{"id":5509,"date":"2017-07-07T17:36:58","date_gmt":"2017-07-08T00:36:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/?p=5509"},"modified":"2017-07-07T17:47:16","modified_gmt":"2017-07-08T00:47:16","slug":"on-national-reciprocity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/?p=5509","title":{"rendered":"On national reciprocity"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The hysterical Left (\u201cRussian! He attended the same party as a Russian!\u201d) may have missed it, but America didn\u2019t just start its glacial shift away from the bizarre agenda of the Democrat Party and the Mainstream Media with the election of Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

(Open borders? \u201cSanctuary\u201d for illegal aliens who\u2019ve raped children? Encouraging schoolboys to use \u201ctransgender\u201d bathrooms, to \u201cidentify\u201d as girls and compete on the girls\u2019 wrestling team? It all went over great with our focus groups in Greenwich Village and San Francisco! Let\u2019s roll it out nationwide!)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Both houses of Congress had already fallen into Republican hands by 2014, with the majority of the state Legislatures and governors\u2019 mansions following suit. The electorate was clearly just waiting for someone to articulate the agenda promoted by Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

But predictably, all too many conservatives — long accustomed to playing defense -\u2013 have been caught without much of an offensive game plan.<\/p>\n

For instance, with a majority of Americans in a vast majority of states finally \u201cgetting it\u201d that well-armed Americans (not the cowardly European prescription to \u201crun, hide, tell\u201d) are our best defense against crime and terrorism (see \u201cFlorida sheriff urges citizens to arm themselves in case of attack,\u201d Fox News, June 10), where should patriots first push to roll back the Democrats\u2019 \u201cgun control\u201d tyranny?<\/p>\n

Repealing restrictions on the use of suppressors, especially for hunting and at shooting ranges? Or interstate recognition of concealed-carry permits? <\/p>\n

The NRA seems to have decided the focus should be on S. 2188, the \u201cNational Right to Carry Reciprocity Act\u201d introduced back in 2012 by (surprisingly enough) Democrats Mark Begich of Alaska and Joe Manchin of West Virginia as a companion to a similar House bill approved in 2011.<\/p>\n

S. 2188, like H.R. 822, \u201cwould allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed handgun in any other state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes,\u201d the NRA summarizes.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese bills would have no effect on permitless carry laws, currently on the books in Arizona, Alaska, Wyoming and Vermont, that allow concealed carry without a permit,\u201d the NRA added, back in 2012. That list should now be amended to add Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota (concealed only) and West Virginia, by the way. Arkansas remains in dispute. <\/p>\n

\u201cIn addition, Vermont residents would be able to take advantage of S. 2188 and H.R. 822 by obtaining a permit from one of the many states that offer non-resident permits,\u201d adds the NRA\u2019s Institute for Legislative Action.<\/p>\n

Sounds great. But if national reciprocity won\u2019t \u201cimpose gun control restrictions of any kind,\u201d what was the reason given for defeating legislation in my own state of Nevada this spring to remove those who legally use marijuana — especially those who use the plant for medical reasons on a doctor\u2019s recommendation — from the list of those prohibited from buying a firearm or obtaining a concealed carry permit?<\/p>\n

Who opposed and defeated those proposals?<\/p>\n

\u2018PROHIBITED POSSESSORS\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

On April 29 I received an email from the Nevada Firearms Coalition, a Political Action Committee I\u2019ve supported in the past:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cPatriots, as you may have heard, several of the bills that we Strongly Oppose (F)<\/strong> have died. These bills include: SB351 — Eliminated medical marijuana holder as prohibited possessor, which would have voided NICS checks and the pending legislation for national reciprocity (and) SB378 — Eliminated medical marijuana holder as prohibited possessor for CCW, which would have voided NICS checks and the pending legislation for national reciprocity.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese victories show that our efforts are working,\u201d the \u201cgun-rights\u201d group continued. \u201cOur voices are being heard, and we are making moves in the right direction for our gun rights. . . .\u201d<\/p>\n

So even PROPOSED national reciprocity is already leading gun lobbyists to fight successfully to LIMIT the number of people whom Nevada will \u201callow\u201d to buy firearms, and to whom Nevada counties may issue concealed-carry permits.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Former Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White explained the problem to the Albuquerque Journal last year:<\/p>\n

White is a medical cannabis user and an investor in a new medical marijuana dispensary in Albuquerque, as well as that outfit\u2019s chief administrator and security chief.<\/p>\n

But medical marijuana use — regardless of whether it\u2019s permitted by state law — remains illegal under federal law, Thomas J. Cole of the Journal reported, and federal law prohibits users of controlled substances (still including marijuana) from possessing firearms, according to the long-held position of the BATF.<\/p>\n

