GOP introduces nat‘l reciprocity bill in Senate

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    Senators Cornyn, Hagerty, Grassley and Inhofe have introduced a senate bill that would allow people who hold carry permits in their own state to have those same rights (subject to local laws) in other states that also issue permits.

    The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act is co-sponsored by 27 other GOP senators.

    Obviously the chances of this making it past Pelosi and Schumer and Biden are vanishingly small. But as usual, it forces legislators from not-insanely-far-left but still blue states to go on the record showing they prefer the patchwork of state permit insanity. Have fun stormin‘ the castle, boys! It‘s a principled, but unlikely to be productive effort.
     

    whistlersmother

    Peace through strength
    Jan 29, 2013
    8,948
    Fulton, MD
    If it can get Senators from squishy (D) areas on record as supporting, might go a long way in heading off any further gun control efforts.
     

    CrueChief

    Cocker Dad/RIP Bella
    Apr 3, 2009
    2,999
    Napolis-ish
    The rinos know this has no chance they through this out to keep us thinking they give a crap about us and voting them in office. Plan and simple they want our votes so they give us crap to eat. And we lap it up like we are leaving a 2 week fat farm visit.
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,533
    Columbia
    Too bad they didn't even had the balls to do this when the had the White House, House, and Senate. I know it wouldn't have passed but it would've been a better look.
    Reminds me of when they voted to repeal Obamacare so many times when they didn't have the majority and then when they did they showed their true colors.
     

    JPG

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 5, 2012
    6,996
    Calvert County
    Too bad they didn't even had the balls to do this when the had the White House, House, and Senate. I know it wouldn't have passed but it would've been a better look.
    Reminds me of when they voted to repeal Obamacare so many times when they didn't have the majority and then when they did they showed their true colors.

    #facts
     

    [Kev308]

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 23, 2020
    3,797
    Maryland
    Too bad they didn't even had the balls to do this when the had the White House, House, and Senate. I know it wouldn't have passed but it would've been a better look.
    Reminds me of when they voted to repeal Obamacare so many times when they didn't have the majority and then when they did they showed their true colors.
    Yep. They are controlled opposition.
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    This gets introduced regularly over the years . Zero chance of ever passing as a freestanding Bill . The perpetual wild card would be for it to get attatched to a huge " must pass " bill , like happened with National Parks carry .

    The most charitable take is to at least occasionally make the other side have to react to our initivies instead of our always being 100% defensive .

    And then , a significant portion of gun rights advocates ( including me ) can tell you why is is a Bad idea .
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    This gets introduced regularly over the years . Zero chance of ever passing as a freestanding Bill . The perpetual wild card would be for it to get attatched to a huge " must pass " bill , like happened with National Parks carry .

    The most charitable take is to at least occasionally make the other side have to react to our initivies instead of our always being 100% defensive .

    And then , a significant portion of gun rights advocates ( including me ) can tell you why is is a Bad idea .
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    While this Congress won't pass it, I do think a win at SCOTUS in NYSRPA will be a big boost for it in the future. The anti states won't be able to outright deny individuals under the "need" statute.
     

    aquaman

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 21, 2008
    7,499
    Belcamp, MD
    Too bad they didn't even had the balls to do this when the had the White House, House, and Senate. I know it wouldn't have passed but it would've been a better look.
    Reminds me of when they voted to repeal Obamacare so many times when they didn't have the majority and then when they did they showed their true colors.

    I thought the same thing.
     

    KingClown

    SOmething Witty
    Jul 29, 2020
    1,154
    Deep Blue MD
    Trump is talking about protecting 2A when he gets elected again in 2024. Problem is he said this last time too then did literally nothing towards protecting it
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    Trump is talking about protecting 2A when he gets elected again in 2024. Problem is he said this last time too then did literally nothing towards protecting it

    Ask gunsmiths and small manufacturers under the regulatory thumb if they agree. Or, check the SCOTUS docket as we speak, where a case involving the very fundamentals of "and bear arms" actually got cert, and never would have without Trump's three originalist nominees. In the lower courts, you've got 300 new conservative federal judges that have and will be facing all sorts of 2A-related matters over the decades that they'll be serving. Are you complaining that Trump didn't somehow personally change the composition of the Senate to magically create a 60-seat GOP majority in that chamber? The reality is that most of what can and will be done on this front for the indeterminate future will happen in courts. And he did more on that front than could possibly have been expected given the enormous amount of friction from the left.

    "Protecting the 2A," more than anything else, means judges and justices actually reading the constitution and its purpose and applying it correctly to the cases brought before them. And culturally, it means showing the left's lies and fake news for what they are, even if it means trolling them from a Trumpian right well enough that they overreact and show their true totalitarian colors. Which his win in 2016 absolutely caused them to do.
     

    JMangle

    Handsome Engineer
    May 11, 2008
    816
    Mississippi
    Ask gunsmiths and small manufacturers under the regulatory thumb if they agree. Or, check the SCOTUS docket as we speak, where a case involving the very fundamentals of "and bear arms" actually got cert, and never would have without Trump's three originalist nominees. In the lower courts, you've got 300 new conservative federal judges that have and will be facing all sorts of 2A-related matters over the decades that they'll be serving. Are you complaining that Trump didn't somehow personally change the composition of the Senate to magically create a 60-seat GOP majority in that chamber? The reality is that most of what can and will be done on this front for the indeterminate future will happen in courts. And he did more on that front than could possibly have been expected given the enormous amount of friction from the left.

    "Protecting the 2A," more than anything else, means judges and justices actually reading the constitution and its purpose and applying it correctly to the cases brought before them. And culturally, it means showing the left's lies and fake news for what they are, even if it means trolling them from a Trumpian right well enough that they overreact and show their true totalitarian colors. Which his win in 2016 absolutely caused them to do.

    This. He brought a level of sanity to the courts.

    As for this bill - it's going nowhere, but I think more people than you'd expect would be on board. A lot of gun ignorant people (being literal, not insulting re: 'ignorant') think that carry permits are already like this - think of them like driver's licenses. A few have gotten in trouble over the years from this.
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,533
    Columbia
    This gets introduced regularly over the years . Zero chance of ever passing as a freestanding Bill . The perpetual wild card would be for it to get attatched to a huge " must pass " bill , like happened with National Parks carry .

    The most charitable take is to at least occasionally make the other side have to react to our initivies instead of our always being 100% defensive .

    And then , a significant portion of gun rights advocates ( including me ) can tell you why is is a Bad idea .


    And yet republicans didn’t introduce it when they held all three branches, because THEY HAVE NO BALLS. That’s their biggest problem. If they fought as hard as Democrats do, we’d have FAR fewer problems


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,087
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom