S 446 : Federally Mandated Concealed Carry

Position: Oppose Status: Senate Committee on Judiciary

Concealed handgun license (CHL) holders who are non-residents of a state are granted the privilege of carrying a hidden, loaded gun in a state even if the person does not meet the other state's standards.

This bill endangers all of us just to save some paperwork and small fees for a few people.

House companion bill is HR 38.

Update


This bill has 40 cosponsors. (40 R)

  • Dangerous for Law Enforcement: Law enforcement groups overwhelmingly oppose federally mandated concealed carry because it would put them in a confusing and dangerous position. Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez argues that officers cannot “effectively do their jobs and ensure public safety” under this bill because there is no way for them to verify that someone is carrying lawfully. Federally mandated concealed carry essentially requires law enforcement to know the permitting standards of every state, a heavy and unnecessary burden. Most alarmingly, the bill in the House of Representatives goes so far as to open up law enforcement to the threat of personal litigation. If a law enforcement officer mistakenly questions a person’s legal authority to carry a concealed firearm, they can be sued, personally. This could have a chilling effect on law enforcement who would fear conducting a thorough investigation and enforcing our laws — two of the core responsibilities as guardians of public safety.
  • National forced concealed carry ignores the rights of states. Right now, each state has the right to determine which concealed carry permits from other states they choose to recognize. This is critical as requirements for obtaining a permit vary significantly among states. Currently there are twelve states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Without a permit system, there is no way for a law enforcement officer to determine who is lawfully carrying a weapon. States with high standards for carrying a concealed weapon would have to allow people from states without permits to carry weapons in their state, even if they would otherwise be prohibited in that state.
  • Concealed handgun licenses (CHL) are not like drivers licenses.
    • U.S. drivers licenses have a minimum standard of training and education required. CHLs do not.
    • For example, Oregon CHL applicants are not required by law to even touch a gun, let alone show marksmanship proficiency, undergo live-fire training, practice active shooter training, or take a simple conflict de-escalation course. Even Texas has higher requirements than Oregon does.
  • Reciprocity endangers us all just to save some paperwork for a few.
    • Some states, like Oregon, grant the privilege of carrying a loaded, concealed firearm only to residents of that state.
    • These states do not allow people with concealed handgun licenses (CHLs) in other states to carry concealed guns in Oregon. The states have a right to determine this for themselves. This concept is called states’ rights.
    • Other states practice reciprocity meaning that State A will accept CHLs from State B if State B accepts CHLs from State A.
    • Requirements for CHLs (sometimes called “concealed carry” or “permit to carry”) differ widely from state to state.
    • The actual licenses for CHLs also differ widely, making police work even more difficult and dangerous.
  • House companion bill is HR 38.
  • CALL your legislators now!  Tell them to vote NO on S 446.  Find you Oregon legislators here. We have a handy list of phone numbers for them below. Not in Oregon? Find your legislators here. Tell them to vote NO on S 446.
  • Oregon Federal Legislators:
  • Senator Ron Wyden: (503) 326-7525 (Thank Senator Wyden for opposing S. 446.)
  • Senator Jeff Merkley: (503)  326-3386 (Thank Senator Merkley for opposing S. 446)
  • Cong. Suzanne Bonamici: (503) 469-6010 (Thank Cong. Bonamici for opposing this bill, HR 38, the House version of this bill.)
  • Cong. Greg Walden: (541) 389-4408 (Tell Cong. Walden you are disappointed that he is endangering Oregon law enforcement and our families by cosponsoring HR 38,the House version of this bill.)
  • Cong. Earl Blumenauer: (503) 231-2300 (Thank Cong. Blumenauer for opposing this bill, HR 38, the House version of this bill.)
  • Cong. Peter DeFazio: (541) 465-6732 (Ask Cong. DeFazio for his position on HR 38, the House version of this bill.)
  • Cong. Kurt Schrader: (503) 557-1324 (Ask Cong Schrader for his position on HR 38,the House version of this bill.)