PDA

View Full Version : CCW Vote In Senate Today


Aldemar
07-22-2009, 8:34 AM
Concealed weapons proposal faces ‘high noon’ vote
Posted: 10:13 AM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The Senate is due to vote at “high noon” Wednesday on a controversial proposal to allow people to carry concealed weapons from state to state.

The measure, which has split Democrats, would require each of the 48 states that currently allow concealed firearms to honor permits issued in other states.

Supporters of the measure argue it would help deter criminals; opponents claim it would endanger innocent people by effectively forcing most of the country to conform to regulations in states with the loosest gun ownership standards.

Sen. John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican who is a co-sponsor of the amendment, argued Wednesday that gun licenses should apply across state lines, like driver’s licenses.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder if this passes would my non-resident permits from Utah Florida and Arizona allow me to carry in Cailfornia?

Assuming the Dems are split 50-50, and a majority GOP vote, shouldn't this pass?

gunbuff
07-22-2009, 8:37 AM
I wonder if this passes would my non-resident permits from Utah Florida and Arizona allow me to carry in Cailfornia?
?

California has no agreement with any other state so...no

Gator Monroe
07-22-2009, 8:39 AM
California has no agreement with any other state so...no

Wonder if Shasta county will remain the largest provider of CCW's in state also ?:confused:

onikage
07-22-2009, 8:44 AM
California has no agreement with any other state so...no

Not trying to argue here, just a genuine question, but isn't that the point of the bill? That is, to create a law at the federal level that makes a CCW valid in all states no matter what state issued it.

I honestly am asking, so please correct me if necessary. :)

Aldemar
07-22-2009, 8:45 AM
California has no agreement with any other state so...no

As I read this, it seems to force reciprocity, doesn't it?

AL

SCMA-1
07-22-2009, 8:48 AM
As I read this, it seems to force reciprocity, doesn't it?

AL

That's my understanding of the intent of the bill.

KylaGWolf
07-22-2009, 8:53 AM
It will force it it in all but three states. And since Nevada no longer accepts the Utah permit that could be argued somewhat four. But even if this does pass you wouldn't be able to carry in CA if you live here with a Utah permit. The debate on the bill is on C-SPAN 2 now.

tango-52
07-22-2009, 8:59 AM
This amendment will allow me, with a non-resident Utah/Florida permit to carry in 47 states. I won't be able to carry in Illinois or Wisconsin, because those states don't issue to their own citizens. And I won't be able to carry in my home state of California, because my Sheriff doesn't believe in average citizens carrying. What this will also do is give us great leverage to force shall issue in CA.

tango-52
07-22-2009, 9:02 AM
They are voting now.

Spyder
07-22-2009, 9:11 AM
...at work and can't really check many places online. Keep us updated!

MFortie
07-22-2009, 9:11 AM
What three states?

The way I read the original post "The measure, which has split Democrats, would require each of the 48 states that currently allow concealed firearms to honor permits issued in other states." would mean California would be required to honor other states permits since California does issue CCW permits (albeit very infrequently...)

Aegis
07-22-2009, 9:12 AM
Concealed weapons proposal faces ‘high noon’ vote
Posted: 10:13 AM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The Senate is due to vote at “high noon” Wednesday on a controversial proposal to allow people to carry concealed weapons from state to state.

The measure, which has split Democrats, would require each of the 48 states that currently allow concealed firearms to honor permits issued in other states.

Supporters of the measure argue it would help deter criminals; opponents claim it would endanger innocent people by effectively forcing most of the country to conform to regulations in states with the loosest gun ownership standards.

Sen. John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican who is a co-sponsor of the amendment, argued Wednesday that gun licenses should apply across state lines, like driver’s licenses.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder if this passes would my non-resident permits from Utah Florida and Arizona allow me to carry in Cailfornia?

Assuming the Dems are split 50-50, and a majority GOP vote, shouldn't this pass?

It may pass, but Obama may veto it.

tango-52
07-22-2009, 9:12 AM
What three states?

The way I read the original post "The measure, which has split Democrats, would require each of the 48 states that currently allow concealed firearms to honor permits issued in other states." would mean California would be required to honor other states permits since California does issue CCW permits (albeit very infrequently...)

True. But as a resident of California, my out of state permits aren't valid in my home state. I have to have a permit from CA to carry here.

KylaGWolf
07-22-2009, 9:14 AM
This amendment will allow me, with a non-resident Utah/Florida permit to carry in 47 states. I won't be able to carry in Illinois or Wisconsin, because those states don't issue to their own citizens. And I won't be able to carry in my home state of California, because my Sheriff doesn't believe in average citizens carrying. What this will also do is give us great leverage to force shall issue in CA.

Tango or Nevada now since they say its not allowed on a Utah permit. There was a thread on CGN about do a search. As to the getting them to make this a shall issue state I would love it but I won't believe it till I see it since right now they are passing more and more stupid anti gun laws.

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 9:16 AM
Under this bill, Nevada would be required to honor Utah, and every other state that has any CCW issue.

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 9:20 AM
Gillibrand voted no. I suppose her NRA rating will be in the toilet next time around.

IGOTDIRT4U
07-22-2009, 9:22 AM
Tango or Nevada now since they say its not allowed on a Utah permit. There was a thread on CGN about do a search. As to the getting them to make this a shall issue state I would love it but I won't believe it till I see it since right now they are passing more and more stupid anti gun laws.

Passing the bill puts immense pressure on CA to go shall issue. It does not sit well with the citizens of a state to watch every other (nearly) citizen come into that state and exercise a right, when you you can't do it as a cicitzen of your state.

Plus, CA already has CCW laws that allow permits, so either it needs to go shall issue, or open carry.

Glock22Fan
07-22-2009, 9:23 AM
Can someone please remind me? (Assuming it passes today) doesn't this have to go back to the House before it goes to Obama?

tango-52
07-22-2009, 9:26 AM
Vote total: Aye- 58 No - 39 Fails needed 60

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 9:27 AM
Can someone please remind me? (Assuming it passes today) doesn't this have to go back to the House before it goes to Obama?

I don't think it has been voted on in the house yet. Both houses must agree on a law before it goes to the president.

Fjold
07-22-2009, 9:27 AM
From what I've read, the Amendment says that CCWs issued by the person's home state would be valid in any other state that issues CCWs.

This would seem to mean that non-resident CCWs would not be granted unlimited reciprocity by this.

SCMA-1
07-22-2009, 9:27 AM
suck.

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 9:29 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if a state like New York would attempt to eliminate CCW altogether, rather than submit to the terms of this bill.

joe_sun
07-22-2009, 9:30 AM
This would have made my day..... weak

KylaGWolf
07-22-2009, 9:32 AM
Vote total: Aye- 58 No - 39 Fails needed 60

::Sighs:: damn although it doesn't seem to be over yet the Minority whip is now up giving a speech so maybe gets to go up for another vote....we shall see. Although DiFi and Boxer of course voted no.

tango-52
07-22-2009, 9:34 AM
No, the amendment was withdrawn. Now they are talking about Sotomayor.

Glock22Fan
07-22-2009, 9:36 AM
I don't think it has been voted on in the house yet.

Thank you, I wasn't sure if it had already been there


Both houses must agree on a law before it goes to the president.

I knew that, just wasn't sure whether it had already been to the House, or whether the amendment would (and I'm guessing that's the case) force it to go back and be agreed again there.

Oh well (sigh), I guess it is a moot point now.

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 9:36 AM
"On this vote, The ayes are 58, the nays are 39, under the previous order requiring 60 votes, the adoption of the amendment is withdrawn."

PEBKAC
07-22-2009, 9:38 AM
My question is, who didn't vote...seems we are a few shy of 100 votes.

bigcalidave
07-22-2009, 9:43 AM
The missing two we needed were probably asleep in their offices

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 9:45 AM
Two votes. That was no accident.

BroncoBob
07-22-2009, 9:52 AM
:mad:

glbtrottr
07-22-2009, 9:53 AM
They totally voted "present" :)

The missing two we needed were probably asleep in their offices

rod
07-22-2009, 9:54 AM
If passed, your CCW from your home state, (state of residence), will be honored in all other states that issue CCWs. Unfortunatly, this bill doesn't help CA yet. I'm not sure what's going to happen to out of state CCWs. If this bill passes, there won't be a need for non resident or out of state CCWs. If that's the case, you might have a good argument to get rid of the "good cause" requirement.

Aldemar
07-22-2009, 9:56 AM
Even though it's now a moot point, I think the fact that something like this was even considered is a step forward.

Just thought of something: since Alaska does not require a permit to CCW, would they now have to issue something in order for other states to recgonize their right to CCW?

I can just imagine an resident of Alaska explaining to some LAPD of LASO that he doesn't need any permit where he is from:nono:

yellowfin
07-22-2009, 10:03 AM
Those voting against it deserve very harsh sanctioning. I know that in CA, NJ, IL, CT, HI, and MA they won't get even a finger lifted against them, but last I checked that doesn't add up to 39 senators.

