Bill Overview
Title: Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act
Description: This bill establishes a federal statutory framework to regulate the carry or possession of concealed firearms across state lines. Specifically, an individual who is eligible to carry a concealed firearm in one state may carry or possess a concealed handgun (other than a machine gun or destructive device) in another state that allows its residents to carry concealed firearms. It sets forth requirements for the lawful concealed carry across state lines. The bill preempts most state and local laws related to concealed carry and establishes a private right of action for a person adversely affected by interference with a concealed-carry right established by this bill.
Sponsors: Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals who carry concealed firearms
Estimated Size: 24000000
- The bill affects individuals who have licenses for concealed carry handguns, who may travel across state lines.
- There are an estimated 21-24 million concealed carry permit holders in the United States.
- The bill impacts state and local law enforcement officers and judicial systems that will have to adhere to this new federal framework.
- It also affects residents of states with different gun control laws since it overrides local regulations.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts a significant number of individuals estimated between 21-24 million concealed carry permit holders, hence we need to consider a diverse response from people in different roles within this demographic.
- Budget constraints mean not all permit holders might experience significant education or resources immediately, particularly in the first year, which might impact state resources handling potential legal challenges.
- The policy will likely have varying degrees of impact on individuals based on their travel habits, frequency of cross-state travel, and prior experiences with firearms regulations in different states.
Simulated Interviews
truck driver (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think having a consistent rule across states helps me as I drive a lot.
- It's a relief not to worry about each state's different regulations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
nurse (Illinois)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about more guns crossing state lines with less oversight.
- This could make my workplace and community feel less safe.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
retired police officer (New York)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Local knowledge is crucial for safety; local discretion in gun laws shouldn't be diluted.
- This bill may lead to conflicts with state laws I'm more comfortable with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
software engineer (Georgia)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not sure how this might affect me directly since I travel rarely.
- Could be useful in rare trips to other states for work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
student (California)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel less safe knowing more people can legally carry firearms across state borders.
- This policy could undermine our state laws designed for public safety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
restaurant owner (Florida)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with our local beliefs about gun rights.
- It'll make my travels within the region more straightforward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
teacher (Virginia)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety of children could be compromised with increased firearm mobility.
- Could pose challenges if more firearms are on campuses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
park ranger (Colorado)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There's a balance needed between open access and control.
- Would appreciate clear guidelines on how the policy should be implemented locally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
lawyer (Arizona)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Legal clarity for cross-state gun owners could reduce lawsuits that currently arise.
- Main concern is how individual states handle conflicting laws.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
college student (Ohio)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could create inconsistencies with what I've experienced locally.
- I'm interested in the debate over federal versus state rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 5: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $40000000)
Year 10: $35000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $45000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy involves preemption of state laws, which could lead to significant legal challenges and costs.
- Adaptation and compliance costs will linger indefinitely as states and localities continue to implement this law.
- Long-term implications for states with strict gun control laws as this legislation circumvents local regulations.
- Effects on local law enforcement agencies that need to revise protocols.