dustycorgill
Well-Known
this
Cornyn introduces Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014
- Thread starter Moonpie
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
this
While I find Stockmans picture of lubing an AK with liberal tears and his obama barf bags funny, I dont know how I feel about geyting behind someone like that. I need to look at his voting record more closely. I doubt he could be worse than Cornyn.
The Feds would not be in charge of carry permits and this has nothing to do with a nationally regulated carry permit. Do not be confused about the issue.
"The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014 would treat state-issued concealed-carry permits like drivers’ licenses, allowing law-abiding citizens with concealed carry privileges to concealed-carry in any other states that also permit it by law."
Permits will continue to be regulated/issued by the states like they already are. They would just allow carry in states that don't currently recognize your state.
The way I'm reading it would be for example, WA does not recognize TX CHL because TX allows under 21-yrs-old (IOW 18yos) honorably discharged veterans to have license. In WA a permit holder must be 21. Apply the bill and it would mean a TxCHL would be valid in WA because WA is a state that permits ccw.
The conflict I see, while I believe there should be no permit, bought & paid for, required to ccw, a bill saying a state's requirements mean nothing severely tramples on state's authority. States base reciprocity on training, application standards and minimum requirements. The example I used up there with WA & TX, on face value the bill tells WA that their minimum age req. means nothing. So, there's the conflict, do you let <21yo CHLer carry in WA? Or do you only let >21yo carry in WA? And what govt makes and holds the law for that? Would WA have to amend their state law to comply? Why should the Fed bill force WA to change their state law? Do you see where I'm coming from on this?
"The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2014 would treat state-issued concealed-carry permits like drivers’ licenses, allowing law-abiding citizens with concealed carry privileges to concealed-carry in any other states that also permit it by law."
Permits will continue to be regulated/issued by the states like they already are. They would just allow carry in states that don't currently recognize your state.
The way I'm reading it would be for example, WA does not recognize TX CHL because TX allows under 21-yrs-old (IOW 18yos) honorably discharged veterans to have license. In WA a permit holder must be 21. Apply the bill and it would mean a TxCHL would be valid in WA because WA is a state that permits ccw.
The conflict I see, while I believe there should be no permit, bought & paid for, required to ccw, a bill saying a state's requirements mean nothing severely tramples on state's authority. States base reciprocity on training, application standards and minimum requirements. The example I used up there with WA & TX, on face value the bill tells WA that their minimum age req. means nothing. So, there's the conflict, do you let <21yo CHLer carry in WA? Or do you only let >21yo carry in WA? And what govt makes and holds the law for that? Would WA have to amend their state law to comply? Why should the Fed bill force WA to change their state law? Do you see where I'm coming from on this?
Mexican_Hippie
TGT Addict
The way to fix this is for each state to repeal the ridiculous laws requiring permission/licensing to carry.
This is the goal I want to arrive at. ETA: It'd be great if we were already there.
ETA: Rereading my post up there I suppose you can say the bill would be federally regulated to the point of if the bill renders some state laws moot. While contradictory enough telling you to "obey state laws while carrying". I think my point still arrives at the same place. Feds should not have any business telling states what they should do in regards to their own laws.
Enter MH's reply that the state's need to repeal reqs to carry.
....and this is the song that never ends. Yes it goes on and on my friend..some people started singing it no knowing what it was...
Last edited:
Mexican_Hippie
TGT Addict
Yep, fix it locally and stay vigilant. We shouldn't have to fight these battles at the Federal level. They have no business interfering here.
It was really frustrating to see Montana's intrastate gun law get shot down this last year in court. Total departure from Madison's guarantee of limited Federal powers.
It was really frustrating to see Montana's intrastate gun law get shot down this last year in court. Total departure from Madison's guarantee of limited Federal powers.
tx_transplant
Active Member
Yep. On the surface, it seems like a terrific idea. But I can't stand the idea of even further meddling into states rights by the feds. To me, this sort of proposal is indicative of exactly what is wrong in our country today. Federalization of everything. At the rate things have been going, we may as well just repeal the 10th amendment.
seeker_two
My posts don't count....
So...is Stockman any better than Cornyn on RKBA? Of course, it would be hard to BE worse....
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
