TexasCHLforum.com

Someone mentioned an extant national reciprocity law; i haven't heard of that, so please tell us more.

With regard to the point that California will try to ban guns at a Federal level regardless of our activity: of course, and I agree with you. I think it's prudent to avoid actions that they might use as a template or even a direct means of attacking us in the future. I'm not certain that is the case here, but I think that we need to fully consider the unintended consequences.

WRT travel in the Northeast, I think that is a far more practical scenario that would lend itself to specific legislation and would leave the door closed to NYC and California trying to turn the law around on us.

I would agree on the point that states violating an individual right is a matter of federal law. However, though the 2A was essentially incorporated by Heller, my understanding is that the majority opinion was essentially silent on CC. While reciprocity mandated by congress may achieve a similar result to recognition and incorporation of a right to CC for some, but not all, gun owners, it is not, in my opinion, a substitute for a USSC opinion affirming and incorporating that right.

Could California, on the basis of Federal reciprocity for CC, impose its thinly veiled gun ban (list of safe handguns) on Texan LTCs? Would that limitation apply only to CC in California? Could they apply a ban on lead bullets to us should they adopt one? Even assuming that they can't apply their statutes outside of their states, the magazine restrictions and "safe handgun list" could make California a legal minefield and still functionally off limits to CC.

I still worry that while congressional action has a far better chance of near term success, it may carry with it troubles which are not at once visible. Specifically, I worry about the "drop safety" standards that California has adopted as a means of banning firearms or their push to incorporate poorly designed and conceived "ballistic fingerprint" and "smart gun" ideas. Even worse are bullet material standards which define essentially all metallic projectiles as either "regulated toxic waste" or "armor piercing". I have deep mistrust of linking my rights to states that would compromise them through any means at their disposal, and I worry that federal CC reciprocity might provide a template for them.

I whole heartedly support your goals, Mr. Cotton, but I am suspicious that the particular means in this case may prove costly in the long run.

I may be in the minority, but I feel that states have the right to determine reciprocity as they see fit. I would not want "reciprocity" in the opposite direction.