Senator Thune Introducing Another National Reciprocity Bill

Senator Thune Introducing Another National Reciprocity Bill.

Senator Thune Introducing Another National Reciprocity Bill.

Sen. John R. Thune, R-S.D. says he will be introducing a new national concealed carry bill in just a few weeks. His 2009 National Reciprocity Bill S. 845 (see below) received 58 votes but that number is slightly deceiving. Some Democrats knowing he would not receive enough votes may have votes for him just to get a pro-gun votes under their belt.

Currently there are 49 states that have some type of concealed carry laws on the books leaving only Illinois that bans concealed carry.

National Reciprocity s845

Read more at Human Events

, , ,

  • Anonymous

    Sen. John R. Thune 2 thumbs up to you. that is how it should be

    • Charles

      I would suggest that as part of a Nationall reciprocity bill an amendment be included to change the FEDERAL law regarding the carrying of guns in a school zone to allow permit holders from out of state to be exempt as are in-state permit holders.

  • Mountaingoat61

    Luke, not trying to be anal or anything but this IS a site accessible to the world… do a little spell checking. Introducting? diceiving?  Important news though, keep up the good work.

  • Pingback: Senator Thune Introducing Another National Reciprocity Bill - INGunOwners()

  • CGMS

    Great! But if you have non resident permits from oyher states and live in NJ or MD your screwed because they will not issue you a resident permit no matter what. I am sure there are a few others.

    It should be that if you have a permit regardless of resident or non resident then any state that is a Shall issue or a May issue (49 states) should qualify and MUST recognize your permit (resident /non resident) because you have passed all the qualifications – State Police, FBI, and federal law requirements to get your permit regardless.

    If the law makes the states recognize other states resident / nonresident permits then you will be forcing those states to start to issue permits rather then be a May issue ( which we all know is BS) that state will have to deside to either become Shall Issue or No Issue period.

    Therefore this new law really does not work except those that live in states that have Shall Issue. When is anyone really going to fix this?

    • Anonymous

      “It should be that if you have a permit regardless of resident or non
      resident then any state that is a Shall issue or a May issue (49 states)
      should qualify and MUST recognize your permit… ”

      That is exactly what it does.

      Paragraph 1 of the bill states “A person who…is carrying a license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of ANY state…”  Meaning any permit that you have, regardless of resident or non-res, will be considered valid in any other state that has some sort of CCW provisions (Now, all but Illinois).

      Paragraph 2 is for residents of states that do not require any permit to carry.  Currently, VT, AZ, AK, and WY.  Residents of these states would be allowed to carry in any state (except IL) without any permit.

  • Net Guru

    I recall during the last presidential campaign, that B H 0bama wanted a “civilian security force that was as  well funded as the military”. HERE is his wish come true. An all volunteer force willing to protect themselves and thier families.

  • Drc573

    Stating that Democrats first voted for this bill, knowing that it would not pass, makes no sense whatsoever and may actually turn some pro gun Dems away altogether, since you make it a party issue. In Ohio, many Democrats as well as our past Democrat Governor, truly ARE pro gun. I happen to know my congressman personally and forwarded this article for him to read. I hope that he would also join this forum to give you his own opinion, but doubt he will due to the anti Democratic party spin on this site. Your biggest mistake would be to assume all Dems are anti-gun….. because we’re not.

  • Drc573

    Stating that Democrats first voted for this bill, knowing that it would not pass, makes no sense whatsoever and may actually turn some pro gun Dems away altogether, since you make it a party issue. In Ohio, many Democrats as well as our past Democrat Governor, truly ARE pro gun. I happen to know my congressman personally and forwarded this article for him to read. I hope that he would also join this forum to give you his own opinion, but doubt he will due to the anti Democratic party spin on this site. Your biggest mistake would be to assume all Dems are anti-gun….. because we’re not.

    • Anonymous

      Aside from a few missing commas and one typo, I think it is stated as plainly as needed. 

      SOME Democrats, (note the word SOME and not the word ALL) knowing he would not receive enough votes, MAY HAVE (as opposed to saying “most certainly did”) votes (should be “voted”) for him just to get a pro-gun vote under their belt.

      I don’t see any implication that all Dems are anti-gun.

    • Derby

      Somehow  I don’t think this is what BO had in mind.

      • Derby

        Sorry, this belonged under Net Guru’s comment.

  • pj

    I am not an attorney. Does “Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof” mean that the State or subdivision government can write a law with a provision that negates permitting carry? I.e. California does not recognize permits issued by any state other than California and to posess a hand gun in CA, one must have a Handgun Safety Certificate (HSC). This type of provision void the applicability of federal law. A city like Chicago could write an ordinance  that only residence of the city may posess a hand gun.

    Sen Thrune, I appreciate the effort and this bill needs some tuning to prevent local government from easily bypassing its intent.

    • Anonymous

      Replace the word “Notwithstanding” with “regardless of”.  IOW, Federal law will trump any state or local law that would contradict it.

  • redhawk45

    Pardon me but we already have all we need to carry in any state, as long as the person with a CHL abides by local law; specifically the “…full faith and credit” clause as contained within Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution. Of course this would not apply for those who don’t believe in what the Constitutions clearly states…such as Obamunists! 

  • Jeff no last name

    Nice, Hawaii issues ZERO permits, not even to their retired PD officers so everyone here has FL or UT permits so this federal law helps us zero!  The HI AG has even been fighting the HR that allows retired PD to have CCW’s. The only folks in HI with concealed firearms are active duty police and the car jackers and armed robbers. Look out tourist your just fresh meat for criminals here.

    • Anonymous

      This law benefits residents of HI, MD, NJ, CA, NYC and DC the most.  Your FL or UT permit would be recognized as valid in HI, regardless of your residency.

  • Anonymous

    I’m skeptical of passage, but even if it does pass both houses, the president will veto…can’t wait for Nov 2012 election. Maybe in 2013 this could actually become law.

  • Shane

    I say they also ammend it to include air travel. If you take off in Florida and land in Michigan (which already is recripicol) why not just carry on board the plane? If New York recognized California 9-11 never would have happened.

  • Dr. J.

    As remote as passage seems, we should support this bill.  I suggest writing your senator. I sent both of mine the following:

    Dear Senator ,
     
    Please support S. 845 offered by Senator Thune.  This bill would provide uniform treatment across the county for those individuals who are licensed to lawfully carry firearms for self-protection in their state of residence.
     
    There is no evidence that the expansion of concealed carry has increased crime or firearms-related incidents.  In fact, evidence points to a reduction in crime where lawful carry is permitted.
     
    As a senior citizen and disabled veteran, I am one of a growing population who are more vulnerable and easily discerned as potential crime victims.  The ability to defend oneself is an important right that should be universally honored by all states.
     
    Sincerely,
     

  • Philtr68

    I hope this time it gets the 60 votes but what about H.B.822 THAT CONGRESSMAN Cliff Stearns & Heath Shuler PUT THE BILL IN FEB 11TH 2011?? Isn’t the same bill???

Quantcast