Dear Majority Leader Reid and Leader McConnell [Not shown]:

I am writing to respectfully urge you and your caucuses to oppose the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act (S.Amdt. 1618 (111th) & H.R. 822 (112th)), which may be before the Senate in short order. This legislation would have a devastating effect on the ability of law enforcement in New York to combat the scourge of gun violence. Specifically, it would force nearly every state in the Union — including those, like New York, with reasonable restrictions on firearm ownership and transport, that are essential to public safety — to abandon its own gun laws by allowing out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms based on their home state’s less safe laws, rather than those of the state they are entering.


This would create a lowest common denominator approach to public safety that would increase the threat to New Yorkers, impede the ability of law enforcement to do its job, and undermine the will of our citizens as expressed through their duly elected state legislators. Stated simply, it would make the people of my State — where we have long-held standards intended to keep firearms out of the hands of those who should not have them — less safe.

Congress should be passing legislation to ensure that there are fewer potentially dangerous people on our streets with concealed, loaded handguns — not legislation, like the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, which undermines state law enforcement efforts to combat gun-related violence. A 2010 study showed that nearly half of the guns that crossed state lines before being recovered in crimes came from just ten states, most with comparatively weak gun laws, indicating that weak gun laws in other states have already had an appreciable negative public safety impact on states like New York. Indeed, in 2009, more than 92% of the traced guns recovered in connection with crimes committed in New York City originally came from outside the State. Unlike New York, which requires every applicant for a handgun license to submit to both a fingerprint-based criminal history background check and a review of his or her mental health records, many states require only one of these two critical background checks, and some require neither.

Forcing us to honor gun permits from other states will dramatically increase the threat posed by firearms in our State by restricting our ability to control who may and may not carry a concealed weapon in all or parts of the State, undermining the ability of police to verify the validity of gun permits (as no national database exists) and allowing gun traffickers to more easily bring illegal guns into the State.

New York has, through its elected representatives, made reasoned judgments about the ability of its citizens to carry concealed firearms based on its own assessment of the dangers posed by these weapons and the particular public safety needs of its residents. Similar public safety concerns form the basis of New York’s longstanding ban on assault weapons and its statutory requirement that background checks be conducted at all gun shows in the State. This legislation would strip New York and other states of the authority to determine who may carry a concealed, loaded weapon within their borders. In so doing, it would increase the threat of gun violence against New Yorkers, compromise the safety of our law enforcement officers and their ability to crack down on illegal firearms, and undermine the considered judgment of this State as to the public safety needs of its own citizens.

For all these reasons, I strongly urge you to oppose the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Eric T. Schneiderman
Attorney General
New York

55 Responses to NY AG to National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act: Nuts!

  1. let’s start digging into his background and see how “desirable” his bona fides are. $20 says he cross dresses and likes to get his ass spanked by midgets.

  2. If you want to get mugged, robbed, beaten or raped you should visit the good ole COMMIE city of ny, and all the gangbangers will be happy to @@@@ you up. The states he says have more freedom regarding guns are also much safer than that hell hole city.

      • The only thing incorrect about his statement is describing NY as “commie”. Everything else is correct.

        I assume that he’s using a bit of hyperbole and that he doesn’t actually believe NY is communist.

  3. There are grains of logic in his defense but not nearly enough to buy the whole loaf of bread. The nationwide reciprocity would undermine the measures the state has taken to keep weapons as a professional hoop jumping process. Obviously he is proud of that. The rest is debatable to say the least as far as relevance.

  4. I immediately contacted him through Facebook, reminding him that there are plenty of existing reciprocity agreements between States that don’t result in any problems, and that furthermore, it benefits New York State residents who’ve been caught packing in other states “illegally.”
    I also mentioned that New York’s gun controls are not reasonable, and that NYS gun owners want them rolled back, not “strengthened.”

  5. I can understand the objection. New York State doesn’t even have reciprocity with New York City, and carrying with a NYS permit is a felony in NYC. Go figure that sh!t.

