Four Flaws in HR 822, how to fix them

[TheTman]

The legend on the map says the dark blue states "Honor My Permit". I don't know what state he is from, but I guess the dark blue states reciprocate with HIS permit state. Then he has something in red saying "Permits Honored by State" and there are no states in red. There is a small map of the 48 in red to the upper right of the larger map. I don't know what that means.

[tv_racin_fan]

Ok first that is the generic map.. if you want to know which states honor your permit you have to click on your state.

The dark blus states are apparently shall issue states that only issue to their residents. Has nothing to do with reciprocity, Light blue states have non resident permits and so on.

http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_ca...city_maps.html

http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_ca...city_maps.html

Notice how the map changed when I selected my state (GA).

[TheTman]

What is the point here? I get it that you don't like the guy or his organization, while I think they do a good job of watching congress and keeping us informed. I just watched the video, I didn't see all the untruths you spoke of earlier, just a guy for the most part defending HR 822 and telling us how much better off we would be if it was to become law. What part of that did you object too? I suppose he could have been mistaken in some of his answers to some of the callers, I don't know all the different state laws. I doubt if he does either. I thought he did a pretty good job for a 69 year old guy. I saw Georgia mentioned once, and that was by the announcer saying they had a caller from there and it was a resident only shall issue state.

[tv_racin_fan]

OK. First things first I have no issue with the organization or the guy in particular EXCEPT I wish they would stick to the truth.

As far as the deal with the map... the question asked by the host was about the differences between may and shall issue. The map was brought out to sort of help explain. When he asked about the states in dark blue Mr Platt explained that those states do not reciprocate with other states which is patently wrong. That particular map has nothing to do with reciprocity it simply shows which states have which sort of carry permit (concealed carry would be wrong since at least GA allows any sort of carry with the permit). Those dark blue states do not issue permits to people who do not live in the state, unlike some states which do and the blue states are what is known as SHALL issue meaning so long as you pass the background check if you apply they will issue the permit. May issue is up to the descretion of the local issuing authority. Just looking at the map and considering he mentioned that a Utah permit is honored in about 38 states if you count the dark blue states you can see that he HAD to be wrong on some count.

It doesn't help the cause when you do not tell the truth or do not know the truth. Pretty sad in my mind when the spokesman for the group doesn't know what he is talking about.

IF you go all the way back to the original post and check out my responce again. It has everything to do with telling the truth warning about something that is factual.

#1 claims that this bill would destroy Vermont Carry. It does no such thing, Vermont would have the choice to issue a permit or not for purposes of reciprocity and they already have this issue. In fact I believe they have started issuing a permit for this exact reason but they do not require one in order to carry. Thus the warning is patently wrong.

#2 claims that this bill undermines Constitutional Carry. Again I do not see this at all what it does is fix an issue with the current carry laws and in fact the states and the federal govt are free to move to Constitutional Carry at any time. Again a warning that is patently false.

3# claims that this bill doesn't help in the may issue states. Well DUH it never was intended to change the STATES carry laws it simply forces the states to honor the others states permits IF they allow carry for their own citizens. Again a warning about nothing since the bill had no intention of addressing this particular issue.

#4 claims that this bill takes the expansive view of the commerce clause. Well gee what exactly does anyone expect from a congress that enjoys expanding the commerce clause at every whim. This bill does nothing to expand congressional view of the clause.

I am against the bill because I don't want Congress to meddle in the issue UNLESS they are going to do away with infringements on my RKBA. They are more than likely going to have some sort of national standard in the final bill IF anything gets thru the senate. Last thing I want is congress telling my state that they must change their permit process and start infringing me more for the permission of exercising a right that CONGRESS should already be defending against ANY state infringement.

[TheTman]

Utah reciprocates in some way with about 38 states. That is probably what he meant to say, I can't get the video to run today, so I can't hear what he did say.
As far as the maps go, they used at least 2 different but very similiar maps, He may have been referencing on map and they showed us a different map. I imagine he did make some mistakes. I don't see why you want to waste our time nit-picking this guy to death.

In reference to the four items he was warning about,
#1 I can't find anyplace that says Vermont is issuing permits. Here is what the NRAILA has to say about it: "NOTE: Alaska and Vermont allow the concealed carry of firearms without a permit. Vermont residents traveling to other states must first obtain a non-resident permit from that state—if available —prior to carrying concealed. Alaska still issues permits to those who want them, allowing them to
benefit by recognition and reciprocity laws.

The others are things he mentions the bill doesnt do and trying to get these fixed while they are messing with things.