that are incredibly difficult, expensive and burdensome to pass, perhaps some type of expensive insurance rules, etc. etc. etc.

 

 

Agree, I also could see NJ develop a CCW that would be more restrictive than the carry permit they have now. In fact I could envision a two tier carry permit. Currently as I understand it, the carry permit they have now is basically available to retired LEO's and armed guards and 'connected/high profile people'. I don't think that will change. Armed guards on the job would still need to access areas like banks and maybe government buildings. Or wherever their job requires them to be armed...on the job.

 

 

 

So in theory the state would develop a 'neutered' CCW that would have so many clauses and high qualifications that would 'satisfy' 822 but keep the people from having the same CCW rights as say here in KY or elsewhere. The State of NJ could argue that ordinary citizens should not carry in the same areas as armed guards do. That would open the door to a 'two tiered' carry permit. I'm sure that State would add more conditions onto the 'citizen carry permit'. Although I sure don't want to give them any ideas.

 

Before anyone dismisses a two tiered carry permit. Mississippi now has a two tiered CCW scheme. Now I am NOT advocating a two tiered permit system. I am merely making an observation that a two tiered system 'might' be NJ's 'response' to HR 822. I believe the citizens of their own State should be able to carry pretty much wherever they are. The law abiding citizens of the state should have the same rights as armed guards, retired leos, connected/high profile people do.

 

 

NY State has a two tiered pistol permit, people in upstate NY can get carry permits in some counties. But the carry permit is not valid in New York City. Some would add that the NY State Pistol Permit is multi-tiered. Full Carry NY State, Full Carry NYC and NY State, Premise Permit, Target Permit.

 

(By the way, if HR 822passes I would not surprise me if Illinois would follow the NY State model with the Illinois carry permit 'not valid in Chicago'...although Chicago is really where a CCW would be most needed)

[EX Carnival man 223]

For us here in NJ anything has to be better than what we have here right now. ANYTHING. At least this would be a start.

[Malsua 1,422]

So in theory the state would develop a 'neutered' CCW that would have so many clauses and high qualifications that would 'satisfy' 822 but keep the people from having the same CCW rights as say here in KY or elsewhere.

 

That would clearly be their goal.

[mrjam2jab 9]

my understanding of 822 is that it has been reworded and now makes any state with CCW laws will recognize any other states CCW. Example: NJ has CCW permit laws on the books so my non resident Utah card is good here. There is a state (I don't remember which one) that has no CCW laws at all. No CCW will be accepted there.

NJ will have 2 options.

1. Remove all CCW laws from the books.

2. Loosen up the laws and start making money on CCW cards. Otherwise NJ residents will get permits from ther states and carry here in NJ.

We shall see what happens.

 

 

With 822, you would need a home state permit to carry in your home state. So as a NJ resident, your UT permit would not help you in NJ.

 

 

to the origninal question...HR2900 adds a paragraph to allow for from states like VT that does not issue permits, to carry in any state that issues permits, without a permit.

 

‘(2) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is otherwise than as described in paragraph (1) entitled to carry a concealed firearm in and pursuant to the law of the State in which the person resides, may carry in any State a concealed firearm in accordance with the laws of the State in which the person resides, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.’.

 

Agree, I also could see NJ develop a CCW that would be more restrictive than the carry permit they have now. In fact I could envision a two tier carry permit. Currently as I understand it, the carry permit they have now is basically available to retired LEO's and armed guards and 'connected/high profile people'. I don't think that will change. Armed guards on the job would still need to access areas like banks and maybe government buildings. Or wherever their job requires them to be armed...on the job.

 

 

 

So in theory the state would develop a 'neutered' CCW that would have so many clauses and high qualifications that would 'satisfy' 822 but keep the people from having the same CCW rights as say here in KY or elsewhere. The State of NJ could argue that ordinary citizens should not carry in the same areas as armed guards do. That would open the door to a 'two tiered' carry permit. I'm sure that State would add more conditions onto the 'citizen carry permit'. Although I sure don't want to give them any ideas.

 

Before anyone dismisses a two tiered carry permit. Mississippi now has a two tiered CCW scheme. Now I am NOT advocating a two tiered permit system. I am merely making an observation that a two tiered system 'might' be NJ's 'response' to HR 822. I believe the citizens of their own State should be able to carry pretty much wherever they are. The law abiding citizens of the state should have the same rights as armed guards, retired leos, connected/high profile people do.

 

 

NY State has a two tiered pistol permit, people in upstate NY can get carry permits in some counties. But the carry permit is not valid in New York City. Some would add that the NY State Pistol Permit is multi-tiered. Full Carry NY State, Full Carry NYC and NY State, Premise Permit, Target Permit.

 

(By the way, if HR 822passes I would not surprise me if Illinois would follow the NY State model with the Illinois carry permit 'not valid in Chicago'...although Chicago is really where a CCW would be most needed)

 

 

Somebody...say me from PA...carrying under HR 822...would not be effected by NJ permit tiers.

[Midwest 28]

Regarding Mississippi's two tiered system and how it works.

 

from http://www.handgunlaw.us/notices.htm 5th paragraph down

 

 

"Mississippi DPS has announced that they have certified Enhanced Instructors who can train permit/license holders for an endorsement to their permit/license that allows them to carry in many of the places off limits in Mississippi law. I have still not obtained information on how this will affect those who can carry in Mississippi with a permit/license Mississippi honors. They can’t get an endorsement so all places in MS Law will most likely be off limits to those carrying in Mississippi under a reciprocity agreement."

