Senate fails to pass concealed carry amendment

I live in Calif and what I thought was a very weird thing happened once. Real weird for CA.

I was in my 4-wheeler and got pulled over by LEO. LEO found out I was carrying because I was real dumb. He looked at my CDL and asked if I was under dispatch. I replied, No - why? It turns out that for CDL holders, while under dispatch, it is completely legal to carry. No permit necessary. I believe, if I remember correctly, that this is true of almost all states (the rules of your company notwithstanding).

Have a chat with your favorite legal shyster before actually using the info in this post - and use it, even then, at your own risk.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

 

I was just reading The Second Amendment and it specifically says, 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed'. To me it means what it says: "shall not be infringed." However, since I am not a constitutional lawyer I turned to The NRA to see what they think. And listed below is what the NRA says:

The Facts About H.R. 822, the "National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act"

Unfortunately, but predictably, H.R. 822 continues to be attacked by anti-gun organizations and the media. Regrettably, even some so-called "pro-gun" organizations have joined with the anti-gun Brady Campaign and Michael Bloomberg's (Gollum-esque douche bag) Mayors Against Illegal Guns to try to defeat this pro-gun bill.

This critically important legislation, introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and cosponsored by more than 240 of their colleagues, would enable millions of permit holders to exercise their right to self-defense while traveling outside their home states.

There is currently only one remaining state (Illinois) that has no legal way for individuals to carry concealed firearms for self-defense. Forty states have permit systems that make it possible for any law-abiding person to obtain a permit, while most of the others have discretionary permit systems. (Vermont has never required a permit.)

H.R. 822 would mark a major step forward for gun owners' rights by significantly expanding where permits are recognized. Dozens of states have passed Right-to-Carry laws over the past 25 years, because the right to self-defense does not end when one leaves home. However, interstate recognition of permits is not uniform and creates great confusion and potential problems for travelers. While many states have broad reciprocity, others have very restrictive reciprocity laws, and a few deny recognition completely.

H.R. 822 would solve this problem by requiring that lawfully issued carry permits be recognized in all states with some form of a permit system, while protecting the ability of the various states to determine the areas where carrying is prohibited within their boundaries.

Opponents of the legislation claim that it tramples on "states rights." States, however, don't have rights, they have powers. And while many anti-gun lawmakers who've long pushed national gun bans, national bans on private gun sales, national waiting periods and other federal restrictions have suddenly become born-again advocates of "states' rights" in opposing this bill, several provisions in the U.S. Constitution give Congress the authority to enact interstate carry. Congress also has the power to protect the rights of citizens, nationwide, under the 14th Amendment (please see related article from last week's Grassroots Alert).

Next, despite what a few so-called "pro-gun" activists have argued, this bill would not create a federal licensing or registration system, nor would it establish a minimum federal standard for carry permits. Rather, it would require the states to recognize each others' carry permits, just as they recognize driver's licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards. Unfortunately, these self-proclaimed "gun rights" supporters, who have no active lobbying presence in any legislature, have an agenda that has very little to do with promoting the interests of gun owners. Here are the FACTS about a few of their claims:

Myth: H.R. 822 would involve the federal bureaucracy in setting standards for carry permits, resulting in "need" requirements, higher fees, waiting periods, national gun owner registration, or worse.

FACT: H.R. 822 doesn't require-or even authorize-any such action by any federal agency. In fact, since it would amend the Gun Control Act, it would fall under a limitation within that law that authorizes "only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out" the GCA's provisions. No federal rules or regulations would be needed to implement H.R. 822, which simply overrides certain state laws.

Myth: H.R. 822 would destroy permitless carry systems such as those in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

FACT: H.R. 822 would have absolutely no effect on how the permitless carry states' laws work within those states. For residents of Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming, where permits are not required but remain available under state law, H.R. 822 would make those permits valid in all states that issue permits to their own residents. Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.

Myth: If H.R. 822 moved through the legislative process, it would be subject to anti-gun amendments.

