Nationwide CCW law HR 882


PDA






newbuckeye
March 16, 2014, 10:55 PM
I've been hearing about this bill that just passed the House and I'm kinda torn. I think national reciprocity would be a good thing, but what about state sovereignty? If you notice the groups for it is rather short (The NRA and Buckeye firearms) but the list opposed is the normal anti gun groups with one surprise at the end.

Brady Campaign
Mayors Against Illegal Guns
National Association for Gun Rights
League of Women Voters of Connecticut
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
American Bar Association
Police Foundation
Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
National Network to End Domestic Violence
International Association of Chiefs of Police
Major Cities Chiefs Association
Gun Owners of America

Links....
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr822-112/bill_positions

Thoughts?

If you enjoyed reading about "Nationwide CCW law HR 882" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rockhopper46038
March 16, 2014, 11:09 PM
I would prefer Constitutional carry.

RoughshodBronco
March 16, 2014, 11:44 PM
Constitutional carry would be the preferred thing, but realistically I just don't see how to get there from here. As for national reciprocity, sure it sounds great in theory, but I feel that we will rue the day that we ceded the authority to make laws like this to the feds. Anything they can make legal they can subsequently do an about face on and make illegal at a later date. As much of a pain as the current patch work of different state laws can be it is much preferable to handing this power over to the federal government.

hso
March 17, 2014, 12:03 AM
GOA is going to be opposed to any federal involvement having seen the mess the Fed can make of things.

Also, it is important to read the proposed legislation as well as the interpretations of it before making judgements about it.

Devonai
March 17, 2014, 12:30 AM
The League of Women Voters of Connecticut opposes this? Here is a copy of the e-mail I just sent them:

To Whom it may Concern,

It has come to my attention that your organization has come out in opposition of a congressional bill to allow for national reciprocity of a concealed carry license, regardless of the state of issue.

For many women, a concealed carry license is the last line of defense against an abusive boyfriend, spouse, or significant other. It is invaluable, especially in tandem with a restraining order, and should not be limited by state boundaries. Full faith and credit is given to license of all kinds across state borders; why would your organization be opposed to a bill that puts more power and flexibility into the hands of women as to the means to defend themselves?

Staff Sergeant David Kantrowitz
103d Airlift Wing, CT Air National Guard

Shovelhead
March 17, 2014, 08:11 AM
What the Feds giveth, the Feds can take away with a stroke of a pen.
Constitutional Carry is the way to go, not a law.
The current resident of the Oval Office has already shown that proper procedures and Congressional oversight are something to be brushed aside on a whim.

heycods
March 17, 2014, 08:17 AM
Looks like National Concealed handgun regristry to me. Dont care for the idea.

HexHead
March 17, 2014, 08:21 AM
National reciprocity doesn't necessarily have to mean federal oversight. It should be a full faith and credit issue just like all states recognizing each other's drivers and heterosexual marriage licenses.

oneounceload
March 17, 2014, 03:40 PM
GOA is going to be opposed to any federal involvement having seen the mess the Fed can make of things.

I agree wholeheartedly. Then they could diminish or restrict things even more depending on which way the winds blows at any moment.

newbuckeye
March 17, 2014, 04:06 PM
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one this make queasy. I've found the more the feds try to "simplify" something, the more complex it ends up. It's in their nature and they can't help it.

Midwest
March 17, 2014, 04:22 PM
My concern about a Nationwide CCW law is that they would design the law after heavy input from NJ, NY, MD and other anti-gun states.

Then we will get to carry in our car, if it is unloaded and only on every other Monday after a full moon on alternating odd and even days.

Of course after we provide four references with their social security numbers, credit check, employer references, 100 hours of training, $300 fee, fingerprints, photos, dna sample, blood sample, physician release, lie detector test, psychological test, stress test.

Absolutely NO federal involvement

.

Spats McGee
March 17, 2014, 04:48 PM
Can anyone confirm that bill or resolution number? When I click the link, I get the list of supporters, but I can't seem to match it up with a bill or resolution.

almostfree
March 17, 2014, 05:16 PM
I think the referenced bill is from 2011. I could be wrong, but that's what it looked like when I did a bit of searching. These threads are from 2011 and talk about it:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=474201

http://arizonashooting.com/v3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=130577

The current HR 882 seems to be about tax accountability.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.882:

JRH6856
March 17, 2014, 05:48 PM
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have." -- unknown

DeadMoneyDrew
March 17, 2014, 06:10 PM
The League of Women Voters of Connecticut opposes this? Here is a copy of the e-mail I just sent them:

Yep. Awhile ago I had some involvement with this group regarding another matter. While researching them I was surprised to discover their anti-gun position, given that their stated reason for being is an equal voice for all.

http://www.lwv.org/content/about-league

The League of Women Voters is a citizens’ organization that has fought since 1920 to improve our government and engage all citizens in the decisions that impact their lives. We operate at national, state and local levels through more than 800 state and local Leagues, in all 50 states as well in DC, the Virgin Islands and Hong Kong.

