AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME

Quick read looks to me like this does away with non-resident licenses. For folks like in NYS a Utah or Florida license at least provides the right to carry while traveling without going thru the wacky process and enormous expense of a home state permit. Am I wrong?

It’s about time!!
I am fully onboard and will make sure my legislators know where I stand.
I also pledge to spread the word to all those I know who carry!!!!!

Concealed carry reciprocity is one of the few legitimate uses of the Commerce Clause. Long overdue!

‘Bout time!

With 80% of the states being “Shall Issue”, this should be a slam dunk to get through the Senate and have a better than not chance of getting passed in the House as well. No bets on getting signed by POTUS.

Long Island Mike, you may have spotted something I missed, but I don’t see where it does away with non-resident permits per se. It largely does away with the NEED for them, but not completely. In Vermont, one problem has long been that since VT doesn’t require permits, there’s no permit issuing system in place there, giving its residents nothing to reciprocate WITH. If this much needed legislation passes, it will not make non-resident permits obsolete or totally unnecessary, IMHO.

The idea is great, what is at question is the application of it. We all know that some congressperson will try to attach poison pills to any firearm legislation.

That’s my senator for ya… Thanks Senator Kelly.. Mas you have to come back up and visit some time. Shoot an IDPA at pioneer or the pemi

If only…the bill could require recognition by ALL states and possessions of a valid CCP, truly the same as a driver’s license, but that is a true political impossibility.
It would also be fun (dream, dream…) to see Obama’s certain veto overturned. There would be great wailing and gnashing of teeth…

I think this is a good start, but only that. Bear with me.

While National Reciprocity would be a good thing in making your carry permit valid across the land, it still leaves the permit holder with the onus of researching and fully understanding the minutiae of each and every local ordinance or rule.

Your drivers license is recognized in every state because it has become a de-facto form of identification, and traffic rules of the road, speeding, passing, etc, are pretty much the same where ever you go. The same manual and the same test is offered by all DMV offices as far as I know.

Because some states give to their local towns and cities authority to create firearms restrictions and laws, it still leaves the pistol carrying visitor open to much heartache and may cause one to spend a good deal of capital proving a negative. Federal law already allows one to travel with a firearm properly stored but if NY and NJ are any example, federal reciprocity may mean nothing.

Don’t misunderstand me, I’m all for more Second Amendment freedoms.

Just remember………..all that glitters is not gold.

I see this as a dangerous precedent for the fed’s to get a foothold in the realm of concealed carry.

Beware the camel’s nose beneath the flap of the tent…….

Might want to take another gander at the article….And read the proposed law…

‘‘§ 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any provision
of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof to
the contrary…..”

Note especially the reference to ‘political subdivision’…

From the article….

“The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of2014 would allow individuals with the ‘RIGHT’ to carry a concealed firearm in their home state to ‘EXERCISE THAT RIGHT IN ANY OTHER STATE THAT ALSO ALLOWS THAT PRACTICE’. (emphasis mine)

Think that will fly in places like New York City? Chicago? Washington D.C.?

Also, if it is a ‘right’, why would the state have to allow the practice?

Might be a good place to start a conversation, or argument, but I don’t think the proposal is all it’s cracked up to be.

YMMV

California is the biggest state that does not do reciprocity. I’d feel a lot safer visiting there at least being able to have a loaded firearm within reach in a car.

It’s good that Arizona that now has constitutional carry still has concealed carry permits. They are good for bypassing background checks when purchasing firearms as well as reciprocity.

One question: Do you really think it’s a good idea to take CCW authority from the states and give it to the federal government?….esp. THIS government?….

What this bill and the previous attemps for national receprocity do not do is allow residents of no-issue states, like NJ, the ability to carry in the other 49 states. I can’t get a carry permit in my home state because no one can meet the burden of a “justifiable need”. The way these bills are crafted, all NJ residents are excluded from the benefit of national reciprocity. My FL & VA permits are not covered under this bill because they’re not from my home state. Ironically, a PA permit holder from PA could carry in NJ under this bill, but as a resident of NJ, I could not. Why? Because I do not have a permit from my home state, a state that doesn’t issue permits. Of course, if this bill becomes law, the first PA resident with a PA permit that get’s caught carrying in NJ will probably be arrested and indicted for felony possession. See, he didn’t have a NJ permit. Poor guy will have to spend time in lockup, loose his gun and spend thousands getting the charges dropped. That’s what happens at our airports and highways when the law abiding invoke the federal safe passage law. Law enforcement could care less, they arrest and let the courts figure it out.

Will do with letters, emails and phone calls! Thanks for the heads up!

It doesn’t look like this bill allows the Feds any authority in issuance or mandating of the carry laws of any state or political subdivision. This allows states to either acknowledge or wrongfully restrict their citizens’ second amendment rights.

