U.S. Congress - H.R.197 National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009
H.R.197 - National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State. view all titles (2)
All Bill Titles
- Short: National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 as introduced.
- Official: To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State. as introduced.
This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.
Bill's Views
- Today: 44
- Past Seven Days: 436
- All-Time: 31,888
95%
Users Support Bill
2476 in favor / 141 opposed
Write Your
Representative
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed ?
What's this?
OpenCongress comment boards are an open forum for discussion. Let's build public knowledge about Congress together, so please keep the discussion civil -- no harsh language, subject to our community Comment Policy. Do not post any information here (for example, your name or email) that you do not wish to be public.
Filter Comments to a Rating of at least
What's this?
The Ratings Filter allows you to determine how many user comments to view on pages here on OpenCongress. Setting the filter higher (towards 10) allows you to see only the comments rated "most helpful" by users, while setting the filter lower (towards 0) allows you to see more comments on a page.
Displaying 61-90 of 104 total comments.
I like the general concept of the law. However, I wonder if this will give the gun grab crowd a later chance of very strict national gun laws. I don't mind the regulation as it stands with CCW. We are talking about a vetting process, shooting exam and other qualifications. The standardized rules would be nice so I know where I cannot carry.
I view it an important form of protection though to carry since Police have been ruled by the Supreme Court that they don't "have to" protect us. They are just there to write a report. Hopefully in the report they will say you are alive.
if they are going to grant carry nationwide then everything should be included. IE airports/trains/buses et. They should issue it similar to a drivers license and each person should be RESPONSIBLE FOR THEMSELVES IE if you are going to board a plan, you should have your hollowpoints stowed and provide yourself with your own frangible ammo for the duration of your flight as to not endanger other individuals. 9-11? I think not. That would have ended with the headline "Mass terrorist plot thwarted by 2nd Amendment/xx (insert number here) Terrorists Apprehended!" But, no, how many people died? What a waste.
there's something I agree on, i everything were included on 9-11-01, that tragedy would have been a triumph, and the 2nd Amendment would have had quite and Aegis Shield to wield against he Gun-Banners. But no it's the other way around.
I'm old enough (60) to remember when you could get on a plane without any screening, and you could pack on airlines, because it was no big deal.
This bill has as much chance of passing as the Republican party has of winning back the majority. Gun control is coming back, so adjust for that.
Exactly the same chance.....GOOD!.
Anonymous? Anonymous? How courageous.
It's about time something like this passed. I don't know if it will or not, but it has a much better chance than newmeximan claims, because both parties now have plenty of pro-gun people in them. The Dems are finally starting to learn that if they want to stay in office, they have to take a more pro-gun stance. (unless of course they're from MA, NY, IL, or CA)
We already have a national concealed carry law ... The Second Amendment. Rather than creating new laws, which simply confuse things, affirm The Second Amendment.
A permit is easier to carry than a copy of the constitution and easier to read.
In Vermont and Alaska you don't need a permit or a copy of the constitution. In those states American citizens can keep and bear arms, concealed or open, just like it says in the constitution. I like that better.
The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms but do you think the right is absolute? Think about it. Do you think convicted, gun-related felons should have the rights that an honest citizen has? Do you think you should be able to own your own nuclear ICBM's?
I am very glad to see this. I have just received my concealed carry permit and have been concerned about how we are going to travel with my firearm. We often travel to the eastern side of our state and in order to do that many times we have to travel through another state that does not recognize my permit.
I need clarification.
"in a school"
What is definition of school? Primary Education schools? Secondary Education school? College Education school?
I do believe college students with a CC permit should be able to defend themselves on college campuses.
Yes and yes! More clarification and if you are old enough to carry, then by all means, carry!
I do have a few issues with this one, although it has good intentions, it has problems. Don't get me wrong, I am a CHL.
1 - It does infringe on States rights (those states that do not have CHL, which I will not go to anyhow)
2 - a couple of the definitions are too broad such as passenger area of an airport or the area of restaurant that serves alcohol.
I agree and don't know what to do about it! I hope that we can get these errors on this one corrected before it gets passed!
One thing that I haven't see on Open Congress is how to help congress fix errors such as this one with revisions or amendments.
If you know a then please let me know!
How does it infringe? It makes you comply with the state law from the state you are in not from the issuing state. It is just like the driver's license.
The catch-all provisions put restrictions in place for a state that has not enacted or repealed legislation regarding CCW's. If the state has laws regarding restrictions, the state laws trump the federal catch-all wording. I am not aware of any state where this wording would be relevant.
I totally agree with the substance of this Bill.
I cannot get a CCW because of Maryland law. Get the congressman
in your state to vote for this bill and be a co sponser.
PRINCIPLE: AAGINST
States Rights issue, not national.
My dad is a long haul truck driver. Would this mean he could carry his concealed weapon across all the states he goes to without fear of being locked up for carrying a concealed weapon? How does this affect NY where you are not allowed to carry a weapon period?
A NY CCW holder can carry concealed. It clearly states that you would have to obey the laws of NY just as if you had a NY CCW.
Since NY does not issue them very often. It seems in NY you would have more rights as a tourist than a resident. Ditto for CA.
Without the second amendment, ther would be no 1st or 3rd. The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. The reason we have guns is beginning to materialize. Tyranny is rearing its ugly head...
IF the bill is limited to allow CCW's should honored like a drivers license. Meaning that your CCW license is valid in all other states. ANY ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH A NATIONAL CCW LICENSE IS WRONG. The constution already grants ownership. The federal government should not be allowed such power. If it is granted control, there is nothing to stop some "agency" from infringing on our constutional rights.
The constitution already grants ownership. Giving the fed control over CCW permits will just make it that much easier for them to eliminate all CCW permits in the future. Just stop making so many d*mn laws!!
Think that the 2nd AMENDMENT applies to the individual which is beyond the FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, or any other "area" within the UNITED STATES whether the LIBERALs like it or not.
I find myself more polite and tolerant of others when I'm armed. I'm not inclined to let something stupid escalate into a deadly force situation..Hence the phrase,"An armed society is a polite society."
I suspect this is expected to fly "under the radar" since everyone is worried about Healthcare "de-form" and Cap and Tax....this is our vigilance required by our founding fathers to keep our liberty..God help us! Should we re-enter a bill with the exact wording of the second ammendment? might be interesting...
A bill with the 2nd amendment wording would be an interesting one. :) It sure would weed out the anti-constitutionalists and give solid reference to persuade the people on the fence to take out their elected officials.
I think this might work better by floating something a little less controversial... Maybe the 1st Amendment?
There is a good reason why Congress has buried this even though there were 142 co-sponsors. It has to get out of committee to get voted on, and probably won't as long has we have the current leadership in the House. Ways and Means probably is blocking committee vote.
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson - He understood liberty and the Constitution , hell, he helped write it.