National Gun-Carry Reciprocity Bill Moves to Mark Up in the House

[Lunyfringe]

Brining ammo into the state will be criminalized.

But the reality is, I'm glad I'm in Texas so I don't have to follow CA's insane gun laws anymore.
**** that state.

Yeah, how is that going to work if one brings loaded mags for their pistol there? And do concealed carry pistols have to be unloaded like open carry?

I never lived there, went a few times for work... not like I could carry for that reason, just trusted my next of kin would sue if I was shot behind enemy lines.

 

[diesel1959]

Yeah, how is that going to work if one brings loaded mags for their pistol there? And do concealed carry pistols have to be unloaded like open carry?

I never lived there, went a few times for work... not like I could carry for that reason, just trusted my next of kin would sue if I was shot behind enemy lines.

You do realize that there are concealed carry permits in California, right? Though not many, they do exist and those folks do carry concealed and those weapons are loaded. The issue with California (and several other states) is that they are stingy about issuing concealed carry permits--they're a "may issue" state rather than a "shall issue" state.

So yes, if HR38 passes, a licensed concealed carrier would be able to cross state lines with loaded mags in their loaded handgun ON their person. *MIND BLOWN*, right?

 

[Younggun]

I think the difference in point of view is a matter of how far some of us believe states like CA will go to make criminals out of unsuspecting CHL holders in order to undermine national reciprocity.

 

[Younggun]

And my concern over what a left wing gov may try if carry licensing is becomes a fed issue. The possibility of mission creep bothers me although I see the logic of national reciprocity.

 

[Lunyfringe]

I think the difference in point of view is a matter of how far some of us believe states like CA will go to make criminals out of unsuspecting CHL holders in order to undermine national reciprocity.

THIS is my point... I haven't read the new laws verbatim, but I'd bet money they don't have exceptions written in them for ccw holders. You come across their border with a loaded pistol, and they don't like you for some reason and they'll thown their arcane book at you.
I don't plan on being the test case if national reciprocity is passed... I don't plan on going there regardless.

The 2013 shit laws in CO taught me that state legislators are NOT very good at writing laws that make sense... especially about things they don't understand (and they don't understand a lot) there are a few exceptions of legislators that research and put effort into writing well... but look at the qualifications required for a state legislator, and the majority will likely hate those that make them look bad by doing a good job.

 

[Darkpriest667]

If NR is passed.. I wonder which state will be the first test case... I imagine it will go to the supreme court.... because those states circuit of appeals courts are notoriously liberal. I know I won't risk it until a precedent is set and I feel comfortable.

 

[Brian Boru]

Congressman Thomas Massie
1 hr ·
ALERT: Feinstein/Schumer sponsored gun legislation that amends the “Brady bill” will be added to Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill (HR 38) in the House this week.

As Chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus, I’m blowing the whistle on the swamp. Last week, Republicans in the House fast tracked through committee HR 4477, a gun bill titled “fix-NICS.” The Senate version of this bill is cosponsored by Senator Dianne Feintstein and Senator Chuck Schumer and it will send $625 million over 5 years to states to expand the national background check database. The bill will also advance former President Obama’s agenda of pressuring every branch of the administration (such as the Veteran’s Administration) to submit thousands of more names to the NICS background check database to deny gun purchases. The House bill is identical in every way to the Senate bill except the House bill will also commission a study on bump-stocks.

What you don’t know, and what virtually no one in Washington wants you to know, is that House leadership plans to merge the fix-NICS bill with popular Concealed Carry Reciprocity legislation, HR 38, and pass both of them with a single vote. Folks, this is how the swamp works. House leadership expects constituents to call their representatives demanding a vote on the reciprocity bill, when in fact the only vote will be on the two combined bills.

