This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
That said, maybe I am missing the point, but I don't really get a lot of the excitement over this bill. It only guarantees the right to carry concealed in another state IF: (1) you have a carry permit that allows you to carry in your state or your state has permitless carry; and (2) the other state allows carry in some form. But most of us who live in "shall issue" or "constitutional carry" states already have reciprocity with most if not all other gun-friendly states.
Note that this bill does NOT require a state to allow you to carry if it does not allow its own citizens to carry. While it requires "may issue" states to honor permits from "shall issue" states, it does NOT require a "no issue" state to do so. There are no "no issue" states right now, but I'll bet there will be a push in some of these states to go back to "no issue" in order to defeat reciprocity under this bill. I'm not sure I like the idea of incentivizing a rollback of gun rights when so much progress has been made even in anti-gun states.
As I said, I am in favor of anything that advances our rights, but it seems like there are a lot bigger fish to fry than this. Frankly, I'd rather see Congress focused on cleaning up or repealing federal laws than interfering in state laws. There is a target-rich environment when it comes to nonsensical federal laws that should be reformed or repealed, such as:
- End the NFA restrictions of short barrel rifles and shotguns.
- End restrictions for importation of non-NFA firearms.
- Either repeal the NFA transfer tax or replace it with an application fee.
- End restrictions on "armor piercing ammunition"
“No issue” is unconstitutional. Illinois went concealed carry because the other choice presented them by the courts was Constitutional Carry. The last refuge of the anti carry scoundrels is in “may issue” states like MD and NJ.
National status opens up DC, California, and New York. That is key start. Make my NV, UT, and OR permits valid in any state.
“The NRA, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Giffords, and Everytown for Gun Safety have all expressed support for the Fix NICS Act.”
Do not like.
Whatever it is, if Giffords and Schumer like it - shun it as hard you possibly can.
This is good. Pass it!
Oh yeah!
I sure hope they get it right.
Screw the LASD, and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s refusal to grant permits to regular citizens.
We’ll end run him. It’s decades past time too.
Its not a complete solution, but it is a big step in the right direction. Will take some of the threat away from the Gestapo states if you are just passing through.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Isn’t it rich that an entire Political Party cannot comprehend the meaning of one simple four word Phrase “Shall Not Be Infringed”? The first word really hangs them up, but the last word really confuses them.
SHALL: verb as required will, by compulsion will, by imperative will, mandatorily will, obligatorily will
Associated concepts: shall be lawful, shall be legal, shall become, shall give, shall have, shall not, shall perform, shall work.
INFRINGED: act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: “his legal rights were being infringed” ·
synonyms: restrict · limit · curb · check · encroach on · undermine · erode · diminish · weaken · impair · damage · compromise
And the really angry part is how the Left will fight to the death over abortion and make it some type of "right", when there is ZERO mention of abortion the Constitution. Forcing taxpayers to subsidize it and making it legal across all 50 states.
Republicans and conservatives need to start getting emotional and start using the Left's tactics on abortion and use them for defending the 2nd Amendment. Stop quoting John Lott and spouting statistics about how guns save lives. Start talking about how it's BS that Hollywood celebrities and politicians get armed security detail but not you to protect your home and kids.
I think you are. As someone already said, there are no "no issue" states. And this bill greatly expands the freedom to travel while armed. My permit, for example, is not recognized by any other state but mine. There is single state permit accepted by all states, and there are a number of states that accept no others.
I am concerned as to what NICS-FIX has in it besides fixing reporting from the Feds. No way that antis support it so loudly without something else, something hidden.
Note that this bill does NOT require a state to allow you to carry if it does not allow its own citizens to carry. While it requires "may issue" states to honor permits from "shall issue" states, it does NOT require a "no issue" state to do so. There are no "no issue" states right now, but I'll bet there will be a push in some of these states to go back to "no issue" in order to defeat reciprocity under this bill. I'm not sure I like the idea of incentivizing a rollback of gun rights when so much progress has been made even in anti-gun states.
Yes, I believe you are missing the point entirely. Illinois was the last state that outright prohibited concealed carry, but thanks to Moore v. Madigan, they now have a shall issue concealed carry system, because they were afraid to have the Supreme Court rule on their case. Because of Moore v. Madigan, no state in the Seventh Circuit (Wisconsin, Illinois, or Indiana) can revert to a no-issue policy.
The same happened in Wrenn v. District of Columbia, where their 'may issue' scheme was challenged in court, found unconstitutional by the appeals court, and the District decided, after much urging by anti-gun entities, not to risk a ruling by the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of concealed carry. Instead they agreed to abide by the must issue order of the court. D.C. can not even revert to may-issue, let alone no-issue because of this ruling.
Any attempt by a state to completely eliminate all forms of concealed carry that was not immediately overturned by the appeals court would force a Supreme Court ruling in the matter, and would in all likelihood result in all 57 states becomming must-issue states, which is something that states such as Kalifornia, New Jersey, and New York will do almost anything to avoid.
So no, I don't see much danger of incentivizing a rollback of carry laws in states that are currently de facto no-issue states in practice.
The only provision I see getting taken out of the bill is the provision that states must honor out-of-state permits issued to their own residents.