Nationwide Constitutional Carry?

 By sending the National Guard troops into Washington D.C, Trump has already proven that the high crime rates of Democrat cities is a choice made by Democrats.  It doesn't have to be that way.  At the American Thinker today, Mike McDaniel discusses the idea of nationwide concealed carry reciprocity, which would greatly help in lowering the crime rate in various blue cities. His article can be found at Concealed carry reciprocity: a conscious choice?

Concealed carry reciprocity (CCR) is a simple concept. Anyone with a concealed carry permit issued by any American state can carry concealed in every state, subject to the specific laws of each state. It’s rather like a driver’s license with one major difference: the right to keep and bear arms—the Second Amendment—is an express, unalienable, natural right. The Second Amendment doesn’t invent or grant it. It merely recognizes it. That right existed long before America and the Constitution existed and will exist as long as human beings exist. Government cannot legitimately take it away or infringe on it.

I know, I know. There are infringements on the Second Amendment. They don’t invalidate our God-given right but do somewhat restrict it, though arguably less now than even eight months ago. I don’t argue the point, but I have only about 800 words with which to work and must keep my theme narrowly focused.

CCR ought to be a universal no-brainer, but it’s not. At the moment, because there is no constitutional, national standard, individual states must write compacts with other states to establish limited CCR. The majority of states do; others—mostly blue--refuse. The District of Columbia does its worst to keep honest residents from so much as owning guns. It’s certainly not going to go for CCR, and I doubt anyone is certain exactly how that process under home rule would differ from state-to-state CCR.

If driver’s licenses are universally honored and so are marriage licenses, as are a great many other licenses and legal documents, why shouldn’t a document upholding an express, unalienable, constitutional right be so honored? To normal, sane Americans it’s a rhetorical question; the answer is obvious. To Democrats, the answer is also obvious, though opposite that of the sane. It’s also usually expressed in spittle-slinging screams and obscenities.

Apparently, Trump has ordered that the processing of concealed carry permits should be faster. Indeed, he has ordered that they should only take 5 days! That exceeds North Carolina's and Virginia's times which are 90 days. Still, I can't see why, in this day and age with computerized crime records, that it should take 90 days to confirm if a person has a criminal record. Indeed, if the National Instance Criminal Background System (NICS) can spit out a request within minutes, why does it take so long for states to issue a permit? And if a person clears this hurdle, the state should issue him a licence on the spot.

McDaniel gets a bit ahead of himself speculating on permit less carry, or Constitutional carry. The idea is that if one can otherwise possess a weapon, in other words if one is not prohibited from owning or possessing a weapon, one can carry it with some exceptions pretty much anywhere. He points out that North Carolina is poised to become the 30th state to "allow" permit less carry. I say "allow" because everyone knows that criminals already carry without a permit. They are seldom prosecuted for it. Still, I am not holding my breath, as our "Republican" legislators have failed us many times before. They could have passed it with a veto proof majority last year but failed to do so. I am not convinced this time it is not to sucker gun owners again, sort of like Lucy pulling the football just as Charly Brown is set to connect.

While I would like to see nationwide concealed carry reciprocity, there are problems with it. It is not the be all and end all. The problem, of course, is that the government would have a record of every concealed permit holder in every state. Could that be used as a form of registration? You bet it could. But it is a good first step on the way back to nationwide Constitutional carry.