H.r. 822

[bushmaster1313]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.822:

Only problem is that under this statute everyone other than New Jersey Residents could legally carry in the state of New Jersey

“(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that—

“(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.

In other words, a non-New Jersey resident can get a Florida concealed carry permit, and unlike a New Jersey resident, can carry in the state of New Jersey.

 

[tyeo098]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7583959&postcount=73

Already under discussion, although i referenced IL, and now I know NJ was the other!

 

[bushmaster1313]

NJ is not like IL
Permits are allowed but unobtainable.
Thus, non residents could carry in NJ but NJ residents could not!

 

[ATBackPackin]

The hearing before the U.S. House subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, regarding H.R. 822, which would set up a national system of interstate reciprocity for concealed handgun carry permits. The video of the subcommittee hearing is an hour and 45 minutes.

http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/wmedia/judiciary/crime/crime09132011.wvx

WARNING: You will want to throw your monitor out the window after hearing the great Police Commissioner of Philadelphia speak.

Shawn

 

[thom1960]

Seems to be a dead link.

 

[ATBackPackin]

There I think I fixed it. Sorry bout that.

 

[JimPage]

At first I thought 822 was a good idea, but after thinking a day or so, I am now opposed to the bill. My fear is that once the Feds are involved, they will start making requirements for the state. Soon you will have the Feds controlling CCW nationwide. That can only lead to a complete prohibition!

 

[Dster007]

I'm sure that the bill as presently written would authorize a resident of a a State like mine (CA )to carry in his State of residence with an out of State permit, in other words it would loophole NJ residents and hopefully myself I'm hoping! I don't remember every seeing that underlined clause that says "other than the State of residence of the person" before although the proposed law may have been amended since the last time I saw it. I will have to double check on it. If it has been changed and or the final version says that it would be a huge disappointment since I was hoping this law would pass because it's very difficult to get permission (ironically) to exercise your right to "keep" protection on you in this State.

 

[Dster007]

I'm sure that the bill as presently written would authorize a resident of a a State like mine (CA) to carry in his State of residence with an out of State permit, in other words it would loophole NJ residents and hopefully myself I'm hoping! I don't remember every seeing that underlined clause that says "other than the State of residence of the person" before although the proposed law may have been amended since the last time I saw it. I will have to double check on it. If it has been changed and or the final version says that it would be a huge disappointment since I was hoping this law would pass because it's very difficult to get permission (ironically) to exercise your right to "keep" protection on you in this State.

 

[MAKster]

The bill as written would not allow a person who does not have a permit from his state of residence to get a permit from another state in order to carry in his home state. So, a Maryland resident could not get a Florida permit and then carry in Maryland. But an out of state person with a Florida permit could carry in Maryland. That provision is supported by the states rights folks.

 

[hermannr]

As I read it, you would obtain a permit from your state, and the other states would have to recognize it, but under their rules. The same as a person's drivers license is recognized by other states, but you still have to abide by the laws of the state you are in. Like, loaded OC is totally legal in WA, but not in NY, TX, OK, FL...etc, even wiith a permit. So even though I can OC in WA, and I have a WA permit, I would not be able to OC in say TX. However, someone from TX could come to WA and OC all day. (even like they can do now)

NY, NYC, NJ and CA would have to recognoze my WA permit at the highest possible level, becasue WA does not have "restricted" licenses. There would be no more "collecting" other states licenses, you would only have/need one from your home state.

The real question is IL. Does IL have any provision for anyone to carry? If there is absolutely no way to carry, for anyone, then they would not have to recognize another states permit. I'm not sure how that will end up.

This is not a Feds getting into the right to carry, this is the feds saying, you need to recognize the license of another state...within their juristiction per Article IV section 1 of the constitution..the full faith and credit clause.

 

[livewire98801]

As I read it, you would obtain a permit from your state, and the other states would have to recognize it, but under their rules. The same as a person's drivers license is recognized by other states, but you still have to abide by the laws of the state you are in. Like, loaded OC is totally legal in WA, but not in NY, TX, OK, FL...etc, even wiith a permit. So even though I can OC in WA, and I have a WA permit, I would not be able to OC in say TX. However, someone from TX could come to WA and OC all day. (even like they can do now)

NY, NYC, NJ and CA would have to recognoze my WA permit at the highest possible level, becasue WA does not have "restricted" licenses. There would be no more "collecting" other states licenses, you would only have/need one from your home state.

