Congressional Second Amendment Caucus Gets New Life

Texas Law Shield mascot of a bear showing its arm

Pro-Second Amendment legislation should get a push when the new Congress convenes in January, 2017, after more than a dozen Republican House members revived the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus (CSAC).

Second Amendment
It seems the government only wants to pass laws to strip the weapons from honest gun owners. I have yet to hear of a single law being proposed that seeks to remove guns from the hands of criminals. Have you?

The Shooter’s Log reported on this last week, and we want to keep you informed with the latest developments. This week, we are hearing from U.S. Law Shield.

Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky will chair the group, which issued a statement that “Caucus members will lead efforts in the House of Representatives to pass meaningful firearms legislation and protect Americans against infringements of the Second Amendment.” CSAC will have an early opportunity to do just that as a champion of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which will reportedly be sponsored by North Carolina Congressman Richard Hudson. In announcing his plan to submit the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, Hudson wrote:

“Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and I plan to introduce legislation in the first days of the 115th Congress to guarantee that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense bill to provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with the administration to advance policies that support and protect our right to keep and bear arms.”

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, has already issued several recommendations to Trump and the upcoming GOP-controlled Congress, including national concealed carry reciprocity or recognition.

Other gun-related issues the Caucus may face include:

  1. Allowing concealed carry on military bases;
  2. Preventing the Veteran’s Administration from arbitrarily disarming veterans it deems troubled;
  3. Legalizing short-barreled rifles;
  4. Passing a National Hearing Protection Act to legalize suppressors;
  5. Restoring the importation of historically valuable firearms from WWII and Korea;
  6. Rescinding U.S. participation in the United Nation’s Arms Trade Treaty; and
  7. Upgrading and fixing the National Instant Check System in conjunction with mental health reform.

There are certain to be many more pro-gun related pieces of legislation introduced as the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Congress take office in January. — by Michael Wisdom, Senior Contributing Editor, Texas & U.S. Law Shield Blog

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 (11)

  1. I’m all for it, but one problem I can forsee is that states like California and New York, will try.and buck those new laws and come up with some stupid state laws that will make it downright difficult to nearly impossible for anyone to be able to carry a concealed weapon even with a valid permit or license from their home state.

  2. To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a means by which non- residents of a State whose residents may carry concealed firearms may also do so in the State.

    That is one of the most confusing statements I’ve ever seen. It means absolutely nothing to me.
    It looks to me like it’s can be interpreted by some jerk of a lawyer however they see fit.

    1. Makes sense to me Spencer. Basically means it will allow for non residents visiting another state to carry their guns in that state if that state “allows” its citizens to carry. For example I live in Indiana, I have an IN LTCH (Carry permit) I can not carry in Ohio despite open and conceal carry being perfectly legal in both states and being licensed to carry in Indiana proving I have a clear criminal background. The bill would make it so that I could carry my gun in Ohio if I went over for a visit for whatever reason.

    2. We already (or are SUPPOSED to) have that! First, it’s called the Second Ammemdment, and it doesn’t need to be INTERPRETED. Secondly, the Consitituion’s Article 4, Section 1: (in a nutshell) Every state MUST recognize the licenses, permits, all legal acts pertaining to the citizens of other states that are visiting their state. Thirdly, Section 2 states that citizens of other states enjoy all rights, protections and privileges of citizens of the state(s) that they are visiting; with the exception of voting, which is laid out elsewhere in the Consitiution. So, there you have it. When will our state and national legislators read, understand and abide by these things, which, by the way, are the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND?!!?

  3. Need to fix our import laws, kill the hughes amendment, kill any mention of “sporting purposes” in gun laws or at least limiting guns to features they deem to be of “sporting purpose”. WW2 and Korean guns are a start, but I want collectible and new guns from all over the world that are illegal to import now due to our stupid laws.

  4. Outstanding! It’s about time that our 2nd Amendment rights under the Constitution get taken seriously, and the CSAC is a good start. I’m proud to see a Congressman from my State of North Carolina spearheading Pro-Firearm legislation. Thank you Congressman Hudson!

  5. This is a small step in the right direction. It would be good for anyone to ask their Congressman if he is a member, and if not, WHY NOT. This would be particularly important if that Representative is a RINO. We’d better start to put the fear of non-re-election in 2018 in their beady little eyes right now. (No disrespect to the ladies, but I am THROUGH referring to generic human beings as anything but “men” and by using male pronouns. I strongly suspect those offended by this not only deserve to be offended, but are also NOT going to listen to anything I say or act in my best interests!)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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.