Originally Posted by Tom Servo
By the time I have evidence, it will be too late. However, we've got precedent. Consider the 1986 FOPA. That was a good bill until Rangel got his hooks into it at the last minute and slipped in a poison pill.
Poison pill, heck. The FOPA was never a good bill. Look how the basic premise plays out in real life. Greg Revell misses a connection at Newark Airport, spends a night in an airport
hotel, and goes to jail for illegally possessing a firearm in NJ.
People are convinced that the FOPA (which, after all is based on interstate commerce
, doesn't apply if you are traveling between contiguous states. So if I live in New Mexico and I go to Arizona to buy something, that's NOT interstate commerce?
Other people believe that the FOPA allows ONLY for actual travel -- to the extent that it doesn't allow the traveler to stop for gas, food, or potty breaks, let alone stopping to sleep for the night. Does the FOPA actually say that if I'm driving from Maine to San Diego I have to drive straight through, that if I stop to sleep in Des Moines I am no longer under the umbrella of the FOPA?
I don't think any of the above make sense. But, given the lousy wording of the law, I understand how people come to have these fears. The FOPA was never a good bill. It was a not-so-bad idea, but horribly executed from the outset. In reality, it's clear that whoever drafted it never thought beyond travel by private auto.