Para45
07-22-2009, 10:12 AM
:mad:

gregorylucas
07-22-2009, 10:15 AM
I still think it's amazing that it garnered 58 votes in the senate no less. Even though it didn't pass it shows me the pro-gun sentiment runs deep throughout the country and it's only a few extremist states that want to maintain the failed gun control policies of the past.

Cali-V
07-22-2009, 10:16 AM
Wow two votes shy...
I'm sure this amendment will be back...

Sidewaysammy
07-22-2009, 10:16 AM
This is a blow to the 2nd Amendment



Concealed arms reciprocity rejected by Senate


WASHINGTON – In a rare win for gun control advocates, the Senate on Wednesday rejected a measure allowing a person with a concealed weapon permit in one state to also hide his firearm when visiting another state.

The vote was 58-39 in favor of the provision establishing concealed carry permit reciprocity in the 48 states that have concealed weapons laws. That fell two votes short of the 60 needed to approve the measure, offered as an amendment to a defense spending bill.

Opponents prevailed in their argument that the measure violated states rights by forcing states with stringent requirements for permits to recognize concealed weapons carriers from states that give out permits to almost any gun owner.

"This is no minor shift in policy," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., whose state requires people to be fingerprinted, get gun training and to undergo a federal background check before issuing permits. "It in fact would be a sweeping change and I think with some deadly consequences."

The vote reversed recent trends where Republicans and gun rights Democrats from rural states joined to push pro-gun rights issues and block gun control legislation.

Congress this year voted to restore the rights of people to carry loaded weapons into national parks and the Senate moved to effectively eviscerate the tough gun control laws of the District of Columbia.

Congress has also ignored urgings from President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to revive a ban on military-style weapons that expired in 2004.

The concealed weapons measure, promoted by the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America, would have made a concealed weapon permit from one state valid in the 47 other states with permit laws. Only Wisconsin and Illinois have no carry permit laws.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., the sponsor, said it would not provide for a national carry permit, and that a visitor to another state would have to obey the limitations of that state, such as bans on concealed weapons in restaurants or other places.

"Law-abiding individuals have the right to self-defense," even when they cross state lines, Thune said, citing the example of truck drivers who need to protect themselves as they travel.

Opponents, however, said the 48 states with permits have a broad range of conditions for obtaining those permits: some such as Alaska and Vermont, give permits to almost all gun owners. Others, such as New York, have firearm training requirements and exclude people with drinking problems or criminal records.

New York Democrat Charles Schumer raised the possibility of his state having to accept gun carriers from states that have few or no restrictions. Thune's proposal, he said, was "the most dangerous piece of legislation to the safety of Americans when it comes to guns since the repeal of the assault weapons ban."

Thune shot back that if a person from South Dakota with a carry permit visited Central Park in New York City, "Central Park will be a much safer place."

Other opponents said the proposal infringed on states' rights, usually an important principle for gun rights groups. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said it would override the laws of 11 states — California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Rhode Island — and the District of Columbia — which do not allow carry permit reciprocity with other states.

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., another sponsor, reminded his colleagues that the NRA and Gun Owners of America were scoring the vote, meaning it would be considered in their election evaluation of lawmakers.

NRA chief lobbyist Chris W. Cox said the last two decades have shown a strong shift toward gun rights laws. "We believe it's time for Congress to acknowledge these changes and respect the right of self-defense, and the right of self-defense does not stop at state lines," he said.

Gun control groups were strongly in opposition.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said Mississippi residents can get a permit without any training, including ever shooting a pistol on a range. These permit holders could carry firearms in New York City, where police have broad discretion to deny permits, or Dallas, where permit applicants must undergo at least 10 hours of training.

"It is critical to our efforts that people who enter our state abide by the laws of our state which have supported the progress we are making," Newark, N.J., mayor Cory Booker said in a statement. "This is not a law that will in any way support our efforts to create a safer Newark."

M. D. Van Norman
07-22-2009, 10:18 AM
Just thought of something: since Alaska does not require a permit to CCW, would they now have to issue something in order for other states to recgonize their right to CCW?

Alaska already does exactly this.

Aldemar
07-22-2009, 10:23 AM
Alaska already does exactly this.


I was under the impression that anyone, even a non-resident could CCW in Alaska:confused:

AL

Opus109
07-22-2009, 10:25 AM
I believe that is correct, but you can request a permit, and they will issue one to you.

chiefcrash
07-22-2009, 10:26 AM
This is a blow to the 2nd Amendment

I love how they call it a "rare win" for gun control...

