Three days ago, The New York Times pronounced that The Highest Court in the Nation™ “misread” the Second Amendment when they ruled that the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right. So the Florida legislature had no business enforcing a 1987 law prohibiting cities and counties from passing local gun control regulations. Today, All The News That Fits throw a hissy fit about the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011. “This trashing of state and local prerogatives is not only unwise but unnecessary. In its wrongheaded 2008 decision recognizing an individual’s Second Amendment right to keep guns in the home for self-defense, the Supreme Court still left room for reasonable gun limits, including restrictions on toting concealed weapons.” Well . . .
If I read the bill (and Nick Leghorn’s interpretation) correctly, H.R.822 would let holders of an out-of-state concealed carry weapons license carry a firearm in any state that allows concealed carry. But just as RI driver must obey Massachusetts driving laws, a Bay State concealed carry license holder must obey The Ocean State’s ban on shooting Rhode Island Red Chickens after dark near a public highway or within 500 feet of a Dell’s lemonade stand. Or something like that.
Where’s the beef? H.R.822 wouldn’t impose any minimum state-wide qualification procedure.
Every state but Illinois makes some allowance for concealed weapons. The eligibility rules vary widely and each state decides whether to honor another state’s permits. For example, 38 states prohibit people convicted of certain violent crimes like assault or sex crimes from carrying concealed guns. At least 36 states set a minimum age of 21; 35 states require gun safety training.
The proposed National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 would shred those standards and the public safety judgments behind them, creating a locked-and-loaded race to the bottom in which states with strict requirements, like New York, would be forced to allow people with permits from states with lax screening to carry hidden loaded guns.
I love how they do that: insinuate that a New Yorker can actually get a concealed carry permit. You know; once they pass the State’s “stringent standards.” In fact, the Big Apple’s standards are so high that only politicians and their pals get a gatt.
The Times reckons if H.R.822 passes bad things will happen. “The bill’s nationalization of lenient concealed-carry rules would increase gun violence [from out-of-staters] and hinder efforts to combat illegal gun trafficking [by making cops check on the validity of out-of-state gun licenses].”
And there’s a bigger danger. If New York, California, Hawaii, New Jersey, etc. let the ballistic barbarians in the gate—and nothing happens— in-state residents will scream “Where MY Glock 30SF?” They’ll force their state to lower their standards. More and people will get guns. I’ll be a race to the bottom of the see I told you so.
Only thing is: concealed carry firearms licensees tend to be a relatively safe, decidedly non-criminal class of people, even when they’re given no mandatory training whatsoever. And more gun equals less crime, even if the owners are a bit of a Doofenshmirtz.
The Times’ postion on National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 reminds me of the old song “Why Can’t a Woman Be More Like a Man?” Redone as “Why Can’t All These Pro-Gun State Be More Like New York City?” Same condescending tone, same blindness to the facts of life.
At least we know who wins in the end.