Senate Takes Up Concealed Carry Reciprocity

[ArcadiaGP]

Senate Takes up Concealed Carry Reciprocity | National Review Online

 

[Spencir]

This would be fantastic, but I highly doubt it gets passed.

 

[chipbennett]

It's about time. Dirty Harry sat on this one for forever.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Necro post city, I know!

There's another bill in the house that's gaining steam, HR 923. I contacted Mrs. Walorski and she's a cosponsor. I believe there is a companion bill in the senate but my google fu is weak today.

Contact your rep and get them to co sponsor it if you are for it.

Anyway, I contacted Coats and Donnelly. Coats response was to the point and sid he supports it. Donnelly was less than...oh well, you decide:

September 1, 2016

Dear Friend,

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about Second Amendment rights. Like you, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, and I have consistently voted to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Like responsible gun owners, however, I believe it is reasonable for all of us to consider ways to reduce gun violence and protect public safety.

I have always recognized that the overwhelming majority of gun owners exercise their Second Amendment rights in a responsible and law-abiding manner. My concern has never been with those who follow the law, but with those who do not. For this reason, I have opposed proposals to ban firearms commonly referred to as assault weapons and continued my longtime support for national recognition of Indiana licenses to carry.

We also must recognize, however, that individuals with criminal records, serious mental illnesses, or who wish to commit acts of terrorism continue to obtain firearms by exploiting loopholes and deficiencies in current law, and in the process, are endangering the lives of others. Whether a gun owner or not, we all can agree that we can take steps to reduce violent crime without sacrificing the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

As your Senator, I will continue to closely follow this issue. Should Congress consider relevant legislation, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind.
It is a privilege to represent you and all Hoosiers in the U.S. Senate. Your continued correspondence is welcome and helps me to better represent our state. I encourage you to write, call, or email if my office can ever be of assistance. You can also check out my Facebook page and follow me on Twitter by visiting my website .

Same form letter I get year after year with anything I contact him to do with the 2A.

Doesn't address the point. Boilerplate answer. Camo reply.

Sheesh!

 

["Username"]

I've never understood why folks are so excited to invite the feds into this matter.

Under a "national reciprocity" rule, do you expect Indiana's firearm laws will eventually end up looking more like something out of Vermont or more like something out of California?

 

[caverjamie]

I would expect neither, something along the lines of a driver's license type photo ID...maybe more like Utah than Indiana's current version. But if Hillary gets elected and appoints the next supreme court justice, then your worries about national reciprocity will be minor in comparison!

 

[KellyinAvon]

Necro post city, I know!

There's another bill in the house that's gaining steam, HR 923. I contacted Mrs. Walorski and she's a cosponsor. I believe there is a companion bill in the senate but my google fu is weak today.

Contact your rep and get them to co sponsor it if you are for it.

Anyway, I contacted Coats and Donnelly. Coats response was to the point and sid he supports it. Donnelly was less than...oh well, you decide:

September 1, 2016

Dear Friend,

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about Second Amendment rights. Like you, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, and I have consistently voted to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Like responsible gun owners, however, I believe it is reasonable for all of us to consider ways to reduce gun violence and protect public safety.

I have always recognized that the overwhelming majority of gun owners exercise their Second Amendment rights in a responsible and law-abiding manner. My concern has never been with those who follow the law, but with those who do not. For this reason, I have opposed proposals to ban firearms commonly referred to as assault weapons and continued my longtime support for national recognition of Indiana licenses to carry.

We also must recognize, however, that individuals with criminal records, serious mental illnesses, or who wish to commit acts of terrorism continue to obtain firearms by exploiting loopholes and deficiencies in current law, and in the process, are endangering the lives of others. Whether a gun owner or not, we all can agree that we can take steps to reduce violent crime without sacrificing the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

As your Senator, I will continue to closely follow this issue. Should Congress consider relevant legislation, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind.
It is a privilege to represent you and all Hoosiers in the U.S. Senate. Your continued correspondence is welcome and helps me to better represent our state. I encourage you to write, call, or email if my office can ever be of assistance. You can also check out my Facebook page and follow me on Twitter by visiting my website .

Same form letter I get year after year with anything I contact him to do with the 2A.

Doesn't address the point. Boilerplate answer. Camo reply.

Sheesh!

I think Donnelly's answers are all the same with a few words changed via find/replace. Talk both sides of the issue without really saying anything. Elections have consequences, Joe will face the consequences in a few years. Thanks to the Internet we forget nothing.

 

[Hawkeye]

I think Donnelly's answers are all the same with a few words changed via find/replace. Talk both sides of the issue without really saying anything. Elections have consequences, Joe will face the consequences in a few years. Thanks to the Internet we forget nothing.

I hope your right in a couple of years, but then he did get elected in the first place. And his Senate track record was entirely predictable. The voters, even here in Indiana are easily bamboozled. I'm just hoping we aren't bedazzled by the Bayh in 2016. That would really be a dark moment.

 

["Username"]

?...maybe more like Utah than Indiana's current version.

