H.R. 197-- the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009"

[gbrown221]

Friday, January 23, 2009

U.S. Representatives Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), recently introduced H.R. 197-- the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009"--a bill that would provide national recognition for valid state Right-to-Carry licensees.

The 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 if the permit holder meets certain criteria. In states that issue permits, a state's laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal standard would apply. The bill would not create a federal licensing system; it would simply require the states to recognize each other's carry permits, just as they recognize drivers' licenses.

Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) is expected to introduce the Senate companion bill in the near future. Rep. Stearns has introduced such legislation since 1995.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 197!

[knight0334]

Been posted elsewhere.

We stand a better chance at divvying the $900 billion stimulation bill directly to the 305 million citizens at about $2950.81 per man, woman and child.

[DiveGerry]

Received this letter from Chris Carney:

February 26, 2009

Dear XXXXX,

Thank you for your message regarding the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act.

Hearing from the people of northeastern and central Pennsylvania is an integral part of my job here in Congress and I appreciate you taking the time to contact me.

As an avid sportsman and firearms owner, I oppose the over regulation of guns owned by responsible Americans. Firearms safety education is an essential aspect of gun ownership, helping create a culture that respects the rights of gun owners and acknowledges their responsibilities. I am not supportive of any legislation that takes away the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

I am proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 197, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, which was introduced to Congress on January 6, 2009 by Representative Cliff Stearns. The bill proposes to amend the federal criminal code to allow a person with a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in one state to also carry in another state, provided they are not prohibited by federal law. Currently this bill is being reviewed by the House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Thank you again for contacting me. As always, please feel free to share your comments and concerns with my staff.

Sincerely,

Christopher P. Carney
Member of Congress

[5711-Marine]

My letter to Congressman Sestak.

Congressman Sestak,

As a former Marine who has defended the Constitution, who enjoys exercising my rights on a daily basis, I write to you to urge your support for H.R. 197 "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009"

The 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 if the permit holder meets certain criteria.

As you know the founding fathers were concerned with the right to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" as espoused in the Declaration of Independence.

I submit that it is the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution that guarantees all of the other rights of the citizens of the United States.

Denying someone a God given right as they cross the border into another state, is wrong on many levels.

Passing legislation that affirms the right to bear arms as a fundamental right regardless of geographic location within the United States, will also deal with this issue, without the need for costly court cases which seek to incorporate the 2nd Amendment under the 14th Amendment.

Sincerely,

I will post any reply I receive.

[Jelanen]

I honestly hope this bill dies. This is Federalism, regardless of how much it benefits me personally. Anytime the decision-making process is removed from the the states, I feel its a very bad thing. For as little control as I have over my state reps and state senators, I have even less over my US reps and senators. If Massachusetts doesn't want me carrying in their state, thats their right...they live there, they pay the taxes, they elect their leaders, not me.

[5711-Marine]

I honestly hope this bill dies. This is Federalism, regardless of how much it benefits me personally. Anytime the decision-making process is removed from the the states, I feel its a very bad thing. For as little control as I have over my state reps and state senators, I have even less over my US reps and senators. If Massachusetts doesn't want me carrying in their state, thats their right...they live there, they pay the taxes, they elect their leaders, not me.

I generally oppose federalism, however the several states ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. If it takes a Federal law to ensure all can exercise their rights regardless of the state they visit, then "federalism" is justified in my opinion.

[steamtownwelder]

I honestly hope this bill dies. This is Federalism, regardless of how much it benefits me personally. Anytime the decision-making process is removed from the the states, I feel its a very bad thing. For as little control as I have over my state reps and state senators, I have even less over my US reps and senators. If Massachusetts doesn't want me carrying in their state, thats their right...they live there, they pay the taxes, they elect their leaders, not me.

And here I thought I would be the sore thumb here. I couldn't agree more. Let the people of the many states decide how to legislate themselves. NO sweeping federal regulations are good.

[imp81318]

I honestly hope this bill dies. This is Federalism, regardless of how much it benefits me personally. Anytime the decision-making process is removed from the the states, I feel its a very bad thing. For as little control as I have over my state reps and state senators, I have even less over my US reps and senators. If Massachusetts doesn't want me carrying in their state, thats their right...they live there, they pay the taxes, they elect their leaders, not me.

I agree in principle. It would be nice, but I don't see any way it would gets passed, and I'm not sure it should either. Although, it would be nice to not have to worry about it if I start carrying...

[theshadow]

I hate to be a cold blanket here. The two things that concern me most, if the Federal Government Giveth, the Federal Government can Taketh away, and when that happens State Governments have no recourse and the people are left up the creek. I also despise making new laws where enforcement of existing ones exist. In this case, the clause in the constitution pertaining to the honoring of licenses between the multiple states.

A majority of the time I see Government intervention as a BAD thing.

[ThomasJ]

Friday, January 23, 2009

U.S. Representatives Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), recently introduced H.R. 197-- the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009"--a bill that would provide national recognition for valid state Right-to-Carry licensees.

The 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 if the permit holder meets certain criteria. In states that issue permits, a state's laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal standard would apply. The bill would not create a federal licensing system; it would simply require the states to recognize each other's carry permits, just as they recognize drivers' licenses.

Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) is expected to introduce the Senate companion bill in the near future. Rep. Stearns has introduced such legislation since 1995.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 197!

I'm on the fence about this one. On the one hand, states do recognize drivers licenses, marriage licenses, and such; and the 2nd Amendment is, to me, pretty straight forward and unconditional. On the other hand, there isn't even reciprocity for lawyers and, at its core, seems to be a states' rights issue.