Formed from the movement that secured the right to vote for women, the centerpiece of the League’s efforts remain to expand participation and give a voice to all Americans. We do this at all three levels of government, engaging in both broad educational efforts as well as advocacy. Our issues are grounded in our respected history of making democracy work for all citizens.

http://www.lwv.org/content/gun-control


Statement of Position on Gun Control, as Adopted by 1990 Convention and amended by the 1994 and 1998 Conventions:

The League of Women Voters of the United States believes that the proliferation of handguns and semi-automatic assault weapons in the United States is a major health and safety threat to its citizens. The League supports strong federal measures to limit the accessibility and regulate the ownership of these weapons by private citizens. The League supports regulating firearms for consumer safety.

The League supports licensing procedures for gun ownership by private citizens to include a waiting period for background checks, personal identity verification, gun safety education and annual license renewal. The license fee should be adequate to bear the cost of education and verification.

The League supports a ban on “Saturday night specials,” enforcement of strict penalties for the improper possession of and crimes committed with handguns and assault weapons, and allocation of resources to better regulate and monitor gun dealers.


Seems kinda contradictory, doesn't it?

newbuckeye
March 17, 2014, 07:42 PM
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr822-112/show

beatledog7
March 17, 2014, 08:58 PM
States do not have to recognize each other's driver and marriage licenses; but not doing so would be economically stupid, and their legislatures know it.

MedWheeler
March 18, 2014, 07:34 AM
Hexhead writes:

It should be a full faith and credit issue just like all states recognizing each other's drivers and heterosexual marriage licenses.

Should be, yes; I agree.

But, there has never been as powerful an agenda to restrict the driving privileges or right-to-marry of citizens as the one that exists to disarm them.

Devonai
March 18, 2014, 10:51 AM
I did receive a reply:

Dear Sgt. Kantrowitz:

Thank you for your query, which I am about to forward to one of our people who’s more heavily involved in gun-law matters than I am.

Speaking personally and not as a League member, I can only say that if Connecticut has determined that we don’t want most people to have the right to carry concealed weapons within the state – as I believe we have – then the federal government has no right to force us to bow to the contrary wishes of other states. If I am wrong about the impact of the full faith and credit provision of the US Constitution on this question, not doubt someone will explain that to me. I am also a little bothered by your suggestion that carrying a concealed weapon is an effective option for most women who are the victims of domestic abuse. In some cases you may be right, but I doubt that many women who have become the victims of abuse could actually bring themselves to shoot their abuser, even in situations where the law would permit it; and it’s my belief that women are far more likely to be the victims of concealed gun users than to be users. If that’s so, as I believe it is, our being primarily a women’s organization militates in favor of our working to remove as many guns as possible from our homes and streets. Let the abused women call 911, and let a well-armed and well-trained police force respond.

Jean Rabinow
Administrator, LWVCT

In my reply, I simply pointed out that it's relatively easy to get a permit in CT, that there are approximately 210,000 active pistol permits, and that I didn't think that was an indication that "we don't want most people to have permits." Since I chose to represent myself in my military capacity, my reply was short and polite and I decided not to get into the weeds with this lady.

Ryanxia
March 18, 2014, 11:18 AM
I say keep the Feds out of it as much as we can even if at the time it might help us out.

Also, the only way it could happen is if they added requirements to some states (which we don't want) or they removed requirements from others, which, as much as that should happen, is further infringing on State's Rights. Just my opinion.

Storm
March 18, 2014, 11:33 AM
I'd rather not have all of the eggs in one basket...held by Uncle Sam.

Godsgunman
March 18, 2014, 01:54 PM
I'm probably gonna fall into the "against it" crowd. In no way, shape, or form do I want Feds having their hands on it. Like heycods was saying, sounds like a nice way for the Feds to easily know who's a permit holder and most likely having a gun registry along with it. I'll stick with how it is now unless it's a Constitutional Carry deal with no need of permits.

Catalina
April 27, 2014, 08:53 PM
Let the abused women call 911, and let a well-armed and well-trained police force respond

What a simpleton.

Midwest
April 27, 2014, 08:59 PM
Let the abused women call 911, and let a well-armed and well-trained police force respond


From 2005.......
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=1&

"WASHINGTON, June 27 - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation."

.

MarkDido
April 27, 2014, 09:22 PM
Let the abused women call 911, and let a well-armed and well-trained police force respond

In time to notify the next of kin.

HexHead
April 27, 2014, 09:31 PM
I did receive a reply:



...and it’s my belief that women are far more likely to be the victims of concealed gun users than to be users. If that’s so, as I believe it is, our being primarily a women’s organization militates in favor of our working to remove as many guns as possible from our homes and streets. Let the abused women call 911, and let a well-armed and well-trained police force respond.

She and her organization are glowing examples why women never should have been trusted with the vote. The Founding Fathers had it right.

If you enjoyed reading about "Nationwide CCW law HR 882" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!