[johnott 5]

If 822 passes, my concern would be that states may not see the need to issue non-resident ccw's anymore. If that happens NJ residents won't be able to carry anywhere.

[Z71 4]

is there anything preventing the nj AG from telling other states not to issue non resident permits

to nj residents ? something like what she did with CMP..

[djg0770 481]

is there anything preventing the nj AG from telling other states not to issue non resident permits

to nj residents ? something like what she did with CMP..

 

Totally different situation. CMP was shipping firearms to NJ residents and the AG said WTF and called CMP and told them that this was not in accordance with NJ law.

 

The AG would need to have a law passed first that says an NJ resident may not obtain an out of state CCW before any state would stop doing what is legal within their own borders. Recall please the the US is a union of states, each has their own independent law. While in NJ you are not required to follow NY or UT or FL law, just NJ law.

[aguilar64 9]

Couple years ago we were able to get PA non-resident permits, but if I'm not mistaken NJ politicians forced PA to stop giving permits to NJ residents. I might be wrong but then I might not.

[Bfin26 0]

your right they pretty muched stopped non resident permits to jersey residents unless they have a carry permit from nj. I'm an armed guard so I have one but everyone else is sol

[Downr@nge 22]

Lets say the House passes this. Can Obama Veto it? Can anyone else stop it?

 

Also, I think H.R. 2900 respects a states Constitutional Carry laws. Also, whats the timeline on this? When will final vote and implementation happen if it passes?

[hmmjak 2]

There is a 3rd option, the same strategy used by DC and Chicago after their losses in Heller and McDonald. That is to implement a set of administrative, bureaucratic and regulatory restrictions to make it effectively impossible to exercise your right. All while claiming this is regulation not prohibition. For example, DC made the zoning requirement for an FFL office so restrictive that there is almost no place in the city for an FFL to get a lease, thereby making it impossible for citizens to transfer a firearm. Or Chicago's famous regulation to require range training while banning ranges. And once one of those regulations is found improper in curt, modify it just enough to get past that court case and begin the next round of legal battle.

 

So if this passes, expect NJ to revamp the CCW regulations to ban CCW withing 1,000 feet of a government building, school or church which effectively excludes almost the entire area of a crowded city. Qualification requirements that are incredibly difficult, expensive and burdensome to pass, perhaps some type of expensive insurance rules, etc. etc. etc.

 

 

Agree, I also could see NJ develop a CCW that would be more restrictive than the carry permit they have now. In fact I could envision a two tier carry permit. Currently as I understand it, the carry permit they have now is basically available to retired LEO's and armed guards and 'connected/high profile people'. I don't think that will change. Armed guards on the job would still need to access areas like banks and maybe government buildings. Or wherever their job requires them to be armed...on the job.

 

 

 

So in theory the state would develop a 'neutered' CCW that would have so many clauses and high qualifications that would 'satisfy' 822 but keep the people from having the same CCW rights as say here in KY or elsewhere. The State of NJ could argue that ordinary citizens should not carry in the same areas as armed guards do. That would open the door to a 'two tiered' carry permit. I'm sure that State would add more conditions onto the 'citizen carry permit'. Although I sure don't want to give them any ideas.

 

Before anyone dismisses a two tiered carry permit. Mississippi now has a two tiered CCW scheme. Now I am NOT advocating a two tiered permit system. I am merely making an observation that a two tiered system 'might' be NJ's 'response' to HR 822. I believe the citizens of their own State should be able to carry pretty much wherever they are. The law abiding citizens of the state should have the same rights as armed guards, retired leos, connected/high profile people do.

 

 

NY State has a two tiered pistol permit, people in upstate NY can get carry permits in some counties. But the carry permit is not valid in New York City. Some would add that the NY State Pistol Permit is multi-tiered. Full Carry NY State, Full Carry NYC and NY State, Premise Permit, Target Permit.

 

(By the way, if HR 822passes I would not surprise me if Illinois would follow the NY State model with the Illinois carry permit 'not valid in Chicago'...although Chicago is really where a CCW would be most needed)

 

 

you guys bring up possibilities of what this state would do if this passes but i think they would only apply to the residents of this state cause under H.R.822 they do have a section which i think addresses that issue

 

© 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

[ianargent 7]

Under HR 822, there's little NJ can do to prevent out of state folks from carrying without also preventing in-state permit holders from carrying under the same restrictions. As noted, reciprocity requires "least restrictions" be extended to the out of state permit holders. Any multi-tier system would allow the out of state folks to carry at the least restricted tier.

[halbautomatisch 60]

Under HR 822, there's little NJ can do to prevent out of state folks from carrying without also preventing in-state permit holders from carrying under the same restrictions. As noted, reciprocity requires "least restrictions" be extended to the out of state permit holders. Any multi-tier system would allow the out of state folks to carry at the least restricted tier.

What NJ will do is arrest people for carrying despite what federal law says (if this passes), just to send a message to anyone else who is considering trying it. They don't care that it will get dismissed and that the defendant will almost certainly sue, it's not their money, and the government people involved will suffer no ramifications from it. They will tie up any cases and drag them out as long as they can, just to wear people out, and create an atmosphere that it's just not worth trying to carry in NJ.

 

Look at what happened to the guy from Utah who was arrested at Newark airport, his civil suit has gone no where so far.

[Murphy4570 15]

HR 822 appears to be unconstitutional, violation of the 10th Amendment. Red herring legislation?

[ianargent 7]

HR 822 appears to be unconstitutional, violation of the 10th Amendment. Red herring legislation?

14th Amendment grants Congress the power to enforce "by appropriate legislation." The 10th Amendment argument is the red herring, since the 2nd is incorporated via the 14th.