Coming to DC? This congressman wants to you to bring a gun.

36
1514

More guns means less crime and when states adopt concealed carry, crime rates drop. That’s why Congressman Thomas Massie is filing legislation to bring concealed carry reciprocity to Washington, D.C.

(From the office of Congressman Thomas Massie):Congressman Thomas Massie, Chairman of the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus, introduced Jun. 15 H.R 2909, the D.C Personal Protection Reciprocity Act. This legislation would allow individuals with a valid concealed carry permit issued from their home state to carry their firearms in the District of Columbia.

“After the horrific shooting at the Republican Congressional Baseball practice, there will likely be calls for special privileges to protect politicians,” Congressman Massie explained. “Our reaction should instead be to protect the right of all citizens guaranteed in the Constitution: the right to self-defense. I do not want to extend a special privilege to politicians, because the right to keep and bear arms is not a privilege, it is a God-given right protected by our Constitution.”

“If not for the heroic efforts of the United States Capitol Police at the ball field yesterday, things could have been much worse. What’s always evident in these situations is this: the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

“To ensure public safety, we need to repeal laws that keep good guys from carrying guns, since not everyone has a personal police detail,” stated Congressman Massie. “The right to keep and bear arms is the common person’s first line of defense in these situations, and it should never be denied.”

Congress has the authority to legislate in this area pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the authority to “exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever over such District as may become the Seat of the Government of the United States.”

Although Virginia extends reciprocity to concealed carry permit holders in many states, the members of Congress and accompanying staff traveled directly from D.C., and were traveling back to D.C after the practice was over. It was D.C.’s harsh gun control laws that prevented these law-abiding citizens from exercising their right to bear arms.

Original Cosponsors include Reps Trent Franks (R-AZ), Scott Perry (R-PA), Steve Chabot (R-OH), Jeff Duncan (R-SC), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Doug LaMalfa (R-CA), Ted Budd (R-NC), Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), Mark Meadows (R-NC), Jody Hice (R-GA), Justin Amash (R-MI), Mo Brooks (R- AL), Alex Mooney (R-WV), Rod Blum (R-IA), Ken Buck (R-CO), Todd Rokita (R-IN), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Keith Rothfus (R-PA) David Schweikert (R-AZ), Rick Allen (R-GA), Tedd Yoho (R-FL), Randy Weber (R-TX), and Bill Posey (R-FL).

  • Bill

    Didn’t C one democrap/communists on the list as cosponsors

  • Davidme2

    I am still unsure about “Concealed Carry” . There are far to many out of control individuals, as-well-as, untrained individuals to trust with a gun! However, I believe there must be extreme punishment established for anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime of any kind !! I agree that there have been several situations where if a person was not in possession of a gun to deescalate the situation it would have turned out badly, but not all people are so trained and capable under pressure !! I believe any and all law abiding Americans must have the right to own and bear arms for protection of ones family, property and self protection, as-well-as for hunting !!! I have read that less then 50% of background check forms are effectively reviewed by ATF Agency !?!? If so that must be changed to 100% effective review !!

  • Mark

    I do agree we need “Concealed Carry” people around more, BUT i think if people want this they need much more training than a day course. They need to do a lot more shooting at the range in different scenarios, to develop better judgement skills on when and where to fire, and better action skills on the time to draw down for their own protection and others. Then they should have a set hours of practice, practice, practice. then be certified on their ability to hit their target to limit the collateral damage.

  • EAGLEKEEPER61

    To obtain a CWP, one must successfully complete the required training. The training includes where you may and may not carry a weapon, along with when you may and may not use that weapon. Laws prohibiting the carry of a weapon for self defense only affect law abiding citizens, and leaves them with without a means of defending themselves as the criminals carry guns regardless of the laws.

  • mmmjam

    You”have read”? Have you read ANYTHING THAT WOULD GIVE YOU THE IDEA THAT THERE IS ANY PROBLEM WITH THE SYSTEM AS IT STANDS? YOU DO KLNOW THAT CCW HOLDERS ARE LISTED AS A GROUP IN THE FBI NATIONAL CRIME REPORT AND RANK HIGHER THAN SWORN POLICE OFFICERS. Facts support the CCW holder and your Feelings are worthless.

  • mmmjam

    If there was any evidance that the currant level of training was causing collateral damage as you suggest it would be the MSM wet dream of the decade. Everyone wants cilivians trained to the level of LEO’s. That would stop at least half of us from having a CCW due to cost so now you have created another class of well off citizen.
    There is nothing to support your opinion and reams of data to support the status quo.

  • nearmisses

    AS LONG AS THEY ARE TRAINED BETTER THAN NYPD LEO’S! HA! THEY HIT MORE BYSTANDERS THAN ANYONE! GO TO https://www.frontsight.com/index.asp? BEST TRAINING OUT THERE FOR YOUR BUCK!

  • DianePenn

    You sound more like a government anti-gun pusher than someone who actually understands the rights of the people to be armed even in the face of a government that seems to be more and more tyrannical.
    Seems the real collateral damage is done by those who are criminals and common thugs, not the CCP holders. BTW, I am a senior woman and have a CCP and darn sure know how to use my weapon without being instructed by dimwits on how and when to use it.

  • Allen

    Thank you for pointing out that my Representatives from the state of Oklahoma are not listed as co-sponsors. I will point this out to them at their next town halls. And, if not, I will exercise my right to vote the next time I am given the chance.

  • Davidme2

    What you say may be so. However, there have been some road rage instances, which are of concern to me !

  • Davidme2

    What you say may be so. However, there have been some road rage instances, which are of concern to me with such armed individuals ! In the heat of the moment an out of control individual could use the gun to settle the disagreement . Even with training not all such persons can remain in control when faced with confrontation . I do agree with your comments about criminals . That is why I stated that Laws With Extreme Punishment Must Be Brought Forward and Enforced for any crime committed while using a gun !!

  • A.P.

    Since no Democrats have signed on, perhaps they could all give up their ‘armed’ guards. The democrat leaders, like Schumer and Pelosi don’t need armed guards anyway, since it seems most criminal shooters are members of their party!

  • Rob Longwood

    When you put conditions on a right, it is no longer a right, but a privilege. The vast majority of Concealed Carry people will get the training without it being mandated. Let common sense prevail for a change.

  • skeptic

    David, what makes you believe having a concealed permit has anything at all to do with criminal action? Why do you perceive a person would be less likely to go on a rampage if they had – or not – a CCW permit? If a person is “road raging,” do you really believe the presence/absence of a CCW would be a deciding factor? Convicted felons and some others are already prohibited from gun possession, much less CCW issue; do you have any evidence this sanction has kept guns out of their hands? The entire world has laws against illegal drugs, yet tons of the stuff comes into the U.S. every year. Even if “background” checks were 100% effective, do you believe the smugglers wouldn’t have a brand new avenue of profit?

  • skeptic

    H.R. 2909 sounds good, but as long as people like Charlie “The Cereal Killer,” “San Fran Nan,” and “DiFi” are in congress, chances of actual passage will hover relentlessly right around zero.

  • skeptic

    The punishment in most states for the crime of murder is either death or life in prison. Have you seen any evidence that this EXTREME punishment is an effective deterrent? Can you think of a worse punishment that would be more effective – and still pass Constitutional muster? Most states also have enhancement clauses for crimes committed with firearms; again, do you have any evidence that’s effective? (Given that the majority of major crimes are committed by people with criminal histories, well, you figure it out!)

  • Mark

    True but i see many people who shouldn’t be carrying, and couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn, this is just common gun safety. Endangering a lot of people. Some are to lazy to put in the time and effort like me or you, this dont mean it should be a right to carry, police and military know this, thats why they get training. This way they dont shoot each other or innocent bystanders. I have many guns and i have military background, and go to the range as often as i can to hone my skills, learn fast draw, and target acquisition.

  • Mark

    SORRY, totally opposite, i am a life member of the NRA and a military vet, with a safe loaded with guns. Read my response to another who thinks all idiot should be armed. True but i see many people who shouldn’t be carrying, and couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn, this is just common gun safety. Endangering a lot of people. Some are to lazy to put in the time and effort like me or you, this dont mean it should be a right to carry, police and military know this, thats why they get training. This way, they dont shoot each other or innocent bystanders. I have many guns and i have military background, and go to the range as often as i can to hone my skills, learn fast draw, and target acquisition.

  • Mark

    REALLY, there have been times when people have had their gun taken from them and used against them, not a lot, but it happens. What can we do about this, we can go to the range, learn to shoot well, and target acquisition. How many out there have guns just to say they have guns, and dont put in the effort to learn how to shoot well or know how to use them. i know of several people who own guns that i would not let my family around when they have them out. I am a lifetime member of the NRA and a military vet. I own a safe full of guns BUT i believe in common sense and gun safety, just because you have hands and can hold a gun does NOT make you ABLE too use it safely.

  • Rob Longwood

    Mark: Everyday I see people (that in my opinion) should not be driving. However, it is not up to me to keep them from driving.

    Freedom is not free, you should know that. There are a Hell of a lot of so called Journalists that should not be spewing their garbage, however it is their right to do so. Should we censor them or pull their broadcast licenses?

    When a law is passed that says certain people should not be able to carry, then someone, usually a bureaucrat has to make the determination who qualifies and who does not. That official has just determined who’s life is valuable and worth preserving, and who’s is not. No government official should have that power and that is the dividing line between a free society and tyranny.

    Okay a person is a poor shot. Do you suppose that they do not value their own life? Let’s say that an old person is too frail to regularly hit a target at a distance, but probably could score hits on a thug at across the room ranges. Do we say “You cannot defend yourself because you are less competent than a police officer or a soldier?” Does this persons life have no value, because some arbitrary paper standard says so?

    Freedom comes with risks my friend. When the risks are legislated away, then we are no longer free.

  • Moderator

    Here’s the link – Co-sponsors are added as they sign up https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2909/cosponsors?r=21

  • Moderator

    I LOVE Frontsight! Not sure about the emails 😉 ~Kelly

  • Mark

    You are not seeing my point. I am NOT saying they dont have the right, I AM saying if they are to lazy to put in the effort to learn how to use it effectively ,and safe, then they should reconsider the actions of carrying. I AM NOT saying they shouldn’t have the right to have a gun to defend life and property at home, but should consider the safety of others in a crowd and take the time to learn how to be effective when carrying, after all we ALL have the right to drive a car, BUT we have to prove we CAN first before getting that license.

  • Allen

    Thank you

  • Steve Whitten

    In most states, a “life sentence often ends up with 2-5 years. I grant that a “death” sentence which is not carried out for 20-30 years, if ever, is no deterrent. Life sentence should mean one dies within prison walls; and death should mean within 18 months.

  • Glen Spicer

    There needs to be a universal reciprocity act which will allow ALL CCP holders to carry in ALL of the United States. The way it is now, even driving through a state with a legally owned and carried gun can get you arrested.

  • skeptic

    No argument. Trying to make the point that the laws and nominally harsh punishment for breaking them _already_ exist – to little or no avail. Therefor, what _new_ law(s) or punishment would be more effective but still get past Constitutional restraints? It’s also worth noting that many criminals seem willing to suicide (70 virgins notwithstanding) rather than give up; a death “sentence” or “life inside” to these people is meaningless.

  • skeptic

    Mark, not trying to be argumentative but you might want to reconsider your analogy; driving a car is not a “right.” Can you think of any other adjudicated “right” that requires governmental approval and licensing?

  • Mark

    The government approval and licensing is just a way for them to MAKE MONEY, just as in the right to own guns, they just dont give them to you. Anyone who can prove they drive safely can get one, unless you prove otherwise like DUI, they you LOSE the right. You STILL should be able to show competence in using one, this is YOUR responsibility,and if you are to lazy to do that, its your fault. It is for your own protection that you practice, do YOU think for a moment that if you engage in a shooting and hit a innocent person that their family WONT sue you. So it benefits you to protect yourself and others, just carrying a gun does NOT give you the right to be responsible with it. If you are you DESERVE to go to jail, you can run over an active shooter with a car also to stop him, but if you run over someone innocent too, you better know there will be consequences.

  • Mark

    Shooting across the room at your house for protection is one thing, i am not saying they shouldn’t try to protect loved ones and property at home. I am saying they should know their limitations and keep themselves from being sued for killing an innocent bystander at a active shooting scene, now they just made a bad scenario worse. All i am saying is that if you take the responsibility to carry , then you need to take the responsibility to learn how to do it properly, its only common sense. If you do not learn how to use one properly then you deserve to be sued and jailed when you kill an innocent. What is the first thing the prosecution will ASK at you trial, WERE YOU TRAINED, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PRACTICED, and if you say no training, or I fired the gun at my concealed carry class 2 years ago. YOU ARE DONE. I SAY AGAIN, it only HELPS YOU to get off your butts and learn to use it properly. If you dont, its you own damned fault.

  • skeptic

    Mark, you’re still confusing “rights” with “privileges.” If it’s a good idea to license the 2nd Amendment, why shouldn’t the other 9 be licensed too? Why not have a competency test before voting? How about one before posting to this forum?

  • Chris

    Most criminal attacks don’t happen in a crowd . Driving isn’t a right . And I
    had to show I could hit a target to obtain a ccw .

  • Mark

    Once again, you are putting words in my mouth, i am NOT saying to get a license is a right. I AM saying that if you exercise your right, then at least go become proficient in using the weapon. It is utter laziness for you to do otherwise AND dangerous to others. If you support someone having a gun without practice, this makes you part of the problem. Hitting a stationary target with NOTHING going on around you is one thing, but to go out and shoot at the same target when you are pressed and stressed needs to be part of the program for CC. Its ONLY common sense and for the protection of others. In the end, if your to lazy to go practice with as many scenarios as possible, and it dont take much, it just takes more than shooting at a stationary target to be good enough in a active shoot out with a crowd. You have a gun in a crowd and shoot a innocent trying to do right and now the anti gun people have more to work with, and you may get sued or charged. I practice with ALL of my weapons every chance i get, shooting different ways, if i couldn’t do that, i would leave them at home.

  • Mark

    We are talking ACTIVE shooter situations and MOST are in a crowd, it just takes more than shooting at a stationary target to be good enough in a active shoot out with a crowd. You have a gun in a crowd and shoot a innocent trying to do right and now the anti gun people have more to work with, and you may get sued or charged. I practice with ALL of my weapons every chance i get, shooting different ways,Pure laziness to do otherwise. If i couldn’t do that, i would leave them at home, even with my CCW, .

  • skeptic

    “I do agree we need “Concealed Carry” people around more, BUT i think if people want this they need much more training than a day course.”

    _Encouraging_ people to get more “training” is a good thing; _forcing_ people to get more “training” as a prerequisite to a carry license is not. If the state is allowed to set requirements, sooner or later those requirements will become overwhelming and the “right” will be a “privilege” if it’s even attainable at all. (Never forget, the raison d’etre of bureaucracy is increasing its own power.)

  • Mark

    If the state is allowed to set requirements, sooner or later those requirements will become overwhelming and the “right” will be a “privilege” if it’s even attainable at all. (Never forget, the raison d’etre of bureaucracy is increasing its own power.) In saying this,,,You DO have a point there, but its hard to find responsible people as a whole. So in saying this, You MUST be the responsible one while carrying.