Posted on 10/24/2011 6:55:50 AM PDT by marktwain
Thanks to the good work of millions of American gun owners and NRA members, Congress is moving closer to restoring one of our fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
Ten days ago, the House Judiciary Committee considered amendments to the “National Right-to-Carry-Reciprocity Act” (H.R. 822), which would allow any person with a valid, state-issued concealed firearm permit to exercise the right to carry a firearm in any state that permits concealed carry.
Some members of the Committee tried to weaken the bill with anti-gun amendments, and I’m happy to report that every one of them failed. The committee is expected to pass the bill soon, after which it will go before the full House for a vote.
As of today, 49 states have laws in place that permit their citizens to carry a concealed firearm in some form or another. Only Illinois completely denies its residents the right to carry a concealed firearm outside their homes or businesses for self-defense, an injustice for which President Obama fought hard when he was an Illinois state senator.
In 41 of these 49 states, law-abiding citizens can carry a firearm without having to navigate an overly restrictive bureaucratic process.
The problem is that some states allow visiting permit holders from other states to exercise their right to carry, and some states do not. As you can imagine, this presents a nightmare for interstate travel, as many Americans are forced to check their Second Amendment rights, and their fundamental right to self-defense, at the state line.
The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act would solve this problem by simply requiring states that allow concealed carry to recognize each other’s permits. Nothing more.
Predictably, gun-ban organizations like the Brady Campaign and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s deceptively named “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” are doing everything they can to demonize H.R. 822, as are their allies in the anti-gun media.
First, they tried to scare Americans into thinking that H.R. 822 would unleash a new “wild west” atmosphere in the United States. This tactic fell flat because nearly every state in the nation already allows concealed carry and none of these outlandish predictions have materialized. In fact, quite the opposite has occurred.
On average, the 41 states that have the most tolerant right-to-carry laws have 22 percent lower total violent crime rates, 30 percent lower murder rates, 46 percent lower robbery rates and 12 percent lower aggravated assault rates, compared to the rest of the country. This is likely due to the fact that, as a group, citizens with permits to carry a firearm are more law-abiding than the general public.
Having failed at scaring Americans, the gun banners are now falling back on the Tenth Amendment as their main argument against H.R. 822. It’s a poorly conceived argument, as you might expect from groups that spend the majority of their time trying to trample the same “states’ rights” that they now want to hold up as sacrosanct.
The fact is the Tenth Amendment is most certainly sacrosanct – that’s why, in the 1990s, the NRA supported a successful constitutional challenge to provisions of the Brady Act that violated it. But the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act doesn’t violate the Tenth Amendment. Rather, the Act recognizes that the Second Amendment guarantees the fundamental, individual right of every law-abiding citizen to bear arms for safety when traveling.
This is an inalienable right that neither the federal government, nor any state government, may infringe upon. In addition, the 14th Amendment gives Congress the power to protect us from states that infringe on our inalienable, constitutional rights.
By the way, these are the same gun-ban groups that don’t give any consideration to states’ rights when they lobby for sweeping federal gun bans, ammunition bans, and magazine bans.
NRA has made the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act a top priority because it restores a fundamental, inalienable right guaranteed to all law-abiding Americans by the Second Amendment. All Second Amendment advocates, gun owners and pro-gun groups should be campaigning for the passage of this bill.
Also, as a general rule, no one should ever take seriously any lessons on constitutional law from groups whose sole mission is to destroy our most basic civil right guaranteed in the Constitution: The right to bear arms and defend ourselves and our loved ones…no matter which state we’re in.
The liberals never wait for perfect. They accept incremental steps toward their agenda. That is why they have been winning while we are waiting for "perfect".
What about us 100% disabled Veterans who have a fuduicary,a care giver, [and in my case a keeper lol this is my wife of almost 20 years]. We are not allowed under a letter of agreement between the va ,doj & batfe. They are citing the Brady Handgun Control Act of 1993 for this. The va makes you read, then they read this to you, that you,your family,close freinds,neighbors are not allowed to have any firearms. Those of us who swore to the Constutition of the US, & who know what lethal force is better than most police officers. Are not allowed to go hunting,self defense,target shooting ect, because of the unlawful desires of those in office & their lawyer lackeys! There is no court to hear our grivences, no lawyer will take our cause up, just a bunch of cowardly disgraseful people in power!
I would like my PTC to be valid in every state too, but I think we are going backwards as far preserving the 2nd Amendment and States Rights.
Yeah. If they have the power to give . . .
It is indeed a step in the right direction. I am anxious for this as well as the ability to purchase handguns across state lines. I live less than a mile from the TN/MS border and it is silly that I can only purchase handguns on one side of the line and not the other.
I think you will find this article on a bill to restore veteran’s rights:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2797112/posts
Would you please post the regulation that you refer to? Preventing neighbors from owning firearms? Sorry, but this sounds very fishy.
Thanks.
To me it seems a huge waste of effort. While the House is very likely to pass it the Senate may or may not and the Infester of the WH certainly wont. I very much doubt the veto will be overrode. There are other more pressing issues. It would have been far better to bring it up when there was a chance of it becoming law.
BS. They can "make you read" anything you let them. It doesn't mean it will carry the force of law.
If my neighbor came and told me I had to get rid of my guns because of his VA status, I'd tell him to pound sand and be well within my Rights to do so.
Yes, I believe so. Of course, it is possible for amendments to occur before it passes.
The democrats see defeat unless a right is federalized? I don’t buy this. It’s a state’s obligation to follow the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution.
Look what happened when the federal government created the “right” to abortion! What about the “right to life”?
Fickle Congress starts legislating “rights” instead of recognizing God-given freedoms and the US is ruined.
From here my assumptions are:
1) The Democrat senate will throw in a whole bunch of intolerable amendments, or try to insert them in conference committee, forcing the Republicans to vote down the corrupted bill. Or,
2) If the senate passes basically the same bill, then Obumble will veto it.
3) The Republicans will then use it as a stick to beat the Democrats with in the next election.
But the bottom line remains. I am deeply wary of congress trying to force reciprocity on the States. Mostly because next time the Democrats have sway, they will try and force reciprocity on things like homosexual marriage, licenses for illegal aliens, and who knows what other liberal crapola.
Second, because that further opens the door to federal judges interfering with reciprocity agreements.
Anecdotal agreement. Had a buddy who was pretty hot-headed. He got a CCW and when he carried, he was meek as a lamb. He never told his wife when he was carrying, and said she often remarked at "How he had matured" when a flare-up situation occurred and he didn't react.
[Sidebar] I don't tell my wife when I carry either. She's comfortable around guns and even mans my table at a gun show when I go walkabout. However I don't want to run the risk of her saying out loud, in a tight situation, "Honey, use your gun". I'd rather blindside the bad guy.
Insofar as unregulated CCW should be the norm, this walks us that way.
So you think you should be able to waltz into any state on election day and vote? The laws of the that state say you can't, but you can vote in your own state so they must allow you to vote? There are all kinds of laws that require residency in a state for a particular length of time before certain rights apply. Do you believe the federal government has the authority to throw out all of these requirements?
See comment# 19. At the very least, it helps to get rid of fair weather friends of the Second Amendment like Mark Pryor and Richard Lugar in the Senate.
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.