Reciprocity introduced

[BC38]

Originally Posted by Onomea

Well, looks like I read it wrong, and that dockmurgw and others are right:

I've been hoping one of our legal beagles would drop by and explain to us whether or not the bill requires states (e.g., CA) that do not recognize the right of a person from a state (e.g., AZ) that recognizes permitless carry to carry in their state (CA in this example.)

No legal beagles have come by to enlighten us so today I asked ChatGPT today, an AI app.

Here is the result











My view, as I think I wrote above, is that setting minimum requirements for permits, and requiring states to recognize one another's permits, would be a more successful strategy to achieve the goal of CCW reciprocity.

And unfortunately, this is why national CC Reciprocity is a pipe dream.
There are too many places like NY and CA that will never, ever allow it to happen.

[Bald1]

Why do you think 2 states could hold up the passage of this. One party has the big 3. If it doesn’t get passed, it’s not because of NY and CA. Why do people want to give these communist more power than they have.

[BC38]

Originally Posted by Bald1

Why do you think 2 states could hold up the passage of this. One party has the big 3. If it doesn’t get passed, it’s not because of NY and CA. Why do people want to give these communist more power than they have.

Please re-read what I said.

I said there are TOO MANY places - like CA and NY - I just gave those as two examples.

IL, WA, OR, MA, NJ and a whole slew of other states refuse to honor CC Permits from most other states.

There are probably at least as many states that would oppose reciprocity as there are states that would support it. Maybe even more who would oppose it.

Unless you can get a solid majority of states to support it, any national reciprocity bill is going to be DOA. It will never even get to a vote in either house, much less make it to the President's desk.

I wish that weren't the case, because I am 100% FOR the idea. But, unfortunately, I don't see it ever happening. Forgive me for being a pragmatist.

[dockmurgw]

Originally Posted by BC38

Please re-read what I said.

I said there are TOO MANY places - like CA and NY - I just gave those as two examples.

IL, WA, OR, MA, NJ and a whole slew of other states refuse to honor CC Permits from most other states.

There are probably at least as many states that would oppose reciprocity as there are states that would support it. Maybe even more who would oppose it.

Unless you can get a solid majority of states to support it, any national reciprocity bill is going to be DOA. It will never even get to a vote in either house, much less make it to the President's desk.

I wish that weren't the case, because I am 100% FOR the idea. But, unfortunately, I don't see it ever happening. Forgive me for being a pragmatist.

You are more than likely right, but then again...these same states, try as they may, have been unable to stop a plethora of things with the new sheriff in town. So, to quote a couple old-time sayings that the younger generation doesn't understand - Strike While the Iron Is Hot, Make Hay While the Sun Shines. If its ever going to happen, it has to be now...before the mid-terms.

[ladder13]

The window is closing rapidly with recent events.

[BC38]

Originally Posted by dockmurgw

You are more than likely right, but then again...these same states, try as they may, have been unable to stop a plethora of things with the new sheriff in town. So, to quote a couple old-time sayings that the younger generation doesn't understand - Strike While the Iron Is Hot, Make Hay While the Sun Shines. If its ever going to happen, it has to be now...before the mid-terms.

Agreed, the chances are better now than they've been, but they are still vanishingly small.
Look at what NY did when Bruen was settled. They started issuing carry permits, then immediately declared most public spaces "sensitive" no-carry zones.
AFAIK, that hasn't been reversed - it still stands.

[dockmurgw]

Originally Posted by BC38

Look at what NY did when Bruen was settled.

Yup...good point. Where carrying is difficult now, it will always be difficult. But I would guess that reciprocity would benefit at least 1/2 the country, so that would be a win. Anyway, I agree it's a loooong shot at best.

[Bald1]

Originally Posted by BC38

Please re-read what I said.

I said there are TOO MANY places - like CA and NY - I just gave those as two examples.

IL, WA, OR, MA, NJ and a whole slew of other states refuse to honor CC Permits from most other states.

There are probably at least as many states that would oppose reciprocity as there are states that would support it. Maybe even more who would oppose it.

Unless you can get a solid majority of states to support it, any national reciprocity bill is going to be DOA. It will never even get to a vote in either house, much less make it to the President's desk.

I wish that weren't the case, because I am 100% FOR the idea. But, unfortunately, I don't see it ever happening. Forgive me for being a pragmatist.

All the states you mention would be in violation of a Federal Law. Would it end up in court? Yeah probably. And those states would loose. This defeatist mentality empowers them. I’m tired of it.

[ladder13]

Positive posts aren’t received very well on this forum.

[steelslaver]

While I am for national reciprocation, I agree that if it were to pass the reality is that the anti states will simply load up on restrictions, which the courts have allowed even after Bruen. More restrictions on types of guns and ammo, lower capacities, add to number the "sensitive areas" and enlarge the existing ones.