The perrenial National Carry bill...H.R. 226
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
Topic author - Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 7590
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:17 pm
- Location: 77504
The perrenial National Carry bill...H.R. 226
H.R. 226, introduced by U.S. Representatives Cliff Stearns’ (R-Fla.) and Rich Boucher (D-Va.), would allow any person with a valid concealed firearm carrying permit or license, issued by a state, to carry a concealed firearm in any state, as follows: In states that issue concealed firearm permits, a state’s laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal "bright-line" standard would permit carrying in places other than police stations; courthouses; public polling places; meetings of state, county, or municipal governing bodies; schools; passenger areas of airports; and certain other locations. The bill applies to D.C., Puerto Rico and U.S. territories. It would not create a federal licensing system; it would require the states to recognize each others’ carry permits, just as they recognize drivers’ licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards. Rep. Stearns has introduced such legislation since 1995.
"Perseverance and Preparedness triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia every time.” -- Steve
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
-
Topic author - Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 7590
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:17 pm
- Location: 77504
From what I have read and understand over the years concerning this issue...
They have cleared up the chance that the Feds could use and abuse this from a registration, and potential infringement risk...
To one that is simply requiring the states to recognize CCW licenses similarly as Drivers Licenses...They either can or won't, and eventually they will as we have done DL's...
Just thinking this is jsut another "baby step" forward...
I'm sure there is still enough to debate to the pros and cons of this bill, but since its still a bill, there is time to vote it up or down...
I believe it deserves its day on the floor...
But it is rather funny it'll be on a floor that may, or may not be too kind to it either way...
They have cleared up the chance that the Feds could use and abuse this from a registration, and potential infringement risk...
To one that is simply requiring the states to recognize CCW licenses similarly as Drivers Licenses...They either can or won't, and eventually they will as we have done DL's...
Just thinking this is jsut another "baby step" forward...
I'm sure there is still enough to debate to the pros and cons of this bill, but since its still a bill, there is time to vote it up or down...
I believe it deserves its day on the floor...
But it is rather funny it'll be on a floor that may, or may not be too kind to it either way...
"Perseverance and Preparedness triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia every time.” -- Steve
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:31 pm
- Location: Allen, TX
It wasn't all that long ago that you couldn't - and the same goes for your ham radio license. If you are a licensed cosmetologist in NY, your license is not good for even a transfer to IL, but is for TX, and your TX license is good for a transfer to IL.kw5kw wrote:I'd have to say, If I can drive in Calfiornia or New York on my Texas DL, why can't I carry in the same with my Texas CHL?
This would allow me to do just that.
Russ
So much for "Full faith and credit."
Real gun control, carrying 24/7/365
Absolutely no. Keep the federal government out of it. Once they have their paws in, there will be further "clarification", and that won't be good.
Drivers licenses aren't recognized in other states because the federal government says so. They're recognized because the states agreed to do so, just as states are working out recognition of concealed handgun licenses. They didn't get there overnight with DLs, and you shouldn't expect instant universal coverage with a CHL, either.
Kevin
Drivers licenses aren't recognized in other states because the federal government says so. They're recognized because the states agreed to do so, just as states are working out recognition of concealed handgun licenses. They didn't get there overnight with DLs, and you shouldn't expect instant universal coverage with a CHL, either.
Kevin
Gotta agree...keep the feds out of this at all cost. This is an issue to be worked out amongst the states...no need for federal intervention and, especially not, federal regulation of CHL's.Absolutely no. Keep the federal government out of it. Once they have their paws in, there will be further "clarification", and that won't be good.
"Superior firepower is an invaluable tool when entering into negotiations." - G. Patton
I think it was about 70 years between the time the first DLs were issued, and universal recognition. South Dakota didn't even issue licenses until 1953!
If anyone thinks the federal government wouldn't take over the handgun license business, just take a look at what they're doing with DLs. The ID required to get a DL is already excessive, and we're on the doorstep of "RealID", which the feds intend to mandate to the states. (They've already issued the mandate, but the requirement for implementation hasn't come yet.)
If anyone thinks the federal government wouldn't take over the handgun license business, just take a look at what they're doing with DLs. The ID required to get a DL is already excessive, and we're on the doorstep of "RealID", which the feds intend to mandate to the states. (They've already issued the mandate, but the requirement for implementation hasn't come yet.)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 929
- Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 1:17 pm
Okay, so I voted first and then read the posts. I think I'm back to "nay". I'd rather give up CA and NY than have the Feds involved in licensing. Heck, drive to Space Center Houston with your Leatherman in your toolbox and you are violating Federal Regulations and the US Criminal Code. (Just pray that you didn't piss off anybody there that would like to give you a hard time!)
No argument from me on that point...those are two states on my short list of "avoid at all cost" states. Ms's Feinstein and Clinton can have 'em. After all, the liberals have to be somewhere, right? Better to consolidate them in a few areas where we can keep an eye on them.I'd rather give up CA and NY than have the Feds involved in licensing.
Been to CA and NY too many times over the years and have no plans to ever return again to either if I can help it!
"Superior firepower is an invaluable tool when entering into negotiations." - G. Patton
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1551
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 9:48 pm
- Location: Odessa
I don't think we have enough info about this.
The Driver's Licence scenario is a good one because it illustrates how the Feds do business. All states had to have their programs comply with a set of standards. The Feds held out a carrot and stick over federal highway funds.
No compliance, no money.
We currently have no idea what reward/penalty system the feds night have for state regulations on chls.
Texas certainly doesn't have a weak program, at "10 minimum hours" for certification. But there are stiffer programs. Most are weaker. Our program would probably be among the top level.
Some of the Texas benefits of a CHL would be nice across state lines. Like no NICS, with no waiting when visiting gun shows, and gun shops.
IF that was the way it worked out.
The Driver's Licence scenario is a good one because it illustrates how the Feds do business. All states had to have their programs comply with a set of standards. The Feds held out a carrot and stick over federal highway funds.
No compliance, no money.
We currently have no idea what reward/penalty system the feds night have for state regulations on chls.
Texas certainly doesn't have a weak program, at "10 minimum hours" for certification. But there are stiffer programs. Most are weaker. Our program would probably be among the top level.
Some of the Texas benefits of a CHL would be nice across state lines. Like no NICS, with no waiting when visiting gun shows, and gun shops.
IF that was the way it worked out.
Ø resist
Take away the second first, and the first is gone in a second.
NRA Life Member, TSRA, chl instructor
Take away the second first, and the first is gone in a second.
NRA Life Member, TSRA, chl instructor
The biggest (only?) advantage, to me, would be standardization of rules and restrictions. As it is now, you have to study the laws of the state you are travelling to. If you get it wrong, by means of interpretation, then you are in trouble. Remember when only certain states had right-turn-on-red after stop? Now you can drive through any state and the laws are pretty much standard. I think states still have say in who or how old or things like that. I heard Texas may restrict the minimum age and/or the maximum age for driver's licenses.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 929
- Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 1:17 pm