The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 25, 2011, 01:34 PM   #26
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,812
IIRC either here or on another forum when this came up it was stated that we would still have to adhere to the states that have the restrictions, like NYC, DC and so on. It was stated that if a state said no to its residents with regards to CCW the national permit would be useless there.I know it makes sense and it makes no sense.
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Range Safety Officer, IDPA Safety Officer, USPSA NROI Range Officer
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old August 25, 2011, 08:15 PM   #27
Crankgrinder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 24, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 761
yes they tell you it is legal under constitutional rights to carry in order to protect ourselves under certain conditions...but... when you must do so you will be thrown in jail and processed as a criminal, and good luck getting out unless youre an oil man
Crankgrinder is online now  
Old September 13, 2011, 05:50 PM   #28
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...est=latestnews



"Lawmakers are considering a House bill that would give Americans who hold permits to carry firearms in their home states the right to carry their weapons across state lines.

Although many states have entered into voluntary agreements, there is no nationwide framework for honoring permits and licenses uniformly. A bipartisan bill, co-authored by Reps. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Heath Shuler, D-N.C., aims to change that. "



IF and ONLY if this is written correctly this may be a way for residents of Illinois like myself to get Utah and Florida permits to conceal carry, bypassing a total prohibition in Illinois or strict rules in states like NY and CA.


If it is NOT written correctly, then it is another mark against the State of Illinois and states like NY and California when their conceal carry statutes are challenged in court.
Patriot86 is offline  
Old September 13, 2011, 06:07 PM   #29
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
I am frightened by the door opening by the Feds to regulate CCW. It should stay a states rights issue period. We are already winning the battles again and again in more and more states. Keep the Feds out even with such a seemingly beneficial bill. It will also include language giving the Feds the power to regulate this issue. That is NOT a good thing at all in my opinion. Leave it to the states and if your state is backwards, then leave the state. That is what I in the process of planning with my residence in CA.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old September 13, 2011, 06:31 PM   #30
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
Quite honestly do you people from NY, CA, MA, etc really think CCW will get easier through State Level legislation? You all MAY eventually have the same rights as people in a state like AZ, FL or GA but it will take decades of court decisions in your favor. This may be the only path for people in the "oppressed" states to improve the recognition level of their second amendment rights on a local level.

That being said IT NEEDS TO BE written properly, sort of how every state has to recognize each others drivers licences, without giving California and MA undue power to impose restrictions on places like GA, Fl and AZ.
Patriot86 is offline  
Old September 13, 2011, 06:39 PM   #31
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Sorry to be so paranoid, but I see it as an opportunity for the Feds to control the CCW issue which could place my rights here in Idaho at risk down the road. Anytime the Feds give you something, you lose something at the same time. I believe it is now 40 states with fairly reasonable gun rights and that is just in the last 25 years or so. We are indeed winning the battle one state at a time. Who would have thought Wisconsin would be a SHALL issue state?

Let's not settle for the cookies and tea while the Feds assume control over what should be a states rights issue. Anyone here of the Trojan Horse. I believe we are about to embark in a huge mistake letting the Feds regulate CCW. Sorry, but HELLO, is anyone else worried about the Feds being in control of my CCW permit from Idaho?

Thanks but no thanks to Federal intervention. I am doing just fine with the system the way it is.

Unfortunately, the oppressed states such as CA deserve what they get since they keep electing these liberal politicians who hate guns. Can't have it both ways. Since CA doesn't appear to becoming any more conservative anytime soon, I will simply leave as my solution. Will take a couple of years to accomplish but I am already half way out with a condo in Idaho. Just a couple more details on the libtards in CA can have their state.

So why should we jeopardize the states who have taken the right step to enforce the second amendment in the hopes of improving the rights of people in state like CA that just reelected Jerry Brown? Sorry, but since I live in CA and am denied CCW from LA county, that still does not in any sense justify allowing the Feds regulating CCW.

