
![]()
U. S. House of Representatives Adopts Right- to- Carry Reciprocity—
All
Anti-Gun Amendments Defeated!
On Wednesday, Nov. 16, the ongoing effort to fully vindicate the fundamental,
individual right to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense took a major step
forward with House passage of
H.R. 822,
the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.” The
bill,
sponsored by Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), which has
245 cosponsors, was approved by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of
272-154.
Several
amendments were offered to undermine the bill’s protections.
Every one of these amendments was
soundly defeated by an overwhelming bipartisan vote, and included:
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee
provided crucial support to H.R. 822’s progress over the last several months,
opened debate on the bill by describing in plain terms what it does.
“This legislation requires states that currently allow
people to carry concealed firearms to recognize other states’ valid concealed
carry permits, much like states recognize driver’s licenses issued by other
states,” Rep. Smith said. Anticipating the claim that H.R. 822
would override state carry laws—a claim that would be made over and over by
House members opposed to the bill—Smith added, “The
bill recognizes the right of states to determine eligibility requirements for
their own residents [and] laws and regulations regarding how, when, and where a
concealed firearm can be carried that apply to a resident will apply equally to
a nonresident.” Rep. Smith concluded his opening remarks by expressing the
central motive behind the bill, saying that the “fundamental right to bear arms
. . . should not be constrained by state boundary lines.”
As the author of the bill, Rep. Stearns expanded upon Chairman Smith’s
arguments, saying “[I]t’s long overdue that we take action to enhance the
fundamental right of self-defense for all law-abiding citizens of this country.
The right—the simple right—to defend yourself and your loved ones from a
criminal is fundamental. And it's not extinguished when you simply cross a state
border. . . . . [U]nder this legislation, lawfully issued carry permits will be
recognized in all states that also issue carry permits. There are now 49 states
that issue these permits. Most of these states also recognize permits issued
from at least some other states, while some states recognize all valid permits
issued by any state. But herein, simply, lies the problem. The non-uniformity of
the laws regarding reciprocity makes it difficult for law-abiding permit holders
to know for sure if they are obeying the law as they travel from state to state.
While preserving the power of the states to set the rules on where
concealed firearms can be carried, this legislation…will simply make it easier
for law-abiding permit holders to know that they are simply in compliance with
the law when they carry a firearm as they travel this wonderful country of
ours.”
Rep. Stearns also
put to rest several self-serving claims recently made by a small number of
groups which claim to support the Second Amendment, but never seem to find a
viable pro-Second Amendment bill they can support. These groups regularly
oppose important pro-gun reform legislation, either complaining that it does not
achieve all of gun owners’ goals in a single stroke, or expressing a paranoid
fear that the legislation contains a hidden, insidious mechanism that will lead
to the destruction of our right to keep and bear arms.
“This bill does not set up a federal carry permit system or establish any
federal regulations of concealed-carry permits,”
Rep. Stearns said. “That power remains with the states.
Additionally, this legislation does not include any new federal gun laws, nor
does it call for additional federal regulation of gun ownership. In fact, it
does not allow for new federal regulation, for it amends the part of the Gun
Control Act that allows only such regulation as is necessary, and in this case
none.”
Some of the other House members speaking in favor were Steve Chabot (R-Ohio),
John Kline (R-Minn.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), and Dennis Ross (R-Fla.), each of
whom reiterated that H.R. 822 does not establish a national licensing scheme or
federal carry permit system, or any other federal regulation relating to carry
permits or gun ownership.
Since the House debate, some of the same critics have focused their complaints
on an amendment by Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) that would require a study of
law enforcement officials’ ability to check the validity of out-of-state
permits. The amendment was adopted by voice vote. It is important to note
that any member of Congress can request a General Accounting Office study of any
issue at any time, with or without legislation. More importantly, this study
will have no effect on the provisions of H.R. 822. Certainly it wouldn't
force the states to use "biometric identifiers" on permits, an idea that so far
exists only in the minds of these naysayers.
Special thanks also go to Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who rose time and again to
defend H.R. 822 against the anti-gun amendments its opponents put forward.
Additional thanks go to Reps. Steve Austria (R-Ohio); Howard Coble (R-N.C.);
Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.); Jason Altmire (R-Penn.); Dan Boren (D-Okla.); Mike Ross
(D-Ark.); Trent Franks (R-Ariz.); Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.); Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.);
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.); Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.); Candice Miller (R-Mich.); Marlin
Stutzman (R-Ind.); and Don Young (R-Alaska) for speaking in support of H.R. 822
during the debate, and to Rep. Rich Nugent (R-Fla.) for managing the Rule which
provided for consideration of the bill.
This critical legislation now moves to the Senate.
Please contact your Senators and urge
them to bring H.R. 822 up for a vote at the earliest possible opportunity!
|
Disclaimer: Much of this information is based upon media sources, such as the AP wire services, newspapers, magazines, books, online news blog and news services, and radio and television, which we deem to be reliable. However, we have undertaken no independent investigation to verify the accuracy of the information reported by these media sources. We therefore disclaim all liability for false or inaccurate information from these media sources. We also disclaim all liability for the third-party information that may be accessed through the material referenced in our emails or posted on our website. |
|