Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement

“Gun Guys” Are Pushing In Wrong Direction. Misguided effort to restore rights can destroy rights. Will NRA, GOA and others get it right?

Constitutional Carry
Stop The National Carry ‘Permit’ Movement
Alan Korwin
Alan Korwin

USA – -( lamestream media told you:

“Do you have a firearms carry permit Mr. Trump?”

“Are you for law and order?”
“Yes. Law and order is very important.”

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The last thing you ever want is to have the federal government issuing national — or any — firearm carry permits.

The feds do not have this power. The feds should never have this power.

Your right to have a firearm anywhere in America should never depend on getting “papers” from any government, much less the federal powers in Washington, D.C.

If you have a gun — constitutionally protected private property — and you aren’t doing anything inherently wrong, that should never be a crime. There is no victim. No one is harmed. No actual crime is committed. The idea that you need a wallet card to be somewhere you have a legal right to be is preposterous.

Too many gun owners, including some leaders of the gun-rights movement, sincere but totally misinformed and misdirected, are salivating for our permit-carrying president elect to issue some sort of national carry plan.

It cannot, must not, better not be a national permit in any way shape or form.

The best solution

The best plan to resolve the travesty of national gun-rights denial Americans have suffered under for generations — worse than racism — is to repeal the restrictions that deny your rights. You don’t need no stinkin’ permits to be black and we don’t need no stinkin’ permits to be peacefully in possession of property.

Repeal restrictions on the right to bear arms.

The next logical step would be to arrest and charge officials who under color of law deny a peaceful person’s civil right to possess arms. Denial of rights is a federal felony under 18 USC §241 et seq. You can’t just deny a person’s constitutional, civil and human rights because you don’t like those rights. That’s got a name. It’s gunism, like racism. This law 18-241 and the ones that follow it were written to prevent haters from denying blacks their rights. Everyone has fundamental rights that need the same protection.

Blind hatred of guns is Gunism.

If a national carry solution is proposed that does not include punishment for violators (officials who stop you solely for possession, or harass you, remove or attempt to remove your firearm for any invalid reason, incarcerate you, post signs that falsely indicate you cannot “drink at this water fountain,” or otherwise act against your legal right to keep and bear arms), experience shows they will not obey the law. We see this all the time. The law only matters if it has teeth.

We call this comitatus-style law, like the posse comitatus law. Instead of enacting, “A person may legally bear arms across state lines,” which officials can violate without repercussion, the law must say, “Anyone who interferes with a person legally bearing arms, shall go to prison and pay a fine.”

Punish official perpetrators who illegally deny your right to arms.


One small step in the right direction is a recognition bill. This would require states to recognize the permits already issued by the states. True, it would further entrench the existing sidearm permit system, but we have to face the fact that it is already in place, and it’s likely a good first step. It advances the freedom of millions of Americans, puts more honest armed citizens out in public, and we know this deters and prevents crime. It also softens the antis arguments.

Despite the terrified but false screams from the agitated and hoplophobic left, having permitted gun owners all over the landscape does not lead to Dodge City and blood at stop lights. They cry about that every time a permit law advances, but it is 100% false every time — another great example of false news — with no corrections ever issued.


A far less desirable choice, it requires states to agree to grant you privileges, which can be removed, typically adds requirements, and involves bickering between unelected bureaucrats on whether you and your state are qualified to have rights in their states. Who do these people think they are?

News is circulating about four bills already in Congress to establish reciprocity, or something. They are: H.R. 923, H.R. 986, H.R. 402, and one Senate bill, S. 498. You can always look up bills by entering their numbers in . Four numbers, but only two basic sets of text. Both are flawed.

HR923 “allows” people with permits to carry in other states under their ever-changing permit conditions, which you would have to know, somehow. There is no penalty if officials in the other states fail to comply, which we see happen all the time. Almost everyone in America is excluded — 97% of us haven’t signed up for “papers” even though more than half of us bear arms.

HR986 explicitly prohibits arresting a person who is carrying under conditions similar to HR923, an improvement, but the same problems exist. It also creates official make-believe gun-free zones by federal law, a very bad precedent. In an effort to provide recourse, a person has an affirmative defense, so after they arrest you anyway, you can provide proof you’re legal, and then even sue. Thanks.

There is still no real penalty for their criminal denial of your rights. It is time for a law-and-order change to that whole upside-down system. The other two bills are similar to these.

I’ll be watching these. Tell your friends to sign up here for news. (scroll to the box)

And support this effort by doing some of your shopping with us. We have great items you won’t find elsewhere.

All our books, DVDs and other goods are listed here by category and alphabetically

Constitutional Carry

Constitutional Carry Coming Soon
Constitutional Carry

State after state has enacted this — freedom to carry with no government interference whatsoever.

You can carry a gun pretty much like you can carry a book. It’s called rights. And everyone knows books are dangerous. Just look at deaths caused by the Quoran, or the Commie Manifesto.

Constitutional Carry works just fine — People don’t shoot each other just because they’re armed. That’s paranoid fear perpetually projected by unstable left-wing reporters and citizens.

Anti-rights wackos scream about Freedom to Carry of course — exactly as they do about permit laws — and they’re the exact same wrong. No one is harmed, there are no victims, crime drops, people are safer.

Instructors and ranges make a lot more money too — because the market increases tremendously.

You go from a measly few percent willing to sign up for a permit, to half the public that owns guns. Get the government out of the way (permits, paperwork, police, pay up, stand in line, register yourself)… and the freed-up market explodes. (At first though, trainers fear losing their government rice bowl.)

Constitutional Carry is the real deal, remove restrictions, restore rights, advance freedom. Society always benefits when liberty is restored. Establish a Culture of Marksmanship.

Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC) reportedly is cooking up some good new bill, but it’s not out for review yet. We shall see. Will it include punishment for rogue officials?

And a good next step: Diplomatic Carry:

Read that and salivate.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The states make the gun laws according to their constitution, GOA is not pushing for a national carry permit, they want to make it so anyone who can legally carry in their state can carry in every state without fear of being arrested. They are also adding new states every year to the constitutional carry list. So if all or most states are constitutional carry and it is legal to carry across state lines, the permit system ends. Unfortunately the FED has a say in interstate relations and this must be addressed at the federal level in order to protect… Read more »


Others here have went into more detail, so I won’t. All I will say is Amen and Amen. I hope other well meaning but naive folks get this message. We already have the right. It must be honored….Thanks, your very informed and intelligent commentary is very much appreciated. Especially by folks here in SW Virginia.

Jim Macklin

People have rights. Emperors and kings have rights. But the United States is a Constitutional Republic. Government have POWERS, among those power is the police power. Unless limited by the various constitutions the police power is unlimited. Until 2010 when the SCOUS ruled that the U.S. Second Amendment applied to the states, the states were free to write laws according to their state constitution and state supreme court. In Kansas in 1905 the political appointee KS SC for the first time in history applied a “militia only” interpretation to the Kansas Bill of Rights. They were wrong but it wasn’t… Read more »

Gregory Armand

I must have lost something big in translation … as have many others who have commented … we seem to have understood a national right to carry as the same thing as drivers licenses; issued by the states but honored nationally! And not allowed to be NOT honored because a state doesn’t like a certain type of driver. Otherwise, you are totally correct in that a right should not require permission!


I would say this. Make the laws federal and put the states in charge of issuing the licenses. All the states have the same rules and regulations and the states get to control the issuing of the licenses and the enforcement. Just like traffic laws, the national speed limit is set by the feds, but the states enforce it.


@Curtiss, sorry, the feds are too big now.

Jim Macklin

The states issue the CCW/CCH and the feds just enforce the reciprocity in ten same manner that active and retired police can carry in any state.
The feds don’t set standards , the state does. The state just cannot decide to criminalize carry of defensive weapons.
A national reciprocity law is just enforcing the Second Amendment right to bear arms.


Actually, the federal government only controls the speed limits on interstate highways although the states, and in some cases, counties and cities enforce those speed laws. Please note that a state can lower a speed limit on a section of interstate highway, but cannot increase it without repercussions from the feds. The feds should set requirements for training people to use firearms such as class/range time, certification of instructors (NRA, etc.) and the states should be allowed to actually be responsible for enforcing those requirements. However, under no circumstances, should the federal government should be allowed to maintain a database… Read more »


absolutely NOTTT!!! States have NO constituitional authority to infringe upon our right to arms. Full stop. And Feds have no authroity to do so either. States must NOT be able to control who can/cannot exercise our right to arms…. they are prohibited that by the Federal Constitutioni. By the bye, we HAVE no “national speed limit”, and the only reason we DID was because some lobbies persuaded FedGov to set the Double Nickel… some states ignored it, and FedGov stepped in it by telling them they’d withhold federal funds for road repairs. if they did not set the same limit.… Read more »


Your point is well taken, however, living in Connecticut, I am unable to purchase an AR type rifle or any semi-auto firearm that has a threaded barrel, or a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. So it seems that even though states have no constitutional rights to infringe on my freedoms, they have the muscle to enforce their will anyway. This argument along with all other 2nd Amendment arguments can and will only be settled if ever, in the Federal and Supreme Courts.


