My CCW proposal made it to D.C.

[JJEH]

Since a few month I'm working on a proposal that would allow your current permit to be recognized in all 50 states. A few weeks ago I finally sent the 4-page proposal off to Senator Tom Coburn M.D. (R-Okla.). Today I got a call from his office. His assistant caught me totally off guard since I honestly didn't expect much response.

After a couple questions and some small talk he said he will forward this to the Senators desk so he can look at it.

Not sure if this is good or bad but I'm happy my letter made it to D.C.

The proposal can be seen here:

Proposal to Senator Tom Coburn M.D. (R-Okla.) for change of current CCW law | estradaarmory

[jrwhitt]

Curious why you restrict the right to just US citizens instead of all legal residents ?

[Germz]

good start but I seem some holes in it, the biggest that struck me was
"ccw is nation-wide except a permit is needed to prevent felons/criminals from carrying"

yet you add the condition that states that already allow constitutional carry (ie alaska) will not be made to require.

the two ideas cancel each other out. if a resident of alaska is a felon, hes still going to carry no matter what because he's a felon and laws don't apply.
constitutional carry without a permit, and a law that forbids felons from carrying is whats needed.. if felons choose to break that law, well then good thing we have constitutional carry for law abiding citizens in place to protect themselves.

[ddestruel]

slip in there that, classes do not need to exceed 8 hours (otherwise you get the 40 hours every year NJ funny business) and that classes are at states discretion constitutional carry states shouldn’t be shunned. Also a biggie i think that should be involved in any CCW law is clarifying that any firearm not defined by the BATF as dangerous and unusual under the guidelines of the NFA, i.e. in common use for law enforcement or by the public is legal to carry at all times and transport across all state lines including the carrying of the associated standard capacity magazines. for purposes of safe interstate travel and defense of commerce they are defining concealed carry across state lines and recognizing transportation of weapons in common use. otherwise everyone from out of state has to stop and buy 10 or 7 round magazines at the various states with unpractical laws like CA & NY. that could both help in preventing micro state laws from entrapping unsuspecting law abiding travelers and help the legal battles we are pursuing now.

[CZ man in LA]

Hate to tell you this but Nationwide CCW reciprocity has been proposed several times in the past three years and it all died out in the Senate.

In 2012, Feinstein placed a hold onto the bill and it eventually died out in the Senate. You can read her letter to the Senate here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/18/dianne-feinstein-concealed-weapon-bill_n_1434798.html

Last year, it failed in the Senate with a 57-43 vote.

http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/breaking-national-concealed-carry-reciprocity-amendment-fails/

Currently, HR2959 National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013 sponsored by Rep. Richard Nugent (R-FL) is in House Committee right now. Prognosis is 2% chance of passing both House and Senate.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr2959

[JJEH]

Thank you guys so far. This is a proposal, nothing is perfect and nothing is written in stone.

Yes, allowing permanent residents to carry is a thing to consider.

My idea behind creating a federal law is that each state has to abide by it. Therefore states like AK have to start issuing ccw permits. But it's valid in all 50 states. Now that's the thing we are gonna chew on for a while. Either let it be state laws and states like AK allow everyone to carry. Or implement something that requires a permit but is valid in all 50 states.

I told Mr. Coburn's assistant that I'm not a politician nor a law student. I'm just a business owner that talks a lot about this. Also I think it's time that common sense prevails again.

[JoshuaS]

Current law states that each state has its own laws regarding ccw

No law states that. There is this thing called federalism. IF it is legitimate to regulate carry and require permits, then it is purely a state matter. Any and all Federal laws here, except as pertains to national defense, regulations of the militia when called to national service (as in the case of rebellion or invasion) or in determining the manner in which and the effect of recognition, with full faith and credit, of judicial proceedings, public acts and records between various states (article IV section 1, US Constitution)

You federal law is wrong, illegal, and blatantly unconstitutional. While Congress can legislate the manner in which full faith and credit is recognized it cannot, e.g., require anything whatsoever for the issuing of a driver's license. Every state can have whatever requirements they deem fit there.

Common sense is that you don't completely go against our very system of government, of federalism, just because you want a certain effect. Any national CCW must be through reciprocity.


Now if you want to argue that the 2nd amendment does not allow such and such requirements to carry, that is legit.

[Mrninninnin]

Please keep us posted as to where this goes so we can give it another try JJEH!
You Must Be Cloned Immediately!

[chuckdc]

Thank you guys so far. This is a proposal, nothing is perfect and nothing is written in stone.

Yes, allowing permanent residents to carry is a thing to consider.

My idea behind creating a federal law is that each state has to abide by it. Therefore states like AK have to start issuing ccw permits. But it's valid in all 50 states. Now that's the thing we are gonna chew on for a while. Either let it be state laws and states like AK allow everyone to carry. Or implement something that requires a permit but is valid in all 50 states.

I told Mr. Coburn's assistant that I'm not a politician nor a law student. I'm just a business owner that talks a lot about this. Also I think it's time that common sense prevails again.

They already do issue them so that their residents can carry elsewhere ( at least in AK's case)

[Ronin2]

Curious why you restrict the right to just US citizens instead of all legal residents ?

I dont have an issue with this...only citzens can vote, only citzens should be CCW's.

[safewaysecurity]

I dont have an issue with this...only citzens can vote, only citzens should be CCW's.

Which means you dont believe the 2nd amendment guarantees a natural right that precedes the existence of.government. You seem to discriminate when it comes to fundamentalnhuman rights of self defense. Voting is not a natural right, voting is something that exists with government. The right to keep and bear arms exists regardless.

[jrwhitt]

I dont have an issue with this...only citzens can vote, only citzens should be CCW's.

Why should legal residents of the country be deprived of the right guarenteed to them by the Bill of Rights (note NOT granted ).

[Drivedabizness]

Thank you guys so far. This is a proposal, nothing is perfect and nothing is written in stone.

Yes, allowing permanent residents to carry is a thing to consider.

My idea behind creating a federal law is that each state has to abide by it. Therefore states like AK have to start issuing ccw permits. But it's valid in all 50 states. Now that's the thing we are gonna chew on for a while. Either let it be state laws and states like AK allow everyone to carry. Or implement something that requires a permit but is valid in all 50 states.

I told Mr. Coburn's assistant that I'm not a politician nor a law student. I'm just a business owner that talks a lot about this. Also I think it's time that common sense prevails again.

No Junior Member. Please read just a little bit about the law and binding Court precedent before you presume to offer legislation with a national scope. Legal residents already enjoy full constitutional rights (with some limitations reserved for citizenship - like voting). Gun permitting and carry has already been litigated. Its not a "thing to consider" (how generous of you). It should have been part of your original proposal. This is what common sense looks like.

Half-baked arguments make our side look like we can't think. Or that we are happy to inadvertently give away someone else's rights as long as we get the particular thing we are after.

I push back at self-appointed "smart people" who say they are the only ones who can speak for our side. But I understand how they could get to feel that way.

We should be on the side of maximum liberty - with only narrowly tailored, compelling infringements (I could swear I've read that somewhere)

[press1280]

Your proposal seems to point to a Federally issued permit. For me that's a non-starter. The other stuff is similiar to what's been proposed and is currently 2-3 votes short of passing in the Senate (it passed the House 2 years ago and would pass again today). The states should continue issuing permits and the SCOTUS will have to take care of NY,MD,NJ and any other restrictive states.
Did you not know something similiar has been proposed for a while?

[Bargearse]

The proposal can be seen here:

Proposal to Senator Tom Coburn M.D. (R-Okla.) for change of current CCW law | estradaarmory