White, who headed the state Department of Public Safety before serving eight years as sheriff, says he shouldn\u2019t be forced to give up his gun because he chooses medical marijuana to treat his chronic back and knee pain, the result of injuries suffered as an Albuquerque police officer and while in the Army.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s no different than using a prescription narcotic,\u201d White says, noting that people who lawfully use pain drugs such as Oxycodone can legally possess firearms.<\/p>\n

According to United Patients Group, which provides education to physicians and others on the uses of medical cannabis, Nevada state law allows medical marijuana users to have firearms in their homes for protection as long as they aren\u2019t used while under the influence.<\/p>\n

A public outcry in Illinois in 2013 caused state policy-makers to kill a proposal that would have required medical marijuana users to give up their firearms, and the Oregon Supreme Court in 2011 upheld the right of a medical cannabis user to obtain a concealed carry permit under state law.<\/p>\n

How ridiculous is the federal superstition about marijuana and guns? At Avvo.com, a Seattle-based legal advice Website, Mary Fetzer reported in a piece titled \u201cHow Medical Marijuana Users Lost Their Gun Rights\u201d last December:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a> <\/p>\n

When S. Rowan Wilson of Nevada attempted to purchase a firearm in 2011, the store\u2019s owner prohibited her from doing so because he knew she had a state-issued medical marijuana card. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court agreed, concluding that such individuals should not have access to guns because the use of illegal drugs can lead to irrational behavior.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, Fetzer reports \u201cWilson doesn\u2019t even USE medical marijuana. She obtained the card to show support for legalization of the drug. The ruling, she says, thus violates not only her Second Amendment right to bear arms but also her First Amendment right to free speech.”<\/p>\n

Simple logistic issues also arise: What happens to people who own guns and then get a medical cannabis card? Do they have to turn in their weapons? Can they get them back if they don\u2019t renew their card? Does an individual\u2019s possession of a cannabis card fall under medical privacy laws?<\/p>\n

Yes, Massachusetts and California should recognize my Clark County concealed firearms permit, just as they recognize my Nevada driver\u2019s license. But there seems to be a pattern, whenever someone tries to sell us on the great benefits of \u201cnational standardization\u201d of anything. Residents of states that already respect our rights -\u2013 whether it be to home-school, to practice self-defense, to self-medicate, whatever — always seem to end up being asked to \u201cbe reasonable,\u201d to \u201ccompromise a little\u201d in order to win approval of the new, \u201cone-size-fits-all\u201d package by lawmakers from Connecticut, Illinois, California (or wherever), who otherwise \u201cwon\u2019t go along with the deal.\u201d<\/p>\n

But that\u2019s ridiculous. Politicians representing the welfare-state hellholes of Chicago, Los Angeles, Baltimore, Detroit, and Washington, D.C. aren\u2019t going to embrace gun rights in our lifetimes.<\/p>\n

Why? They\u2019ll speak of \u201ccultural differences.\u201d But in fact, behind this code talk, today\u2019s holier-than-thou Democrats are no less racist than their forebears who tried to block integration by standing in schoolhouse doors in the South 60 years ago -\u2013 what these leftist Democrats really mean is \u201cWe can\u2019t trust these Negroes and Latinos with guns! They\u2019re animals!\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

But outside those socialist crime capitals, we\u2019ve been making darned good progress — first bypassing balky police chiefs by replacing “may issue” with \u201cshall issue\u201d permit regimes, then restoring \u201cConstitutional carry\u201d with no permit requirement at all — in one state after another.<\/p>\n

Is it really a \u201cmove in the right direction for our gun rights\u201d to now embrace some kind of national standard for \u201crecognizing permits\u201d -\u2013 if it involves keeping all kinds of restrictions on who can own guns, just so as not to make Elizabeth \u201cFauxcahontas\u201d Warren and Kamala Harris nervous?<\/p>\n

I\u2019m also a little nervous, myself, about this part where \u201cVermont residents would be able to take advantage of S. 2188 and H.R. 822 by obtaining a permit from one of the many states that offer non-resident permits.\u201d Why not just specify in the new law that -\u2013 in keeping with the principle that a Vermont driver\u2019s license must be honored in Chicago — the residents of states that are \u201callowed\u201d to carry a concealed weapon at home without any stinking permit, \u201cshall similarly retain the right to carry their concealed weapons without a permit, in all of the other 49 states\u201d?<\/p>\n

How does a law-abiding, armed resident of Vermont or Arizona magically turn into a reckless incompetent who can’t be trusted to responsibly exercise this God-given Constitutional right. just because he or she drives a few miles over the state line into New York or California? <\/p>\n

