|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 11, 2014, 02:55 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
The states have been doing a fine job with reciprocity without getting the federal government's mucky maulers in the mix. Reciprocity is making strides every year. Let the state residents put pressure on their state government to work out reciprocity.
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
|
February 11, 2014, 06:26 PM | #27 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
February 11, 2014, 07:19 PM | #28 |
Member
Join Date: February 11, 2014
Location: Where you can find REAL BBQ.
Posts: 19
|
There are some people who choose to have non-resident CHLs (i.e. from other states than they live in) due to various reasons -- cheaper, recognized by more states than their home state, etc. As such, a national reciprocity that relied on your home state license would affect those people.
I'm all for States Rights (even though the War of Northern Aggression pretty much destroyed that concept), but States Rights should not be able to counter our natural rights which were reaffirmed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Should a state be able to restrict a particular religion? The same goes for our right to bear arms. |
February 12, 2014, 09:50 AM | #29 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. Last edited by noelf2; February 12, 2014 at 09:56 AM. |
||||
February 12, 2014, 10:02 AM | #30 |
Member
Join Date: February 11, 2014
Location: Where you can find REAL BBQ.
Posts: 19
|
What we should be working towards is less federal gun "laws". Besides, every one of them that came after the 2nd Amendment is blatantly unconstitutional since it violates the "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" clause.
|
February 12, 2014, 10:42 AM | #31 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Swamp dweller
Posts: 6,187
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer, ICORE Range Officer, ,MAG 40 Graduate As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be. |
||
February 12, 2014, 11:46 AM | #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. Last edited by noelf2; February 12, 2014 at 11:51 AM. |
|
February 12, 2014, 12:13 PM | #33 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
We're always yelling about this or that being constitutional or unconstitutional... unless we agree with the stated goal, then we don't seem to care.
Any type of national reciprocity has to be based on a power that's been delegated to the federal government and/or the federal government using it's power to protect the ENUMERATED rights set forth therein. Right now, carrying a gun is not a (recognized) right. It should be, but it isn't. What you or I think does not matter, what the SCOTUS says is all that counts. So, first we need a recognized constitutional right to carry outside the home THEN we need a lawsuit, probably based on the Privileges and Immunities clause of the 14th amendment to prevent states from abridging those privileges. (So goes my best understanding, IANAL)
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
February 12, 2014, 12:49 PM | #34 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
Brian's right. We need to fix this through the courts before we can push a nationwide change. If we don't, our opponents will. Imagine this bill got signed into law (which is not going to happen in this administration). A coalition of states including, say, New York, New Jersey, and California mounts a legal challenge. The argument? 10th Amendment violations and the idea that the 2nd Amendment only applies to home defense. What happens if they win that one? Yeah. This is a waste of time and resources, and it's only being pushed because a few politicians want to keep their NRA ratings up.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
February 12, 2014, 02:28 PM | #35 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
Quote:
While we're discussing life choices, why haven't you left PA for AZ? They don't have constitutional carry in PA. Don't go there. Don't live there. Don't work there. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
February 12, 2014, 03:40 PM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
As for the issue of home defense, federal courts are already applying the 2nd Amendment to carry outside the home. I agree that it would be difficult to get signed with this administration. I see it more as an option for 2016. |
|
February 12, 2014, 04:06 PM | #37 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Wayne in Virginia, we're getting better every year. Closer and closer to constitutional carry. And I can carry in PA with reciprocity without getting shot (done it). If, in the future, Virginia gun laws and reciprocity gets worse, I will give priority to constitutional carry states. Until then, I will keep fighting the good fight in Richmond with the VCDL. We make progress every year.
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
|
February 12, 2014, 05:33 PM | #38 |
Member
Join Date: June 3, 2013
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 98
|
Part of me wonders if they know this won't go through, and are using it as a pawn, so they appear to 'compromise' when they try again with one the dems would like better... Kinda like the proverbial foot in the door....
|
February 12, 2014, 05:51 PM | #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
I believe Tom Servo hit the nail on the head with his comment about NRA ratings in post #34. If the goal is to score political points, no follow-up is necessary. Frankly, I'm not sure that an intelligent compromise is possible, given the current ideological gulf on the gun-rights issue.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
February 12, 2014, 06:48 PM | #40 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
Virgina is getting better, I'm sure, but you'll find that eventually, it plateaus off. Some states don't allow for reciprocity. And most shall issue states have a clause that allows for reciprocity for states with laws that are substantively similar, and each state interprets that differently. For example, even though we have a training requirement, we allow reciprocity with many other states that do not have that requirement. Even though we require an FBI background check, we allow reciprocity with many other states that do not have that requirement. But give us another couple of years on the license, and some states have booted us. I agree the long term solution is constitutional carry. Or a court decision requiring states to issue permits to non residents. Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
February 12, 2014, 09:01 PM | #41 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
My understanding is that Florida residents can still carry in PA on their FL permits. What the PA attorney general did was to slam the door on PA residents carrying in PA on out-of-state permits rather than getting a PA license to carry firearms (LTCF). http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/pennsylvania.pdf Last edited by Aguila Blanca; February 13, 2014 at 09:02 AM. Reason: Typo |
|
February 12, 2014, 09:22 PM | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 14, 2013
Posts: 231
|
I got a better one for everyone. A few line federal law.
If you can legally own a firearm under federal standards and laws, then you have the right to carry it on your person, concealed or unconcealed. State laws and rules concerning where you can carry should still be enforced, but the ability to restrict carry from out of state residents shall be illegal. Aka no permit needed and no class required. |
February 12, 2014, 09:34 PM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
And when we lost Washington, it was because we extended the right to carry to veterans under 21. |
|
February 13, 2014, 09:07 AM | #44 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
I hold a home state permit and three non-resident permits. The number of states in which this assortment allows me to carry concealed has been reduced by three or four states, total, in the twelve or so years since I obtained the fourth permit. That's not what I consider progress. |
|
February 13, 2014, 10:20 AM | #45 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. |
|
February 13, 2014, 12:31 PM | #46 | |
Member
Join Date: February 11, 2014
Location: Where you can find REAL BBQ.
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
The right to keep and bear arms that is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment is absolute and not subject to any sort of restrictive interpretation. All federal and state laws that attempt to limit this are hereby deemed unconstitutional and void. |
|
February 13, 2014, 05:35 PM | #47 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
|
|
February 13, 2014, 06:25 PM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stuart, VA
Posts: 2,473
|
Quote:
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither. Last edited by noelf2; February 13, 2014 at 06:48 PM. |
|
February 13, 2014, 09:03 PM | #49 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
That said, rather than formally passing anti-reciprocity laws, I believe that jurisdictions like NYC will simply disregard the law altogether and arrest out-of-state CHL holders anyway, then wait for a pro-2A USDOJ to take them to court over it. Also, I suspect that several states will suddenly enact stiff penalties for carry of an unregistered handgun by a license holder, and that the procedure for registering one from out-of-state will be annoyingly inconvenient.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
February 14, 2014, 11:26 AM | #50 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
Quote:
All joking aside, I dead set against federal mandatory training. I'm all for training, but not MANDATORY training. Things change every two years in the federal government. You never know who's in power. The last thing I want is a government to sets the standard so high that one could never pass it.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|