# New York AG Takes On "Reciprocity" Gun Bill



## MaDuce (Sep 18, 2011)

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/11/new_york_ag_tak.php'

As it currently stands, the Second Amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to own firearms. But each state is permitted to place its own restrictions on the types of firearms -- and the manner in which they're possessed -- that people are allowed to own.
A bill making its way through Congress would grant "reciprocity" for gun owners in states where they don't actually live. In other words, if you can carry a concealed handgun under Ohio law, an Ohio resident can carry a concealed weapon in New York -- regardless of New York's gun laws.
The bill is designed to keep gun owners from getting arrested in other states where gun laws might be different than they are in the state in which they live. But New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman ain't havin' it.

Schneiderman is leading a coalition of attorneys general who oppose "The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act" and "The Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act," which he says "would force states like New York, and the other co-signing states, to abandon their own gun laws by allowing out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms based on their home state's less safe laws, rather than those of the state they are entering."

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the attorneys general expressed their concern that "the bill would restrict their states' ability to control who may and may not carry a concealed weapon within their borders, undermine the ability of police to verify the validity of gun permits, and allow gun traffickers to more easily bring illegal guns into their respective states.

"These two bills would force states to recognize concealed carry permits issued by any other states, even those with poor oversight and weaker permitting standards," the attorneys general wrote. "These bills would create a lowest common denominator approach to public safety that would endanger police and make it more difficult to prosecute gun traffickers."

Scheniderman says, that in 2011, about 68 percent of guns recovered in connection with crimes committed in New York State originally came from outside the state. That said, all of those guns found their way to New York without the help of a reciprocity law.


----------



## Pvt. Cowboy (Jan 26, 2005)

More proof we need to divide this country and go our separate ways...


----------



## Guest (Nov 30, 2012)

Pvt. Cowboy said:


> More proof we need to divide this country and go our separate ways...


 Some people are seriously considering that option.


----------



## Pvt. Cowboy (Jan 26, 2005)

corsair said:


> Some people are seriously considering that option.


That looks about right.


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

I actually used to be against this as a federalism issue and as an unconstitutional Commerce Clause expansion, but that ship has sailed. States don't have the right anymore to prohibit Congressional reciprical carry legislation post-Heller and McDonald on a "state's rights" theory.

Since the 2nd Amendment was incorporated via the 14th, Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives the Congress the right to enforce incorporated rights by legislation.

End of story.


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

Maybe we need to repeal NDR then too cuz, I don't think we should allow some Iowa farmer to drive legally in such a dangerous place as Boston, Mass........


----------



## wwonka (Dec 8, 2010)

As long as Nevada is blue I am good with that division. 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Deuce (Sep 27, 2003)

I have no problem with someone from another state carrying concealed in MA, on their home state license. Provided I can verify their license is valid of course. My only issue is, suitablitiy of the license holder. In MA one needs a modicum of training before receiving their LTC. In other states one just needs an OLN. Also, in many of those states, the justification for blasting someone is a little more lax than here. Kind of unfair to someone from another state, who blasts someone here, when laws aren't standard across the board.

Blue = welfare.. I hate blue more and more.....


----------



## Mr Scribbles (Jul 7, 2012)

" In MA one needs a modicum of training before receiving their LTC."
MAYBE! Don't count on it if you live in Boston-they're still requiring "need" in writing, despite the Heller and MacDonald rulings.
Funny thing about Libs-if they don't like the SJC ruling, they keep the status quo- re-write the laws to continue their restrictions, and thumb their nose at the Supremes. BUT if dear leader gets another Justice, and the 2nd goes down-they'll be rounding up our weapons the next day...except of course all those that are _ahem_ "stolen" overnight


----------



## Guest (Dec 2, 2012)

Just this week I paid for my lifetime NRA membership. Here's hoping they lead the way in the fight. *Obie*'s right. This shouldn't even be an issue.


----------



## Deuce (Sep 27, 2003)

Wolfman said:


> There's no reason why "verification" should require anything more than a criminal history check for prohibitive convictions. If you're not prohibited, you should be allowed to carry. Period. In MA, suitability is whatever the licensing authority says it is. If anyone's being treated unfairly, it's us.


I agree, in regards to issuing an LTC. My comment at verifying an out of state license was for job purposes. I don't care if Joe Blow from Pheonix Arizona is carrying in Worcester MA. My only concern is when some cellphone warrior gets a glimpse of Joe's concealed firearm and calls me because said warrior is a liberal pussy and just the mere sight of a firearm sends him/her off on a tisy. So now I have to meddle in Joe's life. All I want to do is verify Joe has a valid LTC from Arizona, tell dispatch to call back the complaintant and tell them to mind their own fucking business, and clear the call. It's up to Pheonix to issue his license and find any prohibitive elements. But does Pheonix do that, do they look to see if Joe is a nutjob? I don't know, for now I'll just have to hope that they do.

And prohibitive bans on carrying or issuing (ala DC), that's BS. As we all know, criminals don't have LTCs and don't care about the laws we all abide by. So we, law abiding citizens, get screwed again.. If that's what you mean by being treated unfairly, again, I agree with you. That could be a blanket statement though, and include us, as in we the police, us as in we the tv repair men, and us, as in we the US citizen. If nothing happens to change our current direction, this country will go by the United Socialist States of America (USSA), much like our "friends" the old USSR... I will happily do my small part to ensure this does not happen in my lifetime....


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

Mr Scribbles said:


> " In MA one needs a modicum of training before receiving their LTC."
> MAYBE! Don't count on it if you live in Boston-they're still requiring "need" in writing, despite the Heller and MacDonald rulings.


 And you still have to qual on Moon Island with some beat-to-shit .38 wheel gun provided by the city, if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## Killjoy (Jun 23, 2003)

New York City should jump on a grenade and secede itself from the union and become its own country; it acts like it is anyways. Most the people from the rest of New York state would probably appreciate the gesture. While they're at it they can chuck Bloomberg on a grenade as well.


----------



## Guest (Dec 3, 2012)

OfficerObie59 said:


> And you still have to qual on Moon Island with some beat-to-shit .38 wheel gun provided by the city, if I'm not mistaken.


Qualification actually isn't a bad idea, provided the standards are reasonable.


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

Delta784 said:


> Qualification actually isn't a bad idea, provided the standards are reasonable.


 I'll have to disagree with you on that one, Delta.

I don't remember having to take a literacy test or a civics exam prior to exercising my 1st Amendment rights.


----------



## Guest (Dec 4, 2012)

OfficerObie59 said:


> I'll have to disagree with you on that one, Delta.
> 
> I don't remember having to take a literacy test or a civics exam prior to exercising my 1st Amendment rights.


Your speech doesn't have the capability to physically injure or kill someone.


----------



## 7costanza (Aug 29, 2006)

Delta784 said:


> Your speech doesn't have the capability to physically injure or kill someone.


Halatosis ?


----------



## pahapoika (Nov 5, 2006)

OfficerObie59 said:


> I'll have to disagree with you on that one, Delta.
> 
> I don't remember having to take a literacy test or a civics exam prior to exercising my 1st Amendment rights.


same. would agree with you Delta 99% of the time, but some country boy growing up around guns his whole would be hard pressed to swollow something like that.

me on the other hand as city kid with no military expereance could use all the practice i can get


----------



## Guest (Dec 4, 2012)

pahapoika said:


> same. would agree with you Delta 99% of the time, but some country boy growing up around guns his whole would be hard pressed to swollow something like that.


A true country boy who grew up around guns would relish the opportunity to shoot someone else's ammunition and display his marksmanship skills.

We have to qualify on a regular (in my case, semi-regular) basis, why not have someone applying for a gun permit that will essentially (absent any fuck-ups) be good for the rest of their life qualify once?


----------



## pahapoika (Nov 5, 2006)

slippery slope i guess

having lived so long in Boston ( until recently ) and dealing with their nonsense with regards to obtaining a permit would hate to see anyone else subjected to that kind of thing.


----------

