On keyboard and then to the post office too, I say!
National Right-to-Carry Bill Introduced in Senate
Recently, Senator John Thune (R-SD) introduced legislation calling for a national reciprocity of right-to-carry (RTC) licenses for firearm owners across the nation. This bill mirrors one introduced in the House by Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and seeks to create a national system of state-to-state recognition of various RTC licenses and permits.
Much like the recognition of our drivers’ licenses state-to-state, law enforcement officers in Florida would recognize an RTC license or permit issued in Texas. This legislation would eliminate the hassle of having to apply for and carry RTC licenses for each and every state in the Union. The bill not only dispenses with this inconvenience, but also keeps the matter state regulated rather than becoming the responsibility of the U.S. Government.
This is not another CCW that you would have to apply for, it would simply equalize CCW permits with licenses to drive and mariage licenses.
You civic duty awaits.
My Senators are Cantwell and Murray and I’m still writing them, so no excuses!
“Have Gun, Will Travel” indeed!
Colorado just passed a law that states that a person that lives in CO must have a CO CCW to carry concealed. I wonder how the federal law would affect that law, if I got a FL or UT CCW would I be able to carry in my home state of CO regardless of what the CO law states?
Well, this is interesting. I can’t find the text of Thune’s bill, but the text of Cliff Stearns’ bill is here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.226:
Without seeing the language of Colorado’s statute restricting CO residents to CO CCWs, the following is little better than an informed guess. So caveat emptor, etc.
Given the above, the way I read it, Colorado’s law would not be affected by the Federal bill, because the bill says that if a person has a valid CCW from a State, then when traveling in another State that also issues CCWs, the person may carry concealed in that other State “under the same restrictions which apply to the carrying of a concealed firearm by a person to whom the State has issued such a license or permit.” And one of those restrictions, in CO, is that if you are a CO resident you may only lawfully carry with a CO CCW. So your FL and UT CCWs would not cut the mustard.
Another interpretation would be that the bill’s language DOES allow a CO resident without a CO CCW but with a FL or UT CCW to carry concealed in CO, under the theory that the “restriction” in this case (that CO residents must have a CO CCW in order to carry concealed) only applies to persons to whom CO has issued a license or permit, and in your case, you haven’t been issued such a CO license or permit. However, I think that’s stretching and would not be upheld by a judge as the correct interpretation.
Again, this is all just a guess, but that’s my first take on it.
Happily, to my knowledge, CA has no statute like CO’s. So if this passes, as a California resident, I should be able to go get my FL or UT CCW and I should be all set — except that there are all sorts of local jurisdictions in CA (I’ve heard stories about San Jose, for example) where the cops delight in confiscating the firearms of people with CCWs issued by another jurisdiction. This is despite State law that CCWs are good statewide.
So at a practical level I’m guessing those same cops would be doubly likely to confiscate the firearm of a CA resident without a CA-issued CCW who sought to rely on an out-of-state CCW.
You know, if this could get passed before I head out to Kaliforinstan, I would be one happy little camper… Of course, does this kind of thing not get introduced just about every year, or near enough? And considering the composition of the current Congress… I hate to be all pessimistic and non-useful, but I am not going to hold my breath.
Something else you might want to look into: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1096