The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 20, 2012, 05:31 PM   #1
Shakgul
Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2012
Posts: 38
Senate bill

Apparently there was a bill on the senate floor that is now stalled, it would of forced states to reconize other states weapons license and permit. Do you think this will eventually pass?
Shakgul is offline  
Old April 20, 2012, 08:57 PM   #2
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,086
You're talking about H.R. 822. It passed the House in November, though the vote was pretty much along party lines. Its chances in the Senate are a bit less optimistic.

Also, moving this to L&CR.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old April 21, 2012, 11:36 PM   #3
Shakgul
Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2012
Posts: 38
petition

I signed the online petition the other day. I am not sure how much of a difference those make, has congressmen ever caved to online petitions?
Shakgul is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 12:05 AM   #4
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,086
Quote:
has congressmen ever caved to online petitions?
We had a thread on this awhile back. I don't think most congressfolk are even aware of the online petitions, and the petitions themselves are distractions from real work like actually calling or writing one's representatives.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 07:52 AM   #5
AirForceShooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2005
Location: Sarasota (sort of) Florida
Posts: 1,185
Pelosi is doing her best to stop this bill in the senate.

edit: should be Dianne Feinstein

AFS
__________________
'Qui tacet consentit': To remain silent is to consent.

Last edited by AirForceShooter; April 22, 2012 at 10:25 AM.
AirForceShooter is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 09:38 AM   #6
WyMark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 221
How exactly is Pelosi doing anything to stop it in the Senate?
WyMark is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 10:24 AM   #7
AirForceShooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2005
Location: Sarasota (sort of) Florida
Posts: 1,185
my error.
I meant Feinstein.
She has asked Reid to table the bills

AFS
__________________
'Qui tacet consentit': To remain silent is to consent.
AirForceShooter is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 12:37 PM   #8
alanheaberlin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2012
Posts: 5
My mother always taught me, if I can't say something good about somebody, don't say anything at all.
I only have good things to say about Dianne Feinstein. She is as tenacious as a hair in a biscuit! And work ethic? If Dianne dropped dead, Barbara Boxer and Chuck Schumer would prop her up in her committee chair seat and put dark glasses on her like Weekend at Bernie's.
Guess that's all the good I have to say about her...
alanheaberlin is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 12:50 PM   #9
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,847
Even if the bill in question does make it through the Senate (which doesn't seem particularly likely given the current makeup of that chamber), it is extremely unlikely that President Obama would sign it as he's made previous statements against CC and comes from the only state in the country which still has no legal provision for a private individual to carry a loaded firearm.

If this bill goes any further, I see it happening after the next election and then only if the political makeup of the Senate and White House is very different from what it is today. Even then, we could expect rather tenacious opposition because the chances of the "usual suspects" such as Feinstein, Boxer, Schumer, Pelosi, Rush, and McCarthy all losing re-election are very, very remote.

I think that the much more likely path for broadening carry rights is the judiciary and agreements between the states, and I'm not all that convinced that's not the way it should be.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old April 22, 2012, 01:03 PM   #10
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,086
Quote:
I think that the much more likely path for broadening carry rights is the judiciary and agreements between the states, and I'm not all that convinced that's not the way it should be.
I think you're absolutely right. HR 822 will be watered down well before passage, and I don't doubt that a number of onerous riders will be attached. Furthermore, all it does is reinforce the idea that carry is a permitted privilege rather than a right.

What we need (and might get with Woollard) is a Supreme Court verdict affirming a right to carry, and things like reciprocity will emanate from that.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old April 24, 2012, 04:40 PM   #11
TexasFats
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 130
I, personally, don't think that HR822 has a chance of making it through the Senate. If it does, Obama will veto it. Since it takes a 2/3 majority in the House and also a 2/3 majority in the Senate to override a presidential veto, it is dead.

Personally, I think that the judiciary is the better way to go right now. That and agreements between states. It is an interstate compact that allows me to drive in every state on a Texas DL, by the way. There is no national law that requires states to recognize other states' DL's.

Also, HR822 has one subtle danger. While it is totally silent on requirements for issuance of a CHL, if it becomes law, the likes of Boxer, Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein, et. al. will begin to demand passage of another law that sets federal standards for issuance of CHL's. In fact, Boxer has already introduced such a law in the Senate. Right now, it's not going anywhere, but passage of HR 822 could change that. Boxer's bill requires that all carry permits be discretionary rather than shall-issue and that the applicant "show good cause" to need to carry a firearm. That is the danger.
__________________
Gun laws are designed to extend and solidify the power of an elite over a peasantry.

Sauron lives, and his orc minions are on the march.
TexasFats is offline  
Old April 25, 2012, 08:59 PM   #12
TheKlawMan
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 23, 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 2,149
TexaFats, At first blush, to me it seems reasonable that if the one state in effect can impose its decisions on the fitness of an individual for a CCW, that there should be the uniformity created by fedral standards. Think about it,

If one lives in a state with a very thin population and few law enforcement officers per its vast territory, the pressure is on a resident to provide for his own protection. The likelihood of accidental shootings may also be less than it is in a densly populated state.

Taking all things into consideration, state one may opt for very low standards to CCW. Densely populated state 2 with a tax basis able to support a large constabulary may decide that higher standards best assure the safety and welfare of its residents.

