A Larger Group Of Co-Sponsors Of HR-822 National Carry Reciprocity

[twyacht]

New Co-Sponsors For HR 822- National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity
HR 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011, just went from one co-sponsor - Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC-11) to 43 co-sponsors. The new co-sponsors represent a cross-section of the country including anti-gun states such as New York and California. I see more than a handful of Democrats have signed on to the bill as well.

If your Congressman is not a co-sponsor and he or she represents that he or she is "a friend of the Second Amendment", then ask them why they aren't a co-sponsor. I'd love to see the number of co-sponsors eclipse that of HR 308 in short order.

The co-sponsors added on March 2nd and 3rd.

    Rep Boren, Dan [OK-2] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Ross, Mike [AR-4] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Graves, Sam [MO-6] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Huelskamp, Tim [KS-1] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Gibson, Christopher P. [NY-20] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Heller, Dean [NV-2] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Owens, William L. [NY-23] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Coffman, Mike [CO-6] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Schmidt, Jean [OH-2] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Young, Don [AK] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Bachmann, Michele [MN-6] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Cole, Tom [OK-4] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Diaz-Balart, Mario [FL-21] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Boswell, Leonard L. [IA-3] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Barton, Joe [TX-6] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 3/2/2011
    Rep Heinrich, Martin [NM-1] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Benishek, Dan [MI-1] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Chaffetz, Jason [UT-3] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Holden, Tim [PA-17] - 3/3/2011
    Rep West, Allen B. [FL-22] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Johnson, Timothy V. [IL-15] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Posey, Bill [FL-15] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Granger, Kay [TX-12] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Rahall, Nick J., II [WV-3] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [GA-2] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Peterson, Collin C. [MN-7] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Kissell, Larry [NC-8] - 3/3/2011
    Rep Davis, Geoff [KY-4] - 3/3/2011

Posted by John Richardson at 1:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: HR 822, National Reciprocity

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/

****

Even NY and Kalifornia, gee, these folks, even Dems, "get it"... Get behind it folks..Let your Reps. & Senators know.

[jnevis]

Don't bet on it.  It doesn't matter how many co-sponsors a bill has, it all boils down to who actually VOTES for it.  They'll throw thier name on a bill as a sponsor to show the little people that they support the Second Amendment but either not vote or vote no on  the actual bill, IF it ever makes it out of committee.  That's been the usual tactic here for making MD a Shall Issue state.  A majority of the Reps sponsor teh bill but it stays in committee until the end of session and dies.  They get to say they supported it but never have to actually PROVE it.

BTW only Rep Owens from NY is a Dem the others from NY and CA are Republican

[TAB]

trust me, this is not a road we want to go down...

it will lead to bad things.  Look past the "hey look at this its great" for a second and think about what some states will do.

[twyacht]

trust me, this is not a road we want to go down...

it will lead to bad things.  Look past the "hey look at this its great" for a second and think about what some states will do.

What kind of "bad things" TAB? ; remove a bureaucratic, over regulated permit for LAWFUL citizens? Standardize and remove some of the B.S. from anti gun states?

What "bad things"? Granted CT, Ca., Ill, Mass. Md, NY, will probably never get it, they have been shooting themselves in the ass as liberal dominated bastions of failed policy after failed policy...

 As the lines for the CC Course go around the bldg. at local gun shows that offer the course, week after week, here in Florida; I would imagine pro gun states have a similar representation.

That is a larger and larger portion of the country LEGALLY acquiring a carry permit, and 42 states have some form of open carry.

That's fine we can make a 42 state reciprocity bill. Screw the other asshats.

As far as sponsors, jnevis, it's called holding them accountable. An informed electorate, is a good thing, Especially today, when more folks realize how were getting screwed by politicians and getting involved.

[tombogan03884]

What kind of "bad things" TAB? ; remove a bureaucratic, over regulated permit for LAWFUL citizens? Standardize and remove some of the B.S. from anti gun states?

What "bad things"? Granted CT, Ca., Ill, Mass. Md, NY, will probably never get it, they have been shooting themselves in the ass as liberal dominated bastions of failed policy after failed policy...

 As the lines for the CC Course go around the bldg. at local gun shows that offer the course, week after week, here in Florida; I would imagine pro gun states have a similar representation.

That is a larger and larger portion of the country LEGALLY acquiring a carry permit, and 42 states have some form of open carry.

That's fine we can make a 42 state reciprocity bill. Screw the other asshats.

As far as sponsors, jnevis, it's called holding them accountable. An informed electorate, is a good thing, Especially today, when more folks realize how were getting screwed by politicians and getting involved.

TAB is right on this, (did I actually type that ?  )
Is it a good thing if all states suddenly have to meet the requirements of the strictest state ?
Is it a good thing if people in Constitutional carry states suddenly have to meet the same requirements as those in NJ, or NY, or MD ?
I think not.

[Sponsor]

[twyacht]

TAB is right on this, (did I actually type that ?  )
Is it a good thing if all states suddenly have to meet the requirements of the strictest state ?
Is it a good thing if people in Constitutional carry states suddenly have to meet the same requirements as those in NJ, or NY, or MD ?
I think not.

I don't think this is how's it going to play

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011’’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.
(2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.
(5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.
(6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed
firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.
(7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.
( The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.
(9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.


‘‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
‘‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
‘‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.
‘‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted
license or permit issued to a resident of the State.
‘‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’’.

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2011/02/hr-822-concealed-carry-reciprocity-bill.html

Seems one will have to read up with any nuance of CC in a particular state, as one should. Some states allow CC in Bars, that serve alcohol, NC does not,...so,...you go with the reg's of that state.

and stay out of liberal asshat states,...

[jnevis]

As far as sponsors, jnevis, it's called holding them accountable. An informed electorate, is a good thing, Especially today, when more folks realize how were getting screwed by politicians and getting involved.

How are you going to hold them accountable?  "Hey I did my part.  I can't help it if it spent the entire session in committee."  The Shall Issue law here gets hit around between three or four committees before finally dying a slow death.  All they have to do is keep sending it back for revision or amendment.  Then if it does leave committee all they need to do is pass it back and forth from House to Senate to get a final bill they can agree on.  By that time it's the end of the session and they haven't voted on it.  When and if they do vote on it it won't be the same bill introduced and will probably be something we DO NOT want. 

What you posted sounds all well and good but what about people living in a May Issue state?  I, for example, live in MD and cannot get a permit here but I have a FL and VA permit.  Would I fall under MD so now my FL/VA permits are void, or does the FL/VA permits now cover MD?  Bet it would be the former.

[Hazcat]

jnevis,

According to how I read this http://apps.carryconcealed.net/legal/reciprocity.php and assuming it is correct, MD does not honor either FL or VA non resident permits.

[jnevis]

Exactly my point Haz. 

So if passed, does my non-resident permit become void, as I am not able to get a permit in my home state?  Probably.  Will it usher in Shall Issue laws in the states that have May Issue, no.  So we will still have a patch work of laws that is not equal in enforcement or process, definately. 

People that live in Northern and Central CA will still be in the same boat they are now.  It's up to the Local LEO and certain counties are more likely to authorize a permit.  If I had a permit issued in Fresno, would it be valid in LA or San Deigo?  Probably not. 

[twyacht]

Your right jnevis, the reciprocity would only apply to those states that are more/less "pro-gun" "less restrictive" states.

The FED law would simply state, that a FL permit, as I have, would be valid in other states, as long as I carried in accordance with state(s) law.

My wife is from Catonsville, MD. An ass backward part of greater Baltimore, in an otherwise anti gun state. I truly understand the crux and dilemma. It does not supercede states rights. (and I'm sure the anti-gun states will fight it.).

However, in the FED big picture scenario of HR822, it would allow me to travel to other states, "with" CC laws, and have valid reciprocity.

The states that want to "buck" the system, "may issue",...type states, are the minority, and the light needs to shined upon them.

If I road trip to Houston for the 2012 NRA Convention, I have reciprocity through Ga, Ms, Al, and Tx. All it does, as Fl SR264, is clarify the law, and standardize the criteria.