    HR822 would significantly impact New York City’s practice of licensing Puff Daddy and Robert DiNiro while restricting regular people who get robbed, beaten and shot with such frequency that even the Post doesn’t report it.

  6. P.S. Disregard the research done in Florida that absolutely obliterates my argument. Oh, and the 2nd amendment too. That thing only applies to hunting rifles that I approve of.

    Yours,

    Eric

  7. As much I as thing the NY AG is an a$$ I remain unconvinced that a national reciprocity law is not an infringement of the 10th Amendment. Even though I would personally benefit from a national law giving me the right to carry I do not want the Federal Government dictating to the States. The common use of “bear arms” in 1789 meant to display arms in the open. The Second is silent on concealed carry but I think that if the Founding Fathers wanted to grant the unambiguous right to conceal they would have used the broader term “carry” to cover both open and concealed carry

    • I’m with you here. I don’t think the federal government has the authority to do this.

      What I do think however is that any state or federal law which restricts the ownership or open carrying of ANY WEAPON is unconstitutional. Of course that means we have to take them all to the supreme court.

      My interpretation of the second is that the states have the authority to regulate concealed carry, but not open carry or what weapon you can or can’t own.

      Unless someone has a good argument regarding the second and cc.

      • Where do we get the idea that “bear arms” refers to bearing them openly? If I’m carrying a gun, and I stick it under my jacket, am I all of a sudden no longer ‘bearing’ it?

        • IIRC, I’ve read several articles about the 2nd amendment by the authors of the constitution discussing the meaning of the word “bear”.

          The idea at the time was that honorable men carried openly and thieves carried concealed.

          Alabama’s constitution has provisions protecting open carry, but outlawing concealed carry. To get cc going here, the anti-cc provisions from the 1800s had to be overturned.

          If the 2nd said carry, equip, or any other verb than “bare” then I wouldn’t think twice. But the current definition of “bare” is “Uncover (a part of the body or other thing) and expose it to view: “he bared his chest”.”

          We’d need a historian to let us know if the verb “bare” meant something different 230 years ago.

      • I don’t think the federal government has the authority to do this.

        Well, there’s this thing called interstate commerce that I read about in law school. Look it up.

        • “there’s this thing called interstate commerce that I read about in law school”

          Never went to law school. Just read about how Congress believes it the magic key to powers not granted it by the Constitution.

        • Carrying a firearm that you already own across state lines is not commerce. Unless you need your weapon to perform your commercial activity being denied that capability does not interfere with your ability to transact business across state lines. I am tired of Congress claiming the commerce clause allows them to pass any kind of legislation.

        • Carrying a firearm that you already own across state lines is not commerce

          Of course it is. Just traveling across state lines is commerce. If it wasn’t, you’d need a passport to go from Arizona to California.

        • I don’t buy that. My carrying a self defense firearm across state lines is not commerce; even if I’m crossing state lines to buy or sell stuff, the fact of my carrying a weapon has nothing to do with the commerce part of it. I’m sick of the feds foisting all kinds of unconstitutional laws on me under tenuous justification of the commerce clause, and can hardly appreciate them doing it for a cause I support.

          How does drivers license reciprocity work, legally?

        • I’m assuming all of the states just agreed between themselves to honor each others’ drivers licenses.

          I haven’t heard of a federal law forcing all states to honor each others’ licenses

    • tdiinva, I love you man, I really do, and I think you’re a real patriot, but I think you should give up the Jimson weed. 🙂

    • “I remain unconvinced that a national reciprocity law is not an infringement of the 10th Amendment”

      I’m with you there.

    • The 10th amendment does not allow the state to infringe upon the 2nd amendment. If a conceal carry law- or lack thereof, makes felons out of lawful citizens who carry into a neighboring state, I think that sufficiently trumps the 10th amendment argument (which is solid enough FWIW).

      Still, it is nice to see liberals sudden interest in the 10th amendment, so we have that going for us.