TRUTH: By this logic, neither NRA, nor any other pro-gun group, should ever promote any pro-gun reform legislation. But inaction isn't an option for those of us who want to make positive changes for gun owners. Instead, we know that by careful vote counting and strategic use of legislative procedure, anti-gun amendments can be avoided or defeated.

H.R. 822 is a good bill for gun owners. Don't listen to false or misleading accusations; instead, read the bill and our fact sheet explaining its provisions. Then, please contact your member of Congress and urge him or her to support the earliest possible consideration of H.R. 822 this year.

After reading The NRA's position my understanding is that my right as a law abiding citizen to self-defense does not end when I leave home. Especially if I have to venture into a thug infested shat hole in the middle of the night to feed my family like (insert any New Jersey City here). Perfectly clear why the bill should be voted into law.

(Mayor Bloomberg dosen't care at all about CCW issues because he has armed NYPD officers by his side 24/7).

Overall I would prefer open carry across the board but that won't happen so the next best thing would be for the "National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act" to pass so that I can have 10+1 of 45 ACP security where ever I go.

 

The bill, H.R. 822, is intended to allow persons who hold a concealed carry permit from one state to also carry anywhere in the country, with the exception of Illinois and Washington, D.C.

Though the bill passed by a wide margin, it was not without controversy on the pro-gun side of the debate.# In previous alerts, GOA has pointed out several flaws in the legislation.

* It forces Vermont residents (who do not need a permit to carry) to either obtain an out-of-state permit or to push their state to pass a more restrictive concealed carry law than it now enjoys;

* By requiring permits for reciprocity, the bill undermines efforts at the state level to pass constitutional carry (i.e., Vermont-style carry);

* In restrictive “may issue” states, the bill allows for non-residents to carry firearms in the state while most residents would still be prohibited, and;

* The bill is yet another example of Congress distorting of the Constitution’s Commerce Clause.

Representative Justin Amash (R-MI), who voted against the bill, addressed this last point in a statement, calling H.R. 822 “an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing.”

Another freshman Representative, Rob Woodall (R-GA), noted that the right to carry a concealed firearm is already protected by the Second Amendment.

“If the Second Amendment protects my rights to carry my concealed weapon from state to state to state, I don’t need another federal law,” Rep. Woodall said.# He went on to remind his colleagues of the original intent of the right to keep and bear arms.

“I don’t believe the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights to allow me to shoot targets [or] hunt for deer and turkey.# I think the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights so that I could defend my freedom against an overbearing federal government.”

Anti-gun Amendment Passes

One extremely troubling amendment to the bill was slipped in on a voice vote.# Sponsored by Republican David Reichert (“C” rated by GOA), the amendment instructs the Government Accounting Office to:

“Conduct a study of the ability of State and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of licenses or permits, issued by other States, to carry a concealed firearm.”

Nowhere in the Constitution is there even a hint of authority for the federal government to “study” the exercising of a right.# Even worse, you can be sure that anti-gunners will use any excuse, including this study, to push for some type of national carry license.#

The bill now heads to the Senate, where GOA is already working with key Senators to address ALL of the problems with the bill.# GOA is also working with Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) on legislation, H.R. 2900, that takes a constitutional approach to concealed carry recognition.

You can click below to send you own Representative a message urging him or her to become a cosponsor of H.R. 2900.

http://gunowners.org/a111711.htm

 

It does make it easier. No more of that crap NJ will do to you or NY and some of the other anti anything states or cities. Lets just hope that some idiots get in a stupid CB Radio Rambo fight and shoots someone like the moron last week at the rest area. Get the stupid out of morons like them before they screw it up for the nation!

 

So let me get this straight....you CAN carry if you have a Conceal license from your state, in all states cept IL and Vermont???
Even as a trucker??

 

Not at this time. IF this bill passes the senate and gets singed in to law you will be able to carry in all states except IL and DC. Right now, the laws of the state you are traveling in prevail.

 

This is so wrong it's not even funny. Please don't spread lies like this, it could get someone in trouble.

