Montana: House to Vote on Concealed Carry Permit Reciprocity Bill

Second Amendment Supporters Can Make A Major Montana Gain
iStock-884194872

Today, March 24, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on House Bill 674. This bill proposes an optional, enhanced concealed carry permit that would allow recognition of Montanans’ concealed carry permits in five more states: WA, MN, NM, SC, and DE. It is imperative that you contact your representative NOW and urge them to SUPPORT HB 674!

CLICK HERE TAKE ACTION

It is unfair that law-abiding citizens should be prevented from exercising their right to self-defense when traveling across the country. As current law stands, Montanans can constitutionally carry in 25 states, and regular concealed carry permit holders can carry in 35 states. If HB 674 passes, Montana’s optional, enhanced concealed carry permit, with the addition of WA, MN, NM, SC & DE, will be recognized in 40 states. Unfortunately, there are 10 states that do not have reciprocity with any other states.

Again, please use the link above to contact your representative NOW and respectfully urge them to support HB 674.


About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

NRA-ILA
7 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
USMC0351Grunt

If the COS was worth a damn, WE, The People would have been with our butts on fire for HOW LONG THIS has taken place to convene, with our legislators to get ANYTHING accomplished! The COS is as dead of a stick as the NRA.

Knute Knute

Exactly so. Dead as fried chicken. For the reasons I stated in a comment above…

OlTrailDog

Not so useful that this shows up in my email on March 25th. Fortunately, I’m confident the legislators currently representing my area are in favor of this. Notwithstanding one (Teresa Manzella) is a John Bircher and opposes the Convention of States hence unlikely I wouldn’t vote for her again. However, we are very fortunate to have an AG who is very proactive on 2A issues (Austin Knudsen).

Desert Rat

OTD, I think you should reconsider your position on the Convention of States. I understand how it works and why it’s in the constitution, but in today’s environment I would be very reluctant to convene that because I don’t trust that there’s enough politicians who can be trusted to use it to reinforce and strengthen the Constitution. I’m afraid that they would see this as their opportunity to gut the Bill of Rights to solidify their positions of power. I no longer trust enough Republican politicians to hold the line on the Constitution and protect it from the Democrat/communists who… Read more »

OlTrailDog

Thank you for your thoughtful and considerate reply. I have thought it over and I will disagree with several of your comments. I question if you “know how it works” because prior to a COS the states, not the fed, would need to publicly declare they were going to “gut the Bill of Rights”. I don’t see that happening. Honestly I see that as FUD fear mongering who often do not understand that COSs have occurred a number of times in the past and the Constitution has been been amended a number of times and mostly in positive ways. This… Read more »

Knute Knute

Sorry OTD, but that is not how a Constitutional Convention works. It did not work that way after the Revolutionary War, and it still doesn’t. The States must call for such a convention, but they are NOT required to state the “why” of it. Plus, if the States should CHOOSE to state a reason, there is no requirement for them to stick to the reasons given. Once a Constitutional Convention gets called, all previous bets (and promises) are off. This was all debated already back in the 1970s and ’80s (and in the Federalist Papers from the first Con-Con) over… Read more »

OlTrailDog

Sorry, but that is not how an Article Five of the Constitution or, in short, COS works. Great FUD propaganda though. Albeit unsound reasoning and historically inaccurate. I do smell a skunk. The reasons for a COS are predetermined. Even more importantly, the findings or resolutions decided upon do not become law, e.g. overthrow the Constitution, become a parliamentary system, or tear up the BofR. The resolutions are then voted on by 3/4 of the states.