Do you think this will make nationwide reciprocity for carry permits more difficult to attain for the common folk? Or is it a foot in the door?
Do you think the ocean is wet?
Not just more difficult, but maybe even impossible!!!
Maybe it's a foot in the door, but only in states where the pubbies have a lock on the executive and the legislature. Even then, I would still expect massive resistance from the LEOs and all the gun control groups as well as the states with strict gun control because you might be passing through them.
I'd like to be optimistic, but the police unions are already pretty smug about pushing for rights of their members and everyone else be damned. The leadership will probably continue to hold hands with the Brady folks and oppose concealed carry for everyone but themselves.
What it is a foot in the door for is the Scary Weapons Ban renewal. Feinstein will try to attach the AWB to this to get the last increment of support that she needs. Call and write your Senators to vote NO.
I doubt it. I'm not aware of a single state that has passed CCW, which used the fact that off-duty cops can carry to enact the bill. Quite the contrary, "cop organizations" are usually the ones trying to block them.
If it weren't for the cops blocking CCW laws across the country, there would already be reciprocity in 45 or more states.
It could be a foot in the door if some of the arguments from this thread are used to shape the "National CCW for regular folks" debate. It depends on who frames the argument.
If this passes, both sides will try to use it. Antis will say that this makes CCW for civilians unnecessary. Pros will disparage the elitism of cop-only CCW and say that the benefits of cop CCW will be increased (more guns = less crime) with civilian CCW.
It might help to point out that civilians have a lower percentage of "bad shoots" than cops do, though this may be an apples & oranges comparison because many concealed carry civilians respond to a crime they actually witness, while on duty cops tend to show up after the fact & have to figure out who the bad guys are. This is an general argument for CCW.
Since most states have CCW now it would seem that it wouldn't be that difficult to get majority votes for national reciprocity. The arguments for CCW on the state level could be used in the national debate.
Would there be a "state's rights" argument against this? If so, I think the 2nd amendment and equal protection should trump it. Doubt a liberal judge would agree with me though.