Late last week, Republican Congressman Pat Harrigan introduced a new bill that would “extend federal concealed carry authority to both serving and veteran special operations forces whose firearms training and marksmanship standards match or exceed those of retired law enforcement officers.”
As a veteran and avid Second Amendment advocate, you would probably think that I enthusiastically support such legislation. But here’s why the bill could actually end up hurting Americans’ constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms – and why Republicans shouldn’t create a two-tiered Second Amendment.
The new legislation is officially titled the “Special Operations Forces Concealed Carry Act.” It specifically would amend 18 U.S.C. Section 926C to give honorably discharged Green Berets, SEALs, Rangers, Delta operators, Marine Raiders, and other specified special operations veterans in paygrades E-5 and above the same nationwide concealed-carry authority currently enjoyed by retired law enforcement officers.
In short, the bill would override state-level restrictions and allow covered individuals to carry nationwide. A DoD/VA photo ID card would serve as a nationwide permit. Congressman Harrigan argues that the bill “fixes” an inconsistency because these warriors have “mastered firearms under the most demanding conditions in the world.”
Mr. Harrigan’s heart is no doubt in the right place. Veterans should indeed have the right to carry a firearm throughout the country – but so should everybody else. Carving out a special class of citizens who are supposedly more qualified or entitled to exercise their Second Amendment freedoms implies that there are other classes of citizens who are somehow less entitled to the same rights.
I say this as an American who has been formally qualified to bear arms. I am an expert marksman through various combat programs in the military, and I currently hold a lifetime concealed carry permit. I’ve trained with some of the finest warriors this nation has ever produced, including special operations forces whose courage and skill I respect without reservation.
But respect for our elite veterans does not mean I will stand silent while Congress carves out special privileges that treat the Second Amendment as a government favor instead of what it is: an unalienable right belonging to We the People. Anything less is fundamentally at odds with the Constitution I swore to defend.
The Second Amendment is crystal clear: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Note the words: “the people.” Not “the people except those who haven’t completed BUD/S.” Not “the people who have a government-issued special badge.” The right belongs to every law-abiding American citizen. Period.
When government starts deciding which Americans are “special enough” to exercise a right without having to jump through the usual state-level hoops, it stops being a right and becomes a privilege. And privileges can be revoked tomorrow by the same politicians who granted them.
I’ve heard the counterargument: “These operators are exceptionally trained. They’ve earned it. Retired cops already have concealed carry reciprocity, so why not extend it?” Here’s why.
First, the “training” talking point is completely arbitrary. Millions of law-abiding veterans, competitive shooters, hunters, and everyday citizens alike train regularly and responsibly. Many of them have more trigger time than some retired officers who qualify once a year with a department-issued Glock.
Second, the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, which allows qualified active and retired/separated law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms nationwide was itself a well-intentioned mistake for the same reason. We never should have acknowledged in law that there are certain Americans who have “more” of a right to keep and bear arms than other Americans. We are all governed by the same Constitution.
We don’t need to expand government-created classes of “approved carriers.” We need to stop infringing on the right altogether.
Look at the practical reality on the ground. A law-abiding plumber in rural Louisiana who has never served in uniform must navigate a patchwork of state laws, training requirements, fees, and waiting periods just to carry the same firearm he keeps in his truck for protection. Yet under this bill, a retired Navy SEAL living next door gets to ignore all that because Washington decided he’s elite.
And indeed, the SEAL is elite, and he should have the right to carry – but so should his plumber neighbor. Anything less is not equality under the law. That’s the very definition of special interest legislation, the kind of insider deal-making that erodes trust in our institutions.
I’ve seen what happens when government picks winners and losers with constitutional rights. I watched the slow erosion of liberties after 9/11, even as I served. We created new security bureaucracies and told Americans it was for their own good. Twenty-five years later, we’re still chipping away at the Bill of Rights in the name of safety and “common sense.”
This bill is the same mentality applied to firearms. It says to the average citizen: “You’re not trustworthy enough for full Second Amendment rights, but these select few are.” That message is poison to a free republic, even if it is in service of honoring those who served.
The Founders knew better. They had just fought a war against a professional standing army and a king who disarmed the populace. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and the rest designed the Second Amendment precisely so that free citizens, not just government agents or military elites, could defend themselves, their families, their communities, and their country. They did not envision a system where retired special operators get a golden ticket while the blacksmith, the farmer, and the shopkeeper remain second-class when they cross state lines.
Supporters will claim this is a narrow, targeted fix. Narrow today becomes precedent tomorrow. Once we accept that Congress can grant nationwide carry rights based on service in certain units, what’s next? Only veterans with combat deployments? Only those who scored “expert” on the range? Only those with a certain security clearance? That slippery slope is greased by the same politicians who already treat the Second Amendment as a suggestion rather than a constitutional right.
The right solution is simple and constitutional: full constitutional carry across all 50 states. No more begging states for permission slips. No more special clubs. The same standard that applies to driving a car across state lines with a valid license should apply to exercising a right explicitly protected by the Bill of Rights.
I honor every Green Beret, SEAL, Ranger, and special operator who has served this nation. Many are friends. Many continue to protect us in the shadows. But their service does not entitle them, or anyone else, to rights the rest of us must still fight for in state legislatures. True respect for their sacrifice means demanding the same freedom for every law-abiding American.
Republican members of Congress would be better served using their platforms instead to push for legislation that recognizes the Second Amendment applies equally to all of us. Retired Colonel, father, grandfather, and proud American that I am, I will never accept a government that tells my neighbors they are less worthy of the rights my brothers-in-arms and I risked our lives to defend.
The Second Amendment is not a reward for exceptional service. It is a birthright. Let’s stop treating it like a government benefit program and start treating it like the supreme law of the land.
Rob Maness is a retired Air Force Colonel, a former wing and squadron commander, veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a survivor of the 9/11 Pentagon Attack, a graduate of the U.S. Navy War College and Harvard Kennedy School, a former U.S. Senate Candidate, Chairman of GatorPAC, CEO and Owner of Iron Liberty Group LLC, and Host of the Rob Maness Show on WorldViewTube.


The government needs to stop being ridiculous and trying to complicate our inalienable rights. The Second Amendment clearly states “shall not be infringed.” It doesn’t say “shall not be infringed, except for those who are/have…blah blah blah.” Our nation was founded on the premise that all men are created equal, not that some are more equal than others. The Founding Fathers carried this forward to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. It should not be altered.
Isn’t elevating certain individuals above others infringing on the rest?
Concealed carry must not be permitted only to those that chose a specific vocation because all Americans are safer when criminals don’t know who’s armed. If you’re permitted to buy a gun, why then are you restricted to use it?
I am becoming more upset with the Republicans everyday!
They need to get a back bone and fight for the Constitution as it was written, if they don’t wakeup thy will lose their base, One damn RINO can screw everything u, I am talking about the slime-bags that voted for the Red-Flag law a couple of yaers back.
Read the DAMN constitution you morons!
God Bless merica!
For more than 40 years now, I have been asking a very simple question: Where, in the wording of The Second Amendment, is there any provision for, or even the suggestion of, restrictions, limitations, or exceptions? Answer: There is none. What that means is that every one of the more than 24,000 gun control laws currently on the books in this nation at the federal, state, and local levels is, in a word, unconstitutional, Court decisions to the contrary notwithstanding.
Too many people have a simple and basic misunderstanding about “gun control.” “Gun control” is not now, and has never been, about crime, criminals, or public safety. Quite frankly, the Left couldn’t give a rat’s behind about crime, criminals, or public safety. Gun control is, and has always been, about disarming the citizenry so they cannot represent a threat to the government once the Left establishes the dictatorship they have been working toward since the end of World War 2. The key word in the term “gun control” is not “gun” – it is “control.”
A quick study of basic world history will show that one of the first actions taken by every Communist government upon their takeover was to go to all of the local police stations, get the lists of gun owners, and then go door to door and disarm everyone. That is why the Communists – er, I mean the Democrats – want a national gun registry. Is there really anyone at this point in time who still does not understand this?
And finally, it is way beyond disingenuous that the Left always speaks of “we need gun control” as if there were currently no laws concerning firearms. Those more than 24,000 gun control laws I mentioned earlier involve and cover every conceivable aspect of firearm purchase, ownership, and use dozens of times over. Firearms are by far the single most regulated and restricted consumer product in this nation. The only ones who are impacted by all these laws, however, are the law-abiding, which of course is the goal. Criminals very rarely (check the FBI data on this) even attempt to obtain firearms through legal channels, and are thus unaffected by “gun control.” As I stated above, “gun control” has nothing to do with crime or criminals.
I also am a military veteran. I served 14+ years. What we need is federal protection against state governments that seek to restrict our 1 and 2 amendment rights. The amendments are clear, the GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT RESTRICT the citizens!
Once the government says certain highly-qualified people are in a special class to bear arms the government’s next step is to take away the right from those who are not special.
Well, in Congressman Pat Harrigan’s defense, Democrats and Libs probably shouldn’t own firearms.
if they can’t define what a woman is, they probably couldn’t identify the business end of a firearm either.
Moreover, did you hear about the California soy-boy who showed up to a gunfight with a pencil & piece of paper?
(He wanted to “draw” his weapon first).
🙂
I want the second amendment to apply to every American, who has not been convicted of a crime of violence, or suffered a mental condition. Of course veterans who have served our country should have the second amendment, but not only them, all of us. The second amendment keeps us safe. Gun free zones are a target for the lawless.
Now even churches have gun security. We all feel safer.
They must have forgotten their oath of office. To protect and defend the Constitution or they should realize it applies to everyone not to a select few. Unless you lost your rights through something you did, the right shell not be infringed. People in power have lost sight of this fact.
HADN’T REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT THIS SUBJECT BUT HAVE TO AGREE. WE CAN’T AND SHOULDN’T MODIFY ANYTHING IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS. I’M NOT HE SAME SHOOTER I WAS 30 YEARS AGO, BUT I THINK I COULD SCARE THE BEJEEBERS O
Does the FIRST amendment only apply to SOME people? I think not! Neither does the SECOND! Reciprocal and national carry should be allowed to all CITIZENS with the exclusion of felons!
God created man/women —-Sam Colt made them equal
I have a picture on my wall of a Colt Handgun and the caption reads —–
Be not affair of any man, regardless of his size when danger threatens call on me and I will equalize!
I won it in a pistol tournament
God Bless America!
THIS is NOT what the 2nd amendment is about. The more folks ‘mess with stuff’, the MORE stuff gets messed up.
Leave it alone Dumba$$ocrat$ are trying hard enough to take it away….
I was promised during the last election that our 2nd amendment rights would, not should but would be protected. And now a republican is trying to create more restrictions. I am 85, soon to be 86. I have been involved with firearms since I was 6 years old. I’ve hunted and shot paper a lot over my years. I was in the National Guard but here we are being discriminated against on my right to protect myself. I am sick of what people are doing to our country!
Bravo, Mr. Maness! It is refreshing to encounter absolute clarity regarding the Second Amendment. A lot of people are truly afraid, not only of injury that can be inflicted by a weapon, but even more so of the burden of responsibility that a weapon represents. It is incumbent on those who recognize these shortcomings in themselves to adjust their own behavior accordingly. As for the rest of us, let’s hope we are there when they need us.
Don’t mess with the 2nd.amendment . PERIOD. Or any ,for that matter.
When it is known that all can carry, crime will drop big time!
If we start dividing 2nd amendment “Rights”, Your first target should be your own foot.
This act would not only create a 2 tiered right, it would divide the 2A community creating class envy. Those who are enabled would fight to keep that as an exclusive right. However, the exclusive right belongs to every law abiding U.S. citizen.
You make the valid point that many Americans regularly shoot more than police. I am one of those people who have more trigger time in a month than most police get in their career. I keep up my proficiency because I value my rights and feel the need to be ready for whatever may happen. I still believe my neighbor who has never shot a gun should have every right I have to carry a gun for protection.
We must recognize the left’s attempt to slip us a Trojan Horse when we see it. It’s all or nothing guys.
The second amendment is in place for all citizens and should not be compromised over one group of people or another group of people. Once you start messing with changing the constitution the country is lost.
No elitism!
Boy, they never stop dreaming up ridiculous Bills. They need to do something sensible & useful for what we pay them!
The 2nd amendment needs to stand as it is! The Democratic Party and their allies want to take away your rights to own a firearm so you can’t defend yourself! However they do allow murders, rapists, child molesters drug dealers, drug users to run free and do what they choose to do but you as a law abiding citizen will not be allowed to defend yourself and your family, nor can you defend our country from enemies foreign and in the Democratic Party case domestic!
I concur with Col Maness absolutely. I have served in the military in one of those special capacities listed, and as a retired police officer and supervisor. Hence, this multi-tier system will open a plethora of problems. What I don’t understand with Congressman Harrigan thinking is his motive. The special categories listed can carry CCW by just applying in their state for a CCW. Why is it necessary to change the law. Retired law enforcement officers have nationwide CCW due to dealing with domestic and dangerous criminals they have arrested etc. They could be face with criminal revenge for prior arrests. Additionally, retired police officers who know the criminal and arrest laws may see a serious crime in progress. They would be more qualified to intervene with a crime in progress that a person who is training a special MOS listed by Harrigan. Those who have served in Special military MOS’s most likely will not see or be confronted by those they have battled with in foreign countries. To be technical, why not do the same for highly qualified gun range instructors just they know guns inside and out. Harrigan’s intention will create different classes of CCW’s and help future democrat arguments that will hurt and not help the general population. God bless these individuals the special MOS’s who keep our country safe. May they be getting CCW through the state.
I agree. We cannot have a tiered system of rights. We all have the same rights. All Americans are granted the rights given to us by our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
I agree with the author. No 2-tier system.
I agree WHOLE-HEARTEDLY!
Citizens do not send representatives to Congress (or to state legislatures) so the long-standing documents can continually be re-examined, reconsidered and re-written to suit a few groupies of the day. They are sent there to attend to the pressing business of the day. Citizens should get more forcefully active while these assemblages are in session to determine who gets put out next election go-round.
After reading the majority of these comments, most concur that a Trojan Horse issue is at play herein. The words “…shall not be infinged…” are very powerfull and clear! This is far more serious than first appears. We must make a stand here and return the spirit of the SWIFT BOATERS and the TEA PARTY. They were able to stop specific evils and now we must make a stand and be heard! The government shal not infringe on the constitution! The law of the land shall not be tampered with, ‘adjusted for the times’, cannot be fine tuned for a new world! If we, the few, do not make a tand then when and where?
I ask not what my country will do for me, but what I will do for my country! I care not what others want, but as for me, give me LIBERTY or give me DEATH. I pledge my wealth, my body and my soul to the constitution and the blood from those already laid down. They did not sacafice, for that implies giving without gain. Yea, they gave BUT there was a gain!
Now it is time to see that once more the vines of tyranny are over grown and I, no we, must stamp out these vines that choke and dim the light of liberty.
Marxism has failed to succeed. Over the decades Marxists have pulled their hair out trying to deal with the failures of their theory. Marxist world wide ask, “Why won’t the common people see the “true” path to be govern? Why is America the one land so stuborn? Why are the American intellectuals & the wealthy agreeable but the regular American holding out? The ‘masses’ should want a ‘paridise’ but yet they refuse to bend!
I know the reason. IT is reason itself. Only reason holds the world of Marxism at bay! Individual integrity in the human mind to know goodness vs evil. To know the difference and keep that truth dear. Ration integrity!
IF I must perish alone in this world of the collective swamp, so be it.
IF I must perish alone in a sea of breached integrity, so be it.
IF I must perish alone by the overwhelming forces of evil, so be it.
I regret I have but one life to give to rational integrity and the constitution of the United States of America. As Winston Churchill stated, ” Americans are a race unto themselves.” Not a nation of many races, but a new race of humans. I understand this statement but I clairify by saying “Americans” are normal rational humans, as humans were intended by nature to live.
Now the world is afraid they must live up to this new standard or perish! Rational man or irrational man? That is the only choice! Free will choice [volition] is the arbitrator. Marxism never understood this and that is another reason why Marxism is doomed to failure.
Volition is what Democrats do not understand! IT is what keeps them in a constant semi-sane profile. This misunderstanding. IT is the cause of their midnight sleeplessness. IT is the lingering subconsconscious worry that provides the door for creeping terror in their life. Not understanding free will! IT IS the reason Hitler and other tyrants had to choose low lifes, criminals, and scum to surronding them so they could feel superior.
People that CHOOSE to see reason and use it as a guide (more than 10% of their life) know what integrity is.
Let’s start with me saying that “I’m a veteran” – I have a lifetime concealed carry permit from my state (Indiana, which is very close to what the 2A intended). As far as my over 8+ years of military service, I was in Personnel (last three years as a Battalion Personnel Staff NCO) which isn’t exactly thought of as a weapons expert (yeah, I qualified Expert with the M14 then the M16 but…). I will confess that the Battalion Commander (LTC) took me along when he was supposed to qualify with the 1911 because I’d do the shooting for him. Later as a civilian, my brother-in-law lived next door to the Chief Deputy of the Sheriff’s department in the county. It was a standing joke that when I was over at the b-in-l’s house, we’d go out back and I was a much better shot than the Deputy. Still, since I live near the state of Illinois – I lock my handgun in a box in the the vehicle when traveling through there, fortunately I travel though the southern part of the state where the people understand firearms and often ignore the “laws” established for Chicago (which obviously not only don’t work but are counterproductive), Said all that to say that when I saw the “Veterans get CC permits good in every state”, I thought that was great…until I read that as Orwell said in Animal Farm, “all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others”. To be honest, I was then offended.
When are the”bleeding heart do gooders” going to figure out that”the goonie”side of our population are the problem,not the normal population of gun owners that have never been a problem.But with the leftists.they love easy,and I gues that we were easy,now we are not,SO,have at it,WE ARE NOT EASY,AND WE WILL NOT BE.
While Mr. Harrington is singling out individuals for special treatment he should be reminded that ALL servicemembers are taught how to handle, use, perform maintenance,
etc., on usually more that one or two types of firearms. Sure, this may be some special “thank you” to the special operators, but, I’m sure Thomas Jefferson had no idea about The Green Mountain boys, or Rogers rangers. The second amendment covers all Americans. Specific treatment for individuals is written into state law(s). So, why would we split hairs like this? It sounds like Mr. Harrington is trying to splinter the 2nd, to give ideas to the communists when the Constitutional Convention happens.
I would propose a Federal LTC for all Americans who could qualify under Federal Law as then passed and put an end to the continued unlawful laws the blue state politicians are doing to confiscate their citizens firearms.
Have every person in Congress study what the word “infringe” is defined as and be able to stand in front of Congress and explain the word.
Discrimination from any angle/
Agreed.
Agree 100%. Concealed carry reciprocity should apply to all States, regardless of the crap the blue States try to pull.
I am posting a logical message to defend the 2nd Amendment. Please, all patriots read and heed!
DO NOT tamper with the 2nd amendment!
DO NOT support bills/acts/attachments that modify the 2nd amendment!
IT IS perfect the way it stands!
As a potential recipient of this two-tiered bill, I can and did see the hidden “flaws”! MY fellow patriots please DO NOT be hood winked into believing this proposal is a positive thing! IT IS NOT positive! IT will only open a “side door” to future 2nd amendment problems. Write to every service member you know and warn them of the “false premise” exposed herein.
So, a person who enjoyed the privilege of becoming a special ops member somehow earns them head of the line privileges. Many of us donated a portion of our lives in defense of our country and the openings in special ops were very limited. The rights granted under our 2nd Amendment were never ment to be doled out on a lottery basis!
Wouldn’t it make more common sense, that legally carry permittees to be able to carry nationally instead of just in their permitted state? Think about a small state like Connecticut that is landlocked with Mass, RI, & NY we are able to carry here but can’t carry across the lines to get to a carry free state.
Apply act to ALL & vet those getting Firearms Lisc
As Colonel Maness states this is a well intentioned proposal by Congressman Harrigan. But in context there is the medieval fuedal aspect of enobling the priviledge to bear arms to the King’s Men, historically the knights, now Cops and SOF Operators, while serfs and other commoner Subjects should be excluded.
100% agree with Col Maness. By favoring a few select individuals who have received government approved training, this legislation will give democrats a vehicle for denying this inalienable right to the rest of us. It doesn’t even include those of us who have served in the military and have fired firearms more than most police officers. Way to discriminate Republicans!!!
I agree with you, but would go a step further. This term “law abiding” is itself arbitrary. If a person has committed a crime, been convicted, served that sentence, and is released, then they should have all their rights back. That’s how it was historically, not, “ok, now you can vote so we can win, but you can’t observe your other constitutional rights.”
If a person has served their sentence and is deemed to be safe enough to return to society, then all their rights should be returned. If not, then change sentencing. But, send it may be a violation of one’s 8th amendment to not allow them to observe their second. Most of the category of crimes that prohibit firearms carry are nonviolent, or, don’t involve guns at all.
Thank you Rob Maness. Your article is right on! As soon as well meaning politicians start making “special” rules for firearm use or ownership, things will degrade until only the “well qualified” can own or use firearms. Let the second amendment stand on it’s own. The right of all legal American citizens.
People that are qualified, meaning they have taken classes and have a carry permit, should be able to carry. A person should not be classified as unable if they have not served in the military or been a police officer. As the article stated, this is discrimination. The second amendment needs to remain as stated. If those opposing the second amendment read it correctly (which is very easy to read), enforce it is as written, it should remain as stated. If it’s changed, it should include ALL officials in government offices along with their families as well.
Very well articulated! Very eloquent! I agree with your points!
Those who enjoyed the privilege of becoming special ops member were truly fortunate as well as endowed with the abilities needed. Special ops positions were very limited, and those of us who gave years of our lives to defending our country are no less qualified to enjoy the rights our forefathers granted us. The 2nd Amendment was never ment to grant the right to keep and bare arms on a lottery basis! Nor should retired law enforcement enjoy a higher level of constitutional rights than any other citizen.
As a veteran of the USAF, I totally agree that the 2nd Amendment is a right to bare arms.
Some come home from combat situations and wind up dealing with PTSD. Should those have automatic freedom to carry a gun everywhere, all the time?
Sometimes I wonder if these “bill writers” take the time to look into possible downsides to their bill? Likely not because they’re wanting to “make a name for themselves” in Congress for committee appointments and re-election purposes
If he is the distinguished military veteran as he is touted to be, he should know better than to push a bill like this. Burecratitis may have set in and he, like others, what the government to controll everthing and everyone.