Please, keep it a state right and if the libs want to keep the population oppressed, the population that elects these folks is ultimately at fault. After all, the population has the power to get rid of them if they wanted to. Let freedom reign in all of the other states that have it right. When people get tired of the oppression, even a place like Wisconsin can become a place where freedom reigns once again.

Let's keep fighting the battle state by state and when the victory is complete, we will have much greater assurance of freedom than trying to do an end run around states rights through the Feds.

Last edited by Alaska444; September 13, 2011 at 07:12 PM.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 01:49 AM   #32
JustThisGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Posts: 311
H.R. 822: National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

This bill has been introduced into Congress to require all states to honor the Concealed Handgun Permits of all other states, much as they do for Drivers Licenses.

You can send your Congressman a letter stating your position on this bill at http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h822/show
__________________
JustThisGuy

Mediocrity dominates over excellence in all things... except excellence.
JustThisGuy is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 09:26 AM   #33
oneounceload
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: N. Central Florida
Posts: 8,518
NO to Federal control or involvement - absolutely NOT!
If that happens, one stroke of a pen in an Executive Order could eliminate

Why are so many here so in favor of big central government when that has been this country's problems since FDR and then again with LBJ.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have"

The more local the government is to the people, the more control the people have over their government
oneounceload is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 06:36 PM   #34
Eghad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
If the House passes it which will likely happen. For some reason the Senate passes it I believe Obama would sign it because he needs every vote he can get for 2012.

If it becomes law then the anti gunners would have to take it to court on the basis that firearms are exempt from the commerce clause and shouldn't be controlled by the federal government.

Imagine the GCA and the other stuff going down the tubes...lol
__________________
Have a nice day at the range

NRA Life Member
Eghad is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 07:30 PM   #35
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
I don't see Obama signing it unless of course it is a real Trojan Horse waiting for a time down the road when the Feds just shut CCW down completely, except of course for them and their buddies. Obama signing it would go against all of his prior stances on gun control.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 08:00 PM   #36
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaska444
Sorry to be so paranoid, but I see it as an opportunity for the Feds to control the CCW issue which could place my rights here in Idaho at risk down the road. Anytime the Feds give you something, you lose something at the same time. I believe it is now 40 states with fairly reasonable gun rights and that is just in the last 25 years or so. We are indeed winning the battle one state at a time. Who would have thought Wisconsin would be a SHALL issue state?
There may be forty states with somewhat reasonable gun rights, but the fact is that interstate carry is a hopeless morass. I have carry licenses/permits from my home state plus three others, and I'm still only legal to carry in something like 32 or 35 states. And even that is unclear, at least to me, due to the fact that some of the states that honor licenses from my "other" states only honor them for residents of those states.

I should not have to consult the web sites, the attorney generals, and the state police commanders of every state I might wish to visit in order to determine whether or not my RKBA is respected in that state. If my state of residence sees fit to grant me a license, the other 49 should respect that.

There's even a clause in the Constitution that says so: "Full faith and credit." If the granting of a state (official government) license to me by an agency of the state government isn't an "act of the government," then what is?
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 08:05 PM   #37
oneounceload
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: N. Central Florida
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
I should not have to consult the web sites, the attorney generals, and the state police commanders of every state I might wish to visit in order to determine whether or not my RKBA is respected in that state. If my state of residence sees fit to grant me a license, the other 49 should respect that.
The current issue of gay marriage might be worth investigating

If the VOTERS of a particular state want to have restrictions or non-reciprocity - that is their right to determine their fate - not yours
oneounceload is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 09:56 PM   #38
raisitup
Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 56
I vote for the status quo on this one. States can work out reciprocity amongst themselves. I'll happily do the CC bingo all day long rather than leave the feds to call out the numbers

"N four thousand.....nobody? OK next number, G five hundred...."

Ryan
raisitup is offline  
Old September 14, 2011, 10:06 PM   #39
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneounceload
The current issue of gay marriage might be worth investigating
I try to stay as far away from that one as possible. I am a Justice of the Peace, but as I understand it the laws of my state do not require that I perform such marriages if requested. As to states recognizing such marriages performed in other states, where legal ... I am squarely on the fence regarding whether or not they should be recognized.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 12:04 AM   #40
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member

Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 1,769

Quote:
There may be forty states with somewhat reasonable gun rights, but the fact is that interstate carry is a hopeless morass. I have carry licenses/permits from my home state plus three others, and I'm still only legal to carry in something like 32 or 35 states. And even that is unclear, at least to me, due to the fact that some of the states that honor licenses from my "other" states only honor them for residents of those states.

I should not have to consult the web sites, the attorney generals, and the state police commanders of every state I might wish to visit in order to determine whether or not my RKBA is respected in that state. If my state of residence sees fit to grant me a license, the other 49 should respect that.

There's even a clause in the Constitution that says so: "Full faith and credit." If the granting of a state (official government) license to me by an agency of the state government isn't an "act of the government," then what is?
Dear Aguila Blanca,

I am even worse off than you. My state of residence is CA where I have essentially zero chance of concealed carry any time soon. Nevertheless, even though my plight is much worse than what you described, I am more frightened by the possibility of Fed control over CCW.

Yes, it is a mess right now, but soon, I will only have to deal with WA, ID, MT, UT, WY, and OR and I only have to get one more CCW permit in ID to be legal in all of the places I will be. That is my solution to the gun control issues that are a mismatch around the nation and it will work for me. I will be able to be 100% carry all the time once I move out of CA.

Why jeopardize my rights in these SHALL issue states for the pathetic liberal voting people that are the majority vote in CA? If I don't like control of CCW by CA, I am quite a bit more frightened by the thought of CCW control by the Feds. That could make the CCW carry issue disappear overnight by the stroke of a pen once it is out of the hands of the state.

Nope, just one more Federal power grab in the guise of gun rights. Sorry, give me what we have today without letting the Feds have a say so in these issues. At least states like ID and other western states have it right.

In addition, with the momentum on our side in the battle state by state, what is the benefit of the Feds really? Many adjoining states offer one class for more than one state permit making the issue mute for most folks. I have NV, UT and ID and that covers almost every state I need except of course for CA. I got those three and could have added FL for additional coverage of KS and NM, but since I really have no plans to go through those states anytime soon, no need to go there.

So why give up the power that we have fighting the battle state by state with more and more joining the club all the time for the power grab of the Feds that WILL come back and bite us later. Not a good trade to me at all even though I am without remedy for CA at present. Not at all worth it to me in my opinion.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 12:28 AM   #41
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arizona444
Why jeopardize my rights in these SHALL issue states for the pathetic liberal voting people that are the majority vote in CA? If I don't like control of CCW by CA, I am quite a bit more frightened by the thought of CCW control by the Feds. That could make the CCW carry issue disappear overnight by the stroke of a pen once it is out of the hands of the state.
But the Feds would not be "controlling" CCW. Each state would still be issuing (or not) its own licenses. ALL this law would do is require that other states recognize the validity of what your home state has done. In short, it codifies the intent of the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution. Nothing is taken out of the hands of the states except the dubious "right" to deny visitors the rights granted both under the Constitution and by their home state.

The worst they could do is repeal the law and set things nack to the patchwork we have now. But to go beyond that and "take over control" of CCW is not something this proposed law would in any way pave the way for. That would be something entirely different, and the Feds either could or couldn't do that today. Passing this law would not in any way affect the possibility or probability of a Federal "takeover."
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 12:35 AM   #42
Mr. James
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 1,521
Well said Alaska444,

I actually found myself wavering on this point today . . . how nice it would be to walk through Manhattan with my concealed weapon, just as I can drive my car through Manhattan. Take some of that! Hoplophobes be damned.

But it would be a cheap victory, and one that would, inevitably, shred us in the end.

No. Leave it to the states. It seems the trend is favoring discretionary or constitutional carry anyway. But we cannot cede yet more power to that insatiable Leviathan.
__________________
"...A humble and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Ps. li

"When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law." —Frederic Bastiat
Mr. James is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 03:16 AM   #43
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
I have been a supporter of this for a long time, and I have very good CCW laws in effect where I live and travel. I respect the naysayers, and most of them are pretty emphatic. I just personally feel it would be a victory for the 2nd Amendment(and not hurt most carryers).
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 03:27 AM   #44
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
there were many people back in the day against licenses - and by the way & obviously - your license is produced by your STATE yet gives you the right to drive anywhere in America. My state CCW will allow me to carry in the other 49states; make your laws and do whatever while I am in your state. My CCW will be legal though. the maze that some posters have referred to in this thread are good points. Just the fact that it is an abyss of misunderstanding, laws, miscommunications, opinions, etc cause it to be more difficult to CCW throughout legal states with the utmost confidence(not the mention the time, patience, & money it takes loyal aficianados who exercise their right to be "as legal as possible").

It won't be like this if the laws change(which it will in time in my opinion UNLESS gun rights go backwards). The CCW you carry will garner more respect and better understanding. People that are clueless will now understand that the permit is the rea deal. As I said, my CCW laws are well above average on the good side for CCWs. That doesn't change the fact that I believe this to be a good thing. Not everything new ends up a bad thing or something that can't be trusted. I don't for a second think that it will make CCWing more difficult in my area when it passes.
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 05:17 AM   #45
alloy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
It would be nice if some pressures were applied to Cali or Illinois etc. But if cities like New York can still hold out, it's just more of the same....you can go here but not there.
"Shall not be infringed" seems to fly over thier heads, and any federal involvment in CCW ought to begin with those states with the most restrictive laws. A little pressure there, and a gov that isn't pulling Fast and Furious moves to take away our rights...maybe I'd have a little more faith...but as it is...I don't.
They show me they want to regulate more, time after time, and things seems to be turning positive around the country slowly in spite of them...not because of them.
__________________
Quote:
The uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done?
Angelo Codevilla
alloy is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 05:24 AM   #46
alloy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
They are takin' away my incandescent light bulbs for chrissakes. Stay out of the CCW business, and go make all the states change thier street signs or something impressive.
They just don't inspire confidence, regarding thier intentions or abilities.
__________________
Quote:
The uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done?
Angelo Codevilla
alloy is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 07:35 AM   #47
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don P
IIRC either here or on another forum when this came up it was stated that we would still have to adhere to the states that have the restrictions, like NYC, DC and so on. It was stated that if a state said no to its residents with regards to CCW the national permit would be useless there.I know it makes sense and it makes no sense.
New York State issues concealed carry permits (or licenses). In fact, on paper so does NYC -- the issue is that they only issue to big shots, not to the commoners. Therefore, under the law as proposed, anyone with a license from their home state would be allowed to carry anywhere in New York State. Including the Big Apple.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 08:57 AM   #48
Beentown71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2009
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,526
And the first time a Permitted Concealed Carrier does something dumb... Lets go drastic and say shoots a cop. What will happen when the Fed has control?


Beentown
__________________
Μολὼν λάβε

Time for the Mall Ninja list:
Beretta 92fs, Springer XD9, High Standard Model HB, RRA bull bbl...aw heck with it time to go plink
Beentown71 is online now  
Old September 15, 2011, 10:53 AM   #49
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,519
Quote:
Therefore, under the law as proposed, anyone with a license from their home state would be allowed to carry anywhere in New York State. Including the Big Apple.
What worries me is that, upon realizing this, New York may simply stop issuing permits altogether to get out of compliance.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old September 15, 2011, 11:50 AM   #50
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Why is everyone referring to the example of the drivers license. In fact, that is exactly the issue to be feared. How soon everyone has forgotten about the National ID system through the states driver's licenses.

http://www.dojgov.net/national_license-01.htm

Yes, the drivers license is a great example but not in the way that folks have nonchalantly posted. The Federal control over the states driver's license could easily sometime in the near future end up with the National ID program.

The ONLY reason it is not yet a reality is because of the power of states opposing these Federal regulations.

So, go for it if you want the temporal privileges that this bill will give you, but do remember that the Feds never give you something without strings attached.
Alaska444 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13977 seconds with 7 queries