House Approves Concealed Firearms Permit Bill

[zenman]

National concealed carry

[bigwakes]

Made for an interesting discussion. Seems like all the Dems can say is let's create jobs and not address any other issue.

[rcrespo106]

God I hope this passes. I travel to Newark, NJ at least 2 times a year and feel naked when I go and have to leave mygun at home.

[zenman]

One down, two to go

[rcrespo106]

Does anyone really think Obama is going to pass this. What else is attached to the bill that would give him reason not to veto it?

[Guest archerdr1]

from what I saw, this was it. None of the dems ammendments passed, which from what i could tell, they were trying to create a federal registry in addition to trying to make the bill mean absolutely nothing. There are a lot (on this board, and off) that say that it is getting the Feds too involved in Gun rights, but since the 2a is a federal one, I think they are already involved. The dems kept saying the exact same thing and I worried that some of the ammendments would pass, but they died big time.

[Oh Shoot]

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/national-politics-legislation/65078-carolyn-mccarthy-proposing-two-amendments-effort-stop-h-r-822-a.html

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/national-politics-legislation/65122-hr-822-passes.html

[Steelharp]

Here is the text of an e-mail I received from the "National Assoc for Gun Rights." I am truly confused; good or bad? :

------------------

Michael,

I was right to be concerned.

Not only was H.R. 822 -- the Trojan horse gun control bill -- passed out of the House of Representatives this evening, it was passed with an amendment that would open the door to federal biometric requirements for concealed firearms permits and a federally-administered database of all permit holders.

Only 7 Republican Members of Congress stood against federal overreach in the concealed carry process by opposing this bill (you can see how your Representative voted here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll852.xml).

The bill was amended this afternoon by ostensibly “pro-gun” Republicans to require a study be done on the ability of law enforcement officers to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearm permits.

You and I both know what this means. A year from now, the study will come back stating that the only way to “verify” out-of-state permits is through federally-mandated biometric requirements for concealed firearm permits and Congress “must” create a nationally administered database of all concealed weapon permit holders.

One of my biggest concerns about this bill -- the lists of gun owners a permit process creates -- should send shivers down your spine: Imagine Eric Holder and the BATFE with a national database of concealed carry permit holders.

It’s bad enough to have those lists exist at a state level. Once Eric Holder and his cronies find a way to request that list from a state, they’ll do it -- all the in the name of “implementing H.R. 822.”

The legislation now moves to the Harry Reid-run Senate, where companion legislation is expected to be introduced in the coming days. I have no doubt that the anti-gunners in the Senate will use this as an opportunity to make H.R. 822 even worse.

What troubles me most about this battle is the institutional gun lobby has been leading the charge for this legislation. In fact, they’ve been brow-beating Members of Congress who dare to question the consequences of passing such a broad, overreaching piece of legislation.

Republican Congressman Justin Amash (MI-03) fought back against the institutional gun lobby for its support of H.R. 822:

"It's remarkably bold of the National Rifle Association to send out false and misleading messages regarding H R 822, an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing. I would support legislation that gets the federal government out of the way of states that want to recognize other states' concealed carry permits. In contrast, H R 822 will hurt gun rights by conceding broad new authority to the federal government to override state sovereignty.

Gun rights advocates have fought hard to prevent liberal abuse of the Commerce Clause that would restrict gun rights... I am disappointed that the NRA has decided to put its own interests ahead of the interests of gun owners. Fortunately, many other gun rights groups rightly oppose H R 822."

Please call your Senator at (202) 224-3121 and tell them you want to keep the government’s hands off your permit and that you oppose federal intrusion into the concealed weapons permit process.

Thank you for taking action to keep the federal government out of the concealed firearms permit system.

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown

Executive Director

[Makiaveli]

All I've heard on the news is that this bill is supposed to allow states to recognize each other's permits. Or do they mean force states (the ones that have only issued to political cronies etc) to recognize other states? But wouldn't that be the Feds stepping on State's rights?

Add in what Steel is talking about, and starting to really worry this bill might actually pass. As to Obama, think about it. He can pass gun control and claim to have supported gun owner's rights at the same time.

[The Legion]

I found this on Fox News website this morning. Click on link.

House Approves Concealed Firearm Permit Bill | Fox News

[UncleJak]

Sweet, I hope it passes! Tennessee's permit is pretty wide extending, but this would make it awesome.

[Steelharp]

Sweet, I hope it passes! Tennessee's permit is pretty wide extending, but this would make it awesome.

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/handgun-carry-self-defense/65059-cspan-showing-hr822-debate-right-now.html

Please read post #8.

[UncleJak]

Oh, I see whats up now. I've been tricked!

[Fallguy]

Threads merged

[Guest bkelm18]

God I hope this passes. I travel to Newark, NJ at least 2 times a year and feel naked when I go and have to leave mygun at home.

You can rest assured that if by some divine intervention this does make it into law, NJ would be one of the states taking it to the Supreme Court getting it overturned.

[Fallguy]

I'm not sure how to feel about this...seems like totally opposite information coming from different groups.

If it simply says that any state that issues permtis must recognize permits issued by other states (other than the feds being involved) I don't think it is that bad.

But if does much of anything else besides that.....not so good.

[Fallguy]

You can rest assured that if by some divine intervention this does make it into law, NJ would be one of the states taking it to the Supreme Court getting it overturned.

I actually wondered if NY, NJ would go so far as do scrap their permit system....

[Guest bkelm18]

I'm not sure how to feel about this...seems like totally opposite information coming from different groups.

If it simply says that any state that issues permtis must recognize permits issued by other states (other than the feds being involved) I don't think it is that bad.

But if does much of anything else besides that.....not so good.

I will agree that if it simply streamlines the process of carrying in other states, ok, I'll dig that, but I really think it goes beyond that. I have no idea as to the validity of Steelharp's post, but it really makes you think. Backdoor gun control was the first thing that popped into my mind when I saw this bill. Maybe I'm just a dumb young guy, but all else being equal, I'd rather the federal gov't just go "pound sand" and leave this for the states to work out.

[Steelharp]

I have no idea as to the validity of Steelharp's post, but it really makes you think. Backdoor gun control was the first thing that popped into my mind when I saw this bill. Maybe I'm just a dumb young guy...

No, you're not, don't ever think that. As far as the validity issue, I can do no more than say that's an e-mail I received from said group.

[Mike.357]

The Fed needs to stay out of the carry permit business.

[E4 No More]

The Fed needs to stay out of the carry permit business.

Feds and states need to stay out of the 2A, but that'll never happen.

[Guest jackdm3]

It was Federal to begin with. I only see this as restoration, but an insufficient one at that.

[Guest pfries]

The addition of the Comptroller General doing the study on whether or not LEO's can check the status/validity of your HCP is a bit interesting, however as Amendment 10 was passed (the only one I note) should not be that much of an issue as all the States I have looked at thus far keep a database of permits issued and current standing. Most states maintain it through the DOJ a few have been with the State Police or DOS. It should not be an issue to make this available to a LEO n order to have it verified much like a DL is now. There is not a federal database for DL's that I am aware of?

I would much prefer to see H.R.2900 move forward as it is almost identical to H.R.822 with the noticeable exception that it is tied directly to the second amendment.

I quote from the email

“Not only was H.R. 822 -- the Trojan horse gun control bill -- passed out of the House of Representatives this evening, it was passed with an amendment that would open the door to federal biometric requirements for concealed firearms permits and a federally-administered database of all permit holders.â€

How does this open the door? No more than holding a drives license or a state ID does, at least as far as I can tell

As far as the biometrics goes I cannot figure that one out unless they mean a national database for fingerprints? As Biometrics in its true sense is using gathering info like medical history of family, blood work, and body mass index to find a probability% that you would suffer from certain genetically pre-disposed conditions. Like Parkinson’s disease, heart ailments, MS and so forth. So throwing out technical sounding loosely used in its definition tem comes off as a scare tactic to me. Misappropriating terms and information is something I thought was a little more exclusive to the Brady campaign.

Speaking of the Brady bunch, if this is such a terrible bill for us I doubt they would have been so thorough in trying to abolish it.

We will see what happens as it progresses.

[JAB]

from what I saw, this was it. None of the dems ammendments passed, which from what i could tell, they were trying to create a federal registry in addition to trying to make the bill mean absolutely nothing. There are a lot (on this board, and off) that say that it is getting the Feds too involved in Gun rights, but since the 2a is a federal one, I think they are already involved. The dems kept saying the exact same thing and I worried that some of the ammendments would pass, but they died big time.

The 2A says nothing about concealed carry. In fact, as it is geared more toward preserving the ability of private citizens to band together, as a last option, to repel an over-reaching Federal government, it really says nothing at all about the regular and daily carry of personal arms for self defense, period. Therefore, the carry of personal arms - either open or concealed - and the administration or regulation of such carry is the right of the individual states. This bill, then, gets the Fed's foot in the door of an issue that is better left to the "States or the People."

As this bill progresses, if Obama signs it, we must ask ourselves a question. That question is, "Why would a President who is on record as being opposed to firearms carry by private citizens and who has said he would like to do away with concealed carry on a national level sign this bill unless it, somehow, advances his clearly stated goal in the matter?" We all know that he favors the restriction of gun owership, as a whole, and that the aspect of gun rights to which he most strongly objects is carry by private citizens. Does anyone honestly think he will do something to advance that aspect of gun rights unless there is already a 'backdoor' way to use such legislation to fit his own and others' anti gun agenda?

Edited November 17, 2011 by JAB

[Guest pfries]

The Fed needs to stay out of the carry permit business.

I still cannot view this as such.

This is the Fed mandating that a state that allows someone a privilege to exercise right needs to recognize the validity of that same privilege granted in another state.