All of the comments here carry merit. There are 2 sides to the reciprocity law. But one must remember, those of us who do carry, understand the metrics of doing so. That said, I reside in kommiefornia, and here we do not have a stand your ground law. We are required to retreat until we know we will suffer imminent bodily harm. Only then are we allowed to defend ourselves and loved ones. We will inherently surrender our weapons, be cuffed and read our rights. We know the drill. The question remains my friends. Do we decide to want reciprocal… Read more »

Wayne Clark

MikeL, paperless carry would be ideal, as that IS how it was (& is) intended to be…but, in analogy…to get a kid to eat a certain stew you KNOW he will like, do you give them a spoonful to try, or do you make them eat the whole pot at once?
Wars (& debates) are won, one battle at a time. Your county is an example of that. Common sense, no matter how slow it may seem, does eventually spread…as is evidenced by this last election. Patience…we’re getting there.

Mike Murray

Mr. Korwin is correct!
Remember the “camel’s nose in the tent”? This also goes to the incorporation doctrine for the Constitution. Does the FedGov have the right to tell the states how to run their gun businesses? Their agriculture? Their (stolen) “Federal lands”? Their own EPA organizations? Their own schools? Their banks? How about the million or so other things we knuckle our brows and beg the Fed’s to give us? How often have the central government enforcers restrained themselves and ended up with LESS power?

Robert Hartwig Jr.

I agree there should never be any permits issued. However everyone who carries should be required to attend a class. The class should be free or cover the actual costs of the class It should be offered in at least one school in each school district. It should be run by NRA certified or Police instructors. It would teach basic gun safety and handling techniques. The basic laws and responsibilities of carry and lawful full use. In short teach when deadly force and self defense is legal by law. I don’t know about you, but I don’t wants someone who… Read more »

Wayne Clark

The problem with that is, you’re removing the restrictions of one right but imposing a restriction to get it. Don’t get me wrong…I think training is a very good & highly suggestable idea to go along with ownership of a firearm…but to make it a requirement is just tit for tat. Not be infringed, means just that.

Ben Langlotz,

There are no federal drivers licenses, but all states are required to honor the licenses of all other states.
It’s not the ideal form of freedom, but it’s a step in the right direction.


The issue Mr. Korwin presents here is troubling. It is very easy to say that the “Second Amendment applies equally to all fifty states,” but then there’s the nature of our Federal system that precludes the DC government from imposing (generally, the GCA 1968 and Klinton’s AW ten year experiment are examples) restrictions against the individual States. Hence, we can have one liberal state such as Vermont, which has permit-less carry, and CA, which turns that on its head and where in most major cities the test is “just cause,” and no reason is just enough in practice. I agree… Read more »

Jim Macklin

“the 2A is a Constitutional right. Therein lies the rub.”
Because it is a right, a law to require a state to honor another state’s carry license should be automatic. But a law to enforce it is not an opening for the feds to regulate or ban guns. They don’t care about rights.

My sig line is

The People think the Constitution protects their Rights.
Government sees the Constitution as an Obstacle to be Overcome.


READ the Tenth ARticle of Ammendment. The restricting the right to arms IS a federal issue, and is clearly and expressly denied the states, thus the states attempting to restrict (infringe, if you wull) that right is illegal. Yet FedGov has stood mutely by, even passing far too many of their own infringements. States have NO AUTHORITY to infringe upon our right to arms, and FedGov have the OBLIGATION to see to it that right is not infringed. Instead, we see states proliferating various infringements at will, and FedGov imposing their own illegal load of elephant exhaust.


I agree with the comment that we shouldn’t need a license to carry because it’s our right to protect ourselves but let’s face some facts. We already inacted laws that require a permit. These laws were made to help law enforcement determine if you are a good citizen or not. The new reciprocity law would require that all states honor other states permits. This would screw states like kommiefornia where you no longer have open carry and you cant get a permit unless you are friends or relatives to a cop, doctor, attorney or judge. I would actually go back… Read more »


Ammoland, You forget the whole state of New York . Remember, we are blessed with the SAFE ACT.and other goodies the King in Albany and his Round table seem fit to throw at us Gun Owners . Pistol permits may be ok in one county but not in another ,sounds a little like those places that like to tell people where they can go and cant go.


