As Deadline Nears, Second Amendment Supporters Demand Senate Vote on Concealed Carry Reciprocity

The United States Capitol Building in Washington DC

By Roger J. Katz

We have two weeks left before the Senate adjourns for the Christmas holiday.

If the Senate fails to act on national concealed handgun carry reciprocity within the next two weeks, any chance that this measure will be taken up anew when the House of Representatives seats a Democratic majority in 2019 will be virtually nil.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has been sitting on the bill that was sent to Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell, last December 2017, when it passed the Republican controlled House. The version of national concealed handgun carry reciprocity that passed the House is designated, 115 H.R. 38, “Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017.” Once Senator McConnell received it, he sent it immediately to the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Charles Grassley, for action. Clearly, no work was done on it and a year has gone by since the Judiciary Committee received it.

It is imperative we get the House version of the bill onto the floor of the Senate for an immediate roll-call vote.

This matter requires the concerted effort of each of us.

The Arbalest Quarrel has been at the forefront of national concealed carry reciprocity. We have written numerous articles on this subject. Interested readers are encouraged to read our articles by visiting our website.

Our articles have also been published by Ammoland Shooting Sports News. See our article, “National ‘Right To Carry’ For Self-Defense Needs Your Help – Take Action.” And, we have recently posted our article on the website, The Truth About Guns. As a regular guest on “LockNLoadRadio,” hosted by Bill Frady, we have discussed the issue of national right to carry, at length.

We have been getting many positive responses. Pro-Second Amendment groups, organizations, radio, respected news sources and social media have joined us to mount a grassroots effort to strengthen our sacred Second Amendment right.

We know that as you have gotten the message, you are doing your part to get the Senate to move on national concealed handgun carry reciprocity. Once the Senate passes the bill, it will be sent to the President for his signature. And have no doubt about this, President Trump will sign it. He has made very clear both during his campaign that he supports the natural, fundamental, unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms.

It’s time to urge Congress to act to strengthen our natural rights and liberties, not weaken them. We must have national concealed handgun carry reciprocity enacted into law now.

For those of you who have not added your voice to this critical effort, there is still time.

Important contact information

Senator McConnell may be reached at 202/ 224-2541, but he does not provide a personal response and he will not take messages at this time. However, there is a referral to Senator McConnell’s on-line email.

Senator Grassley can be reached at: 202/ 224-3744. The Senator provides a personal response to your message and your message will be relayed directly to the Senator.

Your Senate Delegation can be reached at: 202/ 224-3121. The switchboard will provide you the phone numbers for the Senators of your State.

You can reach the White House at:  202/ 456-1414. At the prompt, you can leave a message for President Trump.

The NRA can be reached at: 800-392-8683. You can leave a message, but be aware there may be a lengthy wait. You can also leave a message for the nra-ila.

With your active assistance, we can turn the tide and see national concealed handgun carry reciprocity a reality. Please join us in this important cause. Time is of the essence. We must get the Senate to act immediately on this.

 

Roger J. Katz has practiced law for the federal Government in Washington D.C., for the State Government in Arizona, and has been in private practice in Ohio, New York, and Arizona. Roger is a co-founder of Arbalest Group LLC, creator of the Arbalest Quarrel weblog, dedicated to strengthening the Second Amendment, preserving our Bill of Rights, and maintaining a free Republic

This article was originally published at arbalestquarrel.com and is reprinted here with permission. 

comments

  1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

    Its our last chance for two years, let’s light up the phone lines!

    1. avatar UsedToBePun says:

      Don’t want it. Don’t want anything the Fed .gov has to offer. Let the States decide. We don’t want liberal bastions to decide what is law in red areas so why do we want to force the same on others? We hate federal bans on guns like the NFA and GCA so why do we want Leviathan to now enshrine and protect our rights?

      What we need to realize is empire is not the answer. The 48 contiguous states are not all “American” by the same definition. Roughly 1/2 the population, mostly in urban cities does not care one wit for the rights that the other half holds dear.

      Time for divorce. Hopefully peacefully, but doubtful. The time of the giant nation-state must come to an end.

