National Reciprocity Article

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • 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!
  • redeemed.man

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 29, 2013
    17,444
    HoCo
    Gotta wait until 2016 at the earliest.

    Change of administration, I think you are right. Even then do the Republicans really have a candidate charismatic enough to win? Obviously charisma matters to American voters. It was certainly not experience or honesty that got Obama into office.
     

    ryan_j

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 6, 2013
    2,264
    Not gonna pass, and if by some miracle it does, O will use his pen and his phone. The pen to veto it, and the phone to call the senators who voted for it and ask them, "did you really think I'd sign this?"
     

    abean4187

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 16, 2013
    1,327
    Not gonna happen till at least 2016 and realistically, 2024 (I am assuming that Republicans will lose again in 2016 and 2020).
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    This just got a big boost with the election last night. The 3 votes needed in the Senate are now there (IA,WV, and SD), along with GOP control, provided all other votes stay the same. The House is a slam dunk and will easily pass.
    The trick will be attaching it to something that Obama will be forced to sign or otherwise pay a huge political price for by vetoing.
     

    HauptsAriba

    Active Member
    Feb 16, 2014
    200
    Anne Arundel
    How about an immigration bill rider?

    :D
    It would only happen if, and that's a big if, there was some kind of registration or restriction on the table for the antis. As much as I want this, in a way, it's not worth it. I would rather leave it to the States and fight in my State to win shall issue, or just move. Giving it to the Feds is a bad idea.

    BUT! What happens if DC is forced to stop all this BS and be a real shall issue local? Then you have a permit issued by the federal gubment, yes? No? Sort of?
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,394
    Westminster USA
    The bill was introduced as national reciprocity, not national registration. Of course that will never fly, and it shouldn't
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    It would only happen if, and that's a big if, there was some kind of registration or restriction on the table for the antis. As much as I want this, in a way, it's not worth it. I would rather leave it to the States and fight in my State to win shall issue, or just move. Giving it to the Feds is a bad idea.

    BUT! What happens if DC is forced to stop all this BS and be a real shall issue local? Then you have a permit issued by the federal gubment, yes? No? Sort of?

    Nonsense. And if you learn what is meant by it you will understand. Bottom line we do it or they will.. our people are smarter than Thiers ..but they can't get other knees cut every time they go in for the kill.

    And you question ...no Dc is not federal... not even a state. Fees will be high and you will need to apply in person.. please let our lawyers do their thing.
     

    DaemonAssassin

    Why should we Free BSD?
    Jun 14, 2012
    23,970
    Political refugee in WV
    Nonsense. And if you learn what is meant by it you will understand. Bottom line we do it or they will.. our people are smarter than Thiers ..but they can't get other knees cut every time they go in for the kill.

    And you question ...no Dc is not federal... not even a state. Fees will be high and you will need to apply in person.. please let our lawyers do their thing.

    DC is a Federal enclave, therefore it is ruled by the Federal government. Might want to go back to history class, bub.

    Our lawyers can't do diddly in DC, unless things pass the city council and are then approved by Congress.

    Nice try.
     
    Feb 28, 2013
    28,953
    It would only happen if, and that's a big if, there was some kind of registration or restriction on the table for the antis. As much as I want this, in a way, it's not worth it. I would rather leave it to the States and fight in my State to win shall issue, or just move. Giving it to the Feds is a bad idea.

    By the gospel according to Chucky "Schmucky" Shumer....:rolleyes:

    "We don't want someone from Montana to be able to carry a gun in New York".
     

    sig63

    Member
    Jun 15, 2009
    195
    FREED AT LAST!!!
    So I am probably being too optimistic but there is at least a potential for enough pro-2A Senators to make up the 2/3 majority required to override a Presidential veto. There are a few other legislative mechanisms that could mess it up and I think it is way down on the priority list, but it is at least theoretically possible now.

    Of course there are other possibilities that might work, such as quietly expanding LEOSA to cover people with certain training prerequisites (military members or retirees, maybe qualified instructors, so on). That could work.

    I'm just spitballing and curious to hear other thoughts on the topic....
     