We, as a Constitutional Republic, started out with what amounted to “Diplomatic Carry” until the do gooders and the anti freedom forces greatly diminished that freedom through misleading the uninformed public, and passing unconstitutional regulations, then telling them that you personally, and the population at large, would be so much safer if there were restrictions on guns for everyone. Those infringements on the good people only put them at greater risk of harm by the evil deeds people. There will always be bad people in this world, and the good people have the Constitutional RIGHT to protect themselves and their… Read more »

Wild Bill

@Me, Yes, it is so: and now is our chance to take back our freedoms and place additional controls on our politicians, judges and bureaucrats. Term limits, right of recall, and repeal of unconstitutional acts of prior Congress.

Jim Macklin

All fifty states allow open or concealed carry, with or without a license. Constitutional carry, such as Vermont, Kansas, Alaska, Wyoming, etc is nice but many people fail to learn the laws that apply to lawful Use of Force. Kansas does not REQUIRE that the person carrying knows the laws or has even seen or is aware that they can go to prison for life IF they violate the Use of Force laws. Without the state issued carry license the feds will put you away with a felony record if you are caught in a Gun Free School Zone [… Read more »

Mike L

You forgot kommiefornia. If I’m not mistaken, one of the first anti gun bills our closet queen governor signed into law was removing open carry. At one time, the citizens were allowed open carry, but chamber had to be empty. Then open, no ammo. Now, no open carry. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Robert Hartwig Jr.

You are quite correct. Several groups were exercising the right to open carry as a protest against the California Policy against concealed carry. It became so in your face that the politicians banned open carry. Which is what many of the groups wanted so they could have a case to take to court saying that he right to self protection was being violated.

Jim Macklin

Note, all fifty states do on occasion issue concealed carry licenses. In some states you can open carry w/o a license, in some states you can carry concealed w/o a license, so “All fifty states allow open or concealed carry, with or without a license. Constitutional carry, such as Vermont, Kansas, Alaska, Wyoming, etc” is not incorrect. But many states, such as Illinois refuse to issue a non-resident license and make getting any license as difficult as possible despite their law being “shall issue.” If the residents of California discover that millions of tourists visit CA and legally carry maybe… Read more »

Robert Hartwig Jr.

Not so California does not recognize ANY other states carry permit at all. PERIOD if you carry using a out of state permit and are caught, it is automatic jail time. In fact I know of cases where a person who had a California Legal carry permit issued in San Bernardino County was stopped in Los Angeles city. He was stopped on a Friday night and held in jail until Monday so they could Confirm the permit. It was done to harass the permit holder plain and simple, and Not for any Legal reason.


and that Mother May I Card holder SHOULD have come back at the stupid jurisdiction that violated HIS rights and sued them big time. CalGuns would love such a matter….. sue for false arrest and confiscation of lawfully held property.

Wayne Clark

Robert, I believe what Jim is saying about CA is…IF…national reciprocity is enacted, the citizens of that snowflake state will finally slap their foreheads & say, “gee…I could have had a carry permit” & start the task of cleaning house of their unconstitutional elected officials. That, or become a sovereign state & lose any & all fundings for earthquakes, floods, fires, actors, etc.


You forgot Connecticut. That aside, there are other flies in the ointment. Connecticut is a state that has a law that caps the number of rounds one can have in a magazine to no more than 10. If someone were to travel to Connecticut with a firearm from a state that had no such restriction, with a magazine that held say 17 rounds, they could be arrested. The same goes for semi-auto firearms that have threaded barrels, flash hiders etc. Also, it seems that this conversation ignores long guns. The right to carry should include them also. Again, Connecticut bans… Read more »

Jacob M. Opperman

I think and this just me thinking that if any one wants to pass any bill on any thing the first passage in the bill should read this. Our guide it the constitution and only the it, and any bill that goes against it is not a legal bill PERIOD.


Federal “permission” to carry gives Obama what he wanted, a national registry of gun owners. You shouldn’t need a “permit” to exercise a right.


. You are right. The current administration would like nothing better than to have every gun owner in this country registered. Just think how much easier it would be for them to come after our guns if they knew exactly who had guns.

Old 1811

Where’s your Federal driver’s license?
None of the bills that have been proposed would institute a “Federal” CCW permit. They would only require the states to honor each other’s CCWs, exactly like they do each other’s driver’s licenses.
The inference drawn by this article is wrong. Whether that’s inadvertent or intentional is another question.