In the sate of Ca: You must have a Permit/License to carry a loaded handgun in any vehicle. The transportation or carrying of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person by any citizen of the United States over the age of 18 years who resides or is temporarily within this state, and is not within the excepted classes prescribed by Penal Code Sections 12021 or 12021.1 or Welfare and Institutions Code sections 8100 & 8103, provided that the following applies:1. the firearm is within a motor vehicle and it is locked in the vehicle's trunk or in a locked container in the vehicle other than the utility or glove compartment,
2. and when the firearm is carried by the person to or from any motor vehicle for any lawful purpose, the firearm must be contained in a locked container while being physically carried. (Penal Code § 12026.1.)

 

Thanks. I appreciate it.

When will this get signed in....if it does?

 

In my mind, I don't frame this as a rep vs dem issue...to me it's just common sense...

And any legistlature with common sense should vote on it...

I personally think it's a good law to pass...and as I stated in my thread, my only question is 'what took them so long?'....

I'll be honest with you...I don't fear people with concield (or however it's spelled) weapons permit...

Cause I know most, all, have gone vigorous back ground checks, many are intructors, cops, people you would excpect to be responsible...

I really don't fear those types of people, at least not in that arena...

Some may be a bit wound up...but I doubt their looking to rob a bank or commit any other type of crime...

More than likely they have their family riding right there with them while going on vacation...



And dad just wants a little extra protection in case they get lost in the woods or something...



I can understand Dads concern...
And it only makes sense to allow responsible adults to carry across lines...

To have conceiled carry permits recognized nationally...

99% of the time I'm sure they'll never have to use it...
And during the 1% that they might, I'm sure they'll excercise every other option first...

In this day and age of law suites, no ones in a hurry to complicate their lives unessisarily...

Anyhow...I do think it's a good idea for the safe and responsible...

 

Like about 40 minutes ago...gun shots...

Do people know how nerve racking that is?? Or I should say Senators?

To have unlicenced emotionally irresponsible people prowling the streets, the hoods at night shooting off rounds??

Less than 400 ft from where you stay?....every night it never fails...

I wish I could invite one of these legistlatures to come spend the night at my house one night (but I only have one bed, you will have to stay on the couch)

Just stay where I say...no bodyguards, no armor...just a regular human...a regular law abiding human...

Let him see shady ghoulish souls, without purpose or aim in life drifting up and down these streets waiting for an opportunity to pounce or prey on the weak...

Then trying to relax in your home and suddenly Bang bang bang!!

And in the hood, if someone gets shot, they don't even call the cops...

Sometimes it's firecrackers, other times it's guns...

And as they clean out the downtown areas, revive it for those who want to prosper...all those residents are being scooted further and further out this way, and bringing their habits with them...

they hardly respect their life so their not going to respect yours...

You never want to get into a conflict with one...cause all they know it to come back with a g......

So your like a prisoner...
It's one thing if you don't live in it...and just passing through...but when you live in it...there really is no place to hide...

Anyways...i say all this cause in light of hearing gun shots almost nightly here...by people who have no business owning one...

All the emphasis seems to be on cracking down on those who do carry responsibly...

This is reality...I'm not motivated by left or right...I write this cause it's what I see, what i deal with...

I'm not from the 'hood'...everyone who follows me knows I'm from rural Eastern, WA state...



Ok, as a kid growing up...this was my playground...open sky's...rolling hills and prairies, harvest season, lentals, wheat, oak....

No one messed with no one...I was wonderful...and I miss it...terribly...

But fast forward...and now I'm here, in the urban southland...totally different...

So no, I did not grow up around generational felons, and homeless, and drug addicts, and violent offenders standing around every corner store at night...

So it's as un nerving to me as it would be to a Senator...the only difference is I can't leave right now...

So when they pass these laws restricting responsible people from carrying...I wish I could bring them to my place, or any number of places around the country where they might think differently after they leave...

You loose touch with reality, or other peoples reality, when your always sorounded by a staff and federal body guards...

Most of us don't have that luxury...

But I'm telling you Senators, you should want more responsible people carrying...
Cause right now as it stands, you have plenty of unlicienced irresponsible ones carrying irregardless of what laws you pass...

Either that or send some of them bodyguards down this way...and assign one body guard per household...lthen maybe I'd feel safer sleeping at night...