Rep. Hudson to introduce Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act

[swinokur]

A Patrick noted, the best ay to get this passed is as an amendment to a bill that the majority of the Senate wants.

Amendments aren't always subject to the 60 vote cloture requirement.

fingers crossed.

 

[Panther]

Could they not just attach it to something huge that none of them will read like the repeal and replace bill? Placing a rider in something like that might work, no? Just a thought.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[bama47]

Could they not just attach it to something huge that none of them will read like the repeal and replace bill? Placing a rider in something like that might work, no? Just a thought.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

isn't that how the democrats get stuff passed through>?

 

[j_h_smith]

Could they not just attach it to something huge that none of them will read like the repeal and replace bill? Placing a rider in something like that might work, no? Just a thought.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, this is a way to get it through the Senate. However, I don't know if the rabid left will pass any bill with this attached.

Time will tell.

 

[Biggfoot44]

For the semantically obsessive - For a Bill to pass an actual vote in the senate requires 50% plus one aka 51 if everyone votes.

In order to cut off a filibuster to have an actual vote, 60 votes are required.

But as mentioned again by Patrick, the real chances lay with attaching as amendment to a big "must pass" Bill. That's how we achieved National Park carry, it was attached to IIRC credit card reform.

 

[HordesOfKailas]

There's 2 or possibly 3 (R) that I wouldn't trust to go along. McCain being one of them.

This is what worries me. Even if we can get several Ds to back this, a few dissident Rs could ruin the whole thing.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still very optimistic (by my standards anyways). Just concerned.

 

[Minuteman]

For the semantically obsessive - For a Bill to pass an actual vote in the senate requires 50% plus one aka 51 if everyone votes.

In order to cut off a filibuster to have an actual vote, 60 votes are required.

But as mentioned again by Patrick, the real chances lay with attaching as amendment to a big "must pass" Bill. That's how we achieved National Park carry, it was attached to IIRC credit card reform.

Yep.
Fingers crossed.

 

[swinokur]

140 cosponsors

 

[press1280]

Yes, this is a way to get it through the Senate. However, I don't know if the rabid left will pass any bill with this attached.

Time will tell.

This, plus what would need to be given up elsewhere for the Democrats support.

 

[bama47]

Yep.
Fingers crossed.

So, just curious. With us controlling both houses of Congress and the White House, what are the chances that we do see a National Conceal Carry Reciprocity law?

And if it does happen, will all currently existing CCW permits automatically become effective in every state? I know that several states will not like it one bit and will start to take immediate legal action so would they be able to get some kind of injunction to delay honoring all CCW permits?

 

[CrazySanMan]

So, just curious. With us controlling both houses of Congress and the White House, what are the chances that we do see a National Conceal Carry Reciprocity law?

3% chance it will pass in 2 weeks

 

[bama47]

3% chance it will pass in 2 weeks

2 weeks huh - love it.

 

[Patrick]

When it starts to get real, expect to see a few GOP squishes jump due to "States Rights" issues. Just remember - States have no rights. People have rights. States have "Powers" and the 10th Amendment does not allow a state to ignore the Bill of Rights or any other Amendment (thank the 14th for that clarification).

Defensive carry is either a fundamental right or a privilege doled out at the whims of your betters. You cannot claim defensive carry to be a right and then say that a federal law to protect that right should not exist, "because states have rights."

No. Those are mutually exclusive realities. The moment you start believing that governments have "rights" supreme to that of The People, you might as well just acknowledge the death of liberty, make peace with it all and go stock up on brown shirts for your closet.

When you hear so-called learned GOPe "conservatives" start talking "States rights", roll your eyes and resist. Take their words and extend them to religion: can California ban Christianity? Can New Jersey make Islam the state religion? "No, because the First Amendment..."

"Then why do you support those same states denying the Second Amendment?"

Remember: the GOP Establishment does not like gun people. They only like to play us for votes and dollars. This goes just as strong for the organizations stocked with GOPe sycophants that claim to represent us. Both laugh all the way to the bank every time we get screwed.

Not this time. Not if we are smart: Resist. Demand. Win.

 

[eruby]

.

 

[Minuteman]

When it starts to get real, expect to see a few GOP squishes jump due to "States Rights" issues. Just remember - States have no rights. People have rights. States have "Powers" and the 10th Amendment does not allow a state to ignore the Bill of Rights or any other Amendment (thank the 14th for that clarification).

Defensive carry is either a fundamental right or a privilege doled out at the whims of your betters. You cannot claim defensive carry to be a right and then say that a federal law to protect that right should not exist, "because states have rights."

No. Those are mutually exclusive realities. The moment you start believing that governments have "rights" supreme to that of The People, you might as well just acknowledge the death of liberty, make peace with it all and go stock up on brown shirts for your closet.

When you hear so-called learned GOPe "conservatives" start talking "States rights", roll your eyes and resist. Take their words and extend them to religion: can California ban Christianity? Can New Jersey make Islam the state religion? "No, because the First Amendment..."

"Then why do you support those same states denying the Second Amendment?"

Remember: the GOP Establishment does not like gun people. They only like to play us for votes and dollars. This goes just as strong for the organizations stocked with GOPe sycophants that claim to represent us. Both laugh all the way to the bank every time we get screwed.

Not this time. Not if we are smart: Resist. Demand. Win.

Excellent political analysis Patrick, thank you!

This is why we have to stay arms length from even the GOP, there are even more than a few Republicans here in Maryland that think this way. This is why in part, I decided to hook my wagon to the many others that decided to go Operation DINO, https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=190211 instead of invest in just the GOP. Supporting Republicans in the blue areas of Maryland is a losing proposition in Maryland until the gerrymandering can be broken; and to me, and many others, the fastest way to do that is by having large numbers of us (Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians, etc.) register as Democrats and vote in the Democrat only Primary election, then vote again in the General election for the best candidate (in most circumstances in Maryland, its the more Conservative candidate).

 

[swinokur]

This bill uses the commerce clause as it's legal foundation, as do other laws that have been passed constitutional muster.

we shall see.
.
.

 

[jeffie7]

3% chance it will pass in 2 weeks

So it has a better chance than hogan or trump?

Nice!

 

[swinokur]

144 cosponsors

 

[press1280]

When it starts to get real, expect to see a few GOP squishes jump due to "States Rights" issues. Just remember - States have no rights. People have rights. States have "Powers" and the 10th Amendment does not allow a state to ignore the Bill of Rights or any other Amendment (thank the 14th for that clarification).

Defensive carry is either a fundamental right or a privilege doled out at the whims of your betters. You cannot claim defensive carry to be a right and then say that a federal law to protect that right should not exist, "because states have rights."

No. Those are mutually exclusive realities. The moment you start believing that governments have "rights" supreme to that of The People, you might as well just acknowledge the death of liberty, make peace with it all and go stock up on brown shirts for your closet.

When you hear so-called learned GOPe "conservatives" start talking "States rights", roll your eyes and resist. Take their words and extend them to religion: can California ban Christianity? Can New Jersey make Islam the state religion? "No, because the First Amendment..."

"Then why do you support those same states denying the Second Amendment?"

Remember: the GOP Establishment does not like gun people. They only like to play us for votes and dollars. This goes just as strong for the organizations stocked with GOPe sycophants that claim to represent us. Both laugh all the way to the bank every time we get screwed.

Not this time. Not if we are smart: Resist. Demand. Win.

I disagree that we will have GOP squishies , at least if we end up with the usual reciprocity bill. They may view this bill differently since it is way beyond what's been proposed before.
Mark Kirk was the only GOP senator to vote against this last time, and I see no others who are anywhere close to him, not to mention all GOP senators are in shall issue states. I don't believe any House members voted against HR822 in 2011 either.
The momentum is all for it right now.

 

[Patrick]

I disagree that we will have GOP squishies , at least if we end up with the usual reciprocity bill. They may view this bill differently since it is way beyond what's been proposed before.
Mark Kirk was the only GOP senator to vote against this last time, and I see no others who are anywhere close to him, not to mention all GOP senators are in shall issue states. I don't believe any House members voted against HR822 in 2011 either.
The momentum is all for it right now.

I wish to subscribe to your optimism. Thanks for starting the morning right.

My concern is that there are show bills and safe votes. Safe votes are votes that please the constituents but won't upset the establishment - because they cannot become law. We saw Harry Reid nod his assent to Dem senators during a previous reciprocity vote, letting his Senator know that it was "safe" to go that way.

The GOP is Lucy and we are Charlie - always having the ball pulled at the last minute. They have used most every excuse imaginable to not protect our right. This time the cynic in me says "filibuster" is the excuse, even when it won't stop other acts from becoming law.But under it all I am optimistic like you. Otherwise I wouldn't care.

At the same time, I'm want to be ready to put my foot somewhere else if I see them pull the ball this time.