Is H.R. 5782 something we want?

[Tim Nunan]

110th CONGRESS 2d Session

H. R. 5782
To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to provide for reciprocity in regard to the manner in which nonresidents of a State may carry certain concealed firearms in that State.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 14, 2008
Mr. BOOZMAN (for himself, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, Mrs. CUBIN, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. HAYES, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. CANNON, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. WAMP, Mr. HALL of Texas, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. DEAL of Georgia, Mr. GINGREY, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. KELLER of Florida, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. CAMP of Michigan, Mr. REHBERG, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. MOLLOHAN, and Mr. SALI) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to provide for reciprocity in regard to the manner in which nonresidents of a State may carry certain concealed firearms in that State.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act of 2008'.

SEC. 2. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:

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

`Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof:

`(1) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of any State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry in any State a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.

`(2) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is otherwise than as described in paragraph (1) entitled to carry a concealed firearm in and pursuant to the law of the State in which the person resides, may carry in any State a concealed firearm in accordance with the laws of the State in which the person resides, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for chapter 44 of title 18 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:

`926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.'.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

[johnharris]

While I fundamentally want to see the laws such that permit holders can carry in any state I also want to see our systems of government as they were intended and designed protected.

The people acting collectively are the ultimate holders of all powers.

The people form among themselves, states.

The people, acting through their individual states, granted specific and limited powers to the federal government. Those powers were enumerated and limited to specific things that collectively the states by essentially a treaty we reference as the Constitution authorized that limited government to perform.

Nowhere in the existing Constitution nor by reasonable interpretation thereof does one find the power in a limited federal government to mandate the substance or defenses relative to the criminal laws in the various states. Nor, I submit, should such power even be remotely contemplated. It is simply not an express grant of authority nor is there any evidence of any state surrendering such powers at the time of the ratification debates.

If this issue were to come about by federal application, I would prefer to see it as an application of the existing 2nd Amendment being applied upon the states by a duly ratified 14th Amendment and not by a mob of elected officials who have largely no concept of constitutional limits on their presumed authority passing yet another federal firearms law.

Allowing them, the federalists, to do so in this fashion because it is something we "want" is akin to leading the horse to draw a carriage by dangling a carrot from a stick - we, the people, saddle ourselves with much greater burdens at the hands of an unrestrained federal government merely because what it offers seems attractive independent of its constitutional basis or lack thereof.

If it were to come about by application of the 2nd Amendment then I think what you might also see is a wholesale determination that many of the existing federal firearms restrictions are themselves unconstitutional.

[jim coulter]

Amen