A Look at HR 822 from INSIDE Anti-Gun States

So the antis are absolutely terrified of HR 822. Of course the most egregious anti-gun states are harping about it because it gets rid of their arbitrary and often racist means of discrimination against people exercising a natural right.

But as a Massachusetts resident I’ve seen what HR 822 will do first hand. First give a quick skim of this list, when I first moved here I lived in Medford Massachusetts where they do not issue carry permits to anybody who isn’t politically connected. Period, full stop. Unless you can hurt the chief of police politically, your rights don’t exist.

Now fast forward to today, I live in one of them “Green” towns where the permits are “Shall Issue” (BTW this is how “May Issue” states work anyway. Its not like my character changed, simply the town will issue you a permit, or it won’t there is no “Discretion” involved), Now I can carry EVERYWHERE in the state. I can, and regularly DO carry in Boston, I carry in Cambridge, I carry in my old neighborhood of Medford. You see while the permits are issued by the town police, the permit is a STATE document. Meaning if its good in my town, its good in every Massachusetts town.

The same thing happened to Dragon when he was living in New York. One county would issue permits to anybody who qualified, the next one over to nobody…but the guy from the Shall-issue County can carry in the “No Issue” County without issue.

Same for Philadelphia and their call for the “Florida Loophole”, you see Philadelphia routinely breaks the law by denying permits to qualified individuals who may have had run-ins with the law. Nothing serious, as a conviction, as that would disqualify you, but things like traffic tickets, or being arrested. (BTW that would make ME ineligible, as I was arrested, tho because it was a paperwork error I had committed no crime and was not convicted…but that’s enough for the criminal that run Philly), the “Florida Loophole” is simply stating that a lawful person can get a Florida (or really any other state recognized by Pennsylvania, which there are quite a few) carry permit, and carry under THAT permit. The Florida permit is more restrictive because Florida requires a training class and live fire, while PA doesn’t, but it’s a way around the criminal practices by Philly. And like any other state, if you have a permit issued by another town you can carry in Philly without issue.

California is the Brady Campaign #1 state, and they are BRUTAL to the right to keep and bear arms. But like the other states if you live in the right county, you can carry state-wide un-molested.

These states aren’t saying anything about this. They really shouldn’t either, because its stupid to think that somebody who can carry lawfully in Arlington Mass suddenly can’t be trusted when they cross the town line into Cambridge. Or somebody who lives in San Bernadino county suddenly becomes dangerous when they cross into LA.

But what you’re telling me is that somehow I’m trusted by the State of Massachusetts to carry here, but as soon as I cross the border into New York, or Connecticut or Rhode Island I become some hell-bent criminal?

Also I was looking at Wisconsin’s CCW Reciprocity list and I noticed that I’m legally allowed to carry in about 45 states…but when Wisconsin recognizes permits, mine won’t be one of them. How does that make any sense? Are 45 other states wrong?

Yeah, its crazy we even need to discuss this law.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics, Self Defense. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to A Look at HR 822 from INSIDE Anti-Gun States

  1. Alan says:

    Hmmm, I smell a VC topic.

  2. McThag says:

    If it makes you feel any better my Florida permit is no good in Wisconsin either.

    It’s good in Iowa. Iowa’s permit is good in Wisconsin.

    So Wisconsin will trust Iowa’s judgement sometimes…

  3. MattW says:

    I was just discussing this with a couple of coworkers today. Because of the detailed language used in NM state statute, we only have written reciprocity with TX and Arkansas. We recognize several other states, but the other states requirements must be as rigorous as ours. Funny thing about WI, apparently we recognize WI now and sent an invitation for written reciprocity but WI hasn’t responded. Time for finger pointing.

    • Richard says:


      Wisconsin is interesting in that the legislature and vast majority of residents have wanted CCW for decades, but the hacks in Madison have managed to black it successfully until now (our last governor vetoed a bill that passed with an overwhelming majority).

      The WI DOJ most decidedly DOES NOT WANT!!!11!! CCW to be available…they have dragged their feet, attempted to put off instituting the rules, and now have published “emergency” rules for training that run contrary to the actual legislation. The governor signed the “emergency rules” into effect, stating that to force DOJ to rewrite them this late (our law takes effect Nov. 1) would violate the law, because he KNOWS they won’t have a compliant set ready in time. One hopes the permanent rules will be compliant…the current ones only allow training by DOJ trainers, who don’t train the unwashed masses.

      So, yeah, WI DOJ will not reply to the the NM request, because that would mean a whole ‘nother five or six people that would be able to carry without their “permission”…

Leave a Reply

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