nationwide reciprocity bill H.R. 822 from NRA website

[FNG19]

There's an easy solution for this. A two tiered license. We can call the current LTCF a Class B LTCF and is valid only in PA and in those states that currently have reciprocity with PA. If you take training, then you get a Class A LTCF and get nationwide reciprocity.

What would you say if they set the Class A requirements to, say, being able to shoot a 1" group at 25 yards with your carry weapon, and knowing chapter and verse all applicable federal and state laws?

How about, once that Class A system is in place, the states decide that it's too expensive to keep their state-wide one, and drop the program? Then, once about 90% of the states have done this, the national system goes away. Voila, no more carry.

That's exactly what's wrong with a nationalized system.

[Falcon118]

I don't think it's as simple as "Voila no more carry" You would still have the
2A to deal with at the Federal level, and the local state constitiutions to deal with. The Law being proposed isn't a federal license but rather forcing states to honor any other states current license. Your stating that "once about 90% of the states have done this, the national system goes away" doesn't make sense as the "National System" is just reciprocacy of a license that already exists. If the Federal law were to "go away" then you would be right back where you started from here with the reciprocacy we have.

[FNG19]

I don't think it's as simple as "Voila no more carry"

I agree with what you say, but I think you might've missed my point. My point was that a two-tier system based on national reciprocity (NR) will lead to some real problems, as eventually people migrate onto the "NR" licenses and the training requirements become both higher and homogenous throughout the states. Effectively, you get to a point where it's "easier" to just have a national license with those standards, since, after all, they'd eventually become the same, and at that point, you have one centralized license. Once that license is in place, the states no longer need to run individual systems, and I suspect many states will drop out of that business altogether to save money. If that's accomplished, it becomes a simple matter for a 2A-hostile administration to shut down those licenses by administrative fiat, and then we're at least two years out from a SCOTUS decision forcing the Administration to keep the federal license open -- unless, of course, one of the Heller Five are replaced by a Democratic Administration, in which case we're well and truly screwed.

Seem unlikely/impractical? Consider what someone like our current president would do with a second term, given that he can stack the executive with people sympathetic to his views, and had the regulatory stroke of the pen. Consider what someone even more hostile to our rights could do. And, finally, consider what an ideologically opposed House could do with the purse strings.

That's why I'm all for keeping licenses at the state level and having the federal government set up national reciprocity as a matter of law. It gives us national rights with local-ish entry. As long as licenses are necessary, that's about as good a setup as we can get, IMHO.

[IronSight]

As long as licenses are necessary, that's about as good a setup as we can get, IMHO.

Excellent post, but I have to add that those licenses are slowly becoming unnecessary, as State after State moves ever closer to Constitutional Carry; we may yet see Pennsylvania do away with licenses within our lifetimes.

Constitutional Carry across the board is, in my opinion, "as good a setup as we can get". Will we ever see it in every State? I don't know, because it will be a hard fight to get it there and a lot would have to go our way; it's a fight I'm more than willing to be involved in though.

[thefirstndsecond]

How about a banner across the top of the screen advertising this bill?

What say FOAC?

[knight0334]

As for PA having a training, fingerprint, etc requirement - the only way I'd be for it is if PA repeals 6106, 6107, 6108, and a few other subsections, making PA a Constitutional Carry state with the license as optional.

Having 2 different licenses is not the solution. Requiring training is just as bad, if not worse than, as having to need a license to begin with.

[PaBimmerGuy]

training requirements have not been the onerous thing that some think that are.

to get my arizona permit i just had to send a copy of my nra instructors card. a dd214 would have worked as would a hunter safety class certificate.

actually the training requirements for most states are pretty laughable.

[FNG19]

actually the training requirements for most states are pretty laughable.

Then they're useless, and should be removed. It seems like the only reason they're there is to appease the gun control crowd or to provide political cover for politicians who know it's career death to vote against pro-guns laws but want to claim they stood tough against "the gun lobby".

Don't get me wrong. I think good training is invaluable, but I don't think it should be a legal requirement for the exercise of one's rights. If training were considered to be a legal requirement for any other right, imagine the consequences for the First Amendment or voting rights.

[Corn Flake]

A two tier license will still be administered by the state, not the feds. I compare it with the driver's licenses, where you have different categories with different requirements, they are all issued by their respective states, but are recognized nationwide.

Ideally, the 2A will allow you to carry nationwide without a license of any sort, but I don't think that that is politically possible right now. The best we can hope, other than a two tier scheme, would be to have constitutional carry and an optional license for reciprocity.

[FNG19]

A two tier license will still be administered by the state, not the feds. I compare it with the driver's licenses, where you have different categories with different requirements, they are all issued by their respective states, but are recognized nationwide.

That's still a really bad analogy. There's no "inside of PA and the handful of states that like our DL" driver's license and "everywhere in the US" driver's license. DL classes come because of the type of vehicle, not where it's good. To be more accurate, you'd have to advocate for one license for revolvers, and one for semi-autos. Clearly, that's absurd.

The other comparison, possibly, could have to do with Junior vs. Senior DL's, but even that's more about passenger limitations (rounds you can carry) and time limits, not about geographical limitations.

No matter how you slice it, two-tiered licenses don't make sense. Now, I understand the concept of getting a license for purposes of reciprocity (a la VT or AK), but having two different licenses makes no sense. We have one tier now, and look at all the problems we have with that as it is. People already can't keep track of what the license does and doesn't do, and what requires a license and what doesn't. Adding another license into the mix will just add more mud to already muddy waters, and will give us nothing in exchange but more hassle.