Ah.... So instead of having a lifetime permit, or no permit at all as in constitutional carry states like VT, I could take mandatory state certified training courses and be required to renew the permission to exercise my rights every fifth year like in UT. I wonder where it will go after that.

The fed is not here to help you.... No matter how much it may wish to spin it as such.

Once it has its nose in the tent, that smellyass camel eventually works its way in.



As it stands today, if I want to carry in other states I can almost always find a way to do so through reciprocity established by the individual states. For states not conducive towards that, it is a matter better worked through with the various individual states.

 

[Bill of Rights]

That's a possible outcome, and one of which we should be cognizant, I agree.

Another possibility is that, as it stands now, every state's license looks pretty similar, but the test to obtain it differs from place to place; from what I understand, California's written test induces apprehension in those who must take it, on a scale unknown by those in other states. I know that those who administer the road test vary from one place to another as well- some are understanding and easygoing, while still ensuring competence, while others take the drill sergeant approach and scare the crap out of the new driver.

Also, some places permit right-on-red, others do not. Speed limits change, etc., etc. The license to drive is still valid everywhere, though. That's how I see it could happen. Ideally, of course, everyone will recognize that the 2A is the ultimate carry license, but that is, as said, the ideal, and I don't expect it to happen in anything short of all-out war (foreign soldiers/attackers) on our soil. If that happens, the bans will be pointless: Gov't could take all the guns they want to, but there will be plenty of them on the ground to pick up and use. May it never go that far, God willing.

Blessings,
Bill

Ah.... So instead of having a lifetime permit, or no permit at all as in constitutional carry states like VT, I could take mandatory state certified training courses and be required to renew the permission to exercise my rights every fifth year like in UT. I wonder where it will go after that.

The fed is not here to help you.... No matter how much it may wish to spin it as such.

Once it has its nose in the tent, that smellyass camel eventually works its way in.



As it stands today, if I want to carry in other states I can almost always find a way to do so through reciprocity established by the individual states. For states not conducive towards that, it is a matter better worked through with the various individual states.

 

[marmion]

It will of course never pass. If it does Obongo will veto it post haste regardless. But keep on your reps and senators to continue to try. The more people hear about this common sense legislation the more likely it will pass one day.

 

["Username"]

It's worth noting there was a time when a license was not required to operate an automobile.

Nothing good will come from inviting the fed to expand.

 

[MinuteManMike]

How is it expanding federal power to force states to recognize the rights of others states' citizens?

 

[PRasko]

If the feds require one state to accept others LTCH, why wouldn't they require all states to follow the most strictest of states firearms laws?

Allowing the feds to set standards for LTCH could end up meaning we all have to follow NY or Cali laws.

Sadly, I see no good coming from this.

 

[gglass]

^^^ Bingo ^^^

I could see Big O signing such a bill just to get the federal camel's nose in the tent. Small steps as it where...

 

[eldirector]

Look no farther than CARB (for you auto enthusiasts).

 

[bwframe]

Why would anyone think this could be a good idea? Just look at what Federal over regulation has done to so many other areas of concern. IRS, FDA, Homeland Security, etc. Do you really want Hillary or Tim to wake up one morning and decide that they feel the BATF should make all firearms with capacities higher than ten rounds illegal nationwide?

 

[Bill of Rights]

While I can see the benefit to "States will obey the US Constitution w/r/t honoring the acts of other states, specifically, honoring all licenses issued by any state in all states" and could see them doing that in re: marriage licenses for all, overall, I agree with what others have stated, that this is the camel lifting the tent flap with his nose.

Blessings,
Bill

Why would anyone think this could be a good idea? Just look at what Federal over regulation has done to so many other areas of concern. IRS, FDA, Homeland Security, etc. Do you really want Hillary or Tim to wake up one morning and decide that they feel the BATF should make all firearms with capacities higher than ten rounds illegal nationwide?

 

[chipbennett]

Why would anyone think this could be a good idea? Just look at what Federal over regulation has done to so many other areas of concern. IRS, FDA, Homeland Security, etc. Do you really want Hillary or Tim to wake up one morning and decide that they feel the BATF should make all firearms with capacities higher than ten rounds illegal nationwide?

I don't think you understand how reciprocity works. A federal law that states, "if State A issues carry permits to its residents, then State A must honor carry permits issued by State B to its residents" does not enumerate authority for the federal government to regulate or otherwise dictate the terms of state issuance of carry permits.

 

[chipbennett]

While I can see the benefit to "States will obey the US Constitution w/r/t honoring the acts of other states, specifically, honoring all licenses issued by any state in all states" and could see them doing that in re: marriage licenses for all, overall, I agree with what others have stated, that this is the camel lifting the tent flap with his nose.

Blessings,
Bill

That argument, taken to its logical conclusion, would also consider the second amendment to be said camel.

I have yet to see anyone explain how one gets from Point A (federally mandated state reciprocity of state-issued resident carry permits) to Point B (federal regulation of state-issued carry permits).