Estimated reading time: 3 minutes
If you live in a free state, you already know the drill: strap on your legally owned firearm and go about your day.
If you live in New York, California, D.C., or a handful of other anti-gun strongholds? Not so much.
That divide is exactly what Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) says he wants to end.
On March 5, Lee introduced the National Constitutional Carry Act, a bill that would establish nationwide permitless carry for law-abiding Americans. The House version is being led by Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY).
And yes, this one goes big.
Table of contents
What the Bill Would Do
According to Lee’s office, the bill would:
- Allow anyone legally eligible to own a firearm to carry it nationwide without a permit
- Preempt state and local permitting schemes
- Protect the right to carry firearms, ammunition, and magazines without arbitrary restrictions
- Override many state-level “gun-free zone” rules
Lee framed it plainly:
“The Founders established a national right to keep and bear arms, not to ask for permission from hostile local officials, or risk imprisonment for crossing the wrong state line.”
In other words, your rights shouldn’t disappear when you cross into New Jersey.
GOA and NAGR Jump In
The bill is backed by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR). Two groups that don’t throw around “real constitutional carry” endorsements lightly.
Erich Pratt, Senior VP at GOA, said the legislation would restore the right to carry “without a government permission slip” and preempt unconstitutional state regulations on firearms, ammunition, and magazine size.
NAGR echoed that sentiment, calling it the only bill that would ensure law-abiding Americans can carry in every state, regardless of local politics.
Why Now?
Supporters argue the timing isn’t random.
In GOA’s breakdown, they point to:
- Rising concerns about narco-terror violence near the southern border
- Lone-wolf attacks tied to foreign conflicts
- High-profile attacks in areas with strict carry restrictions
The argument goes like this: police response times, even when fast, are rarely instantaneous. If citizens are disarmed by permitting schemes or gun-free zones, they’re defenseless when seconds count.
SEE ALSO: Top 5 CA Compliant Handguns
They cite recent attacks in Texas and Washington, D.C., arguing that local restrictions prevented lawful citizens from carrying where violence ultimately occurred.
Whether you buy that argument or not, it’s clear supporters see nationwide carry as both a constitutional issue and a public safety one.
What It Means for Blue States
If passed, this bill would dramatically reshape the carry landscape in states like:
- New York
- California
- Illinois
- New Jersey
- Washington
- D.C.
No more:
- Social media reviews for permits
- 16-hour training mandates before you can carry
- “Sensitive place” maps that effectively make entire cities off-limits
Under Lee’s proposal, states couldn’t criminalize or indirectly dissuade lawful carry through excessive fees, training barriers, or broad gun-free zones.
The only enforceable gun-free zones would be places with active screening, like courthouses or jails.
Private property rights would remain intact, but businesses would need to clearly communicate any firearms prohibition.
The Bigger Picture
Right now, 29 states have some form of constitutional carry.
Lee’s bill would nationalize that standard.
Supporters argue the Second Amendment is not a state-by-state privilege. Opponents will likely argue this is federal overreach into state police powers.
And let’s be real, this bill faces an uphill climb in a divided Congress.
But as a marker bill? As a statement of intent? It’s about as bold as it gets.
Bottom Line
The National Constitutional Carry Act would eliminate permitting requirements nationwide for law-abiding gun owners and override restrictive state carry laws.
Available on GunsAmerica Now
For gun owners in free states, it would protect what they already have.
For gun owners in restrictive states, it would be a seismic shift.
The real question now:
Does Congress have the appetite to make permitless carry the law of the land?
Because if this passes, the patchwork era is over.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
I strongly support carry permit reciprocity but not a blanket constitutional carry law. There’s too many idiots walking around let alone giving them permission to carry a gun without any gun course/training whatsoever. I understand states like New Jersey and New York make it impossible for you to get a carry permit and that is exactly why we have reached the point where we are considering constitutional carry for everyone. This bill will be killed unless it makes it to the house floor and senate before the midterm elections.
this will be real good for all of us. need to get this done while Trump is in office. Dems/Libs wont support this at all. as a veteran i’ve earned the right.
i’m with you brother!
Somebody please tell me why we need more laws, to cover our 2nd Amendment RIGHTS, which says, “the RIGHT to KEEP (that means to possess, have, hold, own, any place, anytime, anywhere) and BEAR (that means anytime, any place, anywhere, anyhow) Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”!
What is this more LAWS crap?
If the Supreme Court would just strike down all of these restrictive laws including the NFA and the GCA which are totally Unconstitutional, we would have no more problems with this issue, but NO the LAWYER LOUTS on the Supreme Court are a bunch of politically indoctrinated anus-kissing weenies!
PROVE ME WRONG! 😡
Of the BoR, the 2A is the stepchild. According to the debates at the ratification of the Constitution and the BoR is a restriction of government powers, not a restriction of individual rights. When the 14th Amendment was debated, it further solidified that the right to bear Arms was an individual right of citizens. Many should read the debates of the 14A, very good information about the intent of the Amendment. At no time before the 14A was it discussed that the 2A was not an individual right of citizens.
If my driver’s license can cross state lines and my insurance coverages, which are privileges and not rights, then the 2A applies cross state lines.
Of the BoR, the 2A is the stepchild. According to the debates at the ratification of the Constitution and the BoR is a restriction of government powers, not a restriction of individual rights. When the 14th Amendment was debated, it further solidified that the right to bear Arms was an individual right of citizens. Many should read the debates of the 14A, very good information about the intent of the Amendment. At no time before the 14A was it discussed that the 2A was not an individual right of citizens.
If my driver’s license can cross state lines and my insurance coverages, which are privileges and not rights, then the 2A applies cross state lines.
There is trash in the Garden State that pride themselves on the fact that their uniforms are modeled after the Geheime Staatspolizei.
There was (is?) a county prosecutor in Middlesex County that gave ORDERS to the various police departments that NO FIREARM, once it was in the hands of the department, was to be returned to the rightful owner. EVEN IF THERE WERE NO CRIME OR CHARGES BROUGHT. He knew that no one would spend 6-12000 dollars suing to get back a 6-1200 dollar firearm. The man was trash.
THERE MUST be teeth in this law that makes it a felony, WITH NO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY for ANY STATE ACTOR to engage in the DEPRIVATION of RIGHTS UNDER color of law when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. Or any of the enumerated Bill of Rights.
We started out this administration with a Republican majority in the Senate, the House and the POTUS who declared his was “the most pro 2A administration in history”. Ask yourself, how many major pro 2A bills were submitted, passed and signed into law? ZERO. Sure they got some small stuff through as the pro 2A community became increasingly angry at not just the lack of progress but the glaringly lack of interest. They would finally pass some small bill to appease the people while ignoring the biggest and most egregious of the unconstitutional issues the gun community wanted changed. They made excuse after excuse until finally there wasn’t enough of a majority to secure the passing of any bill and we find ourselves here today.
Today we have this bill, something that shouldn’t even have to be voted on, it should never have been a question to begin with, of course the right to permit-less carry nationwide is guaranteed by the constitution but here we are, begging for the right to exercise a constitutional right. Why now though? Why not when we had total control? The article mentions why towards the end, because… “And let’s be real, this bill faces an uphill climb in a divided Congress. But as a marker bill? As a statement of intent?It’s about as bold as it gets.”… Because it has almost ZERO chance of making it to the presidents desk. It’s a safe time to do it. Just like politicians have done since before I was born, when they pull this crap: “Look…we tried but there just wasn’t enough of us to get past the Democrat anti 2A votes, maybe we can try again another day”. It’s intentional, it’s all by design. You wait and see what major changes comes during the rest of this administration. I’ll spoil it….none. No major pro-2A bills will be signed into law during this historic “most pro-2A administration in history “. Once election time rolls around again they will once again make promise after promise and if they win, break promise after promise. It’s by design because they don’t want things to change. Most Republican Congress members don’t support the second amendment, at least not how it was written. If they support it at all, they support the “Fudd” version where registrations, limits on the types of guns and how they operate keep everyone safe. Basically, the support maintaining the status quo. Occasionally you get a congress member who genuinely supports the 2A as it was written like Andrew Clyde of Georgia but as he said, he can’t get more than a couple Republicans to agree to support any of his bills. They just plain refuse to do it.
