I had a heads up phone call from the NRA today from one of their fundraisers about the U.N. move on our 2nd Amendment and thought I would do some checking on the internet about it. Well, instead I came across the HR 822 bill and the arguments for it and against it. Multiple amendments to the bill were defeated that would have allowed federal registrations, tracking, databases and all those things that are infringements on our 2nd Amendment. Read for yourself.
The first one is an action alert from the· the National Association of Gun Rights Dudley Brown and the one after is from the NRA.· Give us your opinion. Personally, a Senate bill from DC permitting CCW across state lines sounds good on the surface, but if that bill can be revised at any point in time to include biometrics, tracking, a database …….. forget it. I think D.C should pass a moratorium on any more bills of any kind except a balanced budget before we repeat Germany 1923 hyperflation.
National Association of Gun Rights | H.R. 822 moves to the Senate
I was right to be concerned.
Not only was H.R. 822 — the Trojan horse gun control bill — passed out of the House of Representatives this evening, it was passed with an amendment that would open the door to federal biometric requirements for concealed firearms permits and a federally-administered database of all permit holders.
Only 7 Republican Members of Congress stood against federal overreach in the concealed carry process by opposing this bill (you can see how your Representative voted here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll852.xml).
The bill was amended this afternoon by ostensibly “pro-gun” Republicans to require a study be done on the ability of law enforcement officers to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearm permits.
You and I both know what this means. A year from now, the study will come back stating that the only way to “verify” out-of-state permits is through federally-mandated biometric requirements for concealed firearm permits and Congress “must” create a nationally administered database of all concealed weapon permit holders.
One of my biggest concerns about this bill — the lists of gun owners a permit process creates — should send shivers down your spine: Imagine Eric Holder and the BATFE with a national database of concealed carry permit holders.
It’s bad enough to have those lists exist at a state level. Once Eric Holder and his cronies find a way to request that list from a state, they’ll do it — all the in the name of “implementing H.R. 822.”
The legislation now moves to the Harry Reid-run Senate, where companion legislation is expected to be introduced in the coming days. I have no doubt that the anti-gunners in the Senate will use this as an opportunity to make H.R. 822 even worse.
What troubles me most about this battle is the institutional gun lobby has been leading the charge for this legislation. In fact, they’ve been brow-beating Members of Congress who dare to question the consequences of passing such a broad, overreaching piece of legislation.
Republican Congressman Justin Amash (MI-03) fought back against the institutional gun lobby for its support of H.R. 822:
“It’s remarkably bold of the National Rifle Association to send out false and misleading messages regarding H R 822, an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing. I would support legislation that gets the federal government out of the way of states that want to recognize other states’ concealed carry permits. In contrast, H R 822 will hurt gun rights by conceding broad new authority to the federal government to override state sovereignty.
Gun rights advocates have fought hard to prevent liberal abuse of the Commerce Clause that would restrict gun rights… I am disappointed that the NRA has decided to put its own interests ahead of the interests of gun owners. Fortunately, many other gun rights groups rightly oppose H R 822.”
Please call your Senator at (202) 224-3121 and tell them you want to keep the government’s hands off your permit and that you oppose federal intrusion into the concealed weapons permit process.
Thank you for taking action to keep the federal government out of the concealed firearms permit system.
SOURCE FOR ABOVE ARTICLE: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GUN RIGHTS
The article below is an action alert from the NRA and supports the bill
National Rifle Association | U.S. House of Representatives Adopts Right-to-Carry Reciprocity—All Anti-Gun Amendments Defeated!
On Wednesday, Nov. 16, the ongoing effort to fully vindicate the fundamental, individual right to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense took a major step forward with House passage of H.R. 822, the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.” The bill, sponsored by Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), which has 245 cosponsors, was approved by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 272-154.
Several amendments were offered to undermine the bill’s protections. Every one of these amendments was soundly defeated by an overwhelming bipartisan vote, and included:
- Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s (D-Texas) amendment to establish a national database of permit holders (defeated 284-139);
- Rep. Jackson Lee’s amendment to require permit holders to notify law enforcement officials in other states of their intention to carry a firearm in those states (defeated 299-123);
- Rep. Steve Cohen’s (D-Tenn.) amendment to exclude permit holders under 21 years of age (defeated 276-150);
- Rep. Alcee Hastings’ (D-Fla.) amendment, intended to exclude permit holders whose states do not require permit applicants to apply in person (defeated 277-148);
- Rep. Carolyn McCarthy’s (D-N.Y.) amendment to apply the bill only to states in which the state legislature votes to accept it (defeated 274-147);
- Rep. Rob Woodall’s (R-Ga.) amendment to allow states to create their own agreements which would exempt them from the bill (defeated 283-140);
- Rep. Hank Johnson’s (D-Ga.) amendment to apply the bill only to permit holders who were required to participate in a live-fire exercise to be eligible for their permits (defeated 281-144); and,
- Rep. David Cicilline’s (D-R.I.) amendment to create a patchwork of recognition (and resistance) by applying the bill only between states where the attorneys general, state police chiefs, and secretaries of state have affirmed that their states’ carry laws are similar (defeated 277-146).