    Chauchat

    Active Member
    Jan 16, 2014
    113
    In the free States
    The District is not federal? Interesting. DaemonAssassin, you have it correct. The District of Columbia was created by the Constitution and is therefore solely a federal entity and completely under the delegated authority given to the Congress.

    While the article was written recently it is a repost of an article from March by the NRA-ILA. But back to civics 101.

    The people and the Congress of the thirteen original States of the American Confederation constituted a new government in 1787 and Congress can only enact statutes where Congress has been delegated that authority according to that Constitution. That requirement has not changed in 227 years.

    So let's look at a "national reciprocity bill" and see what it has to say.

    https://www.congress.gov/113/bills/hr2959/BILLS-113hr2959ih.pdf

    Section 2 states what the bill is supposed to do. It amends and only amends the GCA of 1968 by adding material and not changing extisting wording. This is where most people eyes roll into the top of their skulls and their brains go to sleep.

    You will notice the word "state" used through out bill. This is a legal term and must be defined for clarity and it is.

    Let us venture to the Act the bill would purport to change.

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/html/USCODE-2009-title18-partI-chap44.htm

    The legal term is defined. It is in the definitions in 921a2.

    §921. Definitions

    (a) As used in this chapter—

    ...
    (2) The term “interstate or foreign commerce” includes commerce between any place in a State and any place outside of that State, or within any possession of the United States (not including the Canal Zone) or the District of Columbia, but such term does not include commerce between places within the same State but through any place outside of that State. The term “State” includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the possessions of the United States (not including the Canal Zone).

    The key is "as used in this chapter" Every place State is mentioned it only means what 921a2 says.

    So is the GCA of 1968 congruent with the Constitution? Yep. The district is not one of the fifty States of the Union. Puerto Rico is not a State of the Union. It is a possession. (I wished they would have voted for full independence a couple of years ago but that is another story) So are the Mariana Islands and other places under the control of Congress.

    So would there be reciprocity under the bill if enacted? Yes, but only between the District and the possessions and territories. There would be no legal federal/national reciprocity between the People's Socialist Republic Maryland or the Free State of Wyoming as one example.

    The law is in black and white for those who want to read it
     

    Dogabutila

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 21, 2010
    2,359
    Straight rider to a must pass bill. Doable with the votes we have now. Think budget or NDAA or something.
     

    HauptsAriba

    Active Member
    Feb 16, 2014
    200
    Anne Arundel
    Nonsense. And if you learn what is meant by it you will understand. Bottom line we do it or they will.. our people are smarter than Thiers ..but they can't get other knees cut every time they go in for the kill.

    And you question ...no Dc is not federal... not even a state. Fees will be high and you will need to apply in person.. please let our lawyers do their thing.
    Nonsense? Which part. It's difficult to decipher what your saying.

    Which lawyers, in which case, and how am I interfering with them? I pay my lifetime dues to SAF just like the next guy.

    I have seen enough of your posts to respect your opinion, just not clear on what it is in this instance.
     

    ryan_j

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 6, 2013
    2,264
    So I am probably being too optimistic but there is at least a potential for enough pro-2A Senators to make up the 2/3 majority required to override a Presidential veto. There are a few other legislative mechanisms that could mess it up and I think it is way down on the priority list, but it is at least theoretically possible now.



    Of course there are other possibilities that might work, such as quietly expanding LEOSA to cover people with certain training prerequisites (military members or retirees, maybe qualified instructors, so on). That could work.



    I'm just spitballing and curious to hear other thoughts on the topic....



    I would be greatly interested in expanding LEOSA but please expand it to everyone who can train and qualify. Don't just restrict it to a chosen few like military and government employees.
     

    Bald Fat Guy

    Active Member
    Oct 7, 2014
    418
    Ideally this would already be covered under the Full Faith and Credit. This is a subject where it all comes down to the details. Accepting various states permits at face value would be *Good thing* . Letting the Fed Gov't establish standards would be removing and entire wall of the tent, to let in a truck load of camels (the aminal, not the cigarrettes). To Me , that would push it into *Bad thing* .
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,418
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom