Myths about H.R. 822


Follow the followimg link for answers about some of the comon myths about H.R. 822. Included on the link is a brief description of the sub comity on crime and terrorism.

Answers to questions like:

If I live in Nj (The ranking arm pit of the world) and have an out of state permit will I be able to carry in Stirsey? Yes

Will there be a federal minimum standard? No

Will there be a federal registration of ccw holders? No

Its an interisting link ccwers check it out!

Lets stop all of the rumors that could diminish support for the bill amung 2A people!

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=7084
 

olsparky

New member
Thanks for posting this. My feelings about this bill have been that if there was a concern about it being a smoke screen for federal interference the NRA-ILA would be all over it rather than encouraging contacting legislators to support it.
 

the dark

New member
Not worried about rumors. My concern is simply the blatant pragmatism inherent in the incongruity between a state's right position and pushing for federal legislation that overrules state's rights. I am not comfortable with changing views from day-to-day simply to suit specific issues - one either has a philosophy or they do not. States should be pressured by their law-abiding CC citizens to establish reciprocity agreements, not abrogate that role to the federal government they would normally want limited as a matter of convenience.

To each their own, but some positions are larger than the 2A.
 

mrjam2jab

New member
I don't see the NJ portion at that link. Could you highlight it for me? The way the bill is worded it most certainly would not help NJ residents.
 

wjh2657

New member
Once a bill becomes law it immediately starts getting modified and amended. The original laws establishing the ATF did not give it the broad powers that the BATF now has. No law is cast in stone. Once it is in effect it is wide open to amendment and court decisions. It isn't the wording of the present law that keeps some of us in a state of worry. It is what the law may read like or how it may be interpreted5-10 years from now. I also agree that this is a gross violation of states' rights.

As far as the NRA is concerned, it is Republican Party lackey and will do whatever it's political masters tell it to do. It needs their money to keep existing. If a Republican sponsors a gun control bill (and some have) the NRA says nothing. If a Democrat sponsors a gun control bill (and many have!) the NRA is all over them. Their agenda is political, not gun control.

I am a former Republican voter and now an Independent. The party propaganda machine has swayed just as many minds as the liberal press has done. I don't trust the NRA anymore.
 

Nightmare45

NRA LIFE MEMBER
Simple answer is make cc license in any state legal as a drivers license in all states and simply remove the federal school zone from affecting license, my Texas drivers license is good in a NJ school zone why not my CC license.
 

cia1984

New member
CWP Reciprocity should be like that for Driver's Licenses

If States can handle people from elsewhere driving, they can do the same with CWP. As with drivers, the CWP holder is responsible for knowing the rules wherever they carry.
 

njsportsman

New member
Simple answer is make cc license in any state legal as a drivers license in all states and simply remove the federal school zone from affecting license, my Texas drivers license is good in a NJ school zone why not my CC license.

Simply because it's New Jersey. New Jersey = dem r rats

I am a NJ resident myself not proud of it but its life right now. Grew up in Philly and at the time NJ was my best option for my kids not growing up in Philly and it is also my place of employment. If I could rewind time believe me I would. I can't stand it here and sometimes I wonder if staying in Philly would have been better. Bucks County where I was looking at before I moved to the armpit we call New Jersey was way out of my price range. For some reason Real Estate was out of control in Bucks county and believe it or not NJ was economically my best move financially but, as we all know now NJ is the most corrupt state around. My taxes have almost doubled in 10 years it’s a bleeping joke. This flaming liberal state I can’t wait to get out.

I don’t know how I feel about this bill; I depend on non res permits. will it mess with what I have? I don’t want to lose the little gun freedoms I have.
 

mrjam2jab

New member
Further down in the article is a myth vs truth segment check it out.

H.R. 822: Responding to the Naysayers
Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, H.R. 822 is now being attacked by a few self-proclaimed "gun rights" supporters with no active lobbying presence in any legislature, whose real agendas have little to do with promoting the interests of gun owners. Here are the facts about a few of their claims:

Myth: H.R. 822 would involve the federal bureaucracy in setting standards for carry permits, resulting in "need" requirements, higher fees, waiting periods, national gun owner registration, or worse.

Fact: H.R. 822 doesn't require -- or even authorize -- any such action by any federal agency. In fact, since it would amend the Gun Control Act, it would fall under a limitation within that law that authorizes "only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out" the GCA's provisions. No federal rules or regulations would be needed to implement H.R. 822, which simply overrides certain state laws.

Myth: H.R. 822 would destroy permitless carry systems such as those in Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

Fact: H.R. 822 would have absolutely no effect on how the permitless carry states' laws work within those states. For residents of Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming, where permits are not required but remain available under state law, H.R. 822 would make those permits valid in all states that issue permits to their own residents. Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.

Myth: If H.R. 822 moved through the legislative process, it would be subject to anti-gun amendments.

Truth: By this logic, neither the NRA nor any other pro-gun group should ever promote any pro-gun reform legislation. But inaction isn't an option for those of us who want to make positive changes for gun owners. Instead, we know that by careful vote counting and use of legislative procedure, anti-gun amendments can be avoided or defeated.

I still don't see anything about NJ....:fie:
 
Vermont's permitless system answers your question about arm pit country. IE nonresident permits will be honored by other states. In other words Fla nonresident permits are deodorant for the armpit of Skervey Jersey!
 

mrjam2jab

New member
Got it...

Residents of Vermont, where no permits are issued or required, could obtain nonresident permits from other states to enjoy the benefits of H.R. 822.

A resident of VT could get a permit from another state to carry in any state (except IL) OTHER than VT.

A resident of NJ could get a permit from another state to carry in any state (except IL) OTHER than NJ.

Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms

‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person 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 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, may 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 person, that--

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

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

father-of-three

New member
If such a measure were to pass on the federal level, it would not surprise me if the states with restrictive gun laws would revoke their laws regarding carry permits prior to the enactment of the law, in response to the federal law. This would be their way of keeping their status quo as long as they could. Granted, I would assume that some states would have enough voting power to overturn such measures, but it would take time.

This would be my answer to the New Jersey question, because states like New Jersey will fight tooth and nail to find law loopholes or legal countermeasures to HR822. I'm not saying New Jersey would be correct in doing so, I am just assuming that this would be a response given what I know about their political climate.

Carry permits have a long way to go before they are on the same legal plane as driver's licenses.
 

MarkX

New member
LBJ quote

"You do not examine legislation in light of its benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and harms it would cause if improperly administered."
Lyndon Johnson

The bill in its current form is good, but once the feds get involved they will want to take greater and greater control.

Do not get fooled into the short term benefits. As a general rule there is no good federal involvement.

This bill is a VERY BAD idea.
 

Seeya

New member
If such a measure were to pass on the federal level, it would not surprise me if the states with restrictive gun laws would revoke their laws regarding carry permits prior to the enactment of the law, in response to the federal law. This would be their way of keeping their status quo as long as they could. Granted, I would assume that some states would have enough voting power to overturn such measures, but it would take time.

This would be my answer to the New Jersey question, because states like New Jersey will fight tooth and nail to find law loopholes or legal countermeasures to HR822. I'm not saying New Jersey would be correct in doing so, I am just assuming that this would be a response given what I know about their political climate.

Carry permits have a long way to go before they are on the same legal plane as driver's licenses.

United States Code: Title 18,31. Definitions | LII / Legal Information Institute

Right to Travel

Supreme Law School : E-mail : Box 036 : Msg 03678

Please read the above, then maybe you will understand how rights are denied under color of law.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,389
Messages
623,037
Members
74,210
Latest member
tgtjf
Top