House panel approves measure allowing nationwide concealed carry reciprocity in bid to end states’ unconstitutional gun restrictions

The Second Amendment is extremely clear in its recognition of the right to keep and bear arms — for self-defense, sure, but also because our founders knew an armed citizenry was the biggest obstacle to a tyrannical government.

There are no qualifiers in the Second Amendment. No if’s, and’s, or but’s. No ambiguity. No uncertainty. Despite what Left-wing, anti-gun progressives tell you, there aren’t any “common sense gun laws;” there are only gun laws, and each one of them is an unconstitutional restriction on an individual’s “right to keep and bear arms.”

The amendment states: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The founders said two things here: A militia is “necessary” for the maintenance of security for “a free state;” and that “the people” have a “right” “to keep and bear arms.”

So why do we have any gun laws whatsoever? That’s a great question, but along those lines, a House panel has just made it one step easier for America to return to its constitutional roots when it comes to living the Second Amendment.

On Wednesday the House Judiciary Committee approved the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, a measure that, if eventually approved by Congress and signed into law by President Donald J. Trump, would do away with state prohibitions on the carrying of concealed guns for self-defense.

The legislation amends federal law permitting the carrying of concealed guns across state lines. As reports, on passage “states would not be able to impose their individual requirements for a concealed carry license on those who have a license to carry in a different state.”

And, of course, the anti-gun Left is already freaking out about it.

Bloomberg News ran this ‘scare you to death’ headline: “Get Ready for Concealed Guns in All 50 States: House panel approves law that will allow firearms-owners to cross any state line with a hidden weapon.” The article was of course accompanied by a video featuring various mass shootings around the country, despite the fact that none of them involved a concealed carry license holder or a member of the NRA. Bloomberg News, of course, was founded and is owned by former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who founded an anti-gun organization called Everytown for Gun Safety.

That group claims the reciprocity bill “is a chaotic and dangerous policy “that would gut every state’s gun laws and make our communities less safe,” though again, there is no evidence that claim is accurate. (Related: Concealed carry holders are some of the most law-abiding citizens we have.)

The site goes on to say, “Right now, every state sets its own rules for who can carry a hidden, loaded handgun in public. There is no national standard for who can carry hidden, loaded handguns in public…”

Yes, states do set their own rules, which is the problem this bill addresses. To claim “there is no national standard for who can carry hidden, loaded handguns in public,” however, is false.

We just discussed above. It’s called the Second Amendment.

Felons shouldn’t have guns? Other criminals, like those who commit domestic violence? How so? The Second Amendment doesn’t make those exceptions. In fact, the Second Amendment is exactly like the First Amendment, in that there are no exceptions to the right. Felons, domestic abusers, and other ne’er-do-wells still have the right to speak, assemble, and worship freely.

And in any community, in any state in the union.

Why, then, should states be permitted to deny Americans their inalienable right to carry a gun — concealed or otherwise — anywhere they want in the country? If they commit another crime, then send them back to jail, perhaps for good. It’s simple.

The Second Amendment makes no state-by-state distinctions. It places no geographical or jurisdictional restrictions on the right.

It’s plain. It’s precise. It’s unassailable.

Frankly, this piece of legislation should not even be necessary because were we still living as a constitutional republic, there wouldn’t be any restrictions on firearms, concealed or otherwise. And we wouldn’t have any were it not for anti-liberty Democrats.

That said, it’s a bill we should all applaud anyway — even those who don’t like guns — because it moves us back closer to our constitutional founding.

Read more of J.D. Heyes’ work at The National Sentinel.

Sources include:

comments powered by Disqus