Hope for national reciprocity

With the defeat of Mary Landrieu in Louisanna, the GOP now controls 54 seats in the Senate.  Add to that the largest Republican majority in the House in generations.

If Republicans were smart, and that is a big if, the new leadership will finally allow the national CCW reciprocity bill to come up for a vote in the Senate.   It would be a great way to pander to their base.  The legislation could be attached as an amendment to an unrelated appropriations bill to ensure that President Obama would sign it.  It does not need to be a prefect bill.  Forcing places like New York City to honor non-resident shall issue licenses would open the door to better resident carry laws as well as new lawsuits based on equal protection.

  • Share on Tumblr

5 thoughts on “Hope for national reciprocity

  1. The big trouble with Congress enacting nationwide reciprocity is that then the Fed Gov. will decide it can regulate firearm carry. We have seen what happens when the .gov decides to regulate.

  2. I’ll agree with pawnshopguy RE: fed.gov regulation of anything, but what about that “full faith and credit” thing in the Constitution? If my driver license works in all 57 states, and a marriage certificate is valid in all 57 states, as is divorce paperwork, and a birth certificate from one of the 57 states is recognized in the other 56, why isn’t my CWP valid everywhere?

    The usual response is “because training” but some states require pre-nup counseling before marriage, and some have pre-divorce counseling before that, and testing procedures on DLs are different, so……?

  3. It can be done like a drivers license. There’s nothing about additional regulation in versions of the bill I’ve seen over the years.

  4. I know people are worried about, “then the Fed Gov. will decide it can regulate firearm carry.”

    They already do, and already have the power to do so. LEOSA is a national law that allows non-sworn, retired officers to carry. FOPA allows carriage (though locked and not on the person) through territories that are significantly hostile to those who have guns on or near their person (DC, NJ, NY, etc.).

    The 14th Amendment give the federal all they need to “protect” the right. Federal laws supercede state laws.

    “But…but…STATES RIGHTS!”

    States don’t have rights, people do. Laws from either the federal or the state government that protect individual rights are welcome and constitutional. In a perfect world, both would be competing to create the most liberty.

    I also fear the federal. They are not always our friend.

    That said, I will gladly welcome a law that sets a floor for recognition (states must accept another permit from another state), but would be concerned if they created additional requirements.

    Let’s see if this goes anywhere. If they create a stand-alone bill to “protect our rights”, then we’re being screwed by a GOP Establishment that wishes to pass something that Obama is guaranteed to veto. If they are serious, they need to attach it to a funding bill Obama cannot veto.

  5. “FOPA allows carriage (though locked and not on the person) through territories that are significantly hostile to those who have guns on or near their person (DC, NJ, NY, etc.).”

    NY prosecutes carriers in clear-language violation of FOPA anyway.

Comments are closed.