I wrote GOA concerning another national CCW proposal and received this response:
We are aware of this bill. However, we prefer Hostettler's Bill, H.R.
1243. This bill would establish a national right to concealed carry for
(1) persons with concealed carry licenses, and (2) persons from states
like Vermont and Alaska which allow concealed carry without licenses.
We believe in limited government -- specifically, that the federal
government should ONLY do those things that are enumerated in the
Constitution.
It is for this reason that GOA supports the Hostettler legislation.
Unlike the many things that Congress usually gets involved in, the
Hostettler bill is actually one of the few bills that has constitutional
authority. Essentially, the Hostettler bill grants citizens the “full
faith and credit” protection that is guaranteed in Article IV. Section 1
of this article says:
“Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts,
Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress
may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records,
and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”
Notice that this constitutional provision expressly authorizes the
Congress to pass legislation forcing each state to recognize the “public
Acts” of other states.
Thus, if states are not willing to recognize another state's acts, the
Congress has the authority to pass laws to require recognition of
another states measures.
For example, if certain states refused to honor the drivers’ or marriage
licenses of other states, Congress could pass legislation (under Article
IV) to require every state to honor these licenses. Likewise, the
Congress should pass H.R. 1243 to require states to recognize the
concealed carry licenses of citizens in other states, thus protecting
their Second Amendment rights.
The good news is that this bill does NOT establish national standards
for concealed carry, nor does it provide for a national carry permit.
In fact, the Hostettler bill will do nothing to change what the states
ALREADY do in terms of allowing or denying their citizens their right to
carry firearms. This bill simply allows citizens who are able to carry
in their home state, to also carry in every other state.
This means that if Uncle Sam “takes back” what they had previously
“given,” the worst that can happen is that citizens can still carry in
their home state -- or in any other state that has established
reciprocity with their home state.
At the federal level, the Hostettler bill is an intermediate objective
to a larger goal, and it has a couple of advantages over other bills
which are similar in scope:
-Unlike other “reciprocity” legislation, it does allow
Vermont and Alaska citizens to carry anywhere in the
Country -- without first getting a permit!
-It does set the stage for a situation where
Vermonters visiting New York City are allowed to
carry firearms to defend themselves -- while New
York’s own residents are prohibited from doing so.
We believe this contrast would soon cause a “rebellion” in repressive
states like New York -- and would reassert the Second Amendment in ways
which civil disobedience alone would not.
We prefer Hostettler's H.R. 1243.
Robert E. Duggar
Public Liaison
We are aware of this bill. However, we prefer Hostettler's Bill, H.R.
1243. This bill would establish a national right to concealed carry for
(1) persons with concealed carry licenses, and (2) persons from states
like Vermont and Alaska which allow concealed carry without licenses.
We believe in limited government -- specifically, that the federal
government should ONLY do those things that are enumerated in the
Constitution.
It is for this reason that GOA supports the Hostettler legislation.
Unlike the many things that Congress usually gets involved in, the
Hostettler bill is actually one of the few bills that has constitutional
authority. Essentially, the Hostettler bill grants citizens the “full
faith and credit” protection that is guaranteed in Article IV. Section 1
of this article says:
“Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts,
Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress
may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records,
and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”
Notice that this constitutional provision expressly authorizes the
Congress to pass legislation forcing each state to recognize the “public
Acts” of other states.
Thus, if states are not willing to recognize another state's acts, the
Congress has the authority to pass laws to require recognition of
another states measures.
For example, if certain states refused to honor the drivers’ or marriage
licenses of other states, Congress could pass legislation (under Article
IV) to require every state to honor these licenses. Likewise, the
Congress should pass H.R. 1243 to require states to recognize the
concealed carry licenses of citizens in other states, thus protecting
their Second Amendment rights.
The good news is that this bill does NOT establish national standards
for concealed carry, nor does it provide for a national carry permit.
In fact, the Hostettler bill will do nothing to change what the states
ALREADY do in terms of allowing or denying their citizens their right to
carry firearms. This bill simply allows citizens who are able to carry
in their home state, to also carry in every other state.
This means that if Uncle Sam “takes back” what they had previously
“given,” the worst that can happen is that citizens can still carry in
their home state -- or in any other state that has established
reciprocity with their home state.
At the federal level, the Hostettler bill is an intermediate objective
to a larger goal, and it has a couple of advantages over other bills
which are similar in scope:
-Unlike other “reciprocity” legislation, it does allow
Vermont and Alaska citizens to carry anywhere in the
Country -- without first getting a permit!
-It does set the stage for a situation where
Vermonters visiting New York City are allowed to
carry firearms to defend themselves -- while New
York’s own residents are prohibited from doing so.
We believe this contrast would soon cause a “rebellion” in repressive
states like New York -- and would reassert the Second Amendment in ways
which civil disobedience alone would not.
We prefer Hostettler's H.R. 1243.
Robert E. Duggar
Public Liaison
