APOD Firearms

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

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • pronstar

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 2, 2017
    10,541
    96
    Dallas
    If this passes, don't forget to pack your CA compliant gun when carrying in CA LOL

    Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
    Texas SOT
     

    easy rider

    Summer Slacker
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2015
    31,489
    96
    Odessa, Tx
    After reading several times, I am very much opposed to this bill. This bill doesn't fix NICS so much as it does undermining the 2nd Amendment. It doesn't address current problems with NICS that I can see, but seems to be moving towards adding more to the ban list under whatever means they see fit. It's a shame and a sham that they would attach an anti-gun bill to a pro-gun bill.
     
    Last edited:

    busykngt

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 14, 2011
    4,730
    96
    McKinney
    They’ve only been combined in the House version. They are still separate bills in the Senate. Also, I don’t believe Cornyn’s bill is written to mandate reporting requirements to “new” or additional agencies or organizations that are not already required by law to make the necessary reports. Cronyn’s bill doesn’t give any “relief” for agencies having to follow HIPPA - if they had to before, they will still have to. The “incentives” would only apply to those agencies that make requests for grant money - if they don’t typically request grants, they’re not impacted by the ‘incentive’.

    Don’t get me wrong - I’m still not in favor of the “Fix NICS” legislation. I tend to follow GOA’s directions on these matters - they’re more in line with my thinking and sentiments.
     

    busykngt

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 14, 2011
    4,730
    96
    McKinney
    Combining the two bills in the House is just political games being played. They effectively can be “un combined” just as easily. As the lady on the gun talk recording said herself, one part of the House bill can simply be dropped out later. While she mentioned the reciprocity part being dropped, it could be just as likely to drop the “fix NICS” part. In fact, this may be the *real* game plan of the House Republicans (especially if the Senate doesn’t pass the “fix NICS” bill). All the House would have to do is, drop that part from their bill and the House & Senate versions of the reciprocity bill would be in substantial agreement at that point.
     

    Lunyfringe

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 22, 2017
    1,402
    96
    Canton, TX
    I'm against the "fix NICS" as well, it seems to create no-win scenarios (where someone would be breaking the law by reporting, and breaking another by not reporting)... it's another poorly thought out, knee-jerk reaction to try and pass something quickly while they have favorable conditions to do so... but I don't see it fixing the problem at all.

    The problem they need to fix is convictions in other systems (like Military convictions) not being reported... just fix that, and stop adding more shit just because you think you can sneak it in.

    Anything related to mental health is a slippery slope- because there is no due process, no conviction- just an assumption of guilt preventing a God-given right based on a bureaucrat pressing a button. I'm not against keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people- but I'm also not for taking rights away from people with no due process.
     

    oldag

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 19, 2015
    17,428
    96
    All this is moot. Odds of getting 60 votes in the Senate is a snowball's chance in Amarillo in August.
     

    busykngt

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 14, 2011
    4,730
    96
    McKinney
    oldag, you’re talking about the reciprocity bill, correct? What about the “Fix NICS” bill... think it’ll pass?
     

    F350-6

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 25, 2009
    4,237
    96
    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.

    It all really boils down to who's in power, and more importantly how the supreme court reacts to, or refuses to take up cases as the states try and sort this thing out.

    Look at the marijuana situation. Feds could easily start locking folks up and the supreme court would back them I'm guessing. But opinions on guns and dope seem to differ on which one is bad and which one is acceptable.

    I'm curious to see if and what the concealed carry insurance folks change in their policies or premiums in case they get stuck with a case that goes to the supreme court.
     

    Kar98

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 8, 2016
    5,071
    96
    DFW
    I'm curious to see if and what the concealed carry insurance folks change in their policies or premiums in case they get stuck with a case that goes to the supreme court.

    I would think that would be the best advertising they can buy for that money. Look! We're going all the way to the SUPREME COURT!!
     

    locke_n_load

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 9, 2013
    1,274
    31
    Houston, TX
    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.

    The Constitution has not done much to dissuade most states in the 9th circus from passing unconstitutional gun laws. Most politicians in those areas don't think you should be able to carry a gun at all. Have you ever heard of regular citizens getting carry licenses in California or New York City? You note that CA makes illegal "laws" all the time, so how the hell is LSGR viewpoint illogical?
    "Just because you're paranoid": people have concerns. The Fed has proven time and time again to not favor gun rights (1934, 1968, 1986, 1994 should ring bells). So excuse people here who enjoy Texas' somewhat decent carry rights/privileges (shall issue, no limits on magazines, OC and CC) who might want to ensure that adding the Federal gov't to our carry rights won't further restrict our rights in the future.
     

    Lunyfringe

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 22, 2017
    1,402
    96
    Canton, TX
    The Constitution has not done much to dissuade most states in the 9th circus from passing unconstitutional gun laws. Most politicians in those areas don't think you should be able to carry a gun at all. Have you ever heard of regular citizens getting carry licenses in California or New York City? You note that CA makes illegal "laws" all the time, so how the hell is LSGR viewpoint illogical?
    Maybe it's just that their exaggeration rubbed me the wrong way, it's a tool of FUD... Say something so far out there and pretend it's what you're going to get if you don't do what I advise. Not a logical debate, it's a way to manipulate.

    "Just because you're paranoid": people have concerns. The Fed has proven time and time again to not favor gun rights (1934, 1968, 1986, 1994 should ring bells). So excuse people here who enjoy Texas' somewhat decent carry rights/privileges (shall issue, no limits on magazines, OC and CC) who might want to ensure that adding the Federal gov't to our carry rights won't further restrict our rights in the future.
    The second half of that quote is "doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you"... so you're agreeing with me.. I'm kinda of two minds on the subject. I just don't agree with their tactics.
     

    Younggun

    Certified Jackass
    TGT Supporter
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jul 31, 2011
    53,615
    96
    hill co.
    I'd say it's the opposite of Fudd. Fudds only think you need a bolt action hunting rifle and maybe grandpas old revolver for self defense.

    Seeing the track record of the Feds once the get involved in what has previously been a state issue gives plenty of reason for concern. I've already described what's happened to with CDL requirements.

    National reciprocity may be great as long as the right people are in DC. What happens when the news blows up some misleading story about an out of state CHL holder shooting a "good kid" who was just walking home with his skittles and cough syrup. Then the narrative can quickly spin to these states having no control over the licensing requirements of other states. Bill is passed mandating federal CHL requirements.

    This isn't a scare tactic, it's a fight that WILL happen. The left won't just roll over because national reciprocity becomes law. Claiming it's "Fudd" is innacurate and does nothing to address the issues that have been raised. It's simply an attempt to delegitimise the concern in order to avoid addressing it.

    I get the urge to further gun rights, but running blindly towards it unwilling to consider the pitfalls would be a terrible mistake, IMO.
     

    Younggun

    Certified Jackass
    TGT Supporter
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jul 31, 2011
    53,615
    96
    hill co.
    It doesn't change the fact that you use it to avoid addressing the reasonable concerns.

    Its perfectly reasonable to fear what might happen to Carry licensing once the Feds are involved.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: gll

    Lunyfringe

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 22, 2017
    1,402
    96
    Canton, TX
    It doesn't change the fact that you use it to avoid addressing the reasonable concerns.

    Its perfectly reasonable to fear what might happen to Carry licensing once the Feds are involved.
    I am divided on this, and I don't trust that powers given to the Feds won't be misused in the future...
    But that doesn't mean I enjoy when somebody tries to convince me using manipulation (and FUD is used to manipulate)... it breeds mistrust with those trying to manipulate. Perhaps it feels too much like what the left does.

    I didn't say they were all wrong, I said I couldn't listen anymore.
     

    Younggun

    Certified Jackass
    TGT Supporter
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jul 31, 2011
    53,615
    96
    hill co.
    I am divided on this, and I don't trust that powers given to the Feds won't be misused in the future...
    But that doesn't mean I enjoy when somebody tries to convince me using manipulation (and FUD is used to manipulate)... it breeds mistrust with those trying to manipulate. Perhaps it feels too much like what the left does.

    I didn't say they were all wrong, I said I couldn't listen anymore.

    I guess you'd have to be more specific then.

    As I read it, you seem to be trying to discredit any dissenting voice as being minioulative or unreasonable. Might not have been your intention and I might even agree with you, but without having some idea of what you consider to be "FUD" minioulation I'll likely continue to defend the cautionary voices as that's the side of the fence where I currently reside.

    I really don't believe those seeing the dangers here are attempting to fear monger, as most examples of what could happen are things that we've already seen happen in many anti gun states or in different forms at the fed level.
     
    Top Bottom