How fast did Fix-NICS, HR 4477, move through the Judiciary Committee? This bill broke the previous records for fast track legislation. It was voted out of committee within hours of being introduced in the House. Check the dates on this link: https://www.congress.gov/…/115th-congr…/house-bill/4477/text . That means the text of the bill wasn’t even discoverable by the public on congress.gov until after the bill passed out of committee! The text was however available over in the Senate where you will find Senator Diane Feinstein and Senator Chuck Schumer are cosponsors. https://www.congress.gov/…/115t…/senate-bill/2135/cosponsors

If that’s not odd enough, consider this: the fix-NICS bill was introduced in the House by a Democrat two weeks ago. https://www.congress.gov/…/115th-congr…/house-bill/4434/text . But, in a very unusual move, the bill was re-introduced verbatim by a Republican two weeks later, with language added to it to commission a bump-stock study. Six Republicans in Judiciary Committee weren’t persuaded by the switcheroo, and voted No. However, because every Democrat voted yes and some Republicans voted yes at the urging of the Chairman, the bill made it out of committee. The deed will be complete this week when the bill is quietly added to the Reciprocity bill, HR 38, and passed without the knowledge of those who would oppose the legislation if they knew what was in it.

To recap, what are some clues that you should be concerned with the fix-NICS bill?

(1) The first sentence after the title of the bill reads “Section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (34 U.S.C. 40901) is amended…”
(2) Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are cosponsors in the Senate.
(3) It’s being rammed through, without a hearing, in a very nontransparent process, and it will be passed by attaching it to the popular concealed carry reciprocity bill which already has enough votes to pass on its own.
(4) It spends over half a billion dollars to collect more names to include in a list of people who will never be allowed to own a firearm.
(5) It compels administrative agencies, not just courts, to adjudicate your second amendment rights.

In my opinion, #5 is the biggest problem. The bill encourages administrative agencies, not the courts, to submit more names to a national database that will determine whether you can or can’t obtain a firearm. When President Obama couldn’t get Congress to pass gun control, he implemented a strategy of compelling, through administrative rules, the Veterans Administration and the Social Security Administration to submit lists of veterans and seniors, many of whom never had a day in court, to be included in the NICS database of people prohibited from owning a firearm. Only a state court, a federal (article III) court, or a military court, should ever be able to suspend your rights for any significant period of time.

Does the NICS background check system have problems? Yes, it results in tens of thousands of unjustified denials of gun purchases every year. But like many bills in Congress, the fix-NICS doesn’t live up to its name – it will likely do the opposite. It throws millions of dollars at a faulty program and it will result in more law-abiding citizens being deprived of their right to keep and bear arms.

If we continue to give the executive branch more money and encouragement to add names to the list of people prohibited from buying a firearm (without a day in court) and if the gun banners achieve their goal of universal background checks, one day, a single person elected to the office of President will be able to achieve universal gun prohibition.

House leadership should immediately de-couple the fix-NICS legislation from the concealed carry reciprocity legislation. People hate it when Washington combines bills like our leadership plans to do this week.

A few have speculated that the House is combining the bills to ensure reciprocity will pass in the Senate. I have some news for them: Senators Feinstein and Schumer aren’t going to vote for reciprocity even if it contains the fix-NICS legislation they support for expanding the background check database. If someone is naïve enough to think that’s going to work, and they’re willing to accept fix-NICS to get reciprocity, then they should ask the Senate to go first with the combined bill.

Here’s a dangerous scenario that’s more likely to play out: The House uses the popularity of reciprocity (HR 38) to sneak fix-NICS through, while the Senate passes fix-NICS only. The Senate and the House meet at conference with their respective bills, with the result being fix-NICS emerges from conference without reciprocity. Fix-NICS comes back to the House and passes because all of the Democrats will vote for it (as they just did in Judiciary Committee) and many Republicans will vote for it. Because Republicans already voted for it once as part of the reciprocity deal that never came to pass, they won’t have a solid footing for opposing fix-NICS as a standalone bill. Then we’ll end up with fix-NICS, which is basically an expansion of the Brady Bill, without reciprocity.

If our House leadership insists on bringing the flawed fix-NICS bill to the floor, they shouldn’t play games. We should vote separately on HR 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill, and HR 4477, the fix-NICS bill. And we should be given enough time to amend the fix-NICS bill, because it needs to be fixed, if not axed.

https://www.facebook.com/RepThomasMassie/posts/1843059172384905

 

[Southpaw]

https://www.facebook.com/RepThomasMassie/posts/1843059172384905

Thanks for posting Brian.

 

[oohrah]

It would be just like New Jersey is now. They arrest for transporting under Federal transport laws, and make you use that as a defense against prosecution.

 

[Vaquero]

https://www.facebook.com/RepThomasMassie/posts/1843059172384905

No bueno

 

[oohrah]

I don't have a problem fixing the background check system. And if it helps getting national reciprocity passed ...

 

[Wildcat Diva]

I have a problem with both bills, now that I’ve considered many angles of what we continue to get ourselves into with Federal fingers that come creeping.

 

[AustinN4]

I'm sure NY, NJ, CA, and IL will find some way to screw LTC holders if caught in their states.

Then I have no business being there. Feel sorry for you guys & gals that have to pass thru there for work.

 

[AustinN4]

At least one more conservative justice would be nice though.

Two more would be twice as better.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

I don't have a problem fixing the background check system. And if it helps getting national reciprocity passed ...

The name “fix NICS” is an ironic misnomer. These will allow potentially folks with unpaid traffics tickets (“fugitives from justice”) to be stripped of their rights to purchase a firearm without due process and with no clear appeal process. What about folks that reported treatment for depression at some time in their life? All that info is gonna get uploaded to NICS potentially under that bill.

And we are one step closer to national registry with national reciprocity. Just wait for the National ID cards clause to get added at some point.

And the house bill adds a commissioned study on bump stocks and defines what those are in federal legislation.

I’m not having any of this.

 

[AustinN4]

I’m not having any of this.

I'm with you!

 

[Lunyfringe]

I have a problem with both bills, now that I’ve considered many angles of what we continue to get ourselves into with Federal fingers that come creeping.

I had a hard time listening after they said "what is there to prevent an anti-gun state from making it illegal to carry a gun within 20ft of a road?"
That's FUD, pure and simple- a law like that isn't going to be constitutional. (admittedly CA creates illegal laws all the time).

I understand the fear the Feds will overstep, but these guys are looking for the bogie man everywhere.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you, but I get the feeling these guys would be afraid to pass something that repeals the Hughes act.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

This lady spells out how the bills have already been combined. Done deal.

She isn’t worried about the HIPPA concerns of the mental health diagnoses being uploaded, but doesn’t address the “fugitive from justice”/ unpaid traffic ticket concerns I’ve heard elsewhere.

 

[busykngt]

As I understand, each state still retains their on laws concerning carrying (and licensing requirements, approvals, etc., etc.). So if you live close to another state’s border and frequently cross between just those two states, keeping up with the differences between laws probably won’t be too bad. But if you regularly travel “interstate” between multiple states, it could be quite a job in keeping up with the different state laws (where cc isn’t allowed, where open carry is/isn’t allowed, laws concerning transport within you vehicle, etc.).

The other thing I saw mentioned in an article I read, is that in *some* states, certain law enforcement agencies and/or LEO fraternal organizations are NOT in favor of citizens carrying! I could see how those types could make life difficult even with “national reciprocity”.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

So, it seems that one of the concerns with the the reporting of serious mental health conditions with the “fix NICS” part of the now-combined bill is that it incentivizes reporting for certain organizations which may have access to the mental health records but doesn’t provide mental health professionals with any legislated immunity for violating HIPPA for disclosing the info to the feds for entry in NICS. That’s garbage and useless. Does nothing anyway but provide a false sense of security that the info will be reported when it likely still won’t be in most cases.


Who is going to take the chance on reporting on what’s legally “suggested?” “required?” (Who knows?) to report when they can get charged with violating HIPPA for doing so?