Top Menu

Reasons I Fear National Reciprocity as a Gun Owner

This article may not be what you expect. I do not intend to create some crazy controversy and tell you why gun owners shouldn't support National Reciprocity. The truth is that I'm all for National Reciprocity. I support the proposed legislation and hope it passes, but there are some things about that law that scare me.

You might expect at this point for me to talk about how this could change federal vs state power relative to gun control and while there may be some legitimate concern for that; there are dozens of other websites where smart people have given their opinions.

No, the fears I have are not being talked about anywhere else.

Consider for a moment that you are New Jersey, Hawaii, or New York City. You have always maintained the ability to NOT honor permits from any state and not to issue them to your own residents. You feel comfortable with that reality and (assuming the proposed bill passes and becomes law) you are forced to now recognize permits from anywhere. Your own local residents will bypass the local system by getting non-resident permits from Arizona, Utah, or Virginia in 60 days or less and your streets will be flooded with permit holders.

In that potential scenario, what control does the State maintain? They still can determine what a citizen with a valid carry permit can do. Where they can go with the firearm. So those states will change their laws from bad to worse… virtually turning concealed carry as most of us understand it into something far different.

The worst part? Firearm owners will undoubtedly get lulled into a false sense of security. With Trump on their lips gun owners will forget all about the differences in state laws and begin to carry across every state border forgetting that just because every other state may honor your driver's license doesn't mean you get to ignore their traffic laws.

This is a call to action for all concealed carriers in this country. Continue to support National Reciprocity. Continue to talk to your representatives in Congress but don't forget that even if National Reciprocity becomes Reality… you still need to be familiar with state-specific gun laws when you travel.

Perhaps I could even argue that it will become even MORE important than before to be familiar with those distinct and unfamiliar laws as one crosses state lines with a legal firearm.

As an organization, is committed to keeping track of relevant law changes and updating you here the best we can but we also encourage you to keep a copy of “Legal Boundaries By State – The Travel Guide For American Gun Owners” in your car.

To celebrate what we believe will be a victory in Congress; and to help prepare America for National Reciprocity; we are for a limited time shipping copies of America's Favorite Gun Law Book; for more than 1/2 off.

Click Here Now to Get Your Copy

Whatever happens in Congress continue to defend the innocent from the threats that surround us…

And Stick To Your Guns!

Jacob Paulsen
President –

, , ,

18 Responses to Reasons I Fear National Reciprocity as a Gun Owner

  1. Scott C. January 29, 2017 at 12:50 am #

    I wholeheartedly agree with national reciprocity. However, if this were to pass, I believe that there should be a nation wide training standard to go along with it. Let’s start with Illinois as one example. The training there is 16 hours (minimum) for a CCL. In my personal opinion, 16 hours is not enough training to give the average “novice” the knowledge or experience for he or she to be proficient in shooting and/or personal protection. Then we can look to the East and use Indiana for the other end of the spectrum. No formal training required. None! The requirements should be equal and provide a standard of training that will make the CCL holders even safer than we already are! I am, by the way, a certified Instructor in Illinois and hold credentials from the NRA to teach multiple phases of pistol training. These are only my personal opinions. I’m all about safety.

    • Crazy Eddy January 30, 2017 at 10:19 am #

      Scott I carry everywhere I go. NO One and I Mean No one-badge or not-(your mental block) will take my weapon away !.

  2. Stephen C. Gregory January 29, 2017 at 2:10 am #

    My concern is that we are creating a new case of federal government control over firearms ownership, external to the 2nd Amendment, that does not previously exist. Once given that control over keeping and bearing arms nationally, what the government gives, it can take away. May not be an issue under this or the next administration, but as sure as the sun still rose on November 9, 2017 there will be a future administration that will use every advantage it can twist out of that usurpation to eliminate private bearing of arms, and they won’t have to usurp the 2nd Amendment to do it. I am leery of giving this additional power to the government.
    Ergo, I see enforcement of straight constitutional carry via affirmation of the people’s right to keep and bear arms by a ruling of the Supreme Court that negates and eliminates standing and potential state, county, and local laws to the contrary, implementing a shall follow ruling instead of a may follow ruling. The attorney General can enforce this ruling across the nation. This keeps the guarantee of our creator endowed rights in the constitution where it has been and belongs, and does not give any wiggle room by providing additional powers where they may be misapplied in the future.
    I think everyone needs to really think about my comments before we launch into wholehearted support of a potential disaster for private firearm ownership. I do not make these conjectures frivolously.

    Stephen C. Gregory
    USCCA Member
    NRA Life Member

    • Mark, NRA Life Member January 31, 2017 at 12:45 am #

      Steve, I agree with you, I don’t trust the Federal Government at all. We don’t need them placing more laws between us and the 2nd amendment that they can take away as soon as the political winds change.

  3. Bruce F. January 29, 2017 at 5:58 am #

    Scott, at one time I would have agreed with you, but after traveling in states where Constitutional carry applies and states where they once issued CCW permits and now require none for residents or those passing through, my opinion has changed. It may seem logical that training would make for a safer firearm carrier, but I see no evidence that such is true.

    I am am also an NRA instructor, but live in the state of CA. Obtaining a CCW license here is virtually impossible if you live in the western/coastal counties. I have had a CCW permit in both states I lived in previous to CA, and still carry a valid non-resident permit from Utah, which allows me to carry in 36 states,,,but not my state of residence. I REALLY doubt that a national carry reciprocity law will EVER pass, regardless of training of the person wishing to carry, due to states like CA, MA, CN, Illinois, and a couple of others which are truly anti-Constitution and anti-gun states!

    If such a law did pass, CA would throw up so many stumbling blocks. road blocks, and walls around the state (except the southern border) with “your reason to carry” type “limitation” questions, that actual implementation would be non-existent. OR they would impose a gargantuan “fee” on non-residents that attempt to carry would be an exercise in futility!

  4. Darkwing January 29, 2017 at 10:30 am #

    It is the states job not the feds. This is the feds taking the rights away from the states. The feds have been doing this for over 50 years and it must stop.

  5. John Saunders January 29, 2017 at 10:31 am #

    I strongly agree that we need National Reciprocity, Why would a perfectly legal action in one state make you a felon by driving across a state line. This is just wrong, I also disagree with the authors reasoning against this type of bill. If a State issues a lic then it should be honored period. It would still be up to the states to make reasonable requirements for the issue of licences. I have held a Concealed permit for 39 years, I have held these credentials in 5 states, all of these states did a background check, Texas had the hardest qualification and Washington State had the least…..along with Wyoming and North Dakota. In all fairness some of these were issued 39 years ago so their requirements might have changed over the years. Lets get our 2nd Amendment rights restored back to were they need to be…

  6. dan January 29, 2017 at 11:00 am #

    adherence to the law as in the 2nd amendment means…NO permission is needed….so why agree to be PERMITTED to be able to use your guarenteed right, your natural right… me the argument needs to be ,Politicians made to obey the Constitution, without their interpertation…….imho

  7. Bob Erickson January 29, 2017 at 11:10 am #

    In dealing with the politicians in Washington D.C Money Talks b******* walks we have to apply and educated effort to our Congressional Representatives and senators. That it is the well of the majority then and only then will we succeed and achieving a working ineffective National reciprocity sincerely Bob Erickson

  8. Jerald Taylor January 29, 2017 at 11:27 am #

    The constitution gives two bases for this law. First, every state must recognize the acts of every other state. Second, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    Given those beginnings, congress may pass a law which states that each State must recognize the permits issued in every other State. Congress has no authority to set standards for carrying firearms. Whether the States may set such standards has, to my knowledge, not been argued at SCOTUS. I believe demonstration of understanding of both safety and laws related to carrying firearms is not an impingement to my rights, nor is a requirement to demonstrate competence, as long as both tests are set at reasonable standards.

    • Doug January 30, 2017 at 1:26 pm #

      Jerald, since when has anything the government has done been “reasonable”? I like your thinking but by adding that one qualifier, passing a skills and knowledge test, you open the door to everything we are experiencing today in the form of infringements.

  9. Bob Johnson January 29, 2017 at 11:29 am #

    What I would be most concerned with is the fascist states saying okay we will honor national reciprocity, but we will ban almost all firearms for this purpose except for say a single shot .22 with the ability to accept no cartridges other than .22 shorts. Sound extreme? It is. But I would put nothing past states like New Jersey, New, York, and a hand full of other so called blue states. This way, they can virtually ignore the law, and not be penalized for doing so unless some real strong language is included in the bill.

  10. John Siemens January 29, 2017 at 11:47 am #

    While I agree that we should all have the right to carry weapons across state lines without fear of being arrested for some minor infraction of rules, I do not like the idea of states continually finding new ways to trap citizens who are exercising their rights. BTW the 2nd Amendment says arms, not just guns. Arms includes knives, swords, spears, tomahawks and potentially includes all manner of tools such as pitchforks, nail guns and chainsaws.

    What we truly need is a Federal government that enforces the constitution. The right to bear arms shall not be infringed! Any state that does ANYTHING to infringe on a citizens right to bear arms should land in federal court. The only citizens that cannot carry should be criminals who have or are accused of using a weapon to commit a crime or those adjudicated to be mentally unable to do so. Non citizens should not enjoy all the rights afforded by our constitution such as bearing arms, having a state issued drivers license, free medical care, welfare, free schooling, etc. They are guests in this country and should act like guests, not taking advantage of the host.

  11. Richard Carter January 29, 2017 at 1:50 pm #

    I am also concerned about this law and I do not want it to pass.
    The federal Gov’t could end this by suing the individual states
    by enforcing the 14th, Amendment, section 1. “No State shall
    make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
    immunities of citizens of the United States……….”. This is the
    only true solution to our Second Amendment.

    Richard Carter

  12. Mike Robinson January 30, 2017 at 8:54 am #

    My son lives in Astoria NY. From what I understand you can not have a gun in your car or your possession if you stay overnight. This is the reason that my wife and I do not visit him in NY. He comes home when we want to see him. Is there a way around this?

    • Jacob Paulsen January 30, 2017 at 8:57 am #

      Mike, there is not currently any way around this.

  13. Doug January 30, 2017 at 1:17 pm #

    Jacob, I’m with you on this issue as well. Just because we can carry into another state won’t change that state’s draconian laws about guns. Magazine size, gun aesthetics regulations, ammo registration, gun bans will remain in effect so you will stand a greater chance of being afoul of the law, now in a state that is mad about being usurped by federal law. In fact, keeping state laws in effect and within states rights is one of the selling points for National Reciprocity. Therefore, NY, NJ, CA, MA and MD will continue to be unfriendly to gun owners/carriers and should be avoided or else require extensive study of their ever changing laws before entering with your gun. I mean, NJ bans hollow point ammo, so you would have to unload your defensive ammo when entering and if you are forced to use your gun in those states, just imagine the exposure to criminal and civil penalties. Not good. I think more should be discussed about this on a wider scale so we know what we are asking for and what we will get.
    Thanks, Doug Gerber

  14. Darkwing February 22, 2017 at 8:53 am #

    My right of self defense was given to me by my creator. My right to carry a weapon to enforce that right was given to me by my creator. No government has a right to control that right in any way.

Leave a Reply