Aegis
07-22-2009, 10:31 AM
I want to see a list of the senators that voted no. My guess is they are mostly Democrats. I hope the American people realize when a Democrat says he or she is pro-2A, it is generally a lie.

Aldemar
07-22-2009, 10:38 AM
^^^
Yes, when/where do they list the votes?


AL

Maestro Pistolero
07-22-2009, 10:40 AM
I want to see a list of the senators that voted no. My guess is they are mostly Democrats. I hope the American people realize when a Democrat says he or she is pro-2A, it is generally a lie.


We may want to stay away from the conventional wisdom on this. Many so-called Blue Dog Dems have shown big cahones in support of 2A. Many signed on to the letter of rebuke that was sent to Holder regarding the AWB nonsense he was spouting. Many voted for this amendment as well. The Blue Dogs are the main, if not the only reason that Schumer, and Feinstein, etc. can't get any gun control done right now, even with a lock on the majority. We have some important friends in the B-D-Dems that need our support and recognition.

PEBKAC
07-22-2009, 10:51 AM
I want to see a list of the senators that voted no. My guess is they are mostly Democrats. I hope the American people realize when a Democrat says he or she is pro-2A, it is generally a lie.
Working with round numbers, assuming all 40 Reps voted for it there is about a 2/3 chance a Dem is lying...this assumes of course they bothered to say they were for gun rights in the first place.

Maybe it's just me, but I was under the impression (correct me if I am wrong) that the DiFi/Boxer et al. crew generally make no illusions about their position on these things. :rolleyes:

Given this a more accurate way to assess the lies on the issue would be to compare Dems who have said that they were for gun rights (reasonably recently) and then compare it to the list of "nays". My guess is that a lot less are lying than you might think.

Obviously, this doesn't excuse the Dems that are not for gun rights and make no illusions about it. But that is less a lying issue and more an issue of determining planetary origin. :D

Aegis
07-22-2009, 10:54 AM
We may want to stay away from the conventional wisdom on this. Many so-called Blue Dog Dems have shown big cahones in support of 2A. Many signed on to the letter of rebuke that was sent to Holder regarding the AWB nonsense he was spouting. Many voted for this amendment as well. The Blue Dogs are the main, if not the only reason that Schumer, and Feinstein, etc. can't get any gun control done right now, even with a lock on the majority. We have some important friends in the B-D-Dems that need our support and recognition.

If a Democrat voted for the bill, I will applaud that vote. Likewise, if a Republican voted against it, I hope they get voted out of office.

The vote shows that the Democrats as a party as generally anti-2A and they would pass every bad piece of gun legislation if they could. I agree, there are a few Democrats that are preventing this from happening. My hope is that people realize that the most of the Democrats want to destroy the 2A if they could. I am so looking forward to the 2010 elections.

yellowfin
07-22-2009, 10:56 AM
^^^
Yes, when/where do they list the votes?


ALRight here:

NAYs ––-39
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burris (D-IL)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kaufman (D-DE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV) Kennedy (D-MA) Mikulski (D-MD)

Aldemar
07-22-2009, 10:58 AM
Found the votes on another thread

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00237#position

Looks like the dems got the two GOP votes they needed. Turncoats

Fjold
07-22-2009, 11:00 AM
Lugar (R-IN)
Voinovich (R-OH)

Traitors

CnCFunFactory
07-22-2009, 11:00 AM
Sucks!:mad:

Para45
07-22-2009, 11:04 AM
Lugar (R-IN)
Voinovich (R-OH)

F*****G Traitors


Fixed it for you. This makes me very unhappy....:mad:

Deadred7o7
07-22-2009, 11:33 AM
Let there be no mistake, Thune-Vitter, though pro-gun, was not pro-Second Amendment.

ArticleTheFourth
07-22-2009, 11:46 AM
Let there be no mistake, Thune-Vitter, though pro-gun, was not pro-Second Amendment.

But, at least they voted correctly on this ammendment; Luger and Voinovich voted on the wrong side - they are TRAITORS!

KDOFisch
07-22-2009, 12:13 PM
What are the next steps?:confused:

God, there are our two votes for 60. Damn.

Scold
07-22-2009, 8:49 PM
2 votes from 60.... and 2 douchebag repubs voting no. Jesus Christ..... what the hell is wrong with them.

If it was only dems voting no, it wouldn't bother me so much... but the 2 god damned votes we needed but didn't get were given to the opposition by the repubs.... sigh.