Senate Takes up Concealed Carry Reciprocity

[rangerrebew]

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com           PRINT

February 12, 2015 1:35 PM

Senate Takes up Concealed Carry Reciprocity
 
By Charles C. W. Cooke

Per the Hill, the Republican Senate is taking up concealed carry reciprocity:


Gun owners would be allowed to carry concealed weapons around the country under new legislation in the Senate.

The Senate’s No. 2 Republican, John Cornyn, will reintroduce a gun rights bill Thursday that critics warn is dangerous.

The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would allow gun owners who have a concealed carry permit in their home state to bring their firearms in any other state with concealed carry laws.

“This operates more or less like a driver’s license,” Cornyn told The Hill. “So, for example, if you have a driver’s license in Texas, you can drive in New York, in Utah and other places, subject to the laws of those states.”

Cornyn, a Texas Republican, said this would “eliminate some of the ‘gotcha moments,’ where people inadvertently cross state lines” with guns they are legally allowed to carry in their home state.

This lattermost claim is almost certainly a direct reference to Shaneen Allen, the single mother who was threatened with ten years in jail for crossing into New Jersey with a concealed handgun. And rightly so. As more and more Americans buy guns and obtain concealed carry permits, legislation such as this is going to be deemed increasingly necessary.

Having said that, there is a raging debate on the right as to how this relates to the important question of federalism, and whether the legislation would be justified by the full faith and credit clause. I’m never quite sure what I think, but I nevertheless tried to sum up the state of the disagreement a few months ago.

Similar legislation has been introduced into the last few Congresses, but has never made it out. One can only imagine that, should this session be different, President Obama would veto the measure.

[olde north church]

Federalism?  You're right to keep and bear arms is in the Constitution.  Period.  NJ, NY, IL, D.C. can go pound sand.

[Oceander]

Another more or less pointless gesture because (a) Obama will veto it - he's itching to veto it - and (b) it won't impress most of the electorate, particularly the middle-of-the-road types who are more interested in the economy and the damage Obamacare is doing to their lives, and who are a little squeamish about lots of people carrying concealed weapons (rightly or wrongly).

This is not a good way to demonstrate the GOP's fidelity to being the grown ups in Congress.

[andy58-in-nh]

It is a welcome idea, but as with anything honorable, sensible, and felicitous to personal liberty, His Majesty, Barack I will never allow it. It is not a bad idea, but the distorted and sad reality of our time makes it impracticable.

My state's Senate (in New Hampshire) has just passed a Constitutional carry bill and our House may well do the same, even as our Democrat governor may also veto it. Meanwhile, our neighbors in Vermont have lived with the same essential law for many years now, miraculously without gun fights breaking out in the streets.

That aside, the greater problem presented for frequent travelers such as myself is that I must always be cautious to leave my perfectly legal sidearm at home, if there is even the slightest chance I may venture 25 miles south to Massachusetts, where its discovery could conceivably (and insanely) land me in jail for 20 years.

[truth_seeker]

Another more or less pointless gesture because (a) Obama will veto it - he's itching to veto it - and (b) it won't impress most of the electorate, particularly the middle-of-the-road types who are more interested in the economy and the damage Obamacare is doing to their lives, and who are a little squeamish about lots of people carrying concealed weapons (rightly or wrongly).

This is not a good way to demonstrate the GOP's fidelity to being the grown ups in Congress.

It is a way to reassure a loud, money rich constituency, about their pet issue.

So much of what is shouted by constituency groups, is false. For example, the idea that people in California can't own guns. Simply false.

And our new County Sherriff, has relaxed rules to justify concealed carry. I think I could qualify if I wanted.

[Oceander]

It is a way to reassure a loud, money rich constituency, about their pet issue.

So much of what is shouted by constituency groups, is false. For example, the idea that people in California can't own guns. Simply false.

And our new County Sherriff, has relaxed rules to justify concealed carry. I think I could qualify if I wanted.

I was just watching an episode of Mythbusters that involved lots of firepower, and they certainly seemed to have quite a selection.  And they're near San Francisco.

[sinkspur]

Another more or less pointless gesture because (a) Obama will veto it - he's itching to veto it - and (b) it won't impress most of the electorate, particularly the middle-of-the-road types who are more interested in the economy and the damage Obamacare is doing to their lives, and who are a little squeamish about lots of people carrying concealed weapons (rightly or wrongly).

This is not a good way to demonstrate the GOP's fidelity to being the grown ups in Congress.

It seems to me that the point of introducing the bill is to draw an additional contrast with Obama.  Sure he'll veto it, but why not continue to point out the differences in a stark way?  Almost every state has concealed carry, and a law like this makes sense, much more sense than handing over $24,000 in found taxpayer money to an illegal.

Republicans should pound and pound on providing the EITC to non-citizens.  It will resonate with that white working class that is becoming more and more the backbone of the GOP in elections.

[Oceander]

It seems to me that the point of introducing the bill is to draw an additional contrast with Obama.  Sure he'll veto it, but why not continue to point out the differences in a stark way?  Almost every state has concealed carry, and a law like this makes sense, much more sense than handing over $24,000 in found taxpayer money to an illegal.

Republicans should pound and pound on providing the EITC to non-citizens.  It will resonate with that white working class that is becoming more and more the backbone of the GOP in elections.

Because it isn't relevant to the day-to-day problems that beset ordinary Americans - like worsening health care under Obamacare and too few jobs - and wasting a lot of valuable time chasing after this red herring simply makes the GOP look like just another lot of irresponsible twits who want to use control of Congress to push pet ideological projects rather than dealing with the real problems.

[sinkspur]

Because it isn't relevant to the day-to-day problems that beset ordinary Americans - like worsening health care under Obamacare and too few jobs - and wasting a lot of valuable time chasing after this red herring simply makes the GOP look like just another lot of irresponsible twits who want to use control of Congress to push pet ideological projects rather than dealing with the real problems.

I'm trusting that a GOP Congress can walk and chew gum at the same time. The GOP can't do anything about Obamacare either until Obama is brought to heel by the Supreme Court.

And jobs?  What can government do about jobs? Obama won't allow a more favorable tax environment for business or individuals. Lousy jobs numbers rub off on the president, whether he likes it or not.

[Oceander]

I'm trusting that a GOP Congress can walk and chew gum at the same time. The GOP can't do anything about Obamacare either until Obama is brought to heel by the Supreme Court.

And jobs?  What can government do about jobs? Obama won't allow a more favorable tax environment for business or individuals. Lousy jobs numbers rub off on the president, whether he likes it or not.

Yeah, playing around with stupid little ideological toys sure makes you look a lot more grown up than proposing sensible, rational alternatives to Obamacare, or reform of the tax system, or reform of the regulatory system - cutting off the EPA at the knees is a good place to start - and this is even if Obama vetoes everything.

At this point the game isn't to compromise and tie one's self into knots to pass something the little sh*t in the White House will sign, the point is to preview what you would be doing for the American people if they give the White House to the GOP in 2016.

So far the GOP hasn't made a very auspicious try-out:  most ordinary Americans don't give a rat's patootie about having one concealed carry law to rule them all, they care about seeing what the GOP would do if it wasn't for Obama.

[sinkspur]

Yeah, playing around with stupid little ideological toys sure makes you look a lot more grown up than proposing sensible, rational alternatives to Obamacare, or reform of the tax system, or reform of the regulatory system - cutting off the EPA at the knees is a good place to start - and this is even if Obama vetoes everything.

At this point the game isn't to compromise and tie one's self into knots to pass something the little sh*t in the White House will sign, the point is to preview what you would be doing for the American people if they give the White House to the GOP in 2016.

So far the GOP hasn't made a very auspicious try-out:  most ordinary Americans don't give a rat's patootie about having one concealed carry law to rule them all, they care about seeing what the GOP would do if it wasn't for Obama.

The constituency for nationwide concealed carry is at least a plurality, is very vocal, and it votes. Every single time.

Passing the KXL, revising Obamacare's full-time job definition back up to 40 hours, and declaring that Obama's amnesty was unconstitutional have been passed, at least in the House.  Those are important statements, it seems to me.

The time for tax reform and regulatory reform is closer to the election when there's some leverage and they will speak louder.

I'm basically agreeing with you, but riling up gunowners seems pretty good politics to me, and the GOP needs all the breaks it can get.

[Oceander]

The constituency for nationwide concealed carry is at least a plurality, is very vocal, and it votes. Every single time.

Passing the KXL, revising Obamacare's full-time job definition back up to 40 hours, and declaring that Obama's amnesty was unconstitutional have been passed, at least in the House.  Those are important statements, it seems to me.