The real question is IL. Does IL have any provision for anyone to carry? If there is absolutely no way to carry, for anyone, then they would not have to recognize another states permit. I'm not sure how that will end up.

This is not a Feds getting into the right to carry, this is the feds saying, you need to recognize the license of another state...within their juristiction per Article IV section 1 of the constitution..the full faith and credit clause.

Illinois does not have any carry provisions. Therefore, we would not be able to carry in IL. AFAIK, the only people that can carry besides on-duty LEOs in IL are licensed private security.

If IL ever passes a CCW system, then this law would apply. Until then, the answer is 'no'.

 

[Cap'n Jack Burntbeard]

As it stands, the way this law is worded, a Vermonter like me could carry in all 50 states with just proof of residency.
All others be damned, I think it's freakin' awesome for Vermonters.

 

[livewire98801]

As it stands, the way this law is worded, a Vermonter like me could carry in all 50 states with just proof of residency.
All others be damned, I think it's freakin' awesome for Vermonters.

49... Illinois doesn't issue CCW permits.

And Vermont might get the short end of the stick in this deal... there would have to be a specific mention of states that allow permitless carry without offering a permit. AFAIK, you're in the only state that doesn't requite permits but also doesn't issue them for reciprocity purposes.

 

[LemmyCaution]

As it stands, the way this law is worded, a Vermonter like me could carry in all 50 states with just proof of residency.
All others be damned, I think it's freakin' awesome for Vermonters.

And there's the rub. If you think Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein are going to allow that to happen, you are insane.

But the way they will 'fix' it will really not make you happy. Once HR822 has passed, congress will 'realize' their mistake and introduce legislation to standardize issuance criteria for all states, just like they do with driver's licenses.

I'm guessing that the criteria will look more like New York's than Vermont's.

Think it can't happen? What about the Real ID Act?

 

[cambeul41]

If I were a resident of a highly restrictive state such as Hawaii or New Jersey, I would favor HR 822 because it would put enormous pressure on my state to loosen the CCW laws. I would expect it to affect the situation in Illinois as well.

I am not a resident of such a state, and I do not trust the government not to start adding restrictions and requirements.

There should be a way to write into the law a prohibition of their doing so. There should at least be a way to make their doing so more difficult.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

I am not a resident of such a state, and I do not trust the government not to start adding restrictions and requirements.

There should be a way to write into the law a prohibition of their doing so. There should at least be a way to make their doing so more difficult.

There is. It's called the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America. None of these CCW and CHL laws should exist to begin with, because none of the laws prohibiting the keeping and bearing of arms in the first place - "necessitating" the creation of further laws creating exceptions to those prohibitions if you get a permit or license - should exist to begin with.

Woody

 

[lawson4]

Don't forget that when the feds wanted all of the states to go to the 55 mph speed limit, it withheld highway money from those that didn't. The driver's licenses were still valid in all states, but the money stopped flowing.
Why would we think that they (the feds) wouldn't try to impose their will through some kind of action like that?

lawson4

 

[tyeo098]

Don't forget that when the feds wanted all of the states to go to the 55 mph speed limit, it withheld highway money from those that didn't. The driver's licenses were still valid in all states, but the money stopped flowing.
Why would we think that they (the feds) wouldn't try to impose their will through some kind of action like that?

lawson4

That was back in the '70s during the first gas crisis.

It wasn't to spite car owners.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

That was back in the '70s during the first gas crisis.

It wasn't to spite car owners.

That is just one example of the Feral(Federal) Government using such tactics. The Ferals take the money from individuals and corporations, then will dole it out back to the states - but with strings attached. If a state wants to get some of its money back, it will have to agree to implement one thing or another - of which the 55 MPH speed limit was one such example. Even if a state doesn't take the money and implement whatever program the Ferals want, the state is still out the money paid in taxes. That is the big incentive for the several states to agree to implement whatever program the Ferals want - so they can receive some of their money back instead of the Ferals spending the money in states with a population more willing to vote for whatever party in power that is doling out the money.

So, it isn't about spite just as you said. It's about power and the retention of power, or the retention of usurped power over We the People.

Woody

 

[Neverwinter]

This is the poster case of the federal government overstepping the bounds defined for it in the Constitution by levying taxes and distributing them to states for the common good.

Actions like mandating minimum license requirements by our elected officials would not be possible if they did not have the power usurped from We the People.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Actions like mandating minimum license requirements by our elected officials would not be possible if they did not have the power usurped from We the People.

Yup. Short, sweet, and right on!

Woody