I find this to be good, because it keeps the federal government fully out of it, except to enforce reciprocity, which is part of the Federal government’s authority under the constitution. This basically mandates state to state relations in regards to CCW just as driver’s licenses are. It is still up to the states and cities to stop wrongfully restricting their citizens’ rights under the constitution.

Now, if this bill were to promote some kind of national CCW permit, or establish national CCW standards, then I’d be really worried.

I think the concept is great. If passed into law, it would make the CCW more standardized across state borders. I travel quite a bit. I’m always having to look up and refresh my memory of the CCW laws particular to the state I’m going to or through. Wonder if the bill is passed, would it somehow make the differences from state to state any more uniform as well? For example, informing an officer when encountering them at a stop that you are carrying currently varies in different states. Mas, I know you promote always informing a police officer if you are “ON”, but not all folks do. Interesting to see if some of these differences among the 50 states become more uniform if the bill passes.

What this bill and the previous attempts for national reciprocity do not do is allow residents of no-issue states, like NJ, the ability to carry in the other 49 states.

True, when you consider the law directly. However, having licensees or Constitutional carry folks from 42 other states carrying in NJ will certainly put enormous pressure on the NJ government to mend their ways. They will, of course, be stubborn. But national reciprocity also wouldn’t go unnoticed by courts, and may influence some of the right-to-carry lawsuits pending.

In Vermont, one problem has long been that since VT doesn’t require permits, there’s no permit issuing system in place there, giving its residents nothing to reciprocate WITH.

The law is worded so people with the “right” to carry can. Residents of Vermont can carry without a license there, so they would also be able to carry without a license elsewhere. With this legislation non-resident licenses will fairly quickly go away.

traffic rules of the road, speeding, passing, etc, are pretty much the same where ever you go

True now, but they didn’t used to be. Back in the day (1950s) different states had different rules. Some allowed right turn on red, some didn’t. Signage varied. Then Congress proposed a standard set of rules and “encouraged” states to adopt them. That’s the only way to solve the problem you’ve raised. Unfortunately.

Lorenzo, & Mike.. bring up some good points!
But with that being said, i will start my letter’s, email’s, and phone calls to the folks who represents my state!
Thanks Mas, God bless all…

Thanks for the heads up on this! I’ve just emailed both of my Senators and will follow up with calls on Monday. I’m also spreading the word via Twitter and Facebook.

As much as I want this bill to pass and firmly believe that it should, I’m rather doubtful that it will, just because of the number of anti-Second Amendment politicians in the Senate, despite the fact that they may represent pro-Second Amendment states. Here’s hoping I’m very, very wrong!

This Almost goes far enough. It should say that ALL CITIZENS of the USA have the right to carry openly in ANY STATE, ANYWHERE they wish.

If states wish to have concealed carry laws, while I find this distasteful, then so be it. The problem is that NJ, NY, and DC/Maryland make it virtually impossible to carry at all, let alone concealed.

Will I support it? ABSOLUTELY 100%

Thanks Mas for alerting us to this important piece of proposed legislation. I just forwarded an edited version of Senator Ayotte’s letter to Senator Toomey of Pennsylvanis asking him to sign-on and support this bill! Others should do the same with their Senators.

Sam

Its a step in the right direction but, like long island mike and Gala Poola, I would expect problems and wouldn’t want to be the test case in a state like NJ.

My senators and congressmen are a waste. But I will try.

Even if this where to pass the senate (which I doubt it would) this bill would be dead on arrival on obama’s desk.

I am deeply suspicious of how this would work out. This is one of those issues that sounds like it would be good for the good guys but I suspect that congress would poison it at the last minute and we will wish we had never opened this can of worms. Nothing good ever comes out of Washington getting involved in anything to do with rights, they always say one thing and do another.

The concept of the bill is good,,,,BUT,,, putting the FEDS in charge of it. Come off it Mas. Sorry pal, I expeccted more from you on this one.

Let’s role play this for one second,,, can you say Obamacare?

I think it’s a waste of time to propose or advocate for this now, because so many states would simply laugh at this idea – CT, NY, NJ, MA, CA, DC, and others.

It’s unreasonable to expect them to allow non-residents additional abilities, when they are passing laws that infringe on gun rights of their own residents as much as possible.

I would rather the politicians from various pro-2A states ban together to void federal 2A infringements on their states’ territory.

I’m from Missouri, so I’ll believe it when I see it. I can’t imagine our brethren in CA have much hope that their Senators (Feinstein and Boxer) will have any interest in supporting this effort.

This is a small example of how states treat their citizens: In Illinois you must have a FOID card (firearm owners I. D.) to purchase a box of .22rf. If you are a non-resident all you need is a drivers license. Generally it takes 3 months to get your FOID. Now with ccw being passed you still need your FOID, you must carry both cards.

