National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Vote Imminent

[Red Hat]

I know some don't like the idea of a national carry law but It looks like it will get a vote.

Vote on Right to Carry Coming Soon

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
Gun Owners of America


Friday, July 17, 2009

A vote to protect your right to travel out-of-state with a firearm could come to a vote next week -- even as early as Monday!

Senators John Thune and David Vitter are the sponsors of S. 845 -- a bill that will establish concealed carry reciprocity amongst the several states.

Senators Thune and Vitter offered the bill as an amendment (#1618) to the Department of Defense authorization bill (H.R. 2647).

This provision will use the constitutional authority allowing Congress to enforce "full faith and credit" across the country, so that each state respects the "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings" of every other state (Article IV).

The benefit of the Thune/Vitter legislation is that -- unlike other, competing measures -- it would protect the right of any U.S. citizen to carry out of state (regardless of whether he possesses a permit), as long as he is authorized to carry in his home state. This is important because of states like Vermont and Alaska, where residents can carry concealed without prior approval or permission from the state... in other words, without a permit!

[rugerfan.64]

Just fired one off to both my senators ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[utimmer43]

So, how are amendments attached? Does the senate simply vote on weather or not to add the amendment?

[matthewaynelson]

Originally Posted by utimmer43

... how are amendments attached? Does the senate simply vote on weather or not to add the amendment?

Unless I'm mistaken, this particular matter is NOT an amendment. It instead is a Senate Bill. Once this Bill was passed by the Senate, it would have to also be passed by the House and ultimately signed into Law by the President.

However, to answer your question about amendments...

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).
The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.

Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be ratified, or approved, by three-fourths of states. There are two ways to do this, too. The text of the amendment may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.

The Constitution, then, spells out four paths for an amendment:

• Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used)
• Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used)
• Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once)
• Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)

It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, nor a ratification. (Source)

I also sent the GOA email to my Florida and Texas Senators! Hope something positive will come of it! :)

[utimmer43]

Matt, thanks for the effort, but read the article again. It states that "Senators Thune and Vitter offered the bill as an amendment (#1618) to the Department of Defense authorization bill (H.R. 2647)."

As such, I'm not asking how to amendment the Constitution (I already know how that works), but how amendments are added to bills?

[Comp_sH00tEr24]

This sounds better than a national concealed carry permit since it applies to reciprocity. I wonder how it would apply to Illinois and wisconsin

[FN1910]

The benefit of the Thune/Vitter legislation is that -- unlike other, competing measures -- it would protect the right of any U.S. citizen to carry out of state (regardless of whether he possesses a permit), as long as he is authorized to carry in his home state. This is important because of states like Vermont and Alaska, where residents can carry concealed without prior approval or permission from the state... in other words, without a permit!

Does this mean that a SC resident without a permit can carry in New York City as long as they keep it in their glove box. How about a NC resident in SC, will they be able to OC in SC but SC residents can't.

From what I have read of this bill it is going to cause one big screw up if it passes and lots of court cases.

[utimmer43]

Originally Posted by Comp_sH00tEr24

This sounds better than a national concealed carry permit since it applies to reciprocity. I wonder how it would apply to Illinois and wisconsin

As I understand it (not being a lawyer, mind you) it would not apply to IL and WI. The bill (S.845) states "A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of any State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit in any State that allows its residents to carry concealed firearms, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried."

If that is the exact wording in the proposed amendment, then it seems it would not allow you to carry in IL and WI.

[utimmer43]

Originally Posted by FN1910

Does this mean that a SC resident without a permit can carry in New York City as long as they keep it in their glove box. How about a NC resident in SC, will they be able to OC in SC but SC residents can't.

From what I have read of this bill it is going to cause one big screw up if it passes and lots of court cases.

Again, not a lawyer, but I think the clause "may carry a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit" would render the bill irrelavent to your two proposed scenarios.

[matthewaynelson]

Originally Posted by utimmer43

... Thune and Vitter offered the bill as an amendment (#1618) to the Department of Defense authorization bill (H.R. 2647)."

My bad! :(

So this "amendment" to the Department of Defense authorization bill is technically referred to as a rider. A rider is an additional provision annexed to a bill under the consideration of a legislature, having little connection with the subject matter of the bill. Riders are usually created as a tactic to pass a controversial provision which would not pass as its own bill.

A rider can be introduced by any senator. In this case this rider has been co-sponsored (Thune and Vitter).

Another example of a rider is the Hate Crimes bill that Democrats have linked to the Defense Bill.

The rider can be modified before the legislation passes from the Senate. And, if the rider is controversial enough it can ultimately kill a piece of legislation. In other instances, the President can use a line item veto to kill a rider.

Hopefully this rider will pass through the Senate without modification and ultimately be signed into law! :)