National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Clears House Panel!

Capitol Hill NRA

Big day on the hill for gun owners.  National concealed carry reciprocity is one step closer to becoming a reality.  (Photo: NRA-ILA)

As expected, a House panel green lit national concealed carry reciprocity this week despite intense caterwauling from Democrats and anti-gun groups.

By a vote of 19-11, the House Judiciary Committee said “yes” to the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 38). This NRA-backed bill would allow permitted gun owners to carry in all 50 states. It would also allow off-duty police and retired police carry in school zones.

“Law-abiding citizens should be able to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense while traveling across state lines without fear of unknowingly breaking the law,” said Chris Cox, the executive director of the NRA-ILA.

“For years, the National Rifle Association’s top legislative priority has been to pass National Concealed Carry Reciprocity, a much-needed solution to the confusing patchwork of state and local gun laws,” Cox continued.

During the hearing, Democrats tried to add various amendments to the bill. As USA Today reported, the amendments would have:

  • banned anyone convicted of a violent misdemeanor in the past three years from carrying a concealed weapon in a state where that conviction would disqualify them from carrying in public.
  • protected state laws banning firearms on private property, such as bars.
  • expanded background checks.
  • required the permits to be issued in the states where the holder resides.

The panel rejected all of them. The bill will now head to the House floor for a full vote. Maybe as soon as next week. This has anti-gunners are in full panic mode.

BREAKING: Bipartisan Gun Deal Reached!

“House Republicans have ignored growing opposition from the law enforcement community, mayors and the American public in order to push the gun lobby’s number one priority, ‘concealed carry reciprocity,’” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety.

“Everytown and Moms Demand Action will work tirelessly to defeat ‘concealed carry reciprocity,’ and in the voting booth next fall, Americans will remember who supported this dangerous legislation,” he concluded.

National Reciprocity will likely clear the House but it will definitely face stronger opposition in the Senate. In fact, to clear the Senate, it will need some Democrats to jump on board.

Along with H.R. 38, the panel voted 17-6 in favor of bipartisan legislation to improve the FBI’s background check system.

The Fix NICS Act, as it’s called, is a carrot and stick approach to background checks. It provides incentives for states and government agencies to report relevant criminal and mental health records to NICS. It also seeks to hold “accountable” those agencies and states who fail to submit records.

Democrats and Republicans, pro-gunners and anti-gunners support the Fix NICS Act.  It’s a pretty safe bet that it will become law.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 76 comments… add one }
  • DR. DAVE December 3, 2017, 3:32 pm

    Does reciprocity include cities and counties as well as states? I imagine a situation which allows me to carry in California unless I enter a city or county that forbids it. This would be more confusing than the current situation.

  • Jon December 3, 2017, 11:49 am

    I didn’t write this, but I believe in it 100%

    “I’d like to ask my friends to please consider avoiding the term “2nd Amendment Rights” as we have our now monthly
    arguments about gun control.
    That term implies that the federal government granted you the right to bear arms. It didn’t.
    The right to bear arms is a natural property right, granted you by your humanity, and is inalienable.
    The 2nd Amendment merely prevents the federal government from infringing on rights you already have.
    It actually matters, because when you concede, even unintentionally, that the government granted your rights,
    you set up the argument that rights which are granted by government can be rescinded by government.”

  • Tom December 3, 2017, 12:31 am

    So explain to me how any American needs to beg permission (and pay for) from the state in the form of a permit/license to exercise their 2nd amendment right justified.

    Driving is a privilege… ok… Owning a firearm and carrying/bearing that firearm in pursuit of self defense is a right… Either you are for the US Constitution or you are not, Constitutional carry nation wide is the ONLY way to go.

  • ice December 1, 2017, 11:04 pm

    My Driver License is valid in all States and I have to obey each State’s Laws so my CPL should be valid in all states as long as I obey state Laws.

  • cisco kid December 1, 2017, 7:18 pm

    While Right Wing Fanatics are always screaming States rights but they conveniently ignore the fact that it is technically a State Right to regulate firearms not the Federal Government but since the Constitution has always been a joke to wipe your ass with this has been ignored as much as the Supreme Court has consistently trashed the 2nd Amendment and in their latest ass wipe decision reversed their Heller ruling and refused to hear a semi-auto ban and confiscation which effectively outlaws all modern firearms which would include guns dating as far back as 1896 and the first semi-auto pistols and rifles. Since there are Republicans lining up against Reciprocity its a dead deal already and if by some miracle it would pass the corrupt Supreme Court would side with the anti-gun law suits against it and again making it a dead deal.

    • common sense December 4, 2017, 6:16 pm

      cisco your an IDIOT .SUPREME COURT has never bashed the 2nd amendment .LIBTARD

  • mcfoo December 1, 2017, 3:07 pm

    So it passed by a vote of 19-11 – “1911” – now that is irony… heh

    • Coltlvr December 1, 2017, 5:26 pm

      Hopefully it’s a blessing that this and other Second Ammendment rights laws will finally be passed!

  • Tripwire December 1, 2017, 2:28 pm

    I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this issue and I’ve come to the conclusion that 2A aside there are people who should not be carrying a gun. I’ve seen them and so have you. If they do come up with a real National Reciprocity law I want it to contain a clause that the person applying have to attend a real safety course and prove they can handle a gun properly.
    I carried for many years in MT and only had to show my DD214 as proof of having had some kind of weapons training. Here in Texas I had to attend a class and take a test which was a farce on the face of it. There was nothing about it that showed one had any ability to use a gun. Most of the class did good to hit the target half the time. An Instructor should instruct. A young lady had a jam and the “instructor” had no idea how to clear it, I finally did it as he looked for a screwdriver to pry away at it, I dropped the mag and jacked the slide back, that’s all it took, I also spent a few seconds showing her how to hold it and to use the sights. That asswipe should not be instructing anybody on anything.
    We all know and love the 2A but face it the presents of the 2A has nothing to do with being qualified to carry a gun. I can hear the howls already but what I said is true. Some people just can’t be trusted to handle a gun properly and having been a range office in pistol matches I can say some of the very worse offenders were cops.

    • Jon L December 1, 2017, 4:47 pm

      I disagree with your clause, however I understand your issues. So many are not trained outside of an initial course for their ccw, but the fact is that it is the responsibility of the individual to train outside of some certificate course they might take. The individual is liable for whatever befalls them due to lack of training (negligent discharge, lack of understanding certain laws, etc). Even if your clause were enacted it would be nothing more than some entry level training like everyone must take to drive a 3000-6000lb death vehicle on the road at high rates of speed. Vehiclular deaths are way higher than gun deaths each year and yet all we have to do is pass a crap test and do a small bit of driving and we are off…….and that’s for a privilege and not a right as it should be.

      This right is the individuals right and if taken for granted can result in serious consequences, but it’s on the individual to bear that responsibility for training and not a government mandate to make sure you know how to excercise your right.

      Federal agents qualify four times a year and still aren’t well trained, which agrees with your point about cops and military as a whole. You cannot solve the safety problem with some mandated training. The individual must train often and correctly whether civilian or LE/Mil to stay proficient but again that’s on the individual.

      In closing, we agree that training is an issue 100%, but we probably disagree on who should levy that requirement. You appear to lean to the government to ensure someone is properly trained (properly trained is an entirely different discussion) and I take the stance that once a background check is done and a permit is issued the individual must take it upon themselves to train.

      • tom p hebb December 2, 2017, 9:27 pm

        It does bother me some that many who carry simply attend a weekend course and are licensed after a background/NCIC check. Not so much so that we do away with it but some sort of added training would be nice. In general though I believe those getting ccws are fairly conciensious. It’s those who don’t bother with any of that and don’t understand the laws or even have basic safety skills who maybe should have a course of some sort. The problem is though thst ss soon as we go there the politicians will complicate things. What irritates me a little is how retired cops are looked at compared to CCW holders. Here in NV I have my retired I.D. and badge and can carry concealed in NV. In order to be legal whereever I go I got a LEOSA permit too. It must be renewed every year which is fine. I have 25 years, with 8 years SWAT another 18 months on the Jail special team, and did tons of training using, handguns, submachine guns, boltguns, and the tactics involved. I’m a certified explosive breacher licensed in NV and under ATF, I hold certificates for numerous special trainng courses. I shot matches on my own time. I buy a firearm I get checked each and every time. The CCW holder most with little training do not need to checked as long as CCW is valid. It’s goofy right? I’ve been told to get a CCW. It just bothers me some that the government feels I need a check each time when Mr./Mrs. Smith first time gun owner with CCW is somehow more trustworthy. LOL

    • Russ H. December 1, 2017, 4:53 pm

      I agree.

    • Bill December 1, 2017, 5:24 pm

      National carry is needed, however the carrier MUST take a NRA course and pass with 90 or better! If criminals can carry, but they don’t know if you the target is they are less likely to try and rob or kill you! I am VN VET I know what guns are capable of doing!

    • JC December 1, 2017, 5:24 pm

      Spot on as far as I am concerned. I believe in the right to carry, but not for everybody. And a good course with legitimate trainers should be required initially and annually to prove competence.

    • John December 1, 2017, 9:24 pm

      Roger That!

    • Red December 4, 2017, 10:38 am

      I totally agree. The founding fathers who wrote the 2A had in mind that it pertained to Able Bodied men. Men who could be counted on to bring their weapons and maintain law and order / defense of the newly formed country. I am certain they had no desire that the amendment apply to all. For example look who they expected to have voting rights! Besides being able bodied you were expected to be 21 years of age and own property. In other words they expected true citizens to have some stake in the country and its course Of course at its writing the 2A of course did not apply to women nor minorities I am not saying therefore that it should be strictly adhered to, but yes some common sense must be applied towards say mentally handicapped, criminals and non citizens It’s refreshing to hear a view point such as yours in these crazy times!!

  • Dave Brown December 1, 2017, 12:54 pm

    Well it is about time! And Yes it might actually pass, but then on The Shadow Knows as Wash DC is helpless and hopeless. I would really enjoy having this passed, and it may even be a right. Driving a Car is a right in my book or should I say driving without a Gov Required Driving Permit is actually a Right. Me, I guess I lean to the Left, you read that right or correctly. I guess I have leaned to the Left since I got my Draft Card during Nam. Over the years this somewhat Left guy has carried since about the age of 25 which is 40 years ago. I have been shooting and hunting for 51 of those years, and I got my kids and grandkids shooting at a younger age then me. Great Times, wouldn’t change any of it, even those dark days of no extended mags, and even having to sign for ammo. You read that right. Now I think those laws or rules were a right and left thing, and they did not hurt much. Sort of like the NFL Law, it hasn’t hurt us, and I think it will stay in place, that or we will be back in The Wild West. Me I live is SD, basically a Right State, yet close to the Wild West still. So maybe this Law will pass, and maybe US on the right and left will learn to get along better, but then maybe Pigs Will Fly. Dae

    • al December 1, 2017, 3:22 pm

      you live in san diego , ca. and you call it a right state. i assume you mean as in politics. i lived in commiefornia for half my life and left when i was 25. the best thing i ever did. could not wait to leave. you people live under a rock and just don’t see or want to admit that california is as close to a CCCP state as can be. just a little example of how i can prove it, why do you think that the powers to be in california are letting thousands and thousands of illegal’s into your state every year ? By the way do you have any idea how many are there now ? why are so many white and legal people leaving your state each month ? it’s no accident you fools , when there are only illegals which will comprise the majority of population the powers to be will do as they wish with no fear of fall out. that’s ok with me cause you get what you vote for. and if you meant a right to carry state that is a total lie and you know it. just ask the average non criminal Joe that lives there with you. what a stupid shit you are. aircra

      • Russ H. December 1, 2017, 4:54 pm

        I think he means S Dakota…

      • Barkus Riudis December 1, 2017, 6:23 pm

        Ditto, California, and Florida are not States, they are third world countries. Napa Valley is the only worthwhile place worth saving. What good is this law, if I cannot get on a plane with my EDC to NYC and Chicago (where I have friends, relatives) if this law does not apply to them? How are these low lives getting away with denying 2A in Chicago and NYC? “Remember The Alamo.”

        • Sepp W December 3, 2017, 7:27 am

          These places are liberal enclaves. In liberal dystopias there are no criminals, only crime and guns are so tightly regulated or controlled it infringes law-abiding citizens rights. You have 2 choices: Don’t go or go unarmed.

      • Glenn December 1, 2017, 6:46 pm

        Let me just say….Kate Steinle….Need I say more? There needs to be a fence built from Mexico to Canada to protect us from these “Brain Dead” people in Calif.

  • FirstStateMark December 1, 2017, 12:14 pm

    Don’t get your panties all in a knot, these dick-heads can’t pass gas let alone H.R. 38.

  • Dave December 1, 2017, 12:07 pm

    Everybody thinks this is a win for gun rights. I don’t! It sets a precedent that the Fed can have the final say over State authority with respect to concealed carry, OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW of its Constitutional duty to uphold the 2nd Amendment. Once this precedent is set, the Fed has its foot in the door to rule against States’ authority on issues both for and against gun owners. All everybody see is the immediate benefit of a CCH being valid everywhere. Can you say: “Trojan Horse?”

    • Dennis M December 1, 2017, 2:15 pm

      Do you then think that you need to get a drivers license from each state you drive through? If Arkansas didn’t recognize a Texas DL then their state sheriffs would pull over every vehicle with a Texas plate for violation of their law. The same thing holds true of any state that doesn’t honor the TX CHL (pull over the vehicle and confiscate any guns found without due process). [Trust me, they can look up a license plate and know if you have a CHL before they pull you over. If you don’t declare then they have you on additional violations.]

      • David Kent December 1, 2017, 3:11 pm

        Apples and oranges. A drivers license is not a Constitutional right. And the only jurisdiction the Fed has with regard to a Constitutional right is to ensure that States don’t enact laws that violate them. That’s why the final arbitor in any contest of gun laws directed at specific classes of individuals, such as people convicted of certain crimes, is the exclusive purview of the State, not the Fed. It’s the reason why the only 2nd Amendment cases heard by the US Supreme court involve unilateral violations of rights, such as a State or City requiring a reason for a person to carry concealed. Driver’s licenses? Certain States honor other’s suspensions and revocations, but that is voluntary and agreed upon. There is no Federal Law that requires one State to honor the driver’s license of another. They in fact do, but because it’s mutually beneficial, not because the Fed requires it.

        • David Kent December 1, 2017, 6:07 pm

          The ONLY way this idea will have a good long term outcome is if the Fed rightly over rules ANY AND EVERY State law that is more restrictive than the plain language of the 2nd Amendment. ANY other itineration of a new Federal Law which assumes its own authority over State Law is a SETUP for FURTHER, FUTURE assumption of authority over State Law. Don’t be fooled! Just because the Fed agrees with us in THIS instance, we should still RUN LIKE HELL from agreeing to give them the power to implement it! The next Admin will retain that SAME POWER (the FED NEVER cedes power once it gets it). Fast forward to 2020, when (God Forbid) Susan Warren is president: “Remember when you guys agreed to give us power over your State Laws regarding who can carry a gun in your state? We do! (Evil laugh, fades to black.

      • John December 1, 2017, 9:28 pm

        Setting another federal precedent is more frightening than what has been done with the antiquities act.

  • Joe December 1, 2017, 11:44 am

    Liberal States will always be a Problem they will, no matter what make it extremely hard for you to carry from your state to their state, even if it passes the Senate which is Highly unlikely, The only real Possible fix to this problem is to elect as many Conservatives as we can into office and remove the Democrats and Rino’s who are and will continue Blocking Reciprocity and so many other Outrageous things they are Blocking such as The Presidents Extreme Vetting Process on Refugees from the Middle East War Zones, or Building the Wall, Sanctuary States Releasing Criminal back on our Streets, Just look at what just happened with the Kate Steinle case: As Liberal jury acquits illegal immigrant from Murder Charges, This guy was Illegal had an illegal Gun was deported many times returns kills an American Citizen girl and it’s not Murder?, you on the other hand may be legal to own a gun if you use it and kill I feel sorry for you in a liberal state. We need to get rid of Liberal Politicians first for the Safety of our entire country. Then and only then will real Reciprocity on all the Issues above be achieved.

  • G. Giant December 1, 2017, 10:40 am

    Surely they have made a mistake. They don’t really trust off-duty police and retired police do they. After all. The record for CCWs is much better than ANY LEO group.

  • Barkus Rudis December 1, 2017, 10:26 am

    I am still baffled at why Chicago, NYC can prevent someone other than Seam Hannity or Howard Stern their 2A rights. What good will it do me flying in from Seattle to Protect myself?

  • Jim December 1, 2017, 10:15 am

    My concern would be that a restrictive city/state with a “sanctuary city” mentality would ignore this reciprocity as well. Say I was travelling through Chicago or (heaven forbid!) San Francisco and was apprehended for an improper U-turn (lost) with my lawfully owned and CPL permitted handgun in the car. Officer advised of weapon’s presence (as required in MI) but still arrested for illegal weapons possession and taken to jail. Even if you make bail, 6-12 months later and after $25,000 in lawyer fees, I PROBABLY will be acquitted. Not saying the reciprocity law is not a good thing, it is just that I would probably lock my gun up in a car safe while passing through the liberal strongholds of the country.

    • G. Giant December 1, 2017, 10:42 am

      Don’t be so slow to learn. Just don’t go there. There is NOTHING in these cities that you can’t do without

      • Tripwire December 1, 2017, 1:52 pm

        Right on! I don’t drive thru any state that has repressive gun laws, In so doing I also don’t spend my money there, fuel, motels and food take a lot of money, money they aren’t getting from me.

      • Jim December 1, 2017, 4:09 pm

        Well, I do not think I am a slow learner, but that is beside the point. I DO avoid those places now and probably would if the bill passes. The point I was trying to stress to other folks is that not to get a false sense of security thinking the law was on your side in such places.

  • Jake December 1, 2017, 10:14 am

    …expanded background checks….
    they now throw in certain misdemeanors in with felonies to be disqualifying of a RIGHT…
    This also keeps the state in charge of the permit issuing process. Sonif your in cali you stil boned, or if you live in any super left leaning county with a no gun sheriff your still boned…
    Piss on the amendments they made.

  • David December 1, 2017, 10:13 am

    Open carey without permit as well! Why do i need to pay govt fees to carry as a retired military law abidding citizens! That being said does the govt have the eight to tell states how to do buisness! Regardless its your choice where you reside, but why do i beed a permit to carry? Plain view will keep crime down, will someone mug you if they see a firearm? Perhaps only a fool

    • G. Giant December 1, 2017, 10:44 am

      Our 2nd amendment righrs are gone. The only time the states are allowed to have the authority that the Constitution gives them is when those states want to take AWAY our rights.

    • december December 1, 2017, 11:34 am

      I have seen way too many open carry people that are so unaware of their surroundings it is laughable. If I was so inclined I could have quite an arsenal of acquired weapons because:
      1. I can see what you have.
      2. If you are paying attention, just put a barrel in your back and relieve you of said weapon.
      3. resist shoot you and then relieve you of said weapon.

    • Dennis M December 1, 2017, 12:19 pm

      You open carry and some nutjob wants to go on a spree then the first people ‘he’ takes out are the people he can plainly see carrying. My opinion, concealed carry is the way to go. Keep the nutjob guessing about how many people might be carrying.

  • Jess December 1, 2017, 9:29 am

    Private property owners have the right to dictate what happens on their property. But I like the TN law that says essentially that that property owner prohibiting guns is liable for the safety of their customer until they get back to their gun. (paraphrased of course.)

    • Dennis M December 1, 2017, 11:56 am

      If I understand that correctly, if a property owner bans guns then they put themselves in a possition that they are then responsible for the safety of anyone on their property? Outstanding! That needs to be copied by every state.
      I have a TX CHL. The background checks are State and Federal. (Federal covers 50 states, correct?). There was also a safety course and a proficiency test (not all states do that). All states should have a minimum standard for there to be reciprocity. That needs to be addressed. Some states only require paperwork and a fee. That standard is too low. Finger printing is also a requirement for the CHL in TX.

  • David German December 1, 2017, 9:15 am

    Every Citizen aspiring for a CCW permit should get a background check and if qualified the Reciprocity Law should apply, as simple as that!

    • Mike December 1, 2017, 11:54 am

      Fix NCIS Act? More lefty garbage.
      The only thing that needed fixing was the GOVERNMENT not following the rules they made up.
      Who’s getting fired? Who’s getting sued? Who’s losing their pension? Who’s going to jail?
      Oh yeah no one. What else is in this bill that would further erode 2A rights? You know it’s something.

  • Nick M December 1, 2017, 8:47 am

    I oppose this. This bill legitimizes permits in several states that infringe on the right to bear arms. If states did like Missouri, where no permit required, that would be different. That is the only thing the Congress should pass. Repealing the NFA and stating the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed in the states that do it.

  • Frank Trisko December 1, 2017, 8:29 am

    I live in NH we don’t need a CCP so towns don’t issue them. What will that look like for us and the people in other States that don’t require CCPs when your in another State that does?

    • Frank Liso December 1, 2017, 8:42 am

      Just apply for a non-resident permit/license in fla or az pay the 105.00 and get fingerprinted and be done with it.

    • Christopher Sourp December 1, 2017, 8:45 am

      Easy. Just get a carry permit.

    • Ironman December 1, 2017, 9:11 am

      Then you won’t get to carry outside your state. If you want to, get a permit. Permit holders should be allowed to carry in all states.

    • FalconEddy December 1, 2017, 11:26 am

      I also live in NH and it was no problem for me to get a CCP in my town. I mean, the whole reason for getting one is for reciprocity in other states that recognize/honor it. I’ve NEVER heard of a town in NH that refused to issue CCP’s.

    • Dan DeCoteau December 1, 2017, 6:24 pm

      The law addresses constitutional carry states. If you have a drivers license or state ID from a permit-less state your ID will be your permit.

  • mike ryan December 1, 2017, 8:11 am

    What we really need is to FIRE the fake GOPe RINOs and elect real constitutional conservatives to the Senate. Also get rid of the fake filibuster rule which is only designed to help gun grabbers! All of them took an oath of office to defend the Constitution but they are too busy defending themselves from female accusers!

  • Jack D December 1, 2017, 8:05 am

    Great idea, but needs to go further. This bill does not address the fact that states have different laws for issuing CCW permits. The bill needs to set a national standard on how the permits are issued.

    • Frank Liso December 1, 2017, 8:43 am

      This only applies to may issue / and shall issue states

    • LowKey December 1, 2017, 8:56 am

      Bad idea. That would be declaring that the FedGov has the right to determine those standards….say goodbye to things like Vermont Carry, or standards in states where currently all that is required to receive a CCW is submitting the application and passing a background check.
      If passed as is, this bill would let someone in a state with draconian requirements side step them by getting an out-of-state CCW from another state.
      Don\’t open the door for more regulatory garbage.

      • H Gene Lawrence December 1, 2017, 11:13 am

        The only permit to carry or possess weapons is the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution. After all, that is what the criminals use.

    • 97bravo20 December 1, 2017, 8:58 am

      I agree. I think all reasonable, thinking gun owners believe the entire system should be Federal. In doing so, the failure to report violations to local law enforcement by the military would be moot. Under a federal CCW system all federal, state and local agencies would be required to report to a centralized system for background checks. In addition the next logical step (I know I’m going to get crap for this) would be a federally based “safety course”. There are too many people out there with state carry permits that don’t know wtf they are doing. Treat a license to carry like a license to drive and you have a system that works better. It eliminates the power from local and state anti-gun fiefdoms. It improves the quality of the safety training for everyone (existing state safety courses are a joke) and allows free passage from state to state which is already covered by federal law and far too often ignored by certain states. Effective gun laws are possible if people just stop taking the radical right and/or left positions on the issues and listen to each other. The Fix NICS vote proves this!
      Respectfully,
      A pro 2nd Amendment, pro effective gun legislation and pro firearm safety education veteran.

    • Jack Patrick December 1, 2017, 10:26 am

      By the time all the “Does Not Address This Issue and That Issue,” are added and included in the legislation. This bill will look as “thick” as the so called Affordable (Obama) Care Act! What about “Shall Not Be Infringed,” is so difficult to comprehend?

    • Dennis M December 1, 2017, 12:04 pm

      Each state has different laws in the books governing driving but driving in all 50 states with only 1 state issued license doesn’t seem to be a problem. Driving is a privilege, gun ownership and the carrying of said gun is a right protected by the 2nd Amendment. As such “shall not be infringed ” should be backed by every Congressman and woman. They swore to uphold the Constitution after all. Impeach those that don’t. ‘Nuff said.

    • Dan DeCoteau December 1, 2017, 6:28 pm

      The second amendment doesn’t require a permit. You are creating laws that are already handled by the states. Allow congress to assign restrictions or requirements will just enable them to do more. Whatever they grant they can also take away.

  • Pete December 1, 2017, 7:25 am

    Could the author of the article please state which section of the bill “would also allow off-duty police and retired police carry in school zones.”? I’ve read the text several times and cannot find it.

  • Lou December 1, 2017, 6:51 am

    I would like to better understand which laws prevail.
    2 of the 4 Dem proposals seem fair.
    Federal gov should not infringe on state rights.
    If a bar owner posts “no guns”, that should be protected.
    If Officials (state or local) pass a law about no guns in a certain location, then that should be followed as well.
    I hope there is clarification brought to the public.

    • WVinMN December 1, 2017, 7:53 am

      Funny how the Marxist’s always manage to discover their “inner Federalist” when it comes to restricting 2nd Amendment rights? Just like when they become deficit hawks when tax cuts are proposed.

    • Barnjoer December 1, 2017, 7:59 am

      If official post be it state or local that ( no firearm can be carried ) in this state or in this town then what is the use of having the law of Carring in ALL 50 States??

      • Manning Sr. Mike December 1, 2017, 9:45 am

        Ill try! If licened in Texas to openly carry, one may carry concealed in California for example if that state issues licenses to carry a firearm! In otherwords California and Texas recognize each others licenses. With regard to restricted zones compliance with a posted notice, althought the syntax may be different, restrictions remain in effect in both states! Truckers & other licensed visitors are those most effected by current stare laws.

    • Jon December 1, 2017, 8:17 am

      Constitutional rights trump state rights. The Constitution is clear: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” As the 2nd Amendment is expressly delegated to the Federal Government in the 2nd Amendment, states cannot infringe upon those rights. Much like states can’t make a law banning people of a certain race from voting, as this is a federally-protected right, as is the right to keep AND BEAR arms.

  • beermademel8 December 1, 2017, 6:44 am

    if a good portion of our citizens got off thier butts,did alittle homework and became conceled carry certified,The streets would no longer belong to the angry,deranged and cowardly.Criminals are many times more likely to not consider pulling off crimes when theres a good chance others unknown to then are weaponized and trained some in defensive yet assertive dynamics in thwarting or even killing said offender.Even the fn odds alittle for crying out loud Dems are mutants @Republicans are whimps.Guns for every man and woman in USA as long as you dont cut yourself,hangout at the grade schools or malls and you havent beat your parents in 12months its all golden.And teachers should be paid alittle less if they dont carry.Politicians should volenteer as targets.They have loaded thier accounts and pockets up for long enough and pass bulls..t.Illrelivent is 99% of the time.Guns will slow maybe nearly stop physical crime.Fingers crossed

    • gandolf December 1, 2017, 8:15 am

      There are 15 million citizens carrying legally in 43 States. You can’t carry in the deep blue gun free zone of NJ. Since the State’s government controls what we can do we are at their mercy. NJ was one of three northern States to not vote for Lincoln in 1860 and 1864. Demwit control goes back a long way.

  • Don December 1, 2017, 6:38 am

    What can average Joe (like me) do to follow up with concealed reciprocity act? How can I stay informed? I like to visit the country by bike and car. I would feel much safer if I could carry countrywide!!

  • RJL December 1, 2017, 5:48 am

    Mr. Feinblatt, needs to review the Constitution of the United States………………………

  • Jay December 1, 2017, 5:35 am

    We would be far, far better off passing a law that says ” Any Government agency of any State, city or County not following our Constitution shall be deemed unfit for any Federal funds of any kind”

    • Barnjoer December 1, 2017, 7:59 am

      Jay You are correct👍🏻
      🔫🇺🇸🤠🇨🇱

    • Reb1 December 1, 2017, 9:28 am

      Jay, you hit the nail on the head! enough said.

    • Ray December 1, 2017, 9:46 am

      and the official breaking the constitution shall be penalized…

      • Dennis M December 1, 2017, 12:10 pm

        That “(penalty)” should be impeachment and loss of any pension or other compensation otherwise due them.

      • STEPHEN MOLO M.D. December 1, 2017, 12:46 pm

        Let’s start with the Politicians health care, Constitution dictates they receive same benefits as the American citizen sponsored health care, and let’s though in their outrageous salaries. What makes them better then ” We The People “?

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend