House Committee Advances Legislation Allowing Concealed Guns In All 50 States

Though it was mostly overlooked amid the Senate's crucial procedural vote on tax reform, the House Judiciary Committee late yesterday voted 19-11 in favor of a highly controversial bill, dubbed the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, which would amend the federal criminal code to allow the concealed transport of handguns across state lines, so long as both states allow it. If passed, the bill would prevent states from imposing their individual requirements for a concealed carry license on armed travelers from other states.  Here's a summary of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017:

This bill amends the federal criminal code to allow a qualified individual to carry a concealed handgun into or possess a concealed handgun in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms.


A qualified individual must: (1) be eligible to possess, transport, or receive a firearm under federal law; (2) carry a valid photo identification document; and (3) carry a valid concealed carry permit issued by, or be eligible to carry a concealed firearm in, his or her state of residence.


Additionally, the bill specifies that a qualified individual who lawfully carries or possesses a concealed handgun in another state: (1) is not subject to the federal prohibition on possessing a firearm in a school zone, and (2) may carry or possess the concealed handgun in federally owned lands that are open to the public.

As Bloomberg points out, the National Rifle Association has called the concealed carry bill, which would make it easier for gun owners to keep their firearms hidden when crossing state lines, its “highest legislative priority in Congress.” Despite concerns raised by Democrats about states’ rights and domestic violence, the Republican-controlled Congress has pushed the proposal one step closer to becoming law.

Hand Gun

Of course, Trump openly courted NRA members during the 2016 election cycle and vowed in a speech to the NRA earlier this year: "you came through for me, and I am going to come through for you."  Here is a portion of Trump's speech transcript courtesy of Newsweek:

But you came through for me, and I am going to come through for you.  I was proud to receive the NRA’s earliest endorsement in the history of the organization.  And today, I am also proud to be the first sitting President to address the NRA Leadership Forum since our wonderful Ronald Reagan in 1983.  And I want to thank each and every one of you not only for your help electing true friends of the Second Amendment, but for everything you do to defend our flag and our freedom.


With your activism, you helped to safeguard the freedoms of our soldiers who have bled and died for us on the battlefields.  And I know we have many veterans in the audience today, and we want to give them a big, big beautiful round of applause.


But we have news that you’ve been waiting for for a long time:  The eight-year assault on your Second Amendment freedoms has come to a crashing end.  You have a true friend and champion in the White House.  No longer will federal agencies be coming after law-abiding gun owners.  No longer will the government be trying to undermine your rights and your freedoms as Americans.  Instead, we will work with you, by your side.  We will work with the NRA to promote responsible gun ownership, to protect our wonderful hunters and their access to the very beautiful outdoors.  You met my son—I can tell you, both sons, they love the outdoors.  Frankly, I think they love the outdoors more than they love, by a long shot, Fifth Avenue.  But that’s okay.  And we want to ensure you of the sacred right of self-defense for all of our citizens.

Not surprisingly, the bill has drawn harsh criticism from the Left which argues that it effectively neuters the laws of individual states and turns the most lax state laws into federal laws...

The bill has found its fair share of detractors as well, including New York Police Department Commissioner James O’Neill. “I don't think there is any reason for anybody to bring a gun into New York City,” O’Neill said in an interview earlier this year. “We don’t need any more guns.” Historically, many firearms used in killings in more highly regulated northeastern states originate in southern and western states with fewer or no gun restrictions.


Moms Demand Action, a gun control group that attended Wednesday’s hearing, has also attacked the bill, arguing it “is a chaotic and dangerous policy that would gut every state’s gun laws and make our communities less safe.”


The group argues that the bill “would effectively turn the weakest state’s laws into nationwide laws” because conceal carry laws vary state by state. For example, convicted stalkers are banned from concealed carry in some states, but not all, and the age for concealed carry also varies. In the event the bill passes, a Georgia permit, a state that allows abusive partners to carry hidden firearms, would become effective in New York, a state that currently doesn’t recognize any other state’s conceal carry permits.


Responding to Republicans during the hearing, Representative Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat from New York, said he “strongly opposed” the bill and argued it would override state’s rights, a traditional policy priority for Republicans. “Public safety would suffer if we were to unwisely adopt this legislation,” he added.

...but Republican take a slightly different stance...

“This would end abuses in anti-gun states like New York and New Jersey and allow law-abiding concealed carriers to exercise their rights nationwide with peace of mind,” the NRA website states. “[The bill] would not, as some critics claim, affect how states issue their own concealed carry permits.”


U.S. Representative Richard Hudson, the North Carolina Republican who introduced the legislation, called the bill “welcome progress” in efforts to expand and protect access to firearms.

So what say you?  Is this a hypocritical trampling of states rights, a traditional priority of Republicans, or a necessary fight against liberal strongholds intent upon circumventing the Second Amendment?


NumNutt Number 9 Thu, 11/30/2017 - 14:58 Permalink

My state allows for permitless CC, so would this bill mean I would be able to now 'legally' transport it across state lines with out a CC permit? It would appear to me that it would with the statement "carry a valid concealed carry permit issued by, or be eligible to carry a concealed firearm in, his or her state of residence."WOOOHOOOO Bring it on!

In reply to by Number 9

Gap Admirer NumNutt Thu, 11/30/2017 - 16:54 Permalink

One YUGE problem with the bill. You must have your CC license from YOUR state of residence to be able to carry nationally. If you live in Maryland, for example, you can NEVER get a Maryland CC license (unless you are a liberal politician). So, if you live in Maryland, and have a Utah CC permit, this law can never work for you. Even though you have a CC permit. They need to change it to a CC permit from **ANY** state.

In reply to by NumNutt

shamus001 Gap Admirer Thu, 11/30/2017 - 19:21 Permalink

I carry every time i cross state lines, concealed carry during long drives acriss the state, but to my left my cc is not respected but it can be in the open, but not loaded, requiring a 3 step process to arm it; to my right, the firearm cannot be in the same compartment, and the magazine has to be in a completely different compartment than the gun, and that magazine CANNOT be loaded! Totally fkng useless, Id be murdered, cut up and buried by the time anyone could assemble some form of "legal" operating use of my firearm for defense. But the mugger is packing ya know it. Likely 3rd offender, let out of a lib prison for 'good behavior' in 12 months after butchering his wife! BOUT TIME! #1 for the good guys!

In reply to by Gap Admirer

Bwana Gap Admirer Fri, 12/01/2017 - 13:38 Permalink

I have a California permit and a host of permits for other states. It is a hassal and large expense to maintain these permits and or licenses. My research on this matter indicates that besides the Second Amendment in our Bill of Rights, Article. IV. Section. 2. (first paragraph) which states as follows:"The Citizens of each State shall be Entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of the Citizens in the several States." I interpret this Constitutional Law is stating that our laws from state to state must be uniform and allow any person legally allowed to carry in another state to carry in any state. This would cover a permitted person who is permitted in any state to carry in any other state. Or said another way if one state will allow you to carry concealed all the other states must respect that privilege and immunity. I might add that until the Second Amendment is fully defined by The Supreme Court of the United States this will have to do. Once the Second Amendment is defined the States, all of them, and the Federal Government will find all the BS laws they have passed are null and void and they will be barred from any future laws. The operative clause of the Second Amendment could not be any more precise or clear in meaning; "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

In reply to by Gap Admirer

Ecclesia Militans ejmoosa Thu, 11/30/2017 - 15:31 Permalink

No one is stopping you from firing up your forge and hammering out your rifled barrel, lock and trigger from reclaimed leaf springs, carving a stock from the walnut tree in your back yard, casting some lead .54 caliber ball shot from an old car battery and using a bucket of bear grease and and old linen shirt to make patches and wadding, and harvesting flint from an appropriate hillside.  The only cost is the time you spend with your sons doing all of this, which will probably take you away from your day trading screens for a bit.

In reply to by ejmoosa

chunga Pool Shark Thu, 11/30/2017 - 14:10 Permalink

Jeff "The Stiff" Sessions is proving once again he doesn't care too much for states' rights. As it stands right now I think he's the worst AG of my lifetime.Sessions hints at crackdown on recreational pot, affecting California, other states

WASHINGTON Attorney General Jeff Sessions hinted Wednesday that the Justice Department may take a tougher stance on recreational marijuana in the near future, a change in policy that would have a significant impact on the five states plus the District of Columbia that already allow the drug to be used for more than medicinal purposes.

In reply to by Pool Shark

Theosebes Goodfellow Pool Shark Thu, 11/30/2017 - 18:16 Permalink

~"Notice that BOTH states have to allow CCW's."~California does have CWPs. They are hard to get in many leftist counties, since it takes the local CLEO to sing off on it, usually the county sheriff, (though police chiefs can do it as well, though that tends to piss of the sheriff). This bill would force California to honor CWPs from other states.The arguments of leftist CLEOs that they "already have too many guns in their towns" are of course, specious. The only guns in their towns are criminals and the LEOs. The citizens are fucked when it comes to self-defense. It seems that when bad guys pull guns, the cops are only minutes, (or hours), away. ~"the bill has drawn harsh criticism from the Left which argues that it effectively neuters the laws of individual states.."~Because effectively neutering the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens takes priority over states' rights. 

In reply to by Pool Shark

bpgnp210 Vergeltung Thu, 11/30/2017 - 13:55 Permalink

Not sure you read the article.  You would have to live in and receive a permit from a state with more lax guns laws and then travel to your deep blue state....  this law won't help you as a resident of your deep blue state obtain a permit in that state to carry a sidearm...

In reply to by Vergeltung