Local, national and world news stories of interest.
 #109197  by David
 
http://planetfreewill.com/2016/12/05/go ... -sworn-in/

Republican Congressman Richard Hudson from North Carolina is set to introduce national concealed carry legislation for the next congress after Donald Trump is sworn in as president.

The bill, known as the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, will allow a person with a concealed carry permit in one state to carry a handgun in any other state that permits residents to conceal carry, as long as the person is not banned from possessing or transporting a firearm under federal law, The Daily Caller has learned.

You can read the full bill here.

Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and I plan to introduce legislation in the first days of the 115th Congress to guarantee that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense bill to provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits,” Rep. Hudson told The Daily Caller.

As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with the administration to advance policies that support and protect our right to keep and bear arms.”

Congressman Hudson introduced a similar bill in February 2015 which never made it out of the House.

Sources tell The Daily Caller that Hudson’s office has been working on the bill for some time now and are “thinking about what we are going to do in the new year and we plan to introduce the bill from this Congress with the addition of constitutional carry in the first days of the 115th Congress.”

If the bill is able to pass the now Republican-controlled House and Senate, it is very likely a President Trump will sign the legislation considering he has vowed to support a national right to carry law on his official DonaldJTrump website.

The right of self-defense doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway,” Trump wrote in a document laying out his positions on the Second Amendment. “That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.
 #109198  by pick_six
 
Well, we can hope. But reality seems like a snowball's chance ...

It would be nice to see the usual culprits have to honor all permits. And be prosecuted when they try to avoid doing so. They better codify that part for failure to honor. Address the "gun sanctuary" zone from the start.
 #109199  by David
 
Yea, I'm not really for this even being presented. To me its a huge overstep onto State's rights by an already oversized, over-empowered federal government. The negotiated bill will probably have lots of compromises likely decreasing your ability to carry at home. It also means Congress will forever control your ability to carry, putting your rights up for sale to the current highest bidder.
 #109201  by Kuntryboy816
 
Although at face value, this seems like a great idea for those who have a CC permit, I'd rather see Constitutional Carry be enforced. No state permits, no need for reciprocity agreements and will also force anti 2A states like CA, NY, NJ, MD, etc. to finally stop infringing upon their citizens RIGHTS to allow them to defend themselves.
 #109204  by GatorDude
 
I fully support this effort.

Since EVERY state now has a mechanism for its residents to get a concealed carry permit (although some never actually issue them), it will apply to all 50 states and, theoretically, to most territories (there are 2 I think that do not permit concealed carry at all by regular Joes).

As for infringement upon States' rights, I do not think this is any different than federal law regarding interstate transportation of firearms. For example, NJ will charge you with a felony if you are a resident of NJ and stop at the gas station with your firearm stowed completely away, unloaded, etc., in your vehicle on the way to the range. However, someone on an interstate trip cannot be charged due to federal law (which preempts the state law).

If states respond by prohibiting ALL concealed carry and do not issue permits, that will set up a terrific quandary for the states that do so. I would think that type of complete restriction on the Second Amendment would be prohibited. The Second Amendment, as it is interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, applies to all states. I, for one, hope this backs them all into a corner. I also would like to be able to prove that there is no great increase in crime due to concealed carry being permitted (the Wild West approach taken by anti-gunners).
 #109205  by NCC
 
State rights aside, I am all for this. I have been waiting for it since the TWO DE senators kept it from passing the last time. Missed by 2 votes, get it?

I am not one to want the government to do anything for me within the US, but in this case I will happily let them help me.
 #109208  by Chizult
 
David wrote:Yea, I'm not really for this even being presented. To me its a huge overstep onto State's rights by an already oversized, over-empowered federal government. The negotiated bill will probably have lots of compromises likely decreasing your ability to carry at home. It also means Congress will forever control your ability to carry, putting your rights up for sale to the current highest bidder.
I agree.
Kuntryboy816 wrote:Although at face value, this seems like a great idea for those who have a CC permit, I'd rather see Constitutional Carry be enforced. No state permits, no need for reciprocity agreements and will also force anti 2A states like CA, NY, NJ, MD, etc. to finally stop infringing upon their citizens RIGHTS to allow them to defend themselves.
And I also agree.

Instead of introducing pro-gun legislation at the national level, which can be later rescinded or reversed, and sets a precedent of federal gun control measures superseding states rights, we should be pushing harder for a SC decision redefining "keep and bear arms" as what it actually means (ie Constitutional Carry). That decision would last a generation and free us of all the retardation and cost that permitting currently requires.
 #109214  by pick_six
 
the discussion of states rights and federal mandates are an interesting balance.

gun issues, on both sides, grab at which suit their situation best.

in all the usual culprits non-fed jurisdictions with crazy A2A stuff, they beg for the fed to come to the rescue. and anti's claim states rights.

in the states with very generous 2a protections, anti's beg for the fed to come in and crack down. and pro say stay away.

either way, the constitution/bill of rights offer protections that are nation wide, not just your house, or city, or state.

yeah, true constitutional carry should be a non-poll taxed thing. permits/training/fingerprints/etc shouldn't be needed. then again, we are back to the states vs the fed's.

we just need a judge to say fed/constitution trumps (no pun intended) state. or just concede that the constitution is not a nationwide document.
 #109224  by Owen
 
I agree with pick_six. I'd rather see a court case decided by the Supreme Court to finally take gun regulation out of government hands. At some point "shall not be infringed" needs to be followed. They've been getting away with all these concealed carry schemes for way to long.
 #109229  by NCC
 
OK, druthers aside, I want it now. I want to be able to carry in PA and MD... NOW. I will take all the help I can get and this works for me.