In my glove box. I need that and my passport to drive in NY and new jersey.

Jim Macklin

A National Reciprocity law is not a Federal Carry License, it is a law that forces the states to honor other states carry laws. There is no national list. As to how the states passed carry laws it requires a little knowledge of history. The Second Amendment was not considered to apply to the states until 2010 and the McDonald after the 2008 Heller case. Before that, states were able to pass carry laws based upon their police power. The fact that such laws increase crime took decades to prove. If you go back and look at the 1858 Dred… Read more »

Pistol Pete

Sounds good to me, just pass a bill that acknowledges our right then we can carry all over the US.


i dont need there permission slips either the feds need some reality checks.

James S Harper

I just want to know where and how did the feds get the power to regulate something (The Second Amendment) that was set up to control them, the federal government? We should never have to ask permission to exercise a right that is enshrined in the Bill of Rights and protected by our United States constitution. But politicians are always trying to diminish the constitution as a meaningless piece of paper, It’s high time to get rid of any and all politicians that refuse to support the constitution. Maybe it should be a requirement that any elected official actually know… Read more »

Wayne Clark

They didn’t GET it…they took it….or more precisely, we allowed them to. When, where & how I couldn’t tell you but the horses are out of the barn & it will take a lot of wrangling to get them back in.
Im not going to say the “R” word but it’s getting close to that…in my opinion.

Wayne Clark

And as far as the paper the Constitution is written on, it is meaningless. The Bible states that ALL MEN, are born with the knowledge of God. It doesn’t say, if you believe in Him or not, just that you are born of the knowledge of Him…which is proven by the many tribes of natives around the world that have never read, heard of been told about the written word. It is the mental awareness of God that makes Him real to billions of people. Same with the rights written about in the Constitution & our Bill of Rights. We… Read more »

Marshal Cote

As a Continental Marshal for the ” Continental united States of America ” I am compelled to protect the rights of the people . Constitutional Carry does not ” give you the right” for anything. You already posess the ” Right ” . Do not mistake the ” Constitution ” for a garauntee of your Rights . It is the ” chains that bind government ” . The ” Government ” cannot restrict anything, violate your God given rights to ” Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” . That encompasses EVERYTHING THAT INVOLVES not harming another human or thier… Read more »


Try exercising that in NJ, NY, HI or a few other States. There’s wishful thinking and there’s reality. Those of us who have been fighting this for decades understand that you don’t just sit back at a keyboard, type trite phrases (that may or may not be true) and then move on. You work to undo bad laws and strengthen existing laws that protect rights.

Wayne Clark

GUARANTEE…I have trouble with that word too.

howard s

National Reciprocity is about making a license issued in one State valid in all other States. Since when was that replaced with a plan to require a national license? Laws don’t protect us from anything. Police are no defense against imminent bodily harm. Instead we need the freedom to arm up and be armed everywhere. It makes more sense to have national Constitutional carry, open and concealed. That’s a separate discussion.


making my “Mother May I Card” valid in any state I visit is not a bad idea… but leaves out all those whose state government does not REQUIRE said Mother May I Card to carry either openly or concealed. Any national laws MUST define “keep and bear”, and clarify that that Second Article of Ammendment MEANS precisely what it says… our right to arms is a right inherent OF THE PEOPLE (not government, militia, military, etc, but ALL of us), predates our government and is not dependent upon it. And IT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.. by any government at any… Read more »


All I have to say is AMEN! I am totally against getting a needless “permission slip” from the government for any of my rights. If I have to ask permission, then it is not a right, pure and simple!


Gun laws aren’t about controlling gun violence, they are about controlling citizens.

“If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.”
Thomas Jefferson

Wayne Clark

I don’t even think it’s to control the citizens as much as it is to take their money. Take away the state’s ability to charge for a right & they’ll…be without money. I pay $22 to have permission to propell a 3000 lb. missile through streets of other 3000 lb. missiles but pay $100 to reveal my private information to be examined by individuals that don’t know me & MAYBE grant me permission to carry an object that I probably will never need, that COULD save my life if I do need it & already have permission from God to… Read more »


Yes, taking our money is a consideration…. they ARE after aggrandising their annual haul of loot from us, but trust me, if they could not exact a jizrah for “granting” us our RIGHT to arms, they’ll just look elsewhere for whatever other money they want to steal. They really DO want to “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in”. No question. Read statements from all the significant politicians who hate ous and our right to arms…. every one of them has openly admitted they want to take our guns. The Clinton She Unit is on record as wanting to… Read more »