      1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        Sorry but Fat Neg Usedtobe. I was investigated more thoroughly for my concealed permit than for my drivers license which is good in all 50 states. And the 2A says “Shall Not Be Infringed”. That’s Federal as far as I’m concerned and every state needs to have that wake up call.

        1. avatar CZ Rider says:

          Every state needs to have that wake up call, but if the feds are the ones giving it, what’s to stop them from, say, requiring a mandatory level of training for the now-federal permit? It’s only fair since you’re forcing states to accept other states’ licenses. I’m sure something like 80 hours of expensive training and a CLEO signoff with a hefty fee and yearly renewal would do the trick, since places like NY and CA and MA probably wouldn’t accept any less.

        2. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

          No CZ, Shall Not Be Infringed means that Ma, NY, Calif and any other moonbat state can just suck on it. My Maine drivers license is accepted without question. My Maine CCP needs to be just as valid and too fucking bad if it makes them run for a safe space.

        3. avatar CZ Rider says:

          Oh, your new 50-state CCP will be valid, it’ll just also require all kinds of draconian extra steps because those moonbat states wouldn’t honor the deal without adding them. Or maybe they’ll declare themselves anti-2A sanctuaries and give the feds the finger. We aren’t going to win this one by just passing a law and waving it in the face of our opposition. We’re going to win it by turning their voting base against them at the state level until opposing reciprocity is an unelectable position to take.

        4. avatar UsedToBePun says:

          You can sit there and say “every state needs a wake up call” all you want, but that’s no different than Cuomo telling the people of NY that they cannot drink 44oz Sodas! That is you wanting to enforce your will on them!

          True liberty means that if people want to willingly trade their rights for slavery, then they should be free to do so. Going to Disney Land might be your ideal vision of a day of happiness, but if you drag someone kicking and screaming when they don’t want to go there then that will be hell for them.

          Having FedGov blanket enforce anything is immoral and evil. Free people get to decide how they want to be governed and by whom.

          Our “sacred Union” is anything but. We are nothing but Rome rebuilt. Empire is not the answer.

          I would rather live in a State with people who willingly live in mutual respect of rights and liberty than to travel to some State where Uncle Sam has forced them to “respect” a right that they don’t. You really think that if NYC is forced to recognize peoples’ CC permits from Kansas that the governor and other local politicians still won’t do everything they can to make the whole visit painful? Local law enforcement will be all to happy to cause pain on any outsider with a gun…sure they may have to end up letting you go, but there’s all sorts of legal loopholes that they can use that still cause misery.

        5. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

          @ both CZ and Usedtobe.

          The basis behind National Reciprocity is the 2A. One of those amendments to the Constitution. That thing that ALL STATES are supposed to have to follow.

          Individual states do not have the legal authority to make modifications to ANY of the amendments.

      2. avatar burley says:

        This particular concept IS Federal law. The Constitution is being ignored in states that do not allow CC. This is not us deciding for them, this is the lawful enforcing the LAW. Shall not be infringed means something simple and plain. If we don’t hold each other accountable to the equal application of protection of rights, there’s no Republic.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      I’ve done my bit…but it’s hard to “demand” anything when the POTUS isn’t with us on this….

  2. avatar tdiinva says:

    Demand all you want but there are not enough votes for cloture.

    1. avatar Too Frank says:

      Agreed. I like TTAG, but this kind of reporting is where TTAG fails. This bill, and every single revision of it got less than last time around. For goodness sakes, Chuck Schumer is the minority leader and has control of enough votes to utterly easily block it. He is not some Dem from Missouri or Florida but from NYC. Do we really think NYC Dem is going to allow people with a Florida licence carry in NY where New Yorkers can’t even?

      This reciprocity attempt is best used as a poison pill against gun control. This was done with UBC, a stake was driven though the heart of UBC in 2013, despite overwhelming public support, with a reciprocity amendment proposal. This was very smart judo against UBC given reciprocity was not even going to get to cloture 2013 when it had even more support.

      1. avatar Kyle says:

        This sort of issue can only be fought by active disobedience, but sadly, that can very quickly become a felony.

