Recommended Posts

Cornyn, Senate GOP Introduce
Concealed-Carry Reciprocity Bill


WASHINGTON

U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. This legislation will allow individuals with concealed carry privileges in their home state to exercise those rights in any other state with concealed carry laws, while abiding by that state's laws.

"This bill focuses on two of our country's most fundamental constitutional protections- the Second Amendment's right of citizens to keep and bear arms and the Tenth Amendment's right of states to make laws best-suited for their residents,"
said Sen. Cornyn. "I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this important legislation for law-abiding gun owners nationwide."

The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-WY), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mike Braun (R-IN), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Steve Daines (R-MT), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Hoeven (R-ND), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Ron Johnson (R-WI), John Kennedy (R-LA), Jerry Moran (R-KS), David Perdue (R-GA), Rob Portman (R-OH), Jim Risch (R-ID), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), John Thune (R-SD), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Roger Wicker (R-MS).

Background on the Constitutional
Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act:

Protecting Fundamental Constitutional Rights:

-Allows law-abiding citizens to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense while they are traveling or temporarily living away from home.

-Allows individuals with concealed carry privileges in their home state to conceal carry in any other states that also allow concealed carry

-Treats state-issued concealed carry permits like drivers' licenses where an individual can use their home-state license to drive in another state, but must abide by that other state's speed limit or road laws.

-Respecting State Sovereignty

-Does not establish national standards for concealed carry.

-Does not provide for a national concealed carry permit.

-Does not allow a resident to circumvent their home state's concealed carry permit laws. If under current law an individual is prohibited by federal law from carrying a firearm, they will continue to be prohibited from doing so under our bill.

-Respects state laws concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried and types of firearms which may not be carried by the visiting individual.

-Protects states' rights by not mandating the right to concealed carry in places that do not allow the practice.

Broad Support:
Last Congress, identical legislation had 40 cosponsors. In the 113th Congress, a nearly identical amendment received 57 votes in the Senate, including 13 Democrats.

Senator John Cornyn, a Republican from Texas, is a member of the Senate Finance, Intelligence, and Judiciary Committees.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to be about the same thing.

It had a chance 2 years ago, now no way it gets past the house.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ADK Native said:

Is this the same bill?

H.R.38 - Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22concealed+carry+reciprocity+act%22%5D%7D

 

 

 

 

 

 

It looks like the same bill but is being presented as a new one. Not sure why because it is being reported as just introduced and I have been unable find the bill on-line. It is shown as "s-69"

This week U.S Senator John Cornyn introduced the bill called S-69, a constitutional conceal carry bill.

So far it’s garnered support from 31 other U.S senators as co-sponsors.

http://www.ktre.com/2019/01/11/cornyn-introduces-concealed-carry-bill-east-texas-instructor-gives-input/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My communications with our senators has resulted in some interesting double talk and/or no response at all. IIRC this is the same bill and same bill number as before. NRA and GOA have sent out alerts recently. I think Reed signed on as a sponsor before but will probably have to again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the bill passes, the state legislatures that don't want it will start rescinding the permits as fast as they can with all sorts of charges against anyone who has a permit.  This isn't the way to do it.  Having the SCOTUS rule on it once and for all is the only way it will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two options:

1. Have all the Attorney Generals in every state issue memorandums of understanding granting reciprocity to all states licensed pistol permit holders.  Many states Attorney Generals have done this with their counterparts in other states, never New York's.  It will never happen with New York's Attorney General because none support law abiding citizens the right to self defense.  Look at New York Cities discriminatory practice against upstate ccw permit holders denying their being allowed to carry in NYC.  No New York Attorney General has ever taken on NYC over this issue

2. Have the Congress establish a national ccw permit system.  It will never happen because not enough politicians care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any law written, can be restricted by another law.  The legislature is not the place to resolve this issue.  It is either a right, like free speech, or it isn't.  Until that question is addressed by the Supreme Court of the United States, this issue will not be resolved.

This is why it was so important to elect President Trump.  Only he was willing to put strict constitutionalist judges on the court who would rule on this issue based on what the Constitution says.  This is an issue those who favor social engineering do not want brought before the Supreme Court under the current administration.  When RBG is finally gone from the court, one more Trump appointed judge is all that is needed to correct all of the unconstitutional anti-2nd Amendment legislation that exists in America today.  

Defenders of the US Constitution are well aware how close the US came to destruction in the last presidential election.  Had Hillary won, the Constitution would have become a tool to bludgeon the opposition into submission, with all rights converted to privilege at the whim of the government.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2019 at 1:22 AM, Rattler said:

Any law written, can be restricted by another law.  The legislature is not the place to resolve this issue.  It is either a right, like free speech, or it isn't.  Until that question is addressed by the Supreme Court of the United States, this issue will not be resolved.

This is why it was so important to elect President Trump.  Only he was willing to put strict constitutionalist judges on the court who would rule on this issue based on what the Constitution says.  This is an issue those who favor social engineering do not want brought before the Supreme Court under the current administration.  When RBG is finally gone from the court, one more Trump appointed judge is all that is needed to correct all of the unconstitutional anti-2nd Amendment legislation that exists in America today.  

Defenders of the US Constitution are well aware how close the US came to destruction in the last presidential election.  Had Hillary won, the Constitution would have become a tool to bludgeon the opposition into submission, with all rights converted to privilege at the whim of the government.

Good post brother.

I agree. I cannot wait until Ginsberg leaves, NYSRPA has already said when that happens they will go to Supremes and get the NY gun laws smashed down. The court appointments will be his biggest legacy IMHO.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2019 at 9:11 PM, TACC said:

Looks to be about the same thing.

It had a chance 2 years ago, now no way it gets past the house.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

gun laws aren't as much of a party issue as some think. Many dems in pro gun states. Many dems on this board that are pro gun rights. It just so happens that the most out spoken anti's do tend to be left, but I'll even argue that some laws could be beefed up in certain areas (background checks, increased penalties for illegal arms) and others like mag limits and scary black gun rules relaxed and i'm a republican nra member. 

but alas, we dig our heels in on both sides and nothing happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They got a 5-4 majority now, if they keep holding out for Ginsbergs replacement nothing will happen. If she died tomorrow they would stall it until the next election

Good post brother.
I agree. I cannot wait until Ginsberg leaves, NYSRPA has already said when that happens they will go to Supremes and get the NY gun laws smashed down. The court appointments will be his biggest legacy IMHO.


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TACC said:

They got a 5-4 majority now, if they keep holding out for Ginsbergs replacement nothing will happen. If she died tomorrow they would stall it until the next election

 


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

 

That 5-4 you mention is not a certainty, as Roberts proved when he voted for sustaining Obamacare.  It needs to be an absolute certainty before we run it up the flag pole and find some of the 5 shoot at it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rattler said:

That 5-4 you mention is not a certainty, as Roberts proved when he voted for sustaining Obamacare.  It needs to be an absolute certainty before we run it up the flag pole and find some of the 5 shoot at it.

I was just about to post the same thing. Remember, once NYSRPA and NRA take it to the Supremes, if it fails, there is nowhere left to appeal.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.