Representative Hudson Introduces National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 11 months ago
… the text of the bill, available as a pdf file on Rep. Hudson’s official House website, will codify that a person “carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides, may possess or carry a concealed handgun … in any State that …. has a statute under which residents of the State may apply for a license or permit to carry a concealed firearm; or … does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
Read the full text of the bill here. The first time I read the bill it seemed weak to me. It took me twice through to recognize its strength.
The operative phrase is “has a statute under which residents of the State may apply for a license or permit to carry a concealed firearm.”
I would like legal minds to weigh in on this, but to me that means that I can carry virtually anywhere except Hawaii (which has no permitting system at all). Every other state to the best of my knowledge has a permitting system, whether it’s a shall issue system or may issue system (where only the rich and politically connected are allowed to carry).
Now I see that the comments already forming on the issue of constitutional carry. No, this law would require a permit from your state, and likely your CLEO. It’s not perfect. Remember folks. I’m not a pragmatist, but I recognize the value of incrementalism in our battle. The progs use it to their advantage. We must learn to use it to ours.
On January 5, 2017 at 12:56 pm, robertsgunshop said:
I noticed that my Rep wasn’t a co-sponsor. I’ve already contacted him about this. Like you, I’m not a legal mind, but it seems like I would be able to carry, even in NYC.
This on Hawaii;
May-Issue by statute, but No-Issue in practice. The chief of police may grant a permit “in an exceptional case, when an applicant shows reason to fear injury to the applicant’s person or property”. In practice, Hawaii is “No-Issue,” as issuing authorities rarely or never approve applications for permits. In March 2014, the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals has ruled Hawaii’s restrictive concealed carry policy unconstitutional, but the court has allowed the law to remain in effect while the State of Hawaii appeals the ruling.
It looks like even though Hawaii is May/no issue, the new law may allow visitors to carry there.
On January 5, 2017 at 1:00 pm, Archer said:
That is creative and ingenious wording of the statute. You don’t have to apply for a non-resident permit, you don’t have to get local CLEO permission, you don’t even have to qualify for the other states’ licenses. If you have a CHL/CPL/CWP/etc from your home state, it’s valid in any state with a CCW application process set by statute.
This is the kind of thing I mean when I advise gunnies to not make gun rights a “first 100 days” issue. We have at least two years of a GOP Congressional majority AND a GOP President. That’s plenty of time to write laws carefully and do it right.
RE: Hawai’i — IIRC, they have a statute under which residents can apply for a CCW permit, but (also IIRC) they’ve never actually issued a permit; their “may-issue” is quite effectively “no-issue”. However, if they have such a statute, they’d have to recognize your out-of-state license, whether their residents can carry or not.
On January 5, 2017 at 1:43 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Well, I didn’t mean that you would have to get any CLEO permission to carry in another state. I meant that most of the time getting a permit to carry in your home state requires CLEO involvement. That should have been clearer. I get in a hurry sometimes.
On January 5, 2017 at 2:48 pm, Archer said:
Your words were pretty clear. I was summing up the advantages to the bill as written. You’d have to have a permit, which would require your CLEO to sign off (they may not have a choice in a “shall-issue” system, but they still sign off). By “local CLEO” I was referring to the CLEO for the state/area you’re visiting. They don’t get a say; if your permit is valid, you can carry.
Sorry for the confusion.
But now for another bit of clarification, this time with the bill itself: Does it make any mention of the patchwork of gun-specific restrictions? For one example, if my Oregon CHL must be honored in California, must they also honor the legality (in Oregon) of my 16-round magazines? For another, is the legality (in Oregon) of my JHP ammo honored in New Jersey?
Or do I have to acquire a different firearm, set of magazines, and/or ammunition to carry safely in other states?
On January 5, 2017 at 2:55 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Good question. I would assume that you would have to comply with all other pertinent regulations of the state you are visiting.
Lawyers needed.