        Tough fight.

        1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

          Time to heed the call up.

        2. avatar frank speak says:

          just more excuses to continue to change more and more of us into convicted felons…all part of their end-game….

    2. avatar LKB says:

      Unfortunately, you’re correct. Like with the HPA, the GOP missed their opportunity, and now that ship has sailed.

      The time to have pushed this was before the midterms, when the GOP might have gotten some Dems in close races to defect. Now, fugetaboutit — they can block it and they know it.

      1. avatar rosignol says:

        Concur yr analysis.

        I remain hopeful for 2020, tho. The vast herds of RINOs that once wandered the halls of Congress are significantly diminished, and if Trump is re-elected, he may gain a House Majority along with it.

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      What a wonderful excuse politicians use when they don’t want to do something they promised.

      They COULD actually press the issue and force the anti-gunners to stand up and filibuster, putting their faces and names up there and putting a lie to the whole “I support the 2nd Amendment BUT…” lines but they won’t. Because that would take work. Because it would cost political capital. Because then the dems might actually make THEM filibuster instead of threatening to do it.

      And why should they bother? It doesn’t matter. Every cycle the same pro-2nd organizations that demand action now will say “well, better vote for them again, better than the dems.” They win, we lose.

  3. avatar Mark N. says:

    Sorry Robert, the battle is already lost. MConnell sent the bill to the Judiciary Committee to die because its provisions conflicted with the bill proposed by Cornyn. Which means it has been “almost but not quite dead” for a year. Come January 3, the sun will rise and the bill will turn to ashes.

    Maybe it is politics, maybe it is not, but it sure as heck is numbers, and the Republicants ain’t got ’em. They need nine Democraps to sign on and no Republicants to defect just to get a bill on the floor for a vote. McConnell doesn’t have even five. After the midterms, I’d be surprised if he had any dems to vote to end a filibuster. The filibuster hurdle is insurmountable.

    1. avatar Too Frank says:

      They never had the numbers needed at any stage or any revision in this bill it is not McConnell or the NRA’s fault. they had less votes than last time when it also failed.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        still…pushing hard may lead to some sort of compromise…you won’t know until you try…

        1. avatar GunnyGene says:

          No Compromise. Shoot this bill in the head, and bury it – or let it rot in the sun for the buzzards.

        2. avatar CC says:

          They got a compromise. It was used last time to stop the freight train of Universals Background Check (something like 75% public support).

  4. avatar LarryinTX says:

    This is a wonderful example of why liberal (Dem) gunowner/contributors here are sometimes treated disrespectfully. Any vote for a Dem is a vote against any recognition of 2A whatsoever, there is no such thing as a single right you have that your chosen representatives have not and will not attempt to take from you, and from me, as well. You need to research, and then get on board. After our Constitutional rights have been restored, you can go back to voting for free stuff.

    1. avatar Sprocket says:

      The are not treated disrespectfully, they are treated like the disingenuous fifth column crap weasels they are. One need only look at Democratic platforms at the state and national level or the laws in any area Democrats control to know the party is working for the destruction of the second amendment. This means our leftie friends are either suffering from some untreated psychological disorder, or are here to advance their agenda under false pretenses.

  5. avatar Stateisevil says:

    Not even going to waste the time

  6. avatar MAGA says:

    Shenanigans like this from the republicans makes me wonder why I vote republican.

    The democrats are all a bunch of tyrants and commies, but the republicans are too pussified to fight back.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      not enough of the repubs actually support this….

      1. avatar CC says:

        You have some of the most fact challenged posts here. Every Republican in the Senate supports this. Every one. We’d need seven DEMOCRAT Senators and do not have them, not even close. How are you blaming the GOP or Trump? There is no way for this to pass. It needs 60 votes in the Senate.

  7. avatar GS650G says:

    There is no way senators from anti gun states will support a law allowing carry on terms they can’t control.

  8. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Negative. People who support this POS bill need to look past the end of their pointy noses. You really think the Blue states will allow a resident of a permitless carry state to get anywhere near their borders? We fought hard for years in many States to get permitless carry and we will not tolerate it being jeopardized to satisfy some bullshit compromise that would be immediately forthcoming.

