Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: DustinD on December 06, 2017, 04:41:05 PM
-
Vote is: 225 R + 6 D yea; and 14 R + 184 D nay; Total is 231-198; the ayes have it. Passed!
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/24910034_2129308427082966_8853286309709851703_n.jpg?oh=8b3e29d7c62c918f62aaf189a37b505f&oe=5AC22DDE)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/446 for the Senate companion.
-
Did the NICS enhancement amendment/Bill get decoupled from it?
-
I see the Dems are holding back their votes until it passes so they can vote no and feel good about themselves and crow about it during their next re-election stump visits. ;)
bob
-
Fix NICS is still attached.
It is now Title II of HR38.
http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171204/BILLS-115HR38-RCP115-45.pdf
-
Anyone have a summary of which Rs voted "no"?
-
It will likely be posted tomorrow on the bill tracker.
-
Watching the Senate. Unfortunately, I already know how my two senators will vote.
As to the Fix NICS amendment, I need to read and re-read the language to know how I really feel about it. In principle, if it's just "fixing" the system so that people who should be prohibited are prohibited, I don't have a problem. If it's going to expand the definition of who is prohibited, or allow the VA and Social Security Administration to administratively declare people "mentally defective," then I have a problem. In practice, though, that would simply reinforce my resolve never to seek mental health services from the VA.
Many years ago, on a forum that may not even exist today, I remember someone posting that if you need mental health counseling, choose s shrink in another city, use an assumed name, and pay cash. He was prophetic.
-
As to the Fix NICS amendment, I need to read and re-read the language to know how I really feel about it. In principle, if it's just "fixing" the system so that people who should be prohibited are prohibited, I don't have a problem. If it's going to expand the definition of who is prohibited, or allow the VA and Social Security Administration to administratively declare people "mentally defective," then I have a problem. In practice, though, that would simply reinforce my resolve never to seek mental health services from the VA.
Some of my concerns with it.
-
Of perhaps more immediate concern, unless I scanned it too quickly and missed it, there's nothing that repeals or modifies the gun free school zone law. If you remember, that says that you can't carry in a school zone unless you have a permit issued by the state in which the school zone is located. I can see police in the anti-gun states staking out school zones, hoping to catch visitors who are carrying in their state under the authority of this reciprocity, without being aware that they need to stay clear of schools.
And in many cities, schools are located so frequently that it can be next to impossible to find areas that AREN'T covered by at least one school zone.
Here's San Francisco:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgunlaws.com%2Fimages%2FGFSZ-SanFranCloseup.png&hash=e51f5c9126a99171d9b32fd3a6696f0f0458d7d4)
Phoenix:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgunlaws.com%2Fimages%2FGFSZ%2520Phoenix.jpg&hash=92c36b2b4fdc4fd867b0aa9b11337db172d4628d)
http://gunlaws.com/Gun_Free_School_Zones.htm
-
So, in the event that this law actually gets passed, Who here thinks that the less than gun friendly states will actually follow it?
-
So, in the event that this law actually gets passed, Who here thinks that the less than gun friendly states will actually follow it?
They'll try not to, then the courts, federal, will slap them down until it grows too expensive for them not to.
-
They'll try not to, then the courts, federal, will slap them down until it grows too expensive for them not to.
My cynicism is flaring up.
So like with sanctuary cities, 2nd Amendment violations and states that ignore FOPA that have an unlimited pot of taxpayer moeny to throw at leagl challenges? Gotcha.
Not trying to be too big of a smartass but The usual suspects will ignore this law and regular people will end up paying the price in ruined lives. Years and years of gridning through a court case for "maybe" an eventual victory will be small comfort.
-
My , probably flawed but its how I read it, federal law forbids carry in a school zone UNLESS the state has other rules. My state, Arizona, allows carry in school zones and possession on school property provided the firearm is unloaded BEFORE entering the property and locked, out of sight , in the vehicle.
-
My cynicism is flaring up.
So like with sanctuary cities, 2nd Amendment violations and states that ignore FOPA that have an unlimited pot of taxpayer moeny to throw at leagl challenges? Gotcha.
Not trying to be too big of a smartass but The usual suspects will ignore this law and regular people will end up paying the price in ruined lives. Years and years of gridning through a court case for "maybe" an eventual victory will be small comfort.
That was going to be my comment. How many successful FOPA lawsuits have there been?
