Rep. Don Young added his name as one of 170 Republican and three Democratic cosponsors of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which would allow gun owners with state-issued conceal carry permits to carry a handgun in any other state in the union, so long as they follow the laws of that state.

“Alaska is home to countless law-abiding, responsible gun owners,” Young said in a prepared statement following his decision to cosponsor the act. “In our state, gun ownership is a way of life, and an important tool for survival in an unforgiving environment.”

Young noted that gun rights in America do not stop at states’ borders.

“Nobody questions whether our right to free speech, protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, or safeguards against cruel and unusual punishment continues when we travel to another state, but the Second Amendment is frequently under attack by those who do not understand gun ownership,” he said. “This is a good bill for gun owners and Second Amendment advocates.”

Young said the bill is straightforward in that it streamlines the “bureaucratic mess threatening our gun rights, encourages responsible gun ownership, and protects permit holders from prosecution by a patchwork of confusing and arbitrary laws.”

Current conceal carry laws vary widely across the country. While many states have agreements, which recognize each other’s conceal carry licensing and permits, many others do not. Alaska conceal carry permits are currently recognized in 38 states. Some notable exceptions are Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Illinois and New York. These states will not allow gun owners to conceal carry with Alaska permits. On the flip side, Alaska honors the conceal carry permits from all 50 states.

According to U.S. Conceal Carry, a gun rights group that tracks gun laws across the nation, there are 12,000 conceal carry permits issued to Alaskans. That represents about 1.6% of the overall population.

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.

Rep. Young cosponsors bill to recognize conceal carry permits across state lines

Joel Davidson
Joel is Editor-in-Chief of the Alaska Watchman. Joel is an award winning journalist and has been reporting for over 24 years, He is a proud father of 8 children, and lives in Palmer, Alaska.


  • Lobo says:

    I guess that’s okay, but why not recognize the actual unambiguous intent of the 2nd. amendment: “The right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”.. I does not say, “Except in states that disagree”.. That is a part of the U.S. Constitution, and is equally applicable to all states. It means that all states within the boundaries of the United States, “Shall not infringe on my rights to bear arms”, regardless of what state I am present in… And, BTW, “bear arms” means to have in personal possession.

  • Herman Nelson says:

    We’re back to the question of why do you need a permit to exercise a right..? Lets make voting the same way as buying a gun. Filling out paperwork, showing ID, doing a background check, waiting periods (in some states), limiting to how many per month, the fees and taxes stacked on top of it all.
    People laugh and say votes are not as dangerous as guns. Really…? Exhibit A- This last election.

  • Michael C Coons says:

    I just called his office.
    I raised the idea that Don go to the Congressmen/women, as well as the Senators of those States that have Constitutional Carry and get them to push their legislatures to change their Constitutional Carry laws so that non-residents can carry. Alaska and Arizona, I think a handful of others allow that. The problem is Idaho, Montana, the two most recent passed are only for residents. Tennessee is in the process of legislation and I have called for non-residents being able to carry concealed as well.
    We are all Americans. Sure we are residents of our States and those States have recognized our civil right to carry. Much less our State Legislators recognize that our people are lawful, trustworthy and able to handle themselves in accordance to basic laws. So, why are those States like Idaho, Montana and others “concerned” about fellow American Law-abiding citizens?
    Bottom line with this bill is that it went nowhere last time because the Senate would never bring it up. I’m thinking that in the past it didn’t pass the House either because the Socialists controlled the House. Now we have a House and Senate Socialist controlled and the new Socialists Hiden and Camella who would veto. So instead of pushing up a cliff, those Congressmen and Senators from free States could do far more at their State Legislative level.