# House passes Gun Bill **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 7, 2017, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826 "2017-12-07T20:06:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2017, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/21 "2017-12-07T23:01:09Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > To take your tinted windows as an example, each states’ laws would still apply to the place and manner of concealed carry that is authorized. For example, Utah allows me to carry at a school if I’ve got a permit. California (I think) does not. If this bill becomes law, my understanding is that my permit will be valid in California, but I’ll still be subject to California’s laws while I’m in their jurisdiction, so, no campus carry in Cali. In fact look to CA and NY to make carry subject to scores of restrictions if reciprocity is passed. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2017, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/22 "2017-12-07T23:04:38Z")
Too lazy to look it up right now, does anyone know how this applies to constitutional carry states? Does anyone from Missouri get to carry concealed anywhere in the country, or does Missouri need to come up with a concealed carry license just for people to take with them when they travel? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2017, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/23 "2017-12-07T23:26:27Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > In fact look to CA and NY to make carry subject to scores of restrictions if reciprocity is passed. Yup, I suspect they will. It’ll be the “free speech zone” equivalent of where CCW is permitted. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2017, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/24 "2017-12-07T23:30:25Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Too lazy to look it up right now, does anyone know how this applies to constitutional carry states? Does anyone from Missouri get to carry concealed anywhere in the country, or does Missouri need to come up with a concealed carry license just for people to take with them when they travel? I’m pretty certain [Missouri already has a CCW license](http://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=571.101&bid=33875&hl=). Vermont may need one though. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/25 "2017-12-08T00:48:39Z")
States have always had the ability to mutually recognize concealed carry permits, and most have done so. I could sworn that I read somewhere that most Republicans support state’s rights. When did this change? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/26 "2017-12-08T02:09:16Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I think I already answered this: “… the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.” > > That, to me, satisfactorily justifies the Armored Car Reciprocity Act and CCW reciprocity. I’ll leave it up to California and Utah themselves to determine where within their state they’re allowed to carry concealed, and if they’re allowed to do so with tinted windows or not. You have glossed over my question about why the public policy exception to the FFC clause is to be ignored. And I already stated that I believe the armored car law to be an exercise of regulating interstate commerce, which it quite obviously is. And then you agreed that not every movement across a state ought to be considered interstate commerce. So it appears there’s a lot about your views that needs explaining, rather than repeating. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/27 "2017-12-08T02:45:15Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Too lazy to look it up right now, does anyone know how this applies to constitutional carry states? Does anyone from Missouri get to carry concealed anywhere in the country, or does Missouri need to come up with a concealed carry license just for people to take with them when they travel? My understanding is that residents of constitutional carry states would be able to carry without a license anywhere under this bill. [Newsweek concurs.](http://www.newsweek.com/gun-laws-looser-concealed-carry-reciprocity-740469) ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/28 "2017-12-08T04:04:40Z")
I suspect that Title II of this bill (the fix NICS) part is the only thing that passes. There will be disagreements in the Senate and then through committee they will strip out the title I reciprocity section. I hope I’m wrong. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/29 "2017-12-08T04:10:07Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > States have always had the ability to mutually recognize concealed carry permits, and most have done so. > > I could sworn that I read somewhere that most Republicans support state’s rights. **When did this change?** When it suits them. The problem is not that most states have reciprocity,[it’s the insane patchwork](https://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html) that is the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/30 "2017-12-08T13:53:18Z")
double post ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/31 "2017-12-08T14:12:45Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Different states have different ideas of what is necessary to have concealed carry. This law effectively lowers the standard to that of the most lenient state. Any requirements above that are effectively relaxed. Presumably, those states have those extra requirements because they believe they help prevent gun violence. And those requirements are effectively being removed. Opponents of the bill had every opportunity to propose a federal standard or to propose a federal carry license. They want nothing to do with setting a federal standard because loosening standards is not the issue, its just a make weight argument. If the bill set a federal standard, not a single legislator that opposes the bill right now would turn around and support it. > [@](#): > > Furthermore, even if people with concealed carry are lower risks than other gun owners, they aren’t lower than people who don’t have a gun. Not being able to conceal makes it less convenient to carry, while not abridging ones rights to carry. By relaxing the conceal carry laws, you are adding more armed people to the state, and more armed people increases gun violence risk, concealed carry or not. They are lower risk than the GENERAL POPULATION. That includes criminals who carry guns illegally… and cops. Not being able to conceal doesn’t just make it less convenient, it makes it illegal in many places. There are part of California and New York where open carry is illegal but the wealthy and politically connected can get concealed carry licenses. Every study shows that passing liberalized concealed carry laws do NOT lead to an increase in gun violence. In this case, the facts have a conservative bias. Over the last few decades dozens of states have liberalized their carry laws and the gun violence rate in those states have not diverged from the violence rates in neighboring states that do not have concealed carry laws. > [@](#): > > Heck, those studies you describe are less viable. They would effectively be based on the current average of concealed carry owners. Now it drops to the requirement of the most lenient state. You can’t even just survey people in that state, as different states have different cultures. On average, guns in rural states are less of a problem than in highly urban ones. If you have a better study then please cite to it. But as of right now, every study done on the subject shows that concealed carry does not increase violence and that concealed carry permit holders are more law abiding than the general population and, in Texas at least, more law abiding than cops. > [@](#): > > If they are going to nationalize concealed carry, they need to do so by sitting down with studies about what the best restrictions and regulations are, and then make that the law. I would expect that, given the Second Amendment, this would be within federal power. If not, then you could make passing this law contingent on the states below the threshold increasing their rules. (You can thus note that I’m NOT anti-gun.) Gun control folks are welcome to follow your advice and propose this legislation. But they will never do so. So they are stuck with what the legislation proposed by the congressman from North Carolina which provides reciprocity of systems that are already in existence. This is a constitutional right and justice delayed is justice denied, amirite? > [@](#): > > As for **Pelosi** : It’s a downstream effect. Even if we assume that the concealed carry laws of the lowest state keep out the criminals (and that’s not a given–having a gun makes you want to use it), you’re still increasing gun ownership, which means more guns that criminals can get their hands on. Granted, it’s not the most pressing concern, but I do get the politics of pushing the concern with the most pizzazz. I do worry that the weaker connection will undermine the politic. But, then again, she’s trying to convince Democrats, who are more likely to think about the long term implications, and are also more likely to have biases against guns. I’m not a politician, and she is. She likely knows what’s she’s doing. Wait. WHAT!?!? There is no indication that when Pelosi meant that the bill would put more guns into the hands of violent criminals because there would be more guns out there for them to try and steal, its not politics, its a lie, she is lying about what the bill says. And yes, she knows what she is doing, she is lying. Are you sure you’re not anti-gun? Not even a little bit? Having a gun makes you want to use it? You mean on other people? I have a car and I never ran someone over or rear ended the asshole that doesn’t know how to make a left turn. Are you really really sure that you are not anti-gun, because you are making a lot of statements that an anti-gun person would make? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/32 "2017-12-08T14:16:39Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So are you arguing that many states are unconstitutionally barring 15 year olds with driver licenses from other states from driving? Or that if a car from, say, State A has tinted windows, but drives in State B which bans tinted windows, that the driver cannot be given a ticket in State B? Because my understanding is that the public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit clause has been observed for a very long time, to guarantee that the laws of one state do not trump the laws of all other states. > > And in the case of the Armored Car Reciprocity Act, I think it makes sense that the Federal government is on totally safe ground to require a standardization of certain requirements for activities that are literally interstate commerce. But I’m not inclined to accept that EVERY crossing of a state border is an act of interstate commerce. For example, if I am wandering around in Maryland some day, and I am a terrible hiker and I just end up in Pennsylvania because I am lost, I am not prepared to say that I have engaged in interstate commerce, even if I am armed. The basis for preventing discrimination at motels and restaurants was that it affected interstate commerce by hindering people from driving round the country. Not exactly the same but ISTM that you could use the same or similar argument. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/33 "2017-12-08T14:19:12Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > To take your tinted windows as an example, each states’ laws would still apply to the place and manner of concealed carry that is authorized. For example, Utah allows me to carry at a school if I’ve got a permit. California (I think) does not. If this bill becomes law, my understanding is that my permit will be valid in California, but I’ll still be subject to California’s laws while I’m in their jurisdiction, so, no campus carry in Cali. > > Neither am I, but ever since Filburn was prevented from growing his wheat, our opinion has been a minority. IIRC Fillburn didn’t cross state borders, he grew wheat to feed to his livestock, he never sold it. If its good for the goose, its good for the gander, the commerce clause doesn’t suddenly lose its efficacy just because the government wants to do things that you don’t like. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/34 "2017-12-08T14:27:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Glad you brought that up – since the Federal government was prohibited from mandating gun-free school zones, how is it that the Federal government can mandate recognition of carry licenses? The gun free school zones were struck down for a lack of nexus with interstate commerce. > [@](#): > > This isn’t actually making the case that the law is sound in your opinion. You seem to be asserting the lots of laws are unconstitutional, in your opinion, so why do you think this law is constitutional, in your opinion? Because there is a specific constitutional provision (referred to as the full faith and credit clause) that specifically gives congress the right to legislate to how states must respect each other’s official acts (like issuing a concealed carry permit) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/35 "2017-12-08T14:31:36Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Too lazy to look it up right now, does anyone know how this applies to constitutional carry states? Does anyone from Missouri get to carry concealed anywhere in the country, or does Missouri need to come up with a concealed carry license just for people to take with them when they travel? It requires a permit. I thought Missouri had a parallel permit system specifically for the reciprocity agreements with other states already in place. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/36 "2017-12-08T14:37:34Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > States have always had the ability to mutually recognize concealed carry permits, and most have done so. > > I could sworn that I read somewhere that most Republicans support state’s rights. When did this change? When they won both houses of congress, the white house, most governor’s mansions and state legislatures. All they want now is a conservative to replace Ginsburg, Kennedy and Breyer. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/37 "2017-12-08T15:36:00Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Because there is a specific constitutional provision (referred to as the full faith and credit clause) that specifically gives congress the right to legislate to how states must respect each other’s official acts (like issuing a concealed carry permit) As I have said several times already, I don’t believe this reflects how the clause has been used ever before. Reciprocity of drivers licenses, admissions to the bar, cosmetology licenses, and so on are not Federally regulated to direct reciprocity - each state sets its laws and isn’t compelled to accept other states’ licenses unless they want to. Can you name other licenses or permits that the Federal government has required reciprocity on the authority the FFC clause, and not the Commerce Clause? ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/38 "2017-12-08T17:01:42Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Glad you brought that up – since the Federal government was prohibited from mandating gun-free school zones, how is it that the Federal government can mandate recognition of carry licenses? Just because one gun related item was struck because of lack of sufficient nexus with commerce, doesn’t necessarily mean that other gun related items would fair similarly. I suspect the commerce angle is sufficient given the expansive view of the commerce clause, _Lopez_ notwithstanding and assuming a favorable court. I’m personally not a fan of this expansive view generally, but as long as it’s a tool available, then it should be used. Don’t hate the player, hate the game and all that. As for the FFC, I think it’s a patchwork sufficient that it could go either way. I’m not clear on what constitutional basis the LEOSA was passed but I think this would be similar. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/39 "2017-12-08T17:09:12Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Just because one gun related item was struck because of lack of sufficient nexus with commerce, doesn’t necessarily mean that other gun related items would fair similarly. > > I suspect the commerce angle is sufficient given the expansive view of the commerce clause, _Lopez_ notwithstanding and assuming a favorable court. I’m personally not a fan of this expansive view generally, but as long as it’s a tool available, then it should be used. Don’t hate the player, hate the game and all that. So the caveat that this argument rests upon is that the firearm being carried must have been involved in interstate commerce, therefore Congress can regulate state laws about permits to carry such weapons. If Congress can use the commerce clause as it pertains to objects, can it then sally forth and make laws overriding the police power of all states so long as such objects are somehow involved? For example, can Congress mandate that everyone in the United States must carry a gun, so long as the guns were somehow involved in interstate commerce? ETA: and let me be clear here, I think striking down the gun free school zone law was entirely reasonable. Just because schools use books that were once in interstate commerce, and guns are plausibly related to interstate commerce, doesn’t mean Congress has plenary authority to make arbitrary rules to override state laws on those two items. But would you agree that the mere travel between states of an individual is not necessarily an act of interstate commerce? > [@](#): > > As for the FFC, I think it’s a patchwork sufficient that it could go either way. I’m not clear on what constitutional basis the LEOSA was passed but I think this would be similar. Thank you for a substantive answer to my question! I wasn’t aware of this; I’m going to look into it. ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2017, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/40 "2017-12-08T17:46:07Z")
What compelling need is there for carrying concealed weapons across state lines? Perhaps folks who are afraid to go to Starbucks without a hidden weapon are even more fearful of interstate travel. The whole thing is absurd. Shooting citizens of other state can be hazardous to ones financial health. Crane [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826.md?page=3)