Now that the GOP controlled House has passed at least 15 economic bills designed to stimulate jobs, which are languishing in the Democrat controlled Senate, they are free to pass other legislation. This one should be rather interesting
(Politico) If congressional gun-rights stalwarts get their way, a firearms owner with a concealed-weapons permit issued in Utah could be allowed to carry that gun in New York — regardless of the gun laws in the Empire State.
But as the House prepares to vote on a bill Wednesday that would allow that and please a core GOP constituency, critics are throwing another core Republican belief back at the party: states’ rights.
GOP backers of the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act — which would allow those with a concealed-weapons permit in one state to carry their firearms elsewhere as long as that state also allows concealed carrying — say they don’t see that as an issue.
“It’s kind of like having a driver’s license,†said Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), a vocal supporter of the bill who penned an op-ed in USA Today this week on the measure. “There are some states that have stricter driving laws than others.â€
But their opponents — including one prominent Republican — are crying foul over the measure, arguing that the bill goes against the Republican Party’s core belief in states’ rights.
Rep Dan Lungren is the only Republican who was against the measure, and it’s weird that anyone on the left would all of a sudden start discussing states’ rights, what with their huge mega giant central politboro government ideas.
The legislation, which Stearns introduced with Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), appears on track for swift passage. It has 245 co-sponsors, including several moderate Democrats, and the rule for the bill passed Tuesday 271-153, indicating that it should pass easily when it comes up for a final vote Wednesday. Thirty-five Democrats voted in favor of the rule.
So, it is more bipartisan than just about everything passed while the Democrats had control of Congress. Good to know. But, is it legal? Is it Constitutional? Does it violate the Bill of Rights and States’ Rights? Obviously, we all know what the Second Amendment states, but, what of the 10th?
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
States have long had different laws on guns, and, in particular, concealed carry. The Politico has a handy dandy reference graphic on the subject. And, certainly, Conservatives do not appreciate Los Federales gaining more power and passing laws which takes States’ powers unto themselves. Yet, consider, Article IV, Sections 1 and 2
(1)Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
(2)The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
This is what makes your drivers license valid when traveling to another state. So, if you are from, say, North Carolina, and posses a concealed permit, you should be allowed to travel to New York and carry said weapon as a visitor already, without need of a new law from Congress. This does not affect states rights, because said “reciprocity” was already encoded in the Constitution. The federal government would not be taking on any powers not already delegated to them. The law would simply be upholding the language of the Constitution.
Of course, if you move to New York, then your concealed carry, much like a drivers license, would be null within a specified time period, and you would have to apply for a new on. If you moved to Illinois, well, they have no concealed carry. That’s their choice. Your NC permit would not carry over, as their laws would have to be respected for Illinois citizens.
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU. Please sign the drill now petition.
I have never understood why this is not the case to begin with. If a marriage in Utah must be recognized in New York, what is the difference between that and a concealed weapons permit?
Quite true. But, therein lies a different problem, at least for those who are against gay marriage. If a marriage is performed legally in NY, then it should be covered if they move to NC, which has no gay marriage.
I started reading some on reciprocity while at work yesterday, and, consider that a 15 year old from Kansas can have an unrestricted license, and drive around in DC on said full unrestricted license, but a DC resident cannot obtain an unrestricted license till they are 21.
But, to flip it around a bit, when I started going to ECU, I could legally drink at 19. But, I couldn’t legally drink in NJ. But, a North Carolinian who was 19 couldn’t drink in NJ.