JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
While I'm generally opposed to this subject due to my fear that the gov't will wind up with my name on a list, the benefits of this vastly outweigh my fears. Look at all the people killed in some cities, We the People need more rights, dammit
 
Interesting. The actual text of the bill may be read here. I just printed a hardcopy to review it in its entirety and will withhold further comment until then. Thanks for the heads up.
 
I question the logic as it might turn out the federal government may make having or getting a permit very difficult.
What federal hurdles are there in getting a drivers license? If all they do is say you have to attend a safety class, and pass an exam (practical/written), I don't see the downside. The Arizona class, when I was stationed there was 16 hours over two days with a qualification shoot. Oregon was a two hour stitch 'n bubblegum that answered no ones questions. Our instructor wasted time talking about home defense shotguns and pepper spray.
 
(other than a machinegun or destructive device)

Is it just me or does that phrase kinda leaves things open ended? :rolleyes: Some of those wing nuts see a BB gun as a destructive device and would probably shoot there eye out if they ever used one.
 
What federal hurdles are there in getting a drivers license? If all they do is say you have to attend a safety class, and pass an exam (practical/written), I don't see the downside. The Arizona class, when I was stationed there was 16 hours over two days with a qualification shoot. Oregon was a two hour stitch 'n bubblegum that answered no ones questions. Our instructor wasted time talking about home defense shotguns and pepper spray.
According to the Constitution this falls under the control of the state's not the federal government. Personally I don't want the federal government to have any say in comtroling my 2A rights. I don't trust them.
 
What federal hurdles are there in getting a drivers license? If all they do is say you have to attend a safety class, and pass an exam (practical/written), I don't see the downside. The Arizona class, when I was stationed there was 16 hours over two days with a qualification shoot. Oregon was a two hour stitch 'n bubblegum that answered no ones questions. Our instructor wasted time talking about home defense shotguns and pepper spray.

That was awhile back, now in AZ it's an 8 hr class & no shooting
 
Interesting. The actual text of the bill may be read here.

Thanks.

On first reading, I'm impressed. Presentation of a carry permit is prima facie evidence, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual did not meet the conditions set out in law, and if you prevail against prosecution the court shall award reasonable attorney fees.

No picture identification on Washington State license to carry concealed pistol, so I suppose that is a loophole for some states to drag their feet in providing identification sufficient under this proposed legislation. But then we know it will always be a state by state battle to secure recognition of our inherent right. No federal bureaucracy or process in this legislation - like a drivers license they have to recognize what other states issue.
 
Where this bill will get the most resistance, is the part that reads, "is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides". This would allow those in constitutional carry states with no permit or background check to carry in other states.
For this bill to pass, we will need a few Dems to vote for it. This section may scare them off.
 
It'll be interesting to see what happens with this bill... I view the right to bear arms to be a civil right, God given, but nonetheless a civil right. I've encouraged my Representative to support this bill and my civil rights... Don't expect that to happen, but who knows, stranger things have happened...
 
Who was the original a-hole that thought we needed a permit?
The God given right thing to self defense as a human trumps any word's on paper.
I've carried since I was in my teen's never had a permit never will.

I don't ask permission to live as a free man.
 
I would've preferred a Second Amendment Clarification Act saying "the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear shall not be infringed by Congress or the States or anybody!"

Granted, that leaves a limbo for LPR's and other non-citizens here legally, but... start with those our Constitution and laws are most intended to protect first.
 
This bill defines magazines and ammo as part of the handgun, and thus appears to supercede state magazine capacity limits (for handguns). I can cut and paste the relevant text from the bill once I crawl out of bed.
 
Full text can be found at https://hudson.house.gov/uploads/Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017.pdf

(2) The term 'handgun' includes any magazine
for use in a handgun and any ammunition loaded
into the handgun or its magazine.
''(f)(1) A person who possesses or carries a concealed
handgun under subsection (a) shall not be subject to the
prohibitions of section 922(q) with respect to that hand-
gun.

This is the part that defines a handgun as including the magazine and ammo, perhaps it will supercede state magazine capacity limits? I'm not sure.

It also appears to allow carry into school zones in any state (provided the state doesn't have their own gun free school laws) since U.S.C. 922(q) contains the prohibitions on carrying in schools.

Track the bill: H.R.38 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a means by which nonresidents of a State whose residents may carry concealed firearms may also do so in the State.

I like this bill, I hope it passes.
 
Last Edited:
According to the Constitution this falls under the control of the state's not the federal government. Personally I don't want the federal government to have any say in comtroling my 2A rights. I don't trust them.

I was having similar thoughts about this but didn't really know how to phrase it. Isn't it generally a bad thing when the federal government supersedes what an individual state has decided? It sounds like a good idea because it is in our favor, but what if it wasn't?
 
Yep, that's a good question. It is a centralization of power. But it's pretty late to be worrying about that any more.

Where this bill will get the most resistance, is the part that reads, "is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides". This would allow those in constitutional carry states with no permit or background check to carry in other states.

No. Elsewhere in the bill, it also requires a license. "Constitutional carry" is not covered in the bill.
 
Who was the original a-hole that thought we needed a permit?
The God given right thing to self defense as a human trumps any word's on paper.
I've carried since I was in my teen's never had a permit never will.

I don't ask permission to live as a free man.

That's a really nice premise, however I do not want anything to ever risk my livelihood, nor my future arms rights nor do I ever want a roommate named Bubba.
 
Yep, that's a good question. It is a centralization of power. But it's pretty late to be worrying about that any more.

This bill protects the second amendment, preventing states from restricting it. It's not centralizing power any more than the second amendment does.

No. Elsewhere in the bill, it also requires a license. "Constitutional carry" is not covered in the bill.

As I read it, it only requires photo identification, NOT a license to carry. It only requires a license to carry if your home state doesn't allow constitutional carry.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top