TexasCHLforum.com

As long as the Commerce Act is interpreted as it currently is, any 2A supporter should be supporting National Reciprocity.

As it stands, Congress can regulate firearms pretty much as it chooses -- not ban entirely perhaps, per Heller, but still lots of room for regulation. Lopez proved that, and there are plenty of other restrictions on the 2A based on the Commerce Clause power. You certainly will not find anyone on the anti-2A side who will nobly oppose Commerce power based restrictions on firearms because they think the Commerce power is abused. Thus opposing National Reciprocity or any other statute that expands the exercise of the 2A effectively means the power can be used to restrict, but not support, the right to bear arms.


If lightning strikes, and the SCOTUS suddenly wakes up and decides the Commerce clause power is much more limited than it is currently, then I will be happy to see National Reciprocity go down the tubes, since it would also be accompanied by a long list of restrictive statutes as well. But until then, I am not going to cede a big section of the battlefield to the Brady bunch.