Bipartisan Majority of the U.S. Senate Votes in Favor of National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity

Fairfax, Va. – Today, by a margin of 58-39, a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate voted in favor of an amendment offered by Senator John Thune to provide interstate recognition of right-to-carry permits. The amendment to S.1390, the National Defense Authorization Act, would acknowledge that the right to self-defense extends across state lines. Under this provision, individuals with carry permits from their home state, or who are otherwise allowed to carry a firearm in their home state, could carry in any other state that issues permits.

“Today’s strong majority vote in the U.S. Senate was an important step forward in the National Rifle Association’s decades long effort to make right-to-carry and national reciprocity the law of the land,” said NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.

Expanding right-to-carry enhances public safety, as criminals are deterred from attempting crimes when they know or suspect that their prospective victims are armed. A Department of Justice study found that 40 percent of felons had not committed crimes because they feared the prospective victims were armed. The Thune-Vitter amendment recognized that competent, responsible, law-abiding Americans still deserve our trust and confidence when they cross state lines.

Passing interstate right-to-carry legislation would not only reduce crime by deterring criminals, but -- most important of all -- would protect the right of honest Americans to protect themselves if deterrence fails.

“While we are disappointed that the 60 vote procedural hurdle was not met, the vote shows that a bipartisan majority agrees with the NRA,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox. “We would like to thank Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), along with all senators who voted in favor of this amendment on both sides of the aisle. The efforts of these senators were not in vain, as the NRA will continue to work tirelessly to ensure this important legislation finds the right avenue to come before Congress once again.”

-NRA-

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military.

I read redstate first. Scared the crap out of me. Commentary brought relief. Thank you!

With respect to Sotomayor, Larry Pratt of GOA threatened the dems saying in effect you’ll undo all the good votes cast this year. I want to see what the dems do. 27 of them voted for concealed carry in national parks, i.e. the Coburn Amendment.

These were the switches today as best I could count.

Klobuchar (D-MN), Kohl (D-WI), Merkley (D-OR), Nelson (D-FL), Rockefeller (D-WV who didn’t vote on Coburn), Sanders (I-VT), Shaheen (D-NH), Specter (D-PA) and Wyden (D-OR) switched their vote from YEAs on Coburn to NAYs on Thune as best that I could check, with that exception for Rockefeller.

Alexander (R-TN) and Johnson (D-SD) did the reverse switch from NAYs on Coburn to YEAs on Thune.

Sure they could. And then the case would be taken to court, and on up the chain until it reaches the SCOTUS, where the right would be incorporated.

This is happening right now, except it isn’t a state who is banning possession, it is a city. It doesn’t matter. The incorporation doctrine means that your rights, as enumerated in the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution, may not be infringed upon by any level of government - state, county, city, township, etc. Gura went after the jurisdiction that clearly has ban, not a mere partial infringement, to push the case. Chicago is an obvious choice for a sovereign to make a case against. They have a ban, they’ve defended it in court so it isn’t a spur-of-the-moment policy whim, it is their express will to deny people their rights. They’re a well defined sovereign, and their track record on this issue is long and somewhat notorious.

The lawyer who took Heller to the SCOTUS, Alan Gura, has brought a case against Chicago to force the incorporation issue as we speak. Thirty Four state AG’s have filed briefs arguing for incorporation.

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

It is a de facto defeat for those states that has “may issue” or don’t issue CCW permits. The rider would have imposed reciprocity of CCW permits by states that don’t issue CCW’s for people living outside the state who came other states that do issue CCW’s. This legislation does nothing to affect CCW in shall-issue states that already allow people to get CCW’s. This was only about reciprocity.

Quite frankly, I don’t want to see a federal CCW statute - yet. I could get into that at another time...

On the whole, this legislation was a way to twist Harry Reid’s tail. Harry ain’t doing so well at home, and Nevada is very pro-gun. Harry had to allow this to come to a vote, but Harry also knew that if it passed, guys like Schumer would have come un-freakin’-glued. So he rigged a vote for cloture, got enough people to go against it, and now it will be tabled. Still, for all those Nevadans who have to pull over and lock up their sidearms when they cross into the People’s Republic of California — they’re going to remember this - ie, that Harry didn’t get the job done.

In short, Harry has problems. This issue is one of them.

NOW.... for all of that, this is a victory for RKBA, even tho the vote did not pass. Why? Because only 10 years ago, you could NOT have gotten 58 votes in the Senate, with a number of them being Democrats (!) for such a bill. The east coast Democrats now are on notice that the screaming hysterical antics of clowns like Schumer aren’t the only view on guns in their party — and that in a different form, with some sort of buy-off, this rider, attached to a different piece of legislation, or through more clever use of the Senate rules, may well pass. 58 ‘yes’ votes for something as “radical” as this has to scare the unholy crap out of guys like Schumer and Lautenberg - and now they know that the deck for passing something like a re-enactment of the AW ban is slim and none.

Agreed. They had a winning number of votes by far (!), sponsors just didn’t want to drag the issue thru the threatened filibuster process. It’s a winning issue, those voting for it just want minimum hysteria when they push it through.

My one concern is that it would entrench the notion of CCW permits as a bureaucratic, papered, permissioned privilege - not a RIGHT. Vermont residents would not enjoy “national reciprocity” as they have no paperwork to reciprocate. Alaska went “Vermont style” not long ago, but kept the permit system precisely for reciprocity. The growing momentum toward unlicensed CCW would be stopped with a national CCW reciprocity because that inherently requires paperwork.

This vote, while abandoned (not lost!), was a great step forward. A large majority is now on record as supporting expanded RKBA. Rather than struggling to reach a majority, the issue now is getting clean passage with a clear and real majority. The Brady Bunch must be scared out of their minds...

"Under this provision, individuals with carry permits from their home state, or who are otherwise allowed to carry a firearm in their home state, could carry in any other state that issues permits."

The way that's written, if you have evidence of a Vermont address, it looks like you would be free as a bird. I believe that was from the first paragraph.

I got a feeling CCW will remain a privilege, but if so, then open carry has to be a right. When enough people have the vapors with open carry, only then will concealed carry be free and a RIGHT.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.