House Approves Concealed Firearms Permit Bill

[Glock30]

Why speculate on the bill, its contents, its meaning, and what the spin doctors want you to think about it?

How about a healthy dose of the FACTS! C'mon guys - bring some meat to the table!!

Here it is, the version that passed:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr822eh/pdf/BILLS-112hr822eh.pdf

[Glock30]

The requirements of validity, per the passed version, is a photo ID shown in addition to a permit - driver's license, ID only, or passport. As I read it, this makes all permits facially valid. I am gathering upon readingthe executive summary linked below that only resident permits would be recognized under the national reciprocity bill.

Executive summary found here:

H.R. 822: National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 - Legislative Digest - GOP.gov

Edited November 18, 2011 by Glock30

[Guest 6.8 AR]

From your link:

Amendment No. 1—Rep. Woodall (R-GA): This amendment would protect the rights of states that already have reciprocal agreements in place for the concealed carry of firearms to continue enforcing those preexisting agreements.

Amendment No. 2—Rep. McCarthy (D-NY): This amendment would specify that the legislation can only go into effect in states that have passed legislation enacting the bill.

Amendment No. 3—Rep. Hastings (D-FL): This amendment would exempt states from issuing a carry permit on the basis of state reciprocity which do not require individuals to apply for and complete a carry permit application in person.

Amendment No. 4—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a state to create a comprehensive database to contain all permits and licenses issued by the state for carrying a concealed weapon and make this comprehensive database available to law enforcement officers from all states 24 hours a day.

Amendment No. 5—Rep. Conyers (D-MI): This amendment would effectively gut the bill by “preserving†state laws with respect to eligibility for concealed-carry.

Amendment No. 6—Rep. Johnson (D-GA): This amendment would require the possession or carrying of a concealed handgun in a state to be subject to “any law of the state that limits the eligibility to possess or carry a concealed handgun to persons who have received firearm safety training that includes a live-fire exercise.’’

Amendment No. 7—Rep. Cohen (D-TN): This amendment would exempt from the bill any state law requiring a person to be at least 21 years of age to possess or carry a concealed handgun.

Amendment No. 8—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a person intending to carry or possess a concealed handgun in a state to inform that state’s law enforcement of their intentions at least 24 hours prior.

Amendment No. 9—Rep. Cicilline (D-RI): This amendment would limit the bill from taking effect in a state until the State Attorney General, head of the State police, and the Secretary of State have jointly certified that the other state’s carry laws are substantially similar to its own licensing or permitting requirements.

Amendment No. 10—Rep. Reichert (R-WA): This amendment would require a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on the ability of state and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearms permits.

Did all this pass with it? Just wondering. Look at Amendment 8, well all of them.

Edited November 18, 2011 by 6.8 AR

[Guest pfries]

Yes at this point only resident permits would be recognized.

The amendment to the bill could be construed in multiple ways.

1. A means to set up a national database

2. To find if out nonresident of issuing states permits should be recognized

3. To see how many people would be able to circumvent the laws of their home states (example . not able to acquire a permit in home state as it is a show cause state but have a nonresident permit from another state) and how that affects the "public safety"

As to #1 agencies are able to determine the validity of a driver’s license without a national database.

Obviously any of these could lead to a potential for action, the data collected will need to be scrutinized, and should be able to facilitate arguments both ways.

[Guest pfries]

From your link:

Amendment No. 1—Rep. Woodall (R-GA): This amendment would protect the rights of states that already have reciprocal agreements in place for the concealed carry of firearms to continue enforcing those preexisting agreements.

Amendment No. 2—Rep. McCarthy (D-NY): This amendment would specify that the legislation can only go into effect in states that have passed legislation enacting the bill.

Amendment No. 3—Rep. Hastings (D-FL): This amendment would exempt states from issuing a carry permit on the basis of state reciprocity which do not require individuals to apply for and complete a carry permit application in person.

Amendment No. 4—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a state to create a comprehensive database to contain all permits and licenses issued by the state for carrying a concealed weapon and make this comprehensive database available to law enforcement officers from all states 24 hours a day.

Amendment No. 5—Rep. Conyers (D-MI): This amendment would effectively gut the bill by “preserving” state laws with respect to eligibility for concealed-carry.

Amendment No. 6—Rep. Johnson (D-GA): This amendment would require the possession or carrying of a concealed handgun in a state to be subject to “any law of the state that limits the eligibility to possess or carry a concealed handgun to persons who have received firearm safety training that includes a live-fire exercise.’’

Amendment No. 7—Rep. Cohen (D-TN): This amendment would exempt from the bill any state law requiring a person to be at least 21 years of age to possess or carry a concealed handgun.

Amendment No. 8—Rep. Jackson Lee (D-TX): This amendment would require a person intending to carry or possess a concealed handgun in a state to inform that state’s law enforcement of their intentions at least 24 hours prior.

Amendment No. 9—Rep. Cicilline (D-RI): This amendment would limit the bill from taking effect in a state until the State Attorney General, head of the State police, and the Secretary of State have jointly certified that the other state’s carry laws are substantially similar to its own licensing or permitting requirements.

Amendment No. 10—Rep. Reichert (R-WA): This amendment would require a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on the ability of state and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearms permits.

Did all this pass with it? Just wondering. Look at Amendment 8, well all of them.

No it passed with only #10

[Oh Shoot]

§ 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms...

Gotta give you that one, I admit. Could conceivably have negative repercussions by a state if repealed.

- OS

[Makiaveli]

No it passed with only #10

Just to make sure, you mean only #10 was included, and the other 9 were dropped?

[Guest pfries]

Just to make sure, you mean only #10 was included, and the other 9 were dropped?

Correct

[Glock30]

Correct

Whew! I couldn't find the answer anywhere... glad the first 9 didn't make it.

[Makiaveli]

Whew! I couldn't find the answer anywhere... glad the first 9 didn't make it.

Amen to that and Thanks!! to pfries.

[Garufa]

Amendment No. 10—Rep. Reichert (R-WA): This amendment would require a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on the ability of state and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearms permits.

So what happens when the GAO concludes, as they most likely will, that there is no way for state and local agencies to verify the validity of out-of-state permits? Is there presently some national system to do this?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Good question. Probably five years of gridlock in a congressional committee. And then some dumb

attempt to create a super database by rationalizing there is no other way to do it. Sounds like

gun registration version 1 to me is possible, after all.

[Guest pfries]

So how do they currently validate a DL?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I was bored, okay? It's been a long day. Still trying to get over it.

I still remain a skeptic for all this because of previous discussions. Heck,

it won't make to the doofus-in-chief's desk for a signature, anyway, unless

there is something else in there we never knew about that could help

his cause, and I doubt that.

Yep I like that title, OS. Doofus-in-chief fits with Obamacrous speed.

[Makiaveli]

So how do they currently validate a DL?

Here in TN they run a query through to the state. Metro can do it from their cars, as well as call it in to dispatch. I assume smaller depts run it via radio/dispatch.

[Guest pfries]

Here in TN they run a query through to the state. Metro can do it from their cars, as well as call it in to dispatch. I assume smaller depts run it via radio/dispatch.

But does that check out of state as well?

[Fallguy]

Here in TN they run a query through to the state. Metro can do it from their cars, as well as call it in to dispatch. I assume smaller depts run it via radio/dispatch.

That's how a TN LEO checks a TN DL.... I think he was asking how TN LEO checks a FL DL or a FL LEO checks a TN DL.

I know it is done through the same computer terminal, but I don't really remember the particulars. Also...I don't think all 50 states maintain a computer database of DLs and/or don't participate in the system that allows them to be checked from out of state.

[Guest pfries]

That's how a TN LEO checks a TN DL.... I think he was asking how TN LEO checks a FL DL or a FL LEO checks a TN DL.

I know it is done through the same computer terminal, but I don't really remember the particulars. Also...I don't think all 50 states maintain a computer database of DLs and/or don't participate in the system that allows them to be checked from out of state.

Yes that is what I am asking. I figured there had to be a way I would rather the individual States maintain the records if that is what it comes to.

[E4 No More]

So how do they currently validate a DL?

Back in the day, (in Missouri), we ran a DL that hit Missouri's database and NCIC. Today, Missouri was aware that my son was suspended in Tennessee: therefore, they wouldn't allow him to get a Missouri license, so that tells me they are all tied into each other now.

[Makiaveli]

Yes that is what I am asking. I figured there had to be a way I would rather the individual States maintain the records if that is what it comes to.

Right sorry. Phrased it poorly, I knew what I meant. At work we call it all "state" since we go thru the state switch etc. They can run a DL and it will check with the issuing state. What they get back depends on what that state chooses to send.

In theory, they could add HCP info to a DL query, or set one up just to check it. Also, most of the background check sites have HCP info as well. Found out that our annual checks at work include checking to see if you have a HCP. Why I'm not sure but hopefully will have mine by my next eval and am curious to see what they say.

[Guest WyattEarp]

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.

so? how is that any different than TN having a database of permit holders? or your fingerprints in the database They have to keep tabs on who has a permit, when the expiration date is, and to validate it for a LEO in the event there is an inquiry during a traffic stop. how else can do they that without the database? There's no way any argument for right to carry without an HCP and fingerprinting and background checks will ever prevail.

in fact, if all the states would work together and connect their databases together, and allow the feds to access it when it's relevant and valid, it would save money from having to create a brand new database, and make a LEO's job easier, and probably make verification and a traffic stop go a little bit faster.

all these systems should be interlinked, DL, HCP and License Plates to save time, efficiency and money.

too much paranoia in my opinion. so what if the government knows you have a gun? or a permit?

Feds have your fingerprints if you've ever applied for a federal job, the military, submitted a Form 4 for automatic weapons, an application to become an FFL. so really what does it matter? Don't break the law, you have nothing to worry about.

states have your picture on file when you get your DL, think the Feds can't get that? psssh. They already more than likely have it. Pretty sure they probably have your fingerprints from when you got your TN HCP too.

Not saying it's right, but really what can you do about it? Nothing. only thing you can really do about it is put your on, and hope it's good enough to keep the Black Ops helicopters from hovering over your house in the middle of the night and dropping members of SEAL Team 6 to come haul you off to some secret bunker because you have a permit and they know about it...

[Guest pfries]

From what I have observed through Google, (the states I have looked at) maintain a database of permit holders already. Therefore, in reality it should not be too difficult for an officer to find out the validity of a permit, although it may take a little tweaking to make it readily accessible to all LEO’s. If this is, the case it would seem likely that the implementation of a federal database could be shot down easily as that seems to be a major concern of many permit holders.

Would this seem a logical thought process?

[Makiaveli]

From what I have observed through Google, (the states I have looked at) maintain a database of permit holders already. Therefore, in reality it should not be too difficult for an officer to find out the validity of a permit, although it may take a little tweaking to make it readily accessible to all LEO’s. If this is, the case it would seem likely that the implementation of a federal database could be shot down easily as that seems to be a major concern of many permit holders.

Would this seem a logical thought process?

It does indeed, which is why the govt will never be able to pull it off.