National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill Introduced in House

By CTD Blogger published on in General

In February 2011 House Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL) introduced HR 822, a bill to provide for national reciprocity of concealed handgun licenses. The bill has bi-partisan support from co-sponsor Heath Shuler (D-NC).

The bill reads as follows:

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.


Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. SHULER) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on (blank)


To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011’’.

The Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the fundamental right of an individual to keep and bear arms, including for purposes of individual self-defense.
(2) The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized this right in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, and in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, has recognized that the right is protected against State infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(3) The Congress has the power to pass legislation to protect against infringement of all rights protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(4) The right to bear arms includes the right to carry arms for self-defense and the defense of others.
(5) The Congress has enacted legislation of national scope authorizing the carrying of concealed firearms by qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.
(6) Forty-eight States provide by statute for the issuance to individuals of permits to carry concealed firearms, or allow the carrying of concealed
firearms for lawful purposes without the need for a permit.
(7) The overwhelming majority of individuals who exercise the right to carry firearms in their own States and other States have proven to be law-abiding, and such carrying has been demonstrated to provide crime prevention or crime resistance benefits for the licensees and for others.
(8) The Congress finds that preventing the lawful carrying of firearms by individuals who are traveling outside their home State interferes with the constitutional right of interstate travel, and harms interstate commerce.
(9) Among the purposes of this Act is the protection of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(10) The Congress, therefore, should provide for national recognition, in States that issue to their own citizens licenses or permits to carry concealed handguns, of other State permits or licenses to carry concealed handguns.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
‘‘§ 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms‘‘
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, related to the carrying or transportation of firearms, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry a concealed handgun (other than a machine gun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State, other than the State of residence of the person, that—
‘‘(1) has a statute that allows residents of the State to obtain licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms; or
‘‘(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
‘‘(b) A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State.
‘‘(c) In a State that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual holders of such licenses or permits, a firearm shall be carried according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted
license or permit issued to a resident of the State.
‘‘(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of State law with respect to the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms.’’.

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:
‘‘926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.’’.

(c) SEVERABILITY.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment made by this section, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this section and the application of such provision or amendment to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Join the discussion on our forums.

What are your thoughts on this bill? Share in the comment section.

Tags: , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (19)

  • Bill


    I oppose this bill. I do not think it wise to take yet more power from the states and transfer it to the federal government.

    I don’t entirely care for the patchwork arrangement, but I care even less for the willingness to support the creeping federalism just to get a quick victory.

    When I went to Minnesota with my NC CCL I asked a cop how I could get a non-resident CC permit (they DO exist) since my NC permits isn’t (yet) valid there and he suggested just getting a Utah or Florida permit instead.

    I REALLY don’t want to feed the federal monster, so I’m planning on following through on his suggestion.


  • William Burns


    I agree that out CCW should be sufficient to carry on any state. I live in Florida but spent 4 years in Maryland where the Govenor made sure no guns were allowed anywhere. There is now a Conservative Govenor in office and I hope he can relax some of these absurd regulations.

    Anyway my point is I drove to Baltimore frequently and , of course, have to go through D.C. I read up on traveling through D.C. with my 9mm and CCW. the paraphrased law says you may stop for gas but you damn not better stop for lunch! It’s difficult to know where and how my CCW is valid and when and where to keep it locked or simply hidden.
    A law that allows me , a good citizen, to utilize my CCW everywhere would be welcome. But as Magnotvlip stated the 2nd Ammendment should be sufficient enough to carry open or concealed anywhere.


  • Michael Bowen Jr


    While this is noble in nature; it is unnecessary. In the Constitution, there already is such a standing rule.

    Article IV, Section 2: “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”


  • fettabsaugung


    Überwiegend werden heute tropfenförmige oder durchlauf Silikon-Gel-Implantate verwendet, mit denen die Spezialisten die Brust unabhängig in Form erwirtschaften.


  • oatka


    Not trying to hijack this subject, but a valid sidebar (IMO) is to allow any CCW holder who has passed the Federal background check be allowed to receive firearms shipped directly to him, bypassing going through an FFL. Even if we have to sign a 4473 it would simplify things.


  • Rob


    I do supprot this Bill as do we all. We need to do it without name calling and ignornant postings. It does not help and supports the other side to say, this is why we need to keep guns away from “those” type of folks. It hurts the cause. This 2nd amendment right is important and we need to defend it professionally. Disclousure, I am an indenpendent and I do not hang my hat left or right. I do not blindly follow anyone, party or cause. I think, analyse then vote or support a cause that merit.


  • Lance


    Why does everybody think banning assault weapons is necessary? Not to mention the term “assault weapon” is being misused and it is becoming very annoying. A true assault weapon is a hand held selective fire weapon. Basically A weapon capable of firing multiple rounds with one trigger pull. A machine gun for my liberal speaking readers that don’t know anything about guns other than they are bad and need to be banned. A civilian semi auto .223 rifle with a collapsible butt stock and pistol grip with a tactical fore grip is not an assault weapon.

    Now you going to ask me, why do you need this? Then your going to try and tell me that those types of weapons are used by criminals to commit crimes. To answer the first quite simply – who needs a corvette with 500hp out of the box to get from point a to point b that is capable of speeds that are not legal anywhere on public roads in this country? Because its fun to drive. Some people like to modify them and show them off. (gun show reference anyone? following me?) Some people like to take their car to an auto cross track and see how it performs and how they stack up as a driver against others. (shooting sports reference? maybe) To the second statement, well, its just untrue. People get this in their head because when a shooting is being covered on the news, the reporters think that it looks great to have a pistol or “assault weapon” picture over their left shoulder.

    Here is some numbers for you. Less than four percent of all homicides in the United States involve any type of rifle. No more than .8% of homicides are perpetrated with rifles using military calibers. (And not all rifles using such calibers are usually considered “assault weapons.”) You want the full story with citied references go here ->

    So all this hype with “assault weapons” needs to stop. I’m sick of hearing it, and the opposing argument is irrational and uneducated at best. Reinstating the ban will do nothing. By the way, real assault weapons and fully automatics (machine guns again for you liberals) have been banned since 1986. Thank you and good day.


  • MagNOTClip


    Isn’t the 2nd amendment everyone’s carry permit?


  • Joep


    Typo, It should have been accuse.


Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.

3 + five =