      • What is your definition of the word “bare”? In my understanding of english, I consider “bare” to mean the exact opposite of “conceal”

        • @Sam

          I say this with all due respect–go back to first grade English and learn the difference between “bare” and “bear.” Then read the Second Amendment…

          the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

          bear (verb) (webster.com):


          b : to be equipped or furnished with (something)

          — bear arms 1 : to carry or possess arms 2 : to serve as a soldier

          bare (verb) (webster.com):


          to make or lay (something) bare

          When arguing a point it’s best not to make yourself look stupid.

        • Ahh, my mistake. Thanks for pointing that out. I think it’s more of a problem of my inability to spell, which means I do need to re-do first grade.

          If only I could delete my embarrassing comments.

  8. Is there any truth to this?:

    “Unlike New York, which requires every applicant for a handgun license to submit to both a fingerprint-based criminal history background check and a review of his or her mental health records, many states require only one of these two critical background checks, and some require neither”

    Is there any state that does not require at least a background check? Are there any states that require neither?

    • AZ comes to mind. As long as you are not otherwise prohibited from possessing a gun you can conceal carry without a licence/permit.

      Now, the TNRTCRA would require that you get a licence/permit if you state issues one and you want to travel to other states. Getting a licence/permit would require a BG check in all states that issue permits.

      • Which is my point, while AZ may allow you to carry without a permit, to get a permit you go through all the same mumbo jumbo you do any place else, which makes the NY AG’s statement absolutely FALSE!

        I went digging through handgunlaw.us and every state requires a background check and while I did download every application from every state, the ones I looked at also do a mental health check — which again, means the NY AGs statement is BS! and he should be called out!

        • I have an AZ non resident permit and I had to send them my fingerprints along with proof of firearms training. I also have permits from Utah, Maine, Conn., Florida, Virginia and New Hampshire. NH is the only one that didn’t want my fingerprints and their one page application was very basic. I just had to send a copy of any gun permit with my app. and I was ready to go. Once Wisconsin starts up on Nov. 1, my seven permits will be good in 38 states and I still haven’t applied for my home state permit. I’ll be getting my home state permit soon which will bring me to 40 states because Michigan only accepts resident permits, and then I’ll get the MA permit. That will only leave the nine COMMIE states that won’t let me carry, which doesn’t really matter because I would never travel to COMMIELAND anyway.

        • Well how long ago was that, Joe? Nowadays, I don’t think you’d have to do that for an Arizona permit.

          When an Arizona citizen visits the Big Apple for a week of Broadway shows and sighseeing, he should not be allowed to carry his gun around. To do that in NY he’d have to have gone through the NY prerequisites first.

          I like the speed limit comparison. When you drive in another state you can’t bring your home-state speed limit with you, you have to obey the local restrictions. Same with concealed carry. You can’t expect to bring your own restrictions with you and have them apply.

        • When you drive in another state you can’t bring your home-state speed limit with you

          Which is what HR822 says. You can carry using your out-of-state license, but you have to obey all the in-state laws.

  9. Yeah, wouldn’t want gun owners from those violent cesspools in rural America to come and make a peaceful paradise like New York City unsafe.

  10. In summary, his perspective seems to be that if you want to come to NY state with CCW from another state, then you a threat and a “potentially dangerous person” from a “state with weak gun laws” and are likely either a “gun trafficker” or a person of questionable mental health.

    It makes me wonder, if he also struggles with any other constitutional rights like “innocent until proven guilty”?

  11. Ralph above: New York State doesn’t even have reciprocity with New York City, and carrying with a NYS permit is a felony in NYC. Go figure that sh!t.

    Absolutely true. NYC pols don’t want the unwashed from rural upstate counties (many of which are de-facto “shall issue”) carrying in NYC.

    Which is why, as a NY State resident, I’d like to see other states change their laws to specifically invalidate reciprocity for NYC CCW holders, many of whom are politically connected. Manhattan salons will only understand this issue when one of their connected uncles gets a year in jail for illegally packing in Texas.

    Are there some decent people this may hurt? Absolutely.
    My answer to them: Too effin’ bad.
    Fix. The. Law. Speak up.
    Whatever juice you have to get blessed with a NYC CCW permit, use it to change NY State Law. Either that, or stay out of flyover country while packing…

    This would drive tools like Schneiderman nuts.

