Would H.R. 822 allow carry in Ill or NYC?

[Mick45]

Would H.R. 822 allow concealed carry in area's which do not allow concealed carry such as Illinois or in New York City? or only in places which also have concealed carry. How about Vermont which I believe has no permits, but allows all elligable persons to carry concealed? (apologies if my legal facts are wrong) Thanks for your answers, Mick

 

[SMMAssociates]

Mick:

I can't say for IL, because I'm not sure if they issue any licenses, but it would cover NYC.... (If IL issues any licenses, though, that should cover you.)

States like VT seem to be included, too. Only the yuppies are objecting up there....

I doubt if Zero would sign this anyway, but who knows?

Regards,

 

[Mick45]

Thanks

Thanks for the info. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but he has suprised me before, and it is coming up on an election year. I'm hoping his self serving nature will win out over his ideology.
So, any place that issues licenses would be forced to reciprocate with my state? Even if the locality is VERY restrictive on who they issue licenses to? Bloomberg must be going nuts over the possibility.
Thanks very much for the info, Mick
Youngstown, huh. Grew up in Mt. Vernon. Tough year for us Buckeye's. Think they'll get Urban Meyer? People down here in Florida are stewing over the thought. lol

 

[Davey Wavey]

From my understanding HR 822 would not allow an out of state permit holder, or anyone for that matter, carry in IL.

Any form of meaningful carry in IL is illegal, period.

 

[hermannr]

Hej Davey! Something I have always wondered...is there an unpublished way that someone in political favor (ie large contributor) could obtain an CC permit? Special deputy? I can't believe they don't have some manner of doing that as crooked as Chicago is.

Anyone, if anyone can carry, even if it is only 1 resident in the whole state, there they would have to allow anyone with any out of state permit to carry.

I do not know how this will reference with LE being permitted. That is a type of permit to carry...

 

[Davey Wavey]

hermannr,
Certain security guard workers can carry while working. I believe aldermen in Chicago can carry once they complete a certain amount of training. I believe it's 80 hours and is on par with what training police get.

Those really are the only legal exceptions.

There is no legit discretionary system in place at all. There are NO CC permits. They don't exist here.

All we have is fanny pack carry. Unloaded in a case on your person. This is more "transporting" than carrying though.

Even that I'm not willing to try though. Many do though. Also from my understanding fanny pack carry isn't even possible in Chicago.

This state bites my crank in Spanish. Some important events are expected soon though.

 

[hermannr]

Cool, the Aldermen thing works...as the requirement is if ANYONE is allowed to carry. (like I said, the question might be, is Anyone non-LEO? or Anyone.

 

[N003k]

Hermann, I think you're mistaken, the CURRENT bill text reads "‘(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."

The state has to allow residents to obtain licenses or permits, or doesn't prohibit it in general...Having non license based systems (Cops, and that alderman example) wont meet that threshold.

 

[MrWesson]

I prefer to keep it to the states.. FL already has around 40 reciprocity states and the other 10(maybe more) will likely pass regulation to override this bill if it passes.

 

[oneounceload]

Say NO to Fed control - this is a State's rights issue

Have you EVER known the Fed gov't to do ANYTHING right, let alone when it comes to gun rules and regs?
There will be large stinks made in NYC, DC, SF, and every zone similar in restraint to make anything so watered down it won't work

NY might recognize my FL driver's license, but I still have to obey their laws when I am driving through it - I do not see this as being any different - except their gun laws are even more stringent than their driving laws

 

[hermannr]

Aldermen are not residents? Law Enforcement officers are not residents? That is why I used if "ANYONE" is allowed to carry. Unless there is a specific exemption for a specific special "class" of residents (when this comes to gun law, if there is a special "Class" it is generally restricted to LE only)

You personally can restrict who is or who is not a "resident", but what is written into the law is what counts.

As you quoted "‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms" It does not say "all" residents, it just says "residents". This could very easily be understood to mean ANYONE who resides in the state, unless the word "resident" is retricted within the definitions.


So goes my reasoning. You do realize opinions are like behinds, everyone has one, and they all stink. If passed, we will read the definitions, take our chances and let the courts define who is correct.

 

[Dnaltrop]

State right or not, Other citizens of the US should have the right to carry concealed in Oregon if they are permitted to in their own state.

A good number of other states have no problem with the Oregon CHL. We recognize NO other state's card, and require you to get an Oregon specific card to do so.

At least we seem to be issuing them in a timely fashion.

Driving is not a right, but we have no problem with out of state drivers. Why should a right ensconced in the very foundation of our nation be different?

I have no problem researching in advance the laws of the states that I might visit, and following their local ordinances regarding how, and where I may CCW, But I'm one of those odd people who actively takes responsibility for my actions

Further thought. It occurs to me that if any individual jurisdiction tries to weasel out of a successful Reciprocity act, they then create a class of citizen, that being ANY legal concealed weapon holder in just about any state short of Illinois, would then have at least legal standing to file against any such attempt as it would directly affect them, not just citizens of that state particularly.

any REAL Legal scholars see any merit in the ability to file Amicus curiae(and similar ilk) in such a way?

