Actually, if you look at the language: (pasting from an earlier post)
reading the text of the bill, it says :
“...subject only to the requirements
of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting,
shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document
containing a photograph of the person, and, may possess or 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 that—
‘‘(1) has a statute under which residents of the State may apply for a license
or permit to carry a concealed firearm; or
‘‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the
State for lawful purposes.”
That looks like the phrase “ who is carrying 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 or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State
in which the person resides” means that a CCW from *ANY* state is valid in all REGARDLESS of if the person is a RESIDENT of the state that issued...
Does anybody else read this the same way?
A conservative in occupied California (who has no option of going anywhere for the next couple of decades)..
I read that to mean that if you are a legal resident of say NY, IL, CA, MA, or NJ - and you have non-resident concealed carry license from UT or FL that allows you to carry in 38+ other states - you are still screwed.
You are a RESIDENT of a gun hating state, and therefore they will not recognize your 2nd amendment rights.
That's my read. If someone can correct me otherwise, I would be happy to be wrong.