The amount of unfounded paranoia over this bill is astounding...
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
This law is the FOPA interstate protection. This is what keeps you from getting convicted of a violation of NYS law if you have a unloaded handgun in your trunk and traversing through New York State.
Let's take a look at this provision:
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued by a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device) may carry in another State a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).
Both of them have notwithstanding clauses. The point of a notwithstanding clause is to allow you to do something that is within the purview of the higher law in a specific manner without fearing local prosecution.
If you carry outside of that protection, you lose that protection entirely and could be subject to state law violations.
It's shocking to me how many people haven't A) Read the actual bill. B) Don't understand what the term "notwithstanding" means. I had a packing.org member state that "this bill would allow a judge to declare open carry illegal nationwide". Unbelievable and a leap, yet this is the level of fear and loathing this bill has caused, for absolutely no reason, other than tinfoil hat paranoia that this bill will "Allow the government to regulate concealed carry and ban it".
I posted this over at Packing.org:
Ok, trailboss, have you even read the bill?
The "restrictions" put in it are not "restrictions" per se. The bill is a "notwithstanding state laws" bill, similar to FOPA. With FOPA, you are protected from being convicted of a crime in New York by transporting your firearm across that state, despite it being illegal to possess said firearms without registration (which is not offered to non-NY residents)
The Stearn-Boucher/Thune bill would extend this "notwithstanding state laws" further in scope to cover concealed carry of firearms if you have a license from any state.
The current situation with state reciprocity agreements will still continue to exist, and in fact will continue to be necessary since there are several "licensed general carry" states that illegalize open or concealed carry unless you have a license. That is my only issue or problem with this bill.
For example, my CPL from Washington is not considered valid in Minnesota for anything. Let's assume for a minute that this is the only license I have, and this bill passes. I would be able to carry concealed in that state, but not openly or I could get charged with a violation of Minnesota's pistol carry law, because I lose the reciprocity protection by openly carrying a handgun in a holster on my hip. In order to do so, I have to either A) Apply for and get a non-resident Minnesota license so I can carry openly or B) Get a license from a state that they have a reciprocity agreement with, such as the state of Utah (I still need to get that one), so that I can carry openly.
As far as the prohibited places in the "states that don't issue licenses" portion, or even the state license prohibited places, federally nothing can happen to you. There is no violation of FEDERAL law here, you merely lose that "notwithstanding" protection from the state laws.
Any arguments against this bill saying that it's "unconstitutional" and all this other crap, should also start demanding the repeal of interstate FOPA protections. They are passed for the same reasons, does the same thing, so I don't see any of you, especially you, Trailboss, calling for the FOPA interstate protection's repeal. Please, allow New York to arrest people just tranversing their state with a handgun in their trunk, just like they did before 1986.
Every argument I've seen is bordering on tinfoil hat paranoia, that this bill will give some sort of "opening" or "camels nose under the tent" to further bans on concealed carry nationwide or "fedgov setting the standards". Considering that they already ban carry in Federal Courthouses, National Parks Service Land, and other various places, you certainly can see that they don't view any bills like this to say "well, now we can REALLY turn up the heat and get everything we want! Mwua ha ha".
One more argument to throw out here:
"Well if this bill passes, New York, California, and New Jersey will just ban carry on all public property, and then pop out of state residents that way"
Any such ban will have to affect in state residents as well as out of state residents just as much. I don't see lucky folk who managed to score a full license in NYC, NJ, or urban California, considering how much in campaign contributions and networking they had to do to be able to get their license, to all of the sudden allow their license to be completely worthless. They will fight for their licenses, and state legislators will face a choice: continue doing what they're doing and have the power brokers try to boot them out something fierce, or sit down and shut up.
In fact, I see this bill as a way to dislodge the "tough nut to crack" states on CCW, especially with the language as currently written where it doesn't seem to have a home state requirement.
Illinois, Wisconsin, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, and New Jersey, if this bill passes, will have a tough choice to make. If they refuse to go shall-issue, they will have tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of people, applying for carry licenses out of state. If they want control over the situation to where they can figure out who is carrying, they have to pass shall-issue or lose money and information to the states that are willing to market their non-resident licenses, namely Florida and Utah.
If the people who keep bashing this bill could actually read and understand the wording of the bill, the history of both the bill AND the FOPA interstate protection, maybe they'd do an about face.
Nah, it's easier to throw water on a good idea and use a flamethrower on the conversation.