    1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

      Gunny, that’s not how it worked. You need a valid CCP from your state in order to qualify. There was no expectation of being able to just go traipsing around the country carrying if you were simply a resident of a constitutional carry state.

      1. avatar GunnyGene says:

        I know how it works. I’ve read the bill several times, and it contains language that will require recognition of legal carry by residents from permitless carry states who do not have a permit from their State. Such as MS and 12 others.

        Quote:

        Ҥ 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

        “(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document containing a photograph of the person, and who is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides, may possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State that—

        “(1) has a statute under which residents of the State may apply for a license or permit to carry a concealed firearm; or

        “(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

        “(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that—

        “(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or

        “(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

        “(c) (1) A person who carries or possesses a concealed handgun in accordance with subsections (a) and (b) may not be arrested or otherwise detained for violation of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof related to the possession, transportation, or carrying of firearms unless there is probable cause to believe that the person is doing so in a manner not provided for by this section. Presentation of facially valid documents as specified in subsection (a) is prima facie evidence that the individual has a license or permit as required by this section.

        “(2) When a person asserts this section as a defense in a criminal proceeding, the prosecution shall bear the burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the conduct of the person did not satisfy the conditions set forth in subsections (a) and (b).

        “(3) When a person successfully asserts this section as a defense in a criminal proceeding, the court shall award the prevailing defendant a reasonable attorney’s fee.

        “(d) (1) A person who is deprived of any right, privilege, or immunity secured by this section, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any State or any political subdivision thereof, may bring an action in any appropriate court against any other person, including a State or political subdivision thereof, who causes the person to be subject to the deprivation, for damages or other appropriate relief.

        “(2) The court shall award a plaintiff prevailing in an action brought under paragraph (1) damages and such other relief as the court deems appropriate, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

        “(e) In subsection (a):

        “(1) The term ‘identification document’ means a document made or issued by or under the authority of the United States Government, a State, or a political subdivision of a State which, when completed with information concerning a particular individual, is of a type intended or commonly accepted for the purpose of identification of individuals. endquote.

        That means that my MS DL by itself meets the criteria set forth above. CA, NY, NJ, and many other States know this and will demand the bill be revised or amended (compromised) to exclude people such as myself. Why should I be required to pay $100+ just to travel armed to another State, when I don’t need a permit within my State? MS does not require residents of some other State to have a permit.

        If y’all want Reciprocity, fine, but do it right. Get rid those politicians in your own State that stand in the way of Permitless Carry. That would be true Reciprocity. Not some stupid, discriminatory, and ineffective Federal Law.

  9. avatar Michael in AK says:

    that ship sailed. Next time, run and vote for conservatives, not RINOs and Dems

    1. avatar CC says:

      What do RINOs have to do with this? This had support of all GOP senators, it needs a whole bunch of Democrat Senators to get to 60 votes and doesn’t have them

  10. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Take a bad idea, rush it through Congress minutes before vacation, before a change of power in the House, and all tinkered with and voted on by a significant number of lame duck legislators? LOL!!!! You’ll be sorry………

  11. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I read the bill last year I did my cheerleading last year and as written it might have helped a few residents traveling from one state to another. Like New Jersey or being caught in NYC. To me this is a states issue.
    Florida has reciprocity with almost 40 of the states. If I traveled in 10 of them that would be about 9 too many. Take this up with your local gubbermint where you can. Nationally it was dead on arrival in the Senate last year. Not enough votes then wouldn’t be any more in a lame duck Senate. More then likely even less.

  12. avatar CZ Rider says:

    The more I think about it, the happier I am that reciprocity by federal legislation won’t pass, and I really wish we hadn’t dumped so much time and effort into it. Instead of forcing it on all the states immediately and inviting endless legal challenges and attempts to subvert it, we need to focus on state-level acceptance and agreements and work to normalize it until CCW and reciprocity become the unquestionable norm. Our fight at the federal level always should have been to pick out, ridicule, and work to repeal the stupidest and most nonsensical bits of law on the books.

  13. avatar possum says:

    We’re paying them sons a bitches to take 3 week long vacations, that’s bullshit, no wonder this country is going broke

  14. avatar andrew cilenti says:

    its time to make your govt work for you!
    Stop self defeating yourselves make the phone calls described above
    then stop sending money to political hacks who ignore us
    if the Republican party cant see that Herr Muller is a Nazi the I will change my voter registration to independent
    WE NEED TERM LIMITS FOR CONGRESS!!!!!!!!!!

  15. avatar Vicrattlehead says:

    While I agree this is a States issue, there are several States in the Union who have completely, utterly, blatently and even proudly thumbed their noses at the Constitution and they will NEVER, not in a MILLION years, under ANY circumstances honor ANY out of state CCW licenses. Nothing short of a Fed-level smackdawn will ever convince them otherwise, even then I could see at least a few (I’m looking at you Ca/NJ/NY) actively defy a federal order to honor out of state permits.

    1. avatar CZ Rider says:

      Cool. Okay. Let’s work toward a future where those few states are considered backward and useless for continuing to deny people their right to self defense. It’ll take a long time and a dedicated effort, but I think we’ll achieve better and more lasting results at the state level. National politics are too sensationalized and theater-driven to get anything really effective done. All we’d do is get smeared by the media as extremists while the politicians laugh behind closed doors at us thinking we ever had a chance in the first place.

    2. avatar GunnyGene says:

      “they will NEVER, not in a MILLION years, under ANY circumstances honor ANY out of state CCW licenses. Nothing short of a Fed-level smackdawn will ever convince them otherwise…”

      And most certainly Hell will freeze over before they recognize a simple drivers license from a permitless carry State such as MS.

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      there are elements in the Hughes amendment that should permit you to transport your firearm(s) safely through restrictive states…but even that is not always honored…

      1. avatar GunnyGene says:

        Sorry but “transport” is not good enough. If I can’t carry it on my hip, loaded and ready to rock, it’s useless.

  16. avatar Vhyrus says:

    “And have no doubt about this, President Trump will sign it. He has made very clear both during his campaign that he supports the natural, fundamental, unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

    Ahah. Ahahahaha. AhahahAHAHAHAHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!!!

    You cannot be serious right now.

    If it actually did pass I’m sure he would sign it only because vetoing it would be suicide for 2020, but that’s the only reason.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      trump has already stated his views on this issue….and it isn’t favorable….

  17. avatar Ark says:

    Senator Turtle does not really believe the plebes should be armed.

  18. avatar Matt in Floridy says:

    This is a terrible idea. If you got caught legally carrying a gun in NYC you’ll be sitting in a public cell at Rikers Island eating banana pudding with roaches and rotten bologna sandwiches wondering when your gang rape was coming.

    You’ll be in jail for days while they “figure out” your legality if they don’t just shoot you first.

    Be certain places like Hawaii, CA, NY, MA and NJ would make your life a living hell if you try to ccw on their commie turf. Not to mention if this nonsense passed (which it won’t) congress would revoke your ccw rights as soon as the democrats took control again.

  19. avatar x says:

    everyone whining about how futile it is, how there’s no chance this will pass, can’t make cloture;

    These are the people who make excuses not to help. They’re the ones who don’t show up to lobbying events, but criticize them. They’re the people who complain loudly on the internet, but never actually contribute to advancing RKBA. When called on it, they protest loudly about how strongly they support RKBA but you can see proof herein, there are a lot of our community – if you can call the blogosphere our community, who simply say they support RKBA, but when it comes time to actually do something, they do nothing.

    just like Republican politicians

    1. avatar CC says:

      You are the one whining. Some of us know the facts, can pass civics 101, and know 60 Senate votes are needed.
      How are you blaiming “republican politicians” when this is a republican effort, with full republican support, but is blocked by Democrats on the 60 vote rule? Do the Republcians have 60 votes in the US Senate? (NO).

  20. avatar Daniel says:

    They won’t vote because they don’t have any guts or brains.

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