Well stated. “This is the most Pro-2A administration in history!” What happen to bump stocks in March of 2019?
As nice as it sounds to have this bill pass as someone who does live in one of those “more (me in CA, the MOST) restrictive” states, please excuse me if I do not hold my breath waiting for this bill to be enacted to law. I’ve been hearing about this same concept in some way shape or, form since probably 2009 and all that’s happened is more restrictions.
Does Draft Kings have this listed to place bets on yet? I’ve never placed a bet on any website but, I’d feel pretty confident on this one. I hate that I sound this negative about the idea. I think I’m just tired of hearing the “vote for me” theatrics with no action behind it.
We gun owning Americans have been let down by our judicial branch of our three part government for decades. We know about these greasy politicians but where are the courts loaded with these spineless judges protecting rights of the 98% of the law abiding gun owners in what was our country…
Will someone please explain something to me. Why, is it ok to do almost everything that the 1st amendment allows with only a few exceptions, (yelling fire in a crowded theatre, need a permit for protest). But when it comes to the 2nd Amendment my rights for that get completely stripped away even as a completely law abiding citizen?
Constitutional carry in Tennessee changed my status from legal to carry with my TN. carry permit to unable to carry at all. The rule used to be, as long as you didn’t have a dishonorable discharge you were good to go as long as you qualified for a permit, which I did. The constitutional carry doctrine in TN. demands an honorable discharge. Which will leave many vets unable to carry because of many reasons to numerous to list. A dishonorable discharge is usually awarded for something serious most times criminal and a logical cut off point. With a D.D. you also lose your right to vote and other rights which is also logical. Blessing only the honorably discharged withs one of our basic rights is just another political means to disarm as many of the citizens as possible.
Why is this still a fight and how did we loose a Constitutional right in the first place? Second Amendment is the only Amendment that says @Shall not be infringed” yet it’s completely infringed in New Jersey?
Although we are on two totally different coasts, trust me, I feel you man! Californian here. I get ya if no one else here does.
FINIALLY!
The time has come for ever dam sentienter , Congress man , Governor.Prosecutors, and all other Law officers to get it strate the Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. No other intatey has the right to tell any American borne Citizen that they can’t have or possess a firearm. We the people are the ones who are responsible for our own safety and the safety of all others around us. I could go on and on here, But the point is that others must just leve us alone. If you don’t want to exercise your Constitutional rights that’s fine but do not even think about trying to tell us we can’t exercise ours.
National Constitutional Carry Act would help protect american citizens. Everyone knows that police response time is minutes in an emergency. And issues can unfold in seconds where lives are in the balance. And in non emergency calls police may not show up for hours. I do however hope that common sence prevails with each prson that does carry. The other thing that must be addresed is the need for laws to protect those that do carry and my need to discharge their weapon in self defense.
As a lifelong resident of northern New York State, this is one of those things we dream about. Our gun-control-infested government has restricted so much that even finding a weapon compliant is an ordeal. For me and other law-abiding citizens, this CANNOT come fast enough!
We already have it, it’s called the 2nd Amendment in our Bill of Rights attached to our Constitution. Unfortunately people have taken it upon themselves to try and change it and enforce their own spin. We don’t need new laws, just enforce our existing rights and prosecute those that violate them. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear.
What you wish for may come back to haunt you. Republicans have always championed States rights over the supposedly evil Federal Government but only when it benefits “them”. Such a bill will never pass Congress as the Anti-gun States will vote against it or if it is passed simply ignore it and go on arresting people from out of State that are caught carrying. New York is fanatical with this. Some pro gun States may vote against it too fearing a new precedent being set that champions Federal Laws trumping all State Laws, the Constitution be damned, but then again “so what else is new”? Sarcasm.
I believe President Lincoln did some work to show States rights do not include violating civil rights. The States do have rights, enumerated as the 10A, but that also applies to the People as well.
If this were to pass Congress, which I do find doubtful at this point, then State’s that do act against the law will be violating civil rights and federal law. There would be lawsuits and in those cases the State’s would appeal to SCOTUS. That would be a narrow positive ruling for the People against the States.
Sadly, not going to happen.
they need to have a federal review board to look into gun confiscations by states and cities that try to skirt the law. plus make it so damages can be awarded!