 

[Birch Knoll]

Aldermen are not residents? Law Enforcement officers are not residents? That is why I used if "ANYONE" is allowed to carry. Unless there is a specific exemption for a specific special "class" of residents (when this comes to gun law, if there is a special "Class" it is generally restricted to LE only)

Sorry, that won't fly. Chicago aldermen may carry a weapon only because Illinois law classifies them as "peace officers", and peace officers are exempted from the blanket prohibition on carrying firearms. Illinois issues no licenses ro permits to carry, so HR 822 would not come into play in that State.

 

[brickeyee]

Driving is not a right, but we have no problem with out of state drivers.

The states agree among themselves to honor driver's licenses.

It is not rammed down everyone's throat by Congress.

 

[Dnaltrop]

I don't consider the Constitution to have been rammed down my throat...

 

[P.O.2010]

NY might recognize my FL driver's license, but I still have to obey their laws when I am driving through it - I do not see this as being any different - except their gun laws are even more stringent than their driving laws

New York gun laws concerning how and where you can carry are actually some of the loosest in the nation. The trick is getting an unrestricted pistol license in the first place. If you can manage that, the only places you cannot carry are in a confinement facility (prison, jail, psychiatric), a courthouse or a school (unless you have written permission from the administrator). You are legally allowed to carry a firearm while intoxicated in New York, you can carry in a bar in New York, at public gatherings, in houses of worship etc. The reason there are almost no restrictions is because getting an unrestricted license is so difficult (at least downstate, upstate is much more reasonable and there are actually shall issue counties). Unrestricted pistol licenses are mainly reserved for the super wealthy, retired cops and businessmen/doctors who transport large amounts of cash or narcotics. Because right to carry is considered a privilege of the elites those same elites don't want to water down the permits and thus restrict what they themselves can and cannot do when carrying.

 

[N003k]

Hermann, I wasnt sure about the aldermen point, but ttolhurst cleared that up. Given that fact, NO they most definitely do NOT qualify. The bill states that the state needs to either A. Issue permits/licenses to carry
or B. Flat out not prohibit it.

Since Illinois doesn't issue licenses or permits to carry (I highly doubt ANY court will rule that a badge counts as either), and does prohibit carrying, it wont allow carrying there. If you or anyone else wants to be arrested in Illinois after getting caught carrying and try to claim that this law (obviously assuming its passed and becomes law and is in effect at the time) protects them, you have fun trying to use that as a defense. What you claim goes against the intent, spirit, and wording of the bill in its current state...and it's bad form to tell people a law would protect them where it wont.

 

[hermannr]

As I said earlier, it will all depend on what the term "resident" is defined as. If it undefined, or defined as a person who resides in the state (the normal definition) just because local LE could carry would be enough even in DC.

If it ends up with a restricted definition (thereby creating an elite class of "residents") then we will see. Actually, the LEOSA could be challanged under the "equal protection under the law" clause. If a national reciprosity law were passed that had an "elite class" included in it, it could be challanged the same way.

Again, it doesn't matter much until a final bill is passed and signed into law.

 

[Dave Workman]

Funny you guys should bring this up.

The New York AG doesn't trust you. He says so plainly in his plea to the US Senate to derail this legislation.

We are all a bunch of public threats, don'tcha know?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-schnederman-concealed-weapons_n_1021800.html


Full disclosure: I'll be writing a column about this and will post a link when I'm finished.

AS PROMISED:

NY Atty General blasts, misrepresents CCW Reciprocity bill

New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has declared war on national concealed carry reciprocity in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, urging them to derail the measure.


http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...ral-blasts-misrepresents-ccw-reciprocity-bill

 

[paininneck]

Concealed carry reciprocity - the last time there was a vote on this topic it lost by one vote. The Tihart amendment lost inthe senate by one vote and was not brought up again.

As far as driver's licenses are concerned - road tax money from the DOT is used as a blackmail tool to push federal issues - e.g. control over people... If your state doesn't meet the DOT rules they don't get the money... so there are "state compacts" to recognize other states "issues"... an example - if you gave up your right to drive in vermont due to a clerical error 25 years ago and it gets in the federal computer system, you can not get your drivers license renewed in NM; even though you have been licensed to drive there for over 20 years... It is part of an effort to computerize records all over the country... I bet there will be a move for a "registration database" formed to list all states concealed carry license/permit holders if the repriciprocity bill passes under the pretext that there must be a database --- for those who don't know already - if there isn't a database then it can't be declared a victory by any government ... Every government agency seems to thrive on new databases....

 

[sig220mw]

I talked to a representative from the NRA ILA 2 days ago about HR 822.
They support it.

Illinois has no concealed permit system so they would not participate unless they started issuing permits.

The thing about it is that any state having a permit system would have to recognize out of state permit holders. This would bring up a situation in which the states that have very prohibitive qualifications would have to allow people to carry in their state that could not carry if they were citizens of that state. There could be instances where those citizens would go out of state to get the permit in order to carry in their own.

I was against the bill until I talked to my state representative's office and the NRA ILA. The NRA will definitely watch the bill as it progresses and pull support if it gets screwed up. They also said that this is the best chance we have ever had in that this is the farthest anyone has ever gotten with something like this.