\u2018LA LA LA LA LA, I CAN\u2019T HEEEEAR YOU\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Meantime, as even the BATF now admits fingerprinting \u201capplicants,\u201d levying a $200 \u201ctax,\u201d and otherwise treating firearm suppressors as though they\u2019re machine guns is time-consuming and ridiculous, the struggle to normalize suppressors is running up against the usual far-left wackiness.<\/p>\n

As Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner reported on June 12:<\/p>\n

In a bid to promote legislation to ease the purchase of gun suppressors, several gun groups have been offering special “silencer shoots” to news media to show the potential benefits of quieter shots and reality that they really don’t silent the weapons.<\/p>\n

The NRA\u2019s May invitation to the Washington Post read:<\/p>\n

“I wanted to reach out to the Post editorial staff and invite any of you to come out to the NRA on Tuesday to meet with NRA-ILA executive director Chris Cox and witness\/take part in a \u2018silencer’ shoot. . . . This is a chance for anyone on the editorial page to come out and ask some questions and see for themselves what shooting with a \u2018silencer’ is really like.”<\/p>\n

According to the NRA, the gun-hating Post declined this offer. But the paper proceeded to slam the Hearing Protection Act a mere three days later.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“If there has ever been a more benignly titled legislative proposal than the Hearing Protection Act, now before Congress, we can’t think of it,\u201d the Post sneered. \u201cWho could possibly oppose a measure to help Americans avoid deafness? Well, we might — because this ostensible public health bill is being promoted by the National Rifle Association in an effort to undo federal restrictions on the ownership of gun silencers, one of the oldest and most effective firearms controls on the books.”<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s true: Gunshots are loud, generally louder than the 140-decibel limit for \u2018impulse noises\u2019 set by federal occupational safety and health authorities,\u201d the Post acknowledges. \u201cAudiologists have found that hunters\u2019 risk of significant high-frequency hearing loss increases by seven percent for every five years they hunt. Yet the sound of gunfire also has benefits, health- and safety-wise. The \u2018bang\u2019 can signal to bystanders to take cover or help police to locate a threat.\u201d<\/p>\n

But after admitting that \u201cThe noise-reduction devices at issue do not eliminate gun noise; they reduce it by 30 decibels or so, making \u2018suppressor\u2019 a more accurate term,\u201d The Post\u2019s writers immediately reverted to the inaccurate term favored by gun-grabbers: \u201cSilencers are almost never used in murders and other crimes under the current restrictive law, but certainly they would be used in more crimes if there were more of them in circulation.\u201d<\/p>\n

In calling on Congress to “tell the NRA to go away,” the paper suggests hunters can simply wear acoustic earmuffs.<\/p>\n

When trying to discern whether the big buck you\u2019ve been trailing is in that thicket up ahead -\u2013 or whether you may now be dealing with a treed mountain lion? Yeah, great time to make sure you CAN\u2019T HEAR ANYTHING.<\/p>\n

I also dare the Post editors to hike for hours through rough terrain without ever taking off a pair of sweaty acoustic earmuffs.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The NRA complained, asking how editors could condemn silencers without ever seeing them in use. The paper suggested the NRA write a letter. The NRA did, including this sentence: \u201cIf the editorial board had accepted NRA’s invitation to a suppressor shoot last week, they would have heard for themselves that the Hearing Protection Act is exactly what its title claims: An act that protects hearing.”<\/p>\n

The paper published the letter, but removed that sentence, which would have exposed a fact they obviously found embarrassing.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a great example of fake news and why the mainstream media has a credibility problem with the American public,” commented Jennifer Baker, of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action.<\/p>\n

Vin Suprynowicz was for 20 years an editorial writer and syndicated columnist for the daily Las Vegas Review-Journal. He blogs at www.vinsuprynowicz.com .<\/p>\n

A version of this column appears in the July 10 edition of “Firearms News,” on newsstands now. <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The hysterical Left (\u201cRussian! He attended the same party as a Russian!\u201d) may have missed it, but America didn\u2019t just start its glacial shift away from the bizarre agenda of the Democrat Party and the Mainstream Media with the election of Donald Trump. (Open borders? \u201cSanctuary\u201d for illegal aliens who\u2019ve raped children? Encouraging schoolboys to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":true,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[8,17,13,22,34,84,51],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5509","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-2nd-amendment","category-big-brother","category-drug-war","category-media","category-nevada","category-politics","category-self-defense"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pWqFl-1qR","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5509","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5509"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5509\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5522,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5509\/revisions\/5522"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5509"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5509"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5509"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}