Latest Status of Pending National Right-to-Carry Legislation

remote.axd

Reprinted from nraila.org

Thanks to your continued calls and emails NRA supported National Right-to-Carry bills have seen, yet again, an increase in cosponsorship.  Please continue to contact your elected officials and urge them to cosponsor and support these important bills . . .


S. 498 – Introduced by U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), this legislation would respect the rights of individuals who possess concealed carry permits from their home state, or who are not prohibited from carrying concealed in their home state, to exercise those rights in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.  This bill currently has 23 cosponsors.  Please contact your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and ask them to cosponsor and support S. 498.

H.R. 923 – Introduced by U.S. Representative Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.), this legislation is the House companion bill to S. 498.  The legislation would also respect the rights of individuals who possess concealed carry permits from their home state, or who are not prohibited from carrying concealed in their home state, to exercise those rights in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.  This bill currently has 17 cosponsors.  Please contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 224-3121 and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 923.

H.R. 986 – Introduced by U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), this bill would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state to carry a concealed firearm in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.  This bill would also provide legal protection for law-abiding concealed carry permit holders against states that violate the intent of this bill.  This bill currently has 114 cosponsors.  Please contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 224-3121 and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 986.

H.R. 402 – Introduced by U.S. Representative Rich Nugent (R-Fla.), this bill would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state to carry a concealed firearm in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.  The bill currently has 81 cosponsors.  Please contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 224-3121 and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 402.

NRA would like to thank the sponsors and cosponsors of these critically important bills.  Again, we ask that you contact your lawmakers today and ask them to cosponsor and support these bills.

You can contact your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative by phone at (202) 224-3121 or click here to write your lawmakers today.

comments

  1. avatar jwm says:

    How about the national constitutional carry bill?

    1. avatar Erik says:

      Couldn’t agree more. And a big old middle finger to California, New York and Massachusetts. Nothing would put a bigger smile on my face.

    2. avatar Dr Brainwash says:

      We’re winning battle by battle. It’s a long war.

      1. avatar Mudshark says:

        We. Are winninng battles? Like the. Battle of Evermore, the queen of light took her bow, and then she tutned to go. ThePrince of peace walked the night alone. Yeh I can dig it . I hear the horses of thunder, down in the valley below

        1. avatar Mikial says:

          I suggest you either lay off the psychotropic drugs, or see your therapist for a higher dosage of your meds. Either that or you’re just another Liberal troll trying to sow confusion on sites you have no legitimate interest in being on because you have no actual life.

  2. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    I love the idea of being able to carry in any other state. (NY, CA, NJ, and so forth). However a 10th amendment challenge MAY make these null in void.

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      Justice Roberts has no problem ignoring the 10th much the same as most of the others.

      1. avatar Sambo82 says:

        The problem is that one or two of the conservative/federalist justices will stand on principal and say it’s a State sovereignty issue, and suddenly every Leftist on the court will proclaim how much they care about the 10th Amendment as well.

        This has zero chance of being upheld by the Court, and I’m usually a optimist about this stuff.

        1. avatar Model 31 says:

          Maybe we can get Thomas and Alito to not talk about it. I’ve seen no evidence the liberal justices even know the 10th exists.
          In researching this I found:
          “A liberal justices’ guide to the Amendments”
          1 – Free Press
          3 – Creates military bases and a proper place to store guns
          4 – Declares judges are neutral and always right
          5 – No double jeopardy
          6 – Jury duty is required
          7 – The reason for jury duty
          8 – A/C and cable TV for convicts
          9 – We really don’t like this one usually
          10 – Ten comes before 11
          11 – Can’t sue the government
          12 – Elections but look at the 13th
          13 – No more slavery – unless you own property or have a job, then give us your money
          14 – Everyone born here or sneaks in is a citizen unless you’re a conservative Senator from Texas
          15 – Everyone born here or sneaks in can vote. Dead voters will cast ballots for democrats
          16 – Yep, bringing slavery back but only if you work
          17 – Keep it moving, the 18th comes next
          18 – No beer ever again
          19 – Men will never agree to our agenda, let the women vote!
          20 – More election stuff, I sure need a drink
          21 – Hey beer is back
          22 – FDR was here a long time, can’t have a republican here that long
          23 – We need just a few more votes to make our guy President
          24 – Oh shoot, lots of our voters don’t pay their taxes -could be a problem
          25 – Somebody has got to be in charge
          26 – Everybody 18 and over can vote…no matter what
          27 – Our raise doesn’t kick in until the next congressional term. Good thing 90% of us will be back next year

        2. avatar B says:

          The 2nd has been incorporated into the states, so it’s no longer a state’s rights issue to force them to follow the Constitution. The 10th doesn’t apply when civil rights are violated, even when that right isn’t in writing anywhere, equal protection clase and all that. So it should doubly apply when the right is specifically written out. That’s what the supreme court just ruled last year in the whole marriage thing, right?

    2. avatar Ing says:

      Full faith and credit? It applies to marriage certificates and driver’s licenses, so it might as well apply to the second enumerated item in the Bill of Rights. (The progs will scream “state’s rights” because local tyranny is better than nationwide freedom.)

    3. avatar Mudshark says:

      Legal eagle, I carry in any state any where, any time I want to,Its a frickin misdameanor, if yah git caught, George Washington said I could, you panty waste demi demos r bettr then him? Ha. Patriots said I could, MEN thar fought to make me free

      1. avatar 16V says:

        A misdemeanor? I wish you the best of luck in your law studies…

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Well, I got a license in ’99 for the first time, had been carrying concealed since ’69, whenever I felt the need, in probably a dozen states including NY and CA, never even suffered a misdemeanor.

        2. avatar 16V says:

          So you never got caught carrying illegally, eh? ‘Cuz that’d be a felony in any of those states…

    4. avatar Jack says:

      But at the same time, NY and CA are trying to make the 2nd Amendment null and void.

  3. avatar Dan says:

    Article 4 section 1 of the U.S. CONSTITUTION. Nuff said

    1. avatar Alex waits says:

      Would be nice.

  4. avatar Wrightl3 says:

    So are they all the same?

  5. avatar mike says:

    HR 402 & 986 will fail. Because they allow any permit grant carry in any state with permits.

    S498 & HR 923 have a miniscule chance because they allow only HOME state permits to carry in any state with permits.

    402 & 986 would allow people who live in the Communist People’s Republic of Commiefornia to go to any state which grants them out of state permits to carry in Commiefornia

    I just can’t imagine any state being willing to give up their ability to decide if their state can decide if their citizens are prohibited.

    1. avatar Mudshark says:

      ThAt artickle this n that is B.S , thats word games n lawyers, edgeicatid (pussies) that are taking away freedoms through the use of education, education thats only obtainable by the rich. Thusly the rich dictate to the poor.

      1. avatar Mudshark says:

        I dont know what moderation means???? Blow me

  6. avatar Gregolas says:

    These bills all say CCP holders can go and carry in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry. But what about political subdivisions that don’t have to obey state law or recognize permits issued by other counties in that state (NYC for example). Would my AL permit have to be recognized by NYC ?

    1. avatar Katy says:

      While the structure of jurisdictions within NYS allow NYC to generally govern itself, the Feds don’t care. Your AL permit would, nominally, be acceptable in NYC, just like any other federal mandate. Reality may be…different.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        Saw this today, Katy, and thought of you.

        The Smithsonian Institution’s National Air & Space Museum’s Tribble-Cam:

        http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/85164569

        One as a pet would be nice, as long as it was neutered… 🙂

        1. avatar Katy says:

          An ecological menace!

          I could watch that all day.

  7. avatar AnhydrousWater says:

    No to the first two listed.

  8. avatar JOE MATAFOME says:

    Anyone know of any state that doesn’t allow concealed carry? I thought that every state had some sort of concealed carry process.

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      ‘May issue’ states are generally ‘no issue states’ in practice even if there is technically some way to carry.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        The “may issue” states typically do not honor permits from any other state. This includes NY, NJ, Ca. Md., Hi., and Il. (although Il does technically issue to nonstate residents).

        1. avatar Mudshark says:

          Stick a cheap smoker in yur pants n fck their law, just like a gangstah

        2. avatar 16V says:

          As long as you have the spare time and required melanin content to enjoy the prison lifestyle…

        3. avatar Ladd Boid says:

          Illinois is shall issue and issues permits without much ado as long as the seeker isn’t a felon, abuser, mental, or druggie, has the requisite training, and has paid the relatively high fee. The nonresident permit exists on paper but the requirements are so strict as to nearly preclude it being issued.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          The entire point is to allow you and me to carry where the Governor can, whether any of his constituenrs can, or not. Remember, so far as we know, DiFi has been licensed in CA for 20-30 years, but nobody else can get a permit.

    2. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      At this point all do, but as a practical matter in corrupt states like HI, NJ MD, NY, etc only the politically connected or those who essentially buy the right politician get a CCW, it ain’t gonna happen otherwise. Only “Shall issue” states are exempted from that type of corruption.

  9. avatar Mark N. says:

    Contact my representatives and senators???? Ahahahah! (I’m from California. Not one of my state reps is pro-gun, not even the nominally republican ones).

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      But all the state and federal representatives for CA have permits, how can that be true?

    2. avatar foodog says:

      +1. National constitutional carry is all I care about.

  10. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin} says:

    This bill is merely a symbolic gesture. A stand alone bill will be vetoed and the Republicans do not have the votes to override. .

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      That’s why we need it tacked onto a Bill the Progressive’s want passed real bad.

      1. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin) says:

        I don’t think they care about anything enough to allow national carry, at least without some other serious infringements like a ban on “military style assault rifles,” magazine capacity limits, universal background checks and handgun registration. So unless Ted Cruz happens and the Republicans keep control of both Houses of Congress I would rather not pay the price of anyone of the potential restrictions that will sell national carry to Obama and Co.

        1. avatar 16V says:

          They’ve had both houses for a while now. They’ve accomplished what exactly?

          Kept themselves employed like the rest, to eventually turn into well-paid lobbyists from K Street, or end up as well-paid employee of a business they used to regulate. NBC pays Chelsea Clinton $600K per year as a ‘special correspondent’, it really all has come off the rails in the last 30 years.

        2. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin} says:

          Glenn Reynolds posted a story about how ignorant Americans are about civics and history. Only about a quarter of the survey knew that it took 2/3 of each House to override a Presidential veto. You are obviously one of the 75%.

        3. avatar 16V says:

          Huh? I know the rules, they’ve done nothing but take care of themselves.

  11. avatar Mudshark says:

    I do not think I like this Bill Ammendment guy, seems like he is allways trying to screw someone. Bill Amendment, I do not like you, us dumb nigerz aint got a chance

  12. avatar Mudshark says:

    T TAG …..Hate you. Hate hate hate you. Ha ha hs thisvdumb hillbillyvwaevdumb rnuff to plsu your sht. And anyway “We.”got thle info we needed.

  13. avatar Mudshark says:

    Fuk u ttabgns. Gawdamn cia cooperetives

  14. avatar Mudshark says:

    So, your fuckin up, like what? 26 peoples lives. Can I change you? Rollon.u

  15. avatar Ragnar says:

    We don’t need a national carry law. We need to look at the Constitution:

    Article. IV.

    Section. 1.

    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

    My driver’s license works in every state, so does my marriage license. No reason that my CHL shouldn’t.

    1. avatar 16V says:

      Except when they say it doesn’t, and you face felony time.

  16. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

    I support an amendment where this Mud Shark guy loses his keyboard privileges.

    1. avatar Wrightl3 says:

      +1000

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      What for? He couldn’t read it anyhow.

  17. avatar Jared says:

    I love the 10th amendment crowd. They don’t even understand it. The 10th amendment doesn’t allow states to violate fundamental rights.

    A state couldn’t use the tenth amendment to only allow white people to vote. So if congress wants to pass national reciprocity to protect people from anti gun states, it’s entirely in their purview to do so.

  18. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

    Gee I just noticed in that pic it’s a Taurus Mil Pro in the holster. And no we’re never getting national reciprocity. Or a decent president. Arm up-a storm is coming…

  19. avatar Raoul Duke says:

    I don’t trust our government. Remember the slippery slope here. Once you give them power to determine national reciprocity you give them the power to dictate the rules. I guarantee you there will be politicians who will want to use this as a chance to stifle us especially if and when the Democrat party becomes the majority again.

    Be careful what you wish for with this.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email