-
Question: Did this legislation address any issues with mag capacity limits or other such laws (like the California approved list)? I'm thinking that if this passes, and I'm going to be traveling with a handgun on my CCW permit, I may want to shop for another revolver. An old 3" Model 13 or 2.5" Model 19 might be a good choice, or maybe one of the 7 shot 2.5" Model 686 revolvers. Convert it to a DA only. That way I don't have to worry about being prosecuted for a SAFE act violation in New York, or other such nonsense for having a gun that is "capable" of holding too many shots or such.
-
My , probably flawed but its how I read it, federal law forbids carry in a school zone UNLESS the state has other rules. My state, Arizona, allows carry in school zones and possession on school property provided the firearm is unloaded BEFORE entering the property and locked, out of sight , in the vehicle.
Take a look at the map of San Francisco. Think about just driving through on the Interstate. How would anyone from out of state (or even in state) know when and where to unload -- and how do you do it while driving on a highway at legal highway speeds? That said, I don't read the gun-free school zone law the way you do. The exception you refer to is essentially the same as the FOPA. You are referring to exception number three:
(iii) that is—
(I) not loaded; and
(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
Reciprocity isn't about transporting an unloaded firearm around in a locked case or in the trunk of your car, it's about having a loaded gun on your belt, ready for instant use for self-defense. The concerning portion of the GFSZA is this:
It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
... does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
So to CARRY a firearm in any state from which you don't have a permit, you have to stay clear of school zones. My home state isn't a problem ... I have a permit. I also have, for example, a permit from Florida, so I can carry in school zones in Florida. A number of other states, such as Tenessee and Kentucky, honor my home state permit. BUT ... I don't have a permit from either of those states, so if I'm there I have to stay out of school zones (which extend 1,000 feet in all directions from the limits of the actual school property) or I'm committing a felony.
Looking at the Senate version, I see this, which may address my concerns. I'd be happy if some of the legal types would offer their opinion on this:
(b) Conditions and limitations.—The possession or carrying of a concealed handgun in a State under this section shall be subject to the same conditions and limitations, except as to eligibility to possess or carry, imposed by or under Federal or State law or the law of a political subdivision of a State, that apply to the possession or carrying of a concealed handgun by residents of the State or political subdivision who are licensed by the State or political subdivision to do so, or not prohibited by the State from doing so.
So if I carry in Tennessee under the authority of this law (if it passes), is this saying that since Tennessee residents with permits can carry in school zones, so can I?
-
Here's the take that the left in congress are taking. I also saw the NY governor talked about "violent criminals can now carry concealed guns in NYC".
I'm not sure which is more infuriating to me - that politicians in "leadership" roles are outright lying (because they absolutely know what they're saying is a lie) or the sheep that swallow this stuff.
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/12/07/stop-trying-to-disarm-women-katie-pavlich-owns-nancy-pelosi-over-ccr-law-in-1-tweet/
-
Good news! This does fix the problem with the gun free school zones!
It is not immediately obvious due to the wording of the bill though.
Look at the Summary:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/38?q=%7B
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.
When you look at the text the part that fixes it is here:
"“(f) (1) A person who possesses or carries a concealed handgun under subsection (a) shall not be subject to the prohibitions of section 922(q) with respect to that handgun. "
922(q) is the gun free schools zone law!
=D
-
Question: Did this legislation address any issues with mag capacity limits or other such laws (like the California approved list)? I'm thinking that if this passes, and I'm going to be traveling with a handgun on my CCW permit, I may want to shop for another revolver. An old 3" Model 13 or 2.5" Model 19 might be a good choice, or maybe one of the 7 shot 2.5" Model 686 revolvers. Convert it to a DA only. That way I don't have to worry about being prosecuted for a SAFE act violation in New York, or other such nonsense for having a gun that is "capable" of holding too many shots or such.
I think it may fix the problem with carrying banned magazines or ammo...
In the definition of "handgun" it includes:
“(2) The term ‘handgun’ includes any magazine for use in a handgun and any ammunition loaded into the handgun or its magazine.
-
Well that's good, because I live right the freak across the street from an elementary school.
-
Well that's good, because I live right the freak across the street from an elementary school.
Don't you have a Virginia permit? If so, you're exempt anyway.
BTR - thanks for that analysis on the GFSZ fix. I am greatly relieved to see that has been addressed. Now we just need to get it through the Senate.