Well, it's a start: Sen. Cornyn's Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill

Apparently they haven't clicked on the link and read the part that shows who else co sponsors the bill & how much support it has....

Doesn't really matter, as it's still grandstanding by all of them. As I recall, in the last Congress the House passed a reciprocity bill but it died in the Senate without being brought to a floor vote by McConnell.

Where were all of these Senators then? Why weren't they pushing McConnell for a floor vote? If they had, it would have passed and Trump would have signed it.
 
Doesn't really matter, as it's still grandstanding by all of them. As I recall, in the last Congress the House passed a reciprocity bill but it died in the Senate without being brought to a floor vote by McConnell.

Where were all of these Senators then? Why weren't they pushing McConnell for a floor vote? If they had, it would have passed and Trump would have signed it.
Here's your answer...
Let's face it folks Most, if not all, of our congress persons and senate persons do not want this to become law. They only introduce this type of bill when they know it's not going anywhere.
 
I don't see how anyone who cares about their rights would want a bill that violates their home states sovereignty.

But yeah, this is just for show. Does the NRA give candidates point for voting for fluff?
 
I don't see how anyone who cares about their rights would want a bill that violates their home states sovereignty.

But yeah, this is just for show. Does the NRA give candidates point for voting for fluff?
Don't know about NRA points, but pretty sure politicians from gun friendly districts sponsor go-nowhere legislation so they can build up a phony record of "accomplishments" to use in their campaign ads when they run for re-election... "Senator Windbag has sponsored legislation the last five years to defend your 2nd ammendment rights, but those rascally other guys put a stop to it."

It's transparent, humorous, and pathetic all at the same tlme.
 
Last edited:
This is why it will never, ever come close to passing (at least it it's the same bill, as Cornyn claims it is. I couldn't find the new bill. This is last year's):

(2) an individual who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and is entitled and not prohibited from carrying a concealed firearm in the State in which the individual resides otherwise than as described in paragraph (1), may possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce in any State other than the State of residence of the individual that—

"(A) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or

"(B) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

It would allow people from Constitutional Carry states to carry in states which require a permit . . .
 
This is why it will never, ever come close to passing (at least it it's the same bill, as Cornyn claims it is. I couldn't find the new bill. This is last year's):



It would allow people from Constitutional Carry states to carry in states which require a permit . . .

Good grief...it's as if they wrote it to fail. Where a better solution might lie in developing a national minimum standard for permits that would be covered by the law, and let the states determine if they want to implement those standards and let their residents take advantage of the law. Constitutional carry states like mine, that don't even issue permits, could even implement an optional permit system for residents that want them to take advantage of the law.
 
Good grief...it's as if they wrote it to fail. Where a better solution might lie in developing a national minimum standard for permits that would be covered by the law, and let the states determine if they want to implement those standards and let their residents take advantage of the law. Constitutional carry states like mine, that don't even issue permits, could even implement an optional permit system for residents that want them to take advantage of the law.

If that ever happens they'll go with the requirements in the strictest state and permits will be "may issue"
 
If that ever happens they'll go with the requirements in the strictest state and permits will be "may issue"

The only way it would pass, and probably the intention in the first place. There are already too many laws that violate the constitution, as well as violating the sovereignty of the states. The commerce clause has been widely abused.
 
If the Las Vegas and Florida shooting had not happened I believe that both the national reciprocity bill and the hearing protection act would have passed...

...now however...not going to happen...

Bob
 
When Missouri went Constitutional Carry, they kept the permit system for just that reason . . .

Interesting. Personally I think that would be the best of both worlds. While I enjoy the fact that we don't need permits, we do get short changed on reciprocity. If VT were to establish an optional permit system and reciprocity agreements, I would be the first in line to get one.
 
Vermont. We don't have permits, open or concealed carry OK for any citizen of any state that is not otherwise restricted by federal law.

Thanks for answering. By coincidence (off topic), the Smithsonian Channel has a series called Aerial America, wherein they talk about a state's history and current culture while showing aerial films of the state. The other morning was about Vermont. Looks like somewhere I could live, and not just for gun laws.
 
If a man is elected to represent my state, and my state wants something, it's his duty to bring it up. That's what Cornyn did. The shortcoming lies with those who don't support the bill. Write your own congressman, don't bag mine.

The reason for representative government is that the rep is supposed to use their judgement in how they represent their constituents. Did your state really want Congress to waste time on empty gestures?
 
If the Las Vegas and Florida shooting had not happened I believe that both the national reciprocity bill and the hearing protection act would have passed...

...now however...not going to happen...

Bob

Las Vegas shooting did not happen until October, they never had any intention of any bill related to nationwide carry become law.
 
The reason for representative government is that the rep is supposed to use their judgement in how they represent their constituents. Did your state really want Congress to waste time on empty gestures?
I didn't elect Congress. I elected two Senators and a Rep. I don't get to choose which footdraggers and losers get elected in other states. I choose not to give up. I don't consider continuing the fight to to be empty gestures. I suppose a better alternative is your recently elected Senator Sherrod Brown? (F rated NRA status)

I just recalled: it's Troller delayed. Your position is noted, no longer interesting.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top