I’m in favor of most the concept, and applaud Senator Ayotte for her proposal. I believe this will bring a lot of people to the table who otherwise would not approach CCW at all…but it will bring the usual wailing and gnashing of teeth by one of my Senators, Dickie Durbin; his puppet, Sen. Mark Kirk, will do as he’s told.

Yes, long overdue. And I don’t think it makes non-resident permits obsolete: people from states that aren’t ‘shall issue’ could get one non-resident permit and then be able to travel armed throughout the country outside of their home state, if I understand correctly. That’s a big plus.

Hello Mas – below is the response I received from Senator Toomey of Pennsylvania regarding the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014 (S. 1908).

Dear Sam,

Thank you for contacting me about gun control and the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you.

Like many Pennsylvanians, I have long been a supporter of Second Amendment rights. They are of fundamental importance to our nation, and I believe that Americans have a personal, constitutional right to self-protection and to engage in recreational activities involving firearms. In fact, during my previous tenure in the House of Representatives (1999-2005), my record of supporting gun owners’ rights earned me an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association.

Like you, I strongly support concealed carry reciprocity. I am therefore proud to be a cosponsor of the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014 (S. 1908). Among its provisions, S. 1908 would require states to honor concealed weapons permits issued by another state unless they prohibit the carrying of a concealed firearm. Introduced by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) on January 9, 2014, S. 1908 is currently pending before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary for review. While I am not a member of this panel, please be assured that I will keep your views about concealed carry reciprocity legislation in mind as S. 1908 or any other related legislation progresses through the legislative process.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.

Sincerely,

What the feds givith, the feds can taketh…and then some. Think about it.

I submit that ANYthing that sheds light on us and enables us to educate non-gun owners is a good thing. We simply must have our eyes wide open and proceed with caution. The discussions that most certainly will ensue with these proposals must not be allowed to degenerate into debates, or worse – arguments. As a recent “convert” to concealed carry, I am surprised and disappointed, every day, with how little most non-gun owners know about us – what we stand for and what we believe. The “facts” they DO know came from mainstream media – certainly NOT the most accurate source for our best interests. No one else is going to teach them – it is up to us, folks.

They tried this once not to long ago called the Dune ammendment, it failed because it was blocked by Senator Chuck Schumer NY.

Very complex laws need to be simplified for the ordinary folks who carry for self protection and travel from point A to point B. Also the American truckers the backbone of our nation those poor drivers have to park in some dangerous dark places unfortunately most of them cannot be armed because of the way the different state laws currently are they might be passing through a state or two that prohibits handguns so even though say they live in a rural town in Geogia and are traveling to New Jersey with a run the trucker cannot bring his gun along even with a CWP. If this law passes it would ellimnate these restrictions.

This is a bad idea on several fronts:

1) It reinforces the idea that a PERMIT should be obtained from the government for us to exercise a RIGHT.

2) It gets the FEDERAL government involved in the Concealed permit process and enforcement.

Pat,

Respectively item 2 of your grievances is incorrect. The federal government touches nothing in regards to the process and enforcement due to this bill. That is all left up to the states. What it does do is enforce state to state relations with regards to the CCW permits. Licensing and enforcement is still totally in state hands, but the feds simply tell the states that they must recognize all others states’ permits.

And I will disagree with your item 1, though I sympathize and think that there is an argument for what you say. I just don’t totally buy that this bill does that.

Very nice….now if there could be reciprocity for Canada, would solve a lot of cross border issues.

Sir: First time writing you. I do believe that the right to self-defense (right to carry) is under attack and must be constantly defended, I agree with those who state that the right to self-defense and 2nd amendment rights are under attack from another direction – the high cost of ammunition. Just wondering if there is any movement anywhere to ensure access to ammunition and other shooting needs at a non-prohibitive cost. Thank you.

Great idea, and I agree that there’s some fixing needed here to preclude the “non-issue” states (NY, NJ, MD, etc.) from slamming some poor slob because he followed this law. Also needs to address the rights of the folks from those states, as well as the states that don’t have permits, who do travel, so that they, too can carry. I don’t really like the idea of the fed having to get involved. And I SURE AS HELL don’t want them to turn this into a REAL ID substitute!! The data should NOT be shared with the fed.

Mark, welcome. To answer your question, I don’t know of anything we can attempt legislatively to control ammo shortages and prices. The general feeling in the industry is that things are getting slightly better, and slowly sorting themselves out, in this regard.

Honestly, I’m not convinced that having the federal government involved in any way is a good thing. There’s little in the way of a track record that says this won’t lead to some sort of national registration. You would still have to abide by the individual state’s regulations, so what does this accomplish that isn’t already done with current reciprocity between the states? Some guy from Texas is still going to have an issue in New York.