The time for tax reform and regulatory reform is closer to the election when there's some leverage and they will speak louder.

I'm basically agreeing with you, but riling up gunowners seems pretty good politics to me, and the GOP needs all the breaks it can get.

It's still a stupid issue.  It doesn't address anything of substance and it will give the left plenty of fodder for their argument that the GOP is nothing more than about spreading guns hither and yon and that the GOP doesn't care a fig about any of the recent shooting sprees.

[olde north church]

I'm trusting that a GOP Congress can walk and chew gum at the same time. The GOP can't do anything about Obamacare either until Obama is brought to heel by the Supreme Court.

And jobs?  What can government do about jobs? Obama won't allow a more favorable tax environment for business or individuals. Lousy jobs numbers rub off on the president, whether he likes it or not.

The GOP Congress has proven they can't organize a hard on.

[Oceander]

The GOP Congress has proven they can't organize a hard on.

[sinkspur]

It's still a stupid issue.  It doesn't address anything of substance and it will give the left plenty of fodder for their argument that the GOP is nothing more than about spreading guns hither and yon and that the GOP doesn't care a fig about any of the recent shooting sprees.

What shooting sprees? Any "shooting sprees" are being perpetrated by Holder's people, and the left is strangely silent about disarming roving gangs of ethnics.

Calm down. It's one issue that you don't happen to like. And so what if the GOP is about spreading guns?  The gun issue works in the Republicans' favor, and reciprocity is just plain common sense.

[Oceander]

What shooting sprees? Any "shooting sprees" are being perpetrated by Holder's people, and the left is strangely silent about disarming roving gangs of ethnics.

Calm down. It's one issue that you don't happen to like. And so what if the GOP is about spreading guns?  The gun issue works in the Republicans' favor, and reciprocity is just plain common sense.

I'm quite calm; watching the GOP snatch defeat from the jaws of victory happens so often I'm numb to it.  Hmmm.  Shooting sprees:  Newtown?  That's still raw in the minds of a lot of people.  And what about a looney toon who pulls a gun and starts killing over a parking space?  Trust me, in Manhattan that's a real fear; people have been run over for trying to save a parking space for a friend who's just turning around at the end of the block.  It's very simple to take that as your starting point and say:  "see, it's bad enough already, and the GOP just wants to make sure that more of these kooks can walk around as armed time bombs just waiting to go off.

As for the underlying point:  I think it makes perfect sense to set a minimum level of reciprocity for concealed carry; certainly with respect to someone who is merely passing through one state from their home state it should be sufficient if that person demonstrates that they're legal under their state's law.

[sinkspur]

I'm quite calm; watching the GOP snatch defeat from the jaws of victory happens so often I'm numb to it.  Hmmm.  Shooting sprees:  Newtown?  That's still raw in the minds of a lot of people.  And what about a looney toon who pulls a gun and starts killing over a parking space?  Trust me, in Manhattan that's a real fear; people have been run over for trying to save a parking space for a friend who's just turning around at the end of the block.  It's very simple to take that as your starting point and say:  "see, it's bad enough already, and the GOP just wants to make sure that more of these kooks can walk around as armed time bombs just waiting to go off.

As for the underlying point:  I think it makes perfect sense to set a minimum level of reciprocity for concealed carry; certainly with respect to someone who is merely passing through one state from their home state it should be sufficient if that person demonstrates that they're legal under their state's law.

Newtown would not have been prevented by any "gun laws" currently on the books nor by any of the proposed laws from the left.

Excuse me if most sensible Americans don't really fret about the rantings of Moms Demand Action.

[Oceander]

Newtown would not have been prevented by any "gun laws" currently on the books nor by any of the proposed laws from the left.

Excuse me if most sensible Americans don't really fret about the rantings of Moms Demand Action.

I never said it would have been prevented.  I merely said that many Americans think tighter regulation might have helped.

[Fishrrman]

sinkspur wrote above:
[[ Republicans should pound and pound on providing the EITC to non-citizens.  It will resonate with that white working class that is becoming more and more the backbone of the GOP in elections. ]]

And what have I been saying over and over and over and over and over (enough?) again in this forum?

If the G.O.P. is to have a future, that future lies in the votes of white Americans.

Give up that base, and the Republican party will disappear within a score of years...