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee provided crucial support to H.R. 822’s progress over the last several months, opened debate on the bill by describing in plain terms what it does. “This legislation requires states that currently allow people to carry concealed firearms to recognize other states’ valid concealed carry permits, much like states recognize driver’s licenses issued by other states,” Rep. Smith said. Anticipating the claim that H.R. 822 would override state carry laws—a claim that would be made over and over by House members opposed to the bill—Smith added, “The bill recognizes the right of states to determine eligibility requirements for their own residents [and] laws and regulations regarding how, when, and where a concealed firearm can be carried that apply to a resident will apply equally to a nonresident.” Rep. Smith concluded his opening remarks by expressing the central motive behind the bill, saying that the “fundamental right to bear arms . . . should not be constrained by state boundary lines.”
As the author of the bill, Rep. Stearns expanded upon Chairman Smith’s arguments, saying “[I]t’s long overdue that we take action to enhance the fundamental right of self-defense for all law-abiding citizens of this country. The right—the simple right—to defend yourself and your loved ones from a criminal is fundamental. And it’s not extinguished when you simply cross a state border. . . . . [U]nder this legislation, lawfully issued carry permits will be recognized in all states that also issue carry permits. There are now 49 states that issue these permits. Most of these states also recognize permits issued from at least some other states, while some states recognize all valid permits issued by any state. But herein, simply, lies the problem. The non-uniformity of the laws regarding reciprocity makes it difficult for law-abiding permit holders to know for sure if they are obeying the law as they travel from state to state. While preserving the power of the states to set the rules on where concealed firearms can be carried, this legislation…will simply make it easier for law-abiding permit holders to know that they are simply in compliance with the law when they carry a firearm as they travel this wonderful country of ours.”
Rep. Stearns also put to rest several self-serving claims recently made by a small number of groups which claim to support the Second Amendment, but never seem to find a viable pro-Second Amendment bill they can support. These groups regularly oppose important pro-gun reform legislation, either complaining that it does not achieve all of gun owners’ goals in a single stroke, or expressing a paranoid fear that the legislation contains a hidden, insidious mechanism that will lead to the destruction of our right to keep and bear arms.
“This bill does not set up a federal carry permit system or establish any federal regulations of concealed-carry permits,” Rep. Stearns said. “That power remains with the states. Additionally, this legislation does not include any new federal gun laws, nor does it call for additional federal regulation of gun ownership. In fact, it does not allow for new federal regulation, for it amends the part of the Gun Control Act that allows only such regulation as is necessary, and in this case none.”
Some of the other House members speaking in favor were Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), John Kline (R-Minn.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), and Dennis Ross (R-Fla.), each of whom reiterated that H.R. 822 does not establish a national licensing scheme or federal carry permit system, or any other federal regulation relating to carry permits or gun ownership.
Since the House debate, some of the same critics have focused their complaints on an amendment by Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) that would require a study of law enforcement officials’ ability to check the validity of out-of-state permits. The amendment was adopted by voice vote. It is important to note that any member of Congress can request a General Accounting Office study of any issue at any time, with or without legislation. More importantly, this study will have no effect on the provisions of H.R. 822. Certainly it wouldn’t force the states to use “biometric identifiers” on permits, an idea that so far exists only in the minds of these naysayers.
Special thanks also go to Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who rose time and again to defend H.R. 822 against the anti-gun amendments its opponents put forward. Additional thanks go to Reps. Steve Austria (R-Ohio); Howard Coble (R-N.C.); Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.); Jason Altmire (R-Penn.); Dan Boren (D-Okla.); Mike Ross (D-Ark.); Trent Franks (R-Ariz.); Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.); Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.); Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.); Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.); Candice Miller (R-Mich.); Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.); and Don Young (R-Alaska) for speaking in support of H.R. 822 during the debate, and to Rep. Rich Nugent (R-Fla.) for managing the Rule which provided for consideration of the bill.