TexasCHLforum.com

ScottDLS wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:[quote="RoyGBiv]
...
Respectfully... There is nothing in that post that comes from the new bill. All of your worries are possible in current law.
Please... Show me NEW infringements in the NEW bill. There are none, AFAIK.

Exactly right. The Bill does not add one single grounds for denying Second Amendment rights. The Bill 1) creates national reciprocity; and 2) tries to get states and federal agencies to comply with CURRENT reporting requirements. Anyone opposed to No. 2 is arguing that current law should not be enforced.

Chas.

[/quote][/quote][/quote]

If the NICS current law contains everything that Cornyn's bill has, then why is it necessary? You are correct in that my problems with the NICS law pre-date Cornyn's bill, and they have more to do with how it is being interpreted vs. what the law says.

The term "adjudicated mentally defective" retains its original meaning from the GCA 1968 as amended. My argument is with the way it is currently being interpreted in the CFR. Adjudicated should not be an administrative process, especially post-Heller, when the adjudication can be by administrative fiat (VA, SSA, etc.). You are depriving someone of a fundamental right under the 2nd amendment by "putting them on a list" of mental defectives. Theoretically without any recourse or ability to challenge the adjudication.

The NICS improvement act didn't actually change 18 USC 922(g)(4), but it did suggest through its reporting improvement language that current interpretations in CFR which are IMO vague and contradictory should stand.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Last reply....
The new bill puts time requirements, review schedules, funding for training and other compliance requirements and measures onto current law.
Current law has no compliance measures.

The new law does not add any new ways for adding you to the denied list, it only enforces agencies to comply with current rules and sets schedules, measures and funds some training.
You should go read it.

ScottDLS wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

crazy2medic wrote:Question for you guys, do all States issue carry permits in some format? I know New York does but you have to be politically connected or wealthy!

All states have a permit system. Several states are "May Issue" and others are "May Issue" but so restrictive that they are essentially "no issue", even though they technically do have a license program...

So, if you are asking whether, if reciprocity passes into law, would a TX licensee be able to carry in all 50 states, I believe the answe is YES, based on the text of the House-passed bill.

Some US territories are no-issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed ... s#No-issue

Vermont does not have a permit system.

Did you read the bill?
Residents of constitutional carry states just have to show a drivers license to prove residency of a CC state.

crazy2medic wrote:Question for you guys, do all States issue carry permits in some format? I know New York does but you have to be politically connected or wealthy!

All states have a permit system. Several states are "May Issue" and others are "May Issue" but so restrictive that they are essentially "no issue", even though they technically do have a license program...

So, if you are asking whether, if reciprocity passes into law, would a TX licensee be able to carry in all 50 states, I believe the answe is YES, based on the text of the House-passed bill.

Some US territories are no-issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed ... s#No-issue

ScottDLS wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

bblhd672 wrote:

TacShot wrote:Louie Gohmert has it right. Listen to him on page 8.

Are we so eager to sell out on the combined bill, as is the NRA, so we can pound our chests and say we have National Reciprocity. I would not be surprised to see the Reciprocity portion stripped out and the Fix NICS (NIX would be more appropriate) portion survive and pass.

Memo to Mr Establishment, Senator Cornyn: If the Senate's most ardent gun grabbers, Schumer, Feinstein, Blumenthal, et al, cosponsor your bill, you screwed up big time.

I'm okay with the President vetoing this bill should it make it to his desk. Fix NICS should begin by enforcing the existing laws and regulations that are being ignored, not adding more infringements.

Did you read the bill?
Please post one section that adds a new infringement. I can find none.
AFAIK the bill is entirely about enforcing existing law.

See my previous "screed" on NICS. NICS is not your friend. It was a lousy compromise to deal with the Brady Bill's original unconstitutional commandeering of the States, after SCOTUS rules it unlawful.

http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic. ... 4#p1179204

Respectfully... There is nothing in that post that comes from the new bill. All of your worries are possible in current law.
Please... Show me NEW infringements in the NEW bill. There are none, AFAIK.

bblhd672 wrote:

TacShot wrote:Louie Gohmert has it right. Listen to him on page 8.

Are we so eager to sell out on the combined bill, as is the NRA, so we can pound our chests and say we have National Reciprocity. I would not be surprised to see the Reciprocity portion stripped out and the Fix NICS (NIX would be more appropriate) portion survive and pass.

Memo to Mr Establishment, Senator Cornyn: If the Senate's most ardent gun grabbers, Schumer, Feinstein, Blumenthal, et al, cosponsor your bill, you screwed up big time.

I'm okay with the President vetoing this bill should it make it to his desk. Fix NICS should begin by enforcing the existing laws and regulations that are being ignored, not adding more infringements.

Did you read the bill?
Please post one section that adds a new infringement. I can find none.
AFAIK the bill is entirely about enforcing existing law.

LSUTiger wrote:Did it pass with FixNICS attached?

Yes

Flightmare wrote:Bill is now up for it's final vote in the house.

Passed!

So... Assuming reciprocity and FixNICS pass the House, which seems likely at this point, how do we get it past a very likely Senate Filibuster?

Cornyn has already said he wants to separate the two pieces of legislation. FixNICS will likely pass the Senate (possibly on a voice vote), but if the Senate splits the legislation, that takes away any incentive for the Progs to allow a floor vote on reciprocity in the Senate ...... and it dies there.?

RoyGBiv wrote:Just a procedural comment to add... I believe this has already been accomplished via HR 645, yesterday.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-con ... ll-actions

I got ahead of the votes on this... 645 is currently being voted on in the House. There are several procedural votes required... The vote that just passed is to limit the House to 1 hour of debate with no amendments considered, before a vote on the bill (after debate) later today.

montgomery wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

montgomery wrote:I just read through https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-con ... ll/38/text

I completely understand the ideology of concealed carry reciprocity, but if this bill passes, does this supercede State and local laws somehow? Will I be able to lawfully conceal carry a handgun with a 13 round magazine while in New York City as a result of this bill? Or would NY laws regarding magazine capacity still be in full effect? Any help to clarify would be great.

As written currently, reciprocity would apply to "any handgun" and "any magazine".
However, the bill sponsor made some contrary statements on Fox a few days ago... For me, the question is still unresolved.

I would love to have true sea to shining sea concealed carry ability, but am struggling with how this squares with 10th amendment. Sure would be nice to see the fine print so-to-speak.

2nd Amendment?

Not intending to be flippant.... Seriously... My 2A rights (and yours) are DENIED by NY and CA and other places.
This is a Constitutional issue, not a States Rights issue. YMMV

RoyGBiv wrote:Debating live now on CSPAN

Apologies! The CSPAN feed is from Tuesday.
Hard to do work and listen to CSPAN at the same time..

montgomery wrote:I just read through https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-con ... ll/38/text

I completely understand the ideology of concealed carry reciprocity, but if this bill passes, does this supercede State and local laws somehow? Will I be able to lawfully conceal carry a handgun with a 13 round magazine while in New York City as a result of this bill? Or would NY laws regarding magazine capacity still be in full effect? Any help to clarify would be great.

As written currently, reciprocity would apply to "any handgun" and "any magazine".
However, the bill sponsor made some contrary statements on Fox a few days ago... For me, the question is still unresolved.

Debating live now on CSPAN

Charles L. Cotton wrote:There will be a vote to merge the bills. Both bills would pass the House as stand-alone bills and HR4477 would pass the Senate. However, HR38 as a stand-alone Bill would be killed by Senate Democrats by way of a filibuster and we'd have to start over. That would be much harder.

Just a procedural comment to add... I believe this has already been accomplished via HR 645, yesterday.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-con ... ll-actions

HR 645 is a procedural resolution that points to H. Rpt 115-440. 115-440 is where HR 38 was amended and replaced in its entirety with the committee reported (combined) HR 38 and HR 4477...
https://www.congress.gov/congressional- ... /440/1?r=7

(Emphasis mine)

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 38, the
Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, under a closed rule.
The resolution provides one hour of debate equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on the Judiciary. The resolution waives all points of
order against consideration of the bill. The resolution
provides that an amendment in the nature of a substitute
consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 115-45 shall be
considered as adopted and the bill, as amended, shall be
considered as read. The resolution waives all points of order
against provisions in the bill, as amended. The resolution
provides for one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.

http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/201 ... 115-45.xml

Watching live now on CSPAN.

Good thing I took my BP meds this morning, watching Clark (D-MA) speak on the bills. Her sky is definitely falling.

ETA: Not all speeches are on HR 38... This session Reps can be recognized for 5 minutes to speak on any topic/bill.