GOA Alert: Concealed carry bill coming before Congress

[sluggo]

Senator Vitter To Offer Concealed Carry Reciprocity Amendment
-- Action needed right away!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org (http://www.gunowners.org/)

Tuesday, May 13, 2008


Senator David Vitter (R-LA) has filed a pro-gun amendment to HR 980, and it
could be voted on as early as tomorrow!

This amendment would protect the right of citizens to carry concealed
weapons (outside of their home state) in states that allow concealed carry.

Sen. Vitter explains that his amendment does not violate the rights of
states as it "does NOT establish national standards for concealed
carry, nor
does it provide for a national carry permit."

In other words, the Vitter amendment specifically says that state laws
concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried
shall be followed. "My amendment will not federalize concealed carry
permits but simply requires concealed carry permits to be recognized in
other states that allow concealed carry permits," Vitter said.

This is a real reciprocity provision which grants citizens the
"full faith
and credit" protection that is guaranteed in Article IV of the
Constitution.
Section 1 of this article says:

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.

Vitter says that this constitutional provision authorizes the Congress to
pass legislation forcing each state to recognize the "public
Acts" of other
states. So if states are not willing to recognize another state's laws,
Congress has the authority to pass laws to require recognition of those
measures.

It's just like with driver's licenses. If certain states refused to honor
the driver's licenses of citizens in other states, Congress could pass
legislation (under Article IV) to require every state to honor all licenses.


ACTION: Please urge your Senators to vote for the Vitter amendment to HR
980 to protect the right to carry concealed firearms outside of your home
state.

You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the pre-written
e-mail message below. And, you can call your Senators at 202-224-3121 or
toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.


----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

Please support the Vitter amendment to HR 980. This amendment will protect
the right of citizens to carry firearms outside of their home state without
violating the rights of other states. Thus, the Vitter language masterfully
protects the principle of federalism while also promoting Second Amendment
rights.

A person's right to defend himself and his family should not end at the
border of his state.

I urge you to vote for the Vitter concealed carry amendment.

Sincerely,


****************************

Defend The 2nd Amendment Through Creative Giving...

As we confront the challenges of the future, we know that the generosity of
those who assist us will make all the difference in our success. That's why
GOA seeks your long-term support.

Please call 703-321-8585 during regular business hours or e-mail
goamail@gunowners.org to request information on how to keep control of your
assets and make a gift at the same time through:

* a bequest
* a retirement plan
* a will, living trust, or insurance policy

Requests for information are confidential and do not represent an
obligation.

****************************

Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will
bounce back as undeliverable.

To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail
address may also be made at that location.

To unsubscribe send a message to
gunowners_list@capwiz.mailmanager.net with the word unsubscribe in
the subject line or use the url below.

Problems, questions or comments? The main GOA e-mail address
goamail@gunowners.org is at your disposal. Please do not add that
address to distribution lists sending more than ten messages per
week or lists associated with issues other than gun rights.
---
If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please visit
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/lmx/u/?jobid=100257948&queueid=1979639086.

[Doktor_Jeep]

Spread it around.

We are in the clutches of a bitchocracy Senate-wise but I hope the other states can pull it for us.

[weslinder]

As republicans (small r), do we really support this? I understand that it is Constitutionally allowed, but it does go against principles of Federalism. A Federal mandate for gun owners' rights is better than most Federal mandates, but is it really good?

[Madcat455]

As republicans (small r), do we really support this. I understand that it is Constitutionally allowed, but it does go against principles of Federalism. A Federal mandate for gun owners rights is better than most Federal mandates, but is it really good?

I'd tend to agree.

This has a "what's the point" feeling. As a FL resident with a CWP, FL has agreements with 32 other states that will recognize my FL license as long as I adhere to that states restrictions, and ANY CWP holder would be smart enough to research what's allowable in states that they plan to visit.

SO.... What's the point??:confused:

[1000-points-of-fright]

As republicans (small r), do we really support this? I understand that it is Constitutionally allowed, but it does go against principles of Federalism. A Federal mandate for gun owners' rights is better than most Federal mandates, but is it really good?

Agreed. This totally undermines the idea of states rights. We should be allowed to carry anywhere because of the 2A, not because Congress passed a law forcing state reciprocity.

[wv@SC]

Agreed. This totally undermines the idea of states rights. We should be allowed to carry anywhere because of the 2A, not because Congress passed a law forcing state reciprocity.

Absolutely. It should be the case that if you are anywhere in the US, you have the right to keep and bear arms with or without this law, and with or without a CWP. PERIOD.

There is NO need for further legislation on the subject.

[Doktor_Jeep]

Hello?

People have rights before the state. Self defense is an individual right, not a group right. The founders intended some conflict between the states and the federal level with the goal in ensuring individual rights.

But I suspect that the poisoning of libertarianism, thanks to the bought-off Cato Institutute, the same people who smeared Ron Paul after years of making libertarianism contradictory to liberty, does show itself.

Especially when people who think they are real libertarians start shouting "states rights" when in fact the individual has rights before the state, and redress of infringements can be sought on the federal level when the states fail to adhere to principles. In cases where the federal government infringes, the states can be sought out for redress. It works both ways and that was intended, so the people, the individuals, cannot be backed into a corner.

I suppose if your states wanted Illinois-style gun laws that too would be "states rights"? In fact that abomination they call gun control in Illinois and California would not stand muster in a federal court if the feds and the state-level gun grabbers were not on the same page. But you have a better chance of purging the state legislature than the federal.

The system was intended for multiple routes of protecting INDIVIDUAL rights. Not "oh, states rights! states rights!" and so mindless libertarians who got sold on false ideals can shoot themeselves in their own foot.

If you think this legislation for enforcing INDIVIDUAL rights is bad, then take a pledge to deem your drivers license as not being applicable in other states and promise not to drive over the state line.

After all, from what I am seeing in this thread, we want to be mindless about "states rights! states rights!". So you want the federal government reigned in but the states can still do whatever they want, eh? This is what happens when people who think they got out of the Matrix but only fell into another one totally forget that neither state or federal trumps individual rights. States don't have rights, individuals do, and the federal was never intended to have rights. In fact the Constitution was intended to remind the federal government that it has no rights.

Of course the feds want to make all licenses applicable in all states through Real ID, and we can't get enough states to fight that. Go figure.

So whatever group of devils we can get to pursue rights for the individual, at any time, consider it a good thing.


Rights 101 people. Don't get led astray (again). We saw the first power WWII freedom movement go off the path (from Goldwater to Reagen to Bush). This kind of thinking will lead down the same path in 40 years.