National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Jpyle, Sep 9, 2011.

  1. Jpyle

    Jpyle New Member

    4,828
    0
    0
    Hearing Scheduled for H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011
    Friday, September 09, 2011

    For months we have been reporting on a critically important bill: H.R. 822—the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. This vital NRA-backed legislation, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) will enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.

    NRA-ILA :: Hearing Scheduled for H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2011
  2. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    Let's keep our fingers crossed on this.
     

  3. Jpyle

    Jpyle New Member

    4,828
    0
    0
    Yes, I hope this will force New Jersey into the "shall" issue column or be faced with the prospect of having only out of state CCW permitted within it's borders while residents are denied the same basic right.
     
  4. Angry_bald_guy

    Angry_bald_guy Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    1,687
    0
    0
    Beautiful! I sincerely hope this passes.
     
  5. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    BTW, is Sewell on the Shore?
     
  6. CourtJester

    CourtJester Active Member

    3,299
    15
    38
    OUT-DAMN-STANDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Not holding my breath but I like their train of thought.
     
  7. Jpyle

    Jpyle New Member

    4,828
    0
    0
    No, it's about 45 miles NW of Atlantic City
     
  8. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member Supporter

    6,127
    107
    63
    Yep, let's let the federal gov't get involved in concealed carry-wrong answer!! i hope this thing never passes. Congress and the federal gov't needs to stay out of concealed carry.
     
  9. REDMIST89

    REDMIST89 New Member

    214
    0
    0
    i agree with this! i hope it passes.Bout damn time,though as courtjester said im not holding my breath. Id be one dead blue faced mofo
     
  10. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 Active Member

    4,910
    2
    38
    I like the idea in principle. However I can see some states having a serious problem being told by the Feds, "you must recognize a license from wherever." Especially if they had a specific reason for not recognizing a particular permit in the first place.
     
  11. dog2000tj

    dog2000tj New Member

    8,176
    2
    0
    So what happens to us folks who live in places that don't need no stinkin' licenses? :confused: :rolleyes: ;)


    VT FTW!!! :D
     
  12. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    okay somebody break this down barney style for me. just what EXACTLY does it mean? I know I would be able to carry in any state with my MS CCW, but would I have to go by the other states laws or my home state's laws? As far as carry condition, or vehicle transpo?

    For instance, with my MS CCW I can carry open or concealed here at home. but lets say I go to California for a visit; would they be able to make me carry in condition 4 as a nonresident, or what?
     
  13. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member Supporter

    6,127
    107
    63
    Just what we need: Another federal law that a president like Obama can set aside due to some trumped up crisis. What ever happened to states rights? :mad:
     
  14. american121

    american121 New Member

    74
    0
    0
    If the federal government allows this, they then have a single throat to choke. Currently, Right-to-Carry is a state issue.
     
  15. 40calcliffy

    40calcliffy New Member

    186
    0
    0
    Hopefully I will be able to carry anywhere. That would be cool.
     
  16. Davo45

    Davo45 New Member

    300
    0
    0
    What "States' Rights"?

    For all practical intents and purposes states rights pretty much died after the Southern War for Independence and was buried with rhe passage of the 14th amendment, the only problem is that until the McDonald v. Chicago case, the 2nd amendment has been the ONLY amendment that has not applied to the states. This has enabled anti-gun states to not only deny their own citizens the right to keep and BEAR arms, but also those from other states as well.

    I think it's only fair and proper if all states would voluntarily honor each others' CCW permits, for that matter all states should allow constitutional carry like Vermont, Alaska, Arizona & Wyoming do but they don't, so if it takes the feds forcing the states to honor each others carry permits then I think that's great.

    If states have "rights" then why is the U.S. government suing to stop states that have passed immigration laws (which either mirror or are more lenient than federal law) to stop them from enforcing them? States don't in practice have any rights, only in theory WHEN it pleases the federal government.
     
  17. CourtJester

    CourtJester Active Member

    3,299
    15
    38
    bingo!!!!!
     
  18. Jpyle

    Jpyle New Member

    4,828
    0
    0
    In the absence of federal law each state may pass it's own laws. Once a federal law is passed any state law is pre-empted by the federal law under The Supremecy Clause of The Constitution. Challenges to federal supremacy have been consistently defeated by The Court. The Warren Court opinion on a State's (PA) anti-treason laws is a good example...

    In your example the immigration laws are federal laws therefore state laws are rendered unenforceable, this is exactly what the proposed reciprocity law is intended to do, i.e. render all state CCW reciprocity laws moot and impose a universal federal reciprocity.

    I believe that the Court stopped just short of incorporating the 2A in the McDonald case so states are still pretty much exempt from it's guarantees and restrictions.
     
  19. BarryNiven

    BarryNiven New Member

    29
    0
    0
    The principles involved make this a complicated issue. On the one hand, it would be nice for CCW to be uniform across the states. On the other hand, uniformity limits state's rights to decide for themselves.

    My personal opinion is that an efficient modern economy is helped by more uniformity. It's helpful to my work that my cell phone operates in CA, OR and KY (thanks FCC, otherwise it would be like the US vs. Europe where my phone does not work.) It's hurtful to our economy that CA gets to set different emission standards for cars. But I also recognize there are two sides to this. Certainly nowhere in the constitution does it say "the federal government can regulate spectrum use." My cell phone working in these locales is a direct effect of limitation of the rights of the states to regulate the spectrum as they see fit.

    So I mostly have no idea. As an aspiring CCW permit holder in KY, I'd love to not worry about state laws. But as someone who thinks that the patriot act is far too much centralized authority, I'd love the federal government to start giving states more authority.

    Nothing is ever easy or simple. :)