Why then should State 2's residents nevertheless have State 1's standards, with risks that were acceptablt to the people of that state but were rejected by those of State 2, imposed upon it.

Some gun rights supporters talk a lot about liberty, but why should the people of one state in effect delegate their legislative rights to the people of a sister state?

The same people might rightly argue that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states.

In actuality, who is affronted by the refusal of certain states to grant comity to the licesees of shall issue states? I don't think many of the agrieved persons are residents of shall issue states, although many would wish to carry when travelling. Isn't it the residents of states like California that cover the right of citzens of other states to carry concealed, but the truth is that many Cali citizens don't want a loose CCW policy.

I am not saying they are right or wrong and the more I look into the CCW issue the more I think it a good thing, but I think it is wrong for Cali to be forced to govern its state according to the laws of another place.

Last edited by TheKlawMan; April 25, 2012 at 09:13 PM.
TheKlawMan is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 08:56 AM   #13
Armorer-at-Law
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 29, 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 358
KlawMan,

All of your reasoning supports that the proposed federal law is a bad idea rather than supporting that there should be some national standards. The federal government has no more Conctitutional authority to set such a standard than to dictate how much water each of our toilets use per flush.
__________________
Send lawyers, guns, and money...
Armorer-at-Law.com
07FFL/02SOT
Armorer-at-Law is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 10:06 AM   #14
JerryM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 1999
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,884
No.
__________________
Ecclesiastes 12:13 *┬ÂLet us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 *For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
JerryM is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 10:32 AM   #15
cannonfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 493
Although it may seem like a good idea up front, I find myself against this bill.

1. It could lead to more government intervention and could lead to more restrictive laws, like was said.

2. The federal government should not dictate anything with firearms unless it is for interstate commerce.

3. That is the beauty of the state government, that they can dictate their own laws as they see fit, not the federal government sees fit, or any other state for that matter.

To voluntarily give the federal government more power goes against everything I stand for personally. I see no problem with states working out who's permits they will honor without the use of the fed. I like it the way it is now. Keep the battles small and separated within the states before we try to tackle the fed's laws.

And I think that can be said about lots of things, not just firearms.

My 2 cents
__________________
Segui il tuo corso e lascia dir le genti - Dante

Blaming guns for crime is like blaming the planes for 9/11
cannonfire is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 10:40 AM   #16
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,421
Quote:
I, personally, don't think that HR822 has a chance of making it through the Senate. If it does, Obama will veto it. Since it takes a 2/3 majority in the House and also a 2/3 majority in the Senate to override a presidential veto, it is dead.
Regardless of its likelihood to earn a veto-proof majority, his party will probably make an all-out concerted effort to ensure that the bill doesn't reach his desk before the November election. Either stance he could take on this bill will upset a lot of voters in crucial swing states. Keeping the bill bottled up will allow his campaign to stay "on message" more easily.

(Pardon the potential sidetrack into politics, I feel it needed to be said.)
Quote:
What we need (and might get with Woollard) is a Supreme Court verdict affirming a right to carry, and things like reciprocity will emanate from that.
+100.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 10:51 AM   #17
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,968
To a federal law mandating recognition of other states' CCLs, I say, "no, thank you." I'd much rather see something akin to the Drivers' License Compact passed at the state level.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 03:51 PM   #18
TexasFats
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 130
Klawman,

I agree with you, but I am considering the political realities of the anti-gun movement. Those people will grasp at any excuse, good, bad, or indfferent, to restrict our rights. If HR822, did become law, then it is quite predictable that, say in 2013, when congress convenes, some of the anti-gun crowd like Schumer, for one, might say something like the following:

"The law now requires all states to recognize other states carry permits; however, some states do not have sufficiently stringent (in Schumer's opinion) requirements for the issuance of those licenses. Therefore, people from other states who would never be allowed to have a permit in NY will be able to carry on our streets. For that reason, we must have a national standard for the issuance of those licenses."

You know that is exactly what Schumer, Boxer, Feinstein, and other anti-gun folks in the House and Senate will argue. And, it sounds reasonable at first glance. Nevermind that in their states, only the wealthy and politically well-connected can get permits. Note: I think that argument is garbage, but it might get some traction. To make sure that out of state licenses are legitimate, they might also require that they all be entered into some new federal database. HR822 has some good things, but I don't think that some of its proponents have sufficiently thought through future unintended consequences. That is my point.
__________________
Gun laws are designed to extend and solidify the power of an elite over a peasantry.

Sauron lives, and his orc minions are on the march.
TexasFats is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 07:43 PM   #19
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannonfire
2. The federal government should not dictate anything with firearms unless it is for interstate commerce.
And if I have a carry license/permit from my home state and I happen to find myself in one of the other states, am I not by definition engaging in interstate commerce?

Besides, there's that pesky Constitution thing:

Quote:
Article 4.

Section 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Is not issuing a license or permit -- to do anything -- an act?
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old April 26, 2012, 09:25 PM   #20
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,086
Quote:
Is not issuing a license or permit -- to do anything -- an act?
It is, but the problem with approaching this from the FF&C angle is that we're reinforcing the notion that bearing arms is a permitted privilege.

A court ruling that it is a right has more force in the long run.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo 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 09:16 AM.


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 0.11488 seconds with 7 queries