    • +1!

      And by the way, Schneiderman is a typical New york sucka$$, nothing more than wad of chewing gun in the jaws of history.

  12. Dear Majority Leader Reid and Leader McConnell:

    I respectfully urge you to implement a ban on reciprocal travel between states.

    As things are now, we Texans have no guarantee that a person who would be executed in Texas for a crime would also be executed in NY or CA – in fact, they may very well be set free.

    Under the absurd current “open-travel” law, that newly freed NY/CA non-criminal is able to travel to Texas and commit all manners of heinous crimes. This madness must stop.

    Thank you.

  13. My daughter lived in NYC for almost 2 years. She was in a bad relationship and I wanted her to carry Kimber Pepper Blaster. Not legal in NYC unless you purchase from a firearms dealer in the city (joke) or a licensed pharmacist. The only thing I could give her was a Surefire Tactical flashlight. Thankfully she is back in our state and can carry what she wants. My view is that anyone who respects the Second Amendment will spend both their time and their money somewhere other than this disgusting Liberal stronghold and do everything they can to change the laws in this state and city.

  14. Thanks for reminding me why I don’t live in new york and rarely visit there. Great hunting, beautiful scenery, abridged constitutional rights. So Eric thinks people who are fingerprinted and pass a background check in another state don’t meet the precious standard New York seems to have for firearms owners in New York.

    So unless other states have a ridiculous permit system applying to only one spouse in a house with guns, laws that require ammo to be in a translucent locked case, and some of the worst crime in the big cities, then other states can’t be trusted to license gun owners who carry into New york. Those draconian restrictions are so effective at eliminating gun crime, we should all be so lucky.

    What is a hot lady like that doing with a knucklehead like him? She needs to visit the south and get a different perspective on life.

  15. Shorter NYAG :

    “No fair, we’re the ones who are supposed to be able to force people to live like the way we want them to, not the other way around!”

  16. But, I agree this is a matter for the States.

    It’s still enjoyable to see the statist freaking out over the ONE form of Federal overreach they don’t like.

    • All of the Amendments are a Federal issue. Do the States ultimately decide the interpretation of the First Amendment? Or any others for that matter? The gravity of a Federal ruling against guns is very heavy but all said and done, like it or not, the Constitution is a nationwide prospect and such is the gravity of Heller and other Federal pro-gun rulings. All other affairs were meant to be left to the States.

  17. Had I more time today I would rewrite this letter so that AG Schneiderman would be arguing against having to accept vehicle registrations, insurance and drivers’ licenses from other states.

    Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of deadly out of state vehicles and drivers pass into and/or through all or parts of New York on a daily basis.

  18. Ahh yes Mr Eric T. Schneiderman, clearly the Sky is Falling.

    Let me guess, for his next act he will predict that “the Streets will run red with Blood as people wantonly shoot each other over parking disputes and road rage.”

    Now, I actually think that states should have the right to set their own rules when it comes to gun control because Federal interference can be a real pain. Imagine if somehow the federal govenment was to try to impose Kalifornia style regulations on our great state of Maine. That would be a sad, sad day. So I am all for States rights when it comes to gun regualtions (the good folks in California can do whatever they want for all I care), but Mr. Schneiderman’s letter is more than a little alarmist and over the top.

  19. After reading all the anti-HR822 comments by TTAG’s armed intelligentcia, I can see why the gungrabbers are so strong. We might be able to protect ourselves from our enemies, but who is going to protect us from our friends?

  20. As a New York State citizen, I think the limitation it has created on gun owners rights is excessive. Fact: People who legally have concealed carry’s are LESS likely to commit a crime. Fact: every year over 2000 people defend themselves against criminals with their personal firearms and it is unfortunately widely unreported by the media. Law abiding citizens should be allowed to carry firearms, people traveling through NY should be able to exercise their rights without being charged with a felony and sentenced to five years in prison for doing nothing wrong.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *