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 (3)

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.
  • Official: National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 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.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 138 total comments.

woolval 01/27/2009 2:44am

As a CWP license holder who travels, this bill will allow me the right to legally carry through other states. I appreciate the opportunity to provide my family and myself self defense protection from potential criminals. Thank you for this bill.

jayarbrough 02/11/2009 7:03pm

As a Concealed Carry Permit instuctor I know that this will help us achieve unifomity in the laws, which will eliminate a lot of confusion !! Weall want to be safe and adhere to the laws, we just need to be able to know what they are !

Euclid_543 02/17/2009 12:05pm

The natural right of a human being to defend theirselves makes this a perfectly logical bill. Too bad we have to have individual laws when our 2nd Amendment rights have already been “certified” by the Supreme Court.

Alven 01/25/2009 6:02am

This will simplify legal requirements for traveling to different states

jazz836062 03/25/2009 9:03am
in reply to Euclid_543 Feb 17, 2009 12:05pm

Amen. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Anonymous 02/19/2009 9:02am

this law does not give Congress or the federal government the right to set law on right to carry. it says the just like states recognize a drivers license from other states and that the drive has a right to drive a car while in the other state. This bill states that a state must recognize the right of an individual to carry in a conceal maner even if that state does not issue conceal carry permits.this law would in effect defeat the opression of denying conceal carry in states becuase their citizens could get a CCP in another state and thier home state would HAVE TO HONOR IT!!!!!!!DC residents could get a CCP in Virginia and DC could not prevent them from carrying on DC streets. It’s a beautiful Law.Hope it passes

Anonymous 01/26/2009 5:11pm

Maybe the last couple of hold out states on CWP will finally get the hint.

it’s a common sense law and I appluad those that have introduced it. hopefully it will past and be another road black to the Gun-Banners.

ShuRugal 03/09/2009 4:49pm
in reply to Alven Jan 25, 2009 6:02am

Amen to this. I just got my VA CCW permit a month ago, and was moderately irritated to find out that i can only carry with it in one neighboring state.

amrich35 01/26/2009 6:24pm

I will be sure to ask my Rep. “Rooney”, to sign on to this bill.

r4fthrs 03/10/2009 2:16pm

Jizzle – As a Paramedic and ex-swat medic, I just hope you are the one packing his big hogleg standing next to me (but not to close)at the bank during a hold up. While they are distracted filling you full of lead I’ll neutralize the hostiles and then patch you up ;). Remember a real man doesn’t have to show every one what he’s packing (if you know what I mean)

rzoller16 02/25/2009 9:58am

I fully support this bill and hope it passes and is signed. The Congress needs to realize people that legally own a gun go above and be on to follow all laws. The real problem is illegally owned guns by felons that are in gangs and so forth (i.e. Chicago). Chicago’s crime rate wouldn’t be as high if they had concealed carry. As for individual laws per state and city governments it never hurts to find out what is legal and what isn’t.

melzellers 03/21/2009 1:34pm
in reply to Euclid_543 Feb 17, 2009 12:05pm

Amen brother!

Anonymous 01/26/2009 4:55pm

Hooray! It’s about time.

JohnF 07/22/2009 4:58am
in reply to carolann Jul 15, 2009 4:25am

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?

gemma_trimm 12/21/2009 9:35am
in reply to callagan Apr 22, 2009 6:21am

What are you talking about? (I actually want to know, I’m not being condescending or anything.)

JohnF 07/22/2009 5:02am
in reply to elsa41 Jun 29, 2009 7:39am

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.

Inthefrontrow 03/24/2009 5:51am

Open carry and concealed should be covered by the same permit system and the method in which you choose to arm is a matter of personal preference. I think one open and concealed back up is ideal. Just my opinion.

Grobare 03/19/2009 11:30pm
in reply to Jizzle Mar 11, 2009 6:45am

“You can’t defend yourself against a threat you are not aware of.”

I think you just made the argument for concealed carry right there.

carljn 03/03/2009 1:41pm
in reply to Anonymous Feb 20, 2009 9:07am

That seems true. But its like a drivers license: if you live in PA and drive into OH, you are bound by the rules of the roads in Ohio. And unless you do something blatantly against the law like bringing your gun into a school, they’re not going to say anything technically. Hopefully it will extend like a drivers license being that your car, registered in another state, has to comply to the laws of the state it is registered in, thus being that because I’m a resident of say Texas, Illinois gun laws won’t apply to what weapons I can own.

cklaszky 05/02/2009 3:34am
in reply to cklaszky May 02, 2009 3:34am

2)
The 2nd Amendment aside, look at this like a driver’s license. My driver’s license is issued in Florida, but allows me to drive in Florida and NJ.. and the rest of the United States. My CCW permit is issued in Florida, and through reciprocity legislation agreements among several states, allows me to carry in those states. It does NOT allow me to carry throughout the U.S. This bill would treat the CCW permit essentially like the driver’s licenses we all hold. This would eliminate a great deal of confusion when traveling from state to state by establishing essentially one set of requirements for ALL states. It would also disallow the infringement of the rights of citizens of the states that currently do not “allow” CCW.

This is a good, and simple piece of legislature.

callagan 04/22/2009 6:13am
in reply to Anonymous Apr 07, 2009 4:03pm

Seems you’re worried about the next election and Republicans gaining a “win”, so you really do have some sense of the outrage.

JohnF 07/22/2009 5:10am
in reply to Joe_Libertarian Apr 21, 2009 3:20pm

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?

Anonymous 02/20/2009 9:07am

I thought I read where each states concealed carry laws would be applicable and one would have to know the laws of the state they were going to travel to. I hope I misread that because if one has a concealed carry permit, all one needs to do is carry and not have to worry about being legal regardless of where they may go. Churches, schools and even D.C. for that matter. I reiterate Euclid 543 concerning the second amendment but the supreme court is/will be the problem as long as they can interpret the Bill of Rights to suit their political ambitions.

JohnF 07/22/2009 5:17am
in reply to thorkyl May 18, 2009 10:38am

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.

waynec 02/26/2009 4:41pm

If your Congressman’s name is not on the list of co-sponsors, get on the phone with them and tell them you want them to support this bill. Get your Senators on S371 also.

GunnyG 02/27/2009 9:03am

About frigging time.

theSaj 03/12/2009 9:38am
in reply to soonertracker Feb 18, 2009 2:01pm

I am not too worried about that, because states are still the deciding power in allowing the carry law. And nothing with this bill prevents a state from loosening or allowing non-permitted concealed or open carry.

It just mandates that CCW permits be treated in like fashion as driver’s licenses. (Imagine if you needed to have a driver’s license for each state you drove in, or a non-resident’s license…unless your state had reciprocity. But said reciprocity changes constantly. No one would drive out of state. Or we’d just break the laws.)

When you put it in that perspective, it becomes very sane. Not all states have the same requirements for a driver’s license. But all states recognize each other’s driver’s license.

Maybe it needs to be a designation. Class A carry permit. As I know some states have a variety of sub-licenses (ie: farm licenses that allow a 13 yr old to drive).

coral5353 06/11/2009 9:02am

PRINCIPLE: AAGINST
States Rights issue, not national.

indgosky 02/23/2009 7:53pm

Common sense. Simple Standard. Less permit holder confusion. Less ENFORCEMENT confusion. 10th amendment notwithstanding, this would be a good thing and hopefully this is something which ALL states would participate in to keep things simple for a change.

Watchemoket 07/14/2010 11:45am

Why did the Founders start the 2nd Amendment with the phrase “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state …?”
What ‘regulations’ did the Founders envision, and were only land-owning whites considered part of the militia? How about women?
Bring on the negative votes, but I really would like to read some intelligent responses to these questions.


Vote on This Bill

94% Users Support Bill

3238 in favor / 223 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments