Contact your representative now for ccw

[youngunz4life]

1)good article^

and

2)tom, let me rephrase though I felt I made my point: at the moment it is as good as it gets. I'll take what I can get & the good w/the bad.

as for a ccw database. this is inevitable. states keep track of who has permits too, and in fact a federal database might allready exist even though it is virtually pointless @ the moment since states handle their own(all it would be is a list of already existing lists anyways). they have a right to keep track of those that have permits. some might dispute it, but you will need to renew your permit eventually just like a license.

now, I have been hearing for DECADES how the DMV is National now that maybe in some places but more often than not it seems to stay at the state...you can purposely or by mistake slip thru the cracks with the state thing(call that the last paragraph babble but I used that growing up in my favor on more than one occaision). Heck you can even get away w/2 licenses...they don't even cancel the old outofstate one when you turn it in upon getting new one in new state

[icedog88]

It might be established that the right to keep and bear arms is in fact fundamental, but it is still open to interpretation if that means to carry, correct?

[Don P]

I could care less who knows I own guns, but that is a separate issue that I do not believe but obviously would be against. If they did that or do that, this bill has nothing to do with it.

On the surface it has noting to do with it as it was stated by another member this bill passing will allow the camel to poke its nose under the tent. This is one reason for privacy the State of FLA has stopped placing the CC permit holders address on the CC license. Again MY OPINION down the line if this bill becomes law the Feds will know who owns what as far as firearms go and thats a bad thing and there would be nothing any one of us could possibly do to stop that from happening.

If they did that or do that, this bill has nothing to do with it.

This the opening of the door.

My curiosity is up with regards to where people are living that are in favor or against this bill.
Are folks for this bill that are living in states that are the short list of reciprocity states. Here in FLA we are reciprocity with 33 states. Just curious. Maybe the mods could set up a poll as to in favor and against with state of residence.

[icedog88]

My curiosity is up with regards to where people are living that are in favor or against this bill.
Are folks for this bill that are living in states that are the short list of reciprocity states. Here in FLA we are reciprocity with 33 states. Just curious. Maybe the mods could set up a poll as to in favor and against with state of residence.

In a few of my earlier posts, I believe I did state those same inferences. Judging by most of the forum members "location" on their profile. Why would anyone who already has reciprocity want this bill? Those of us who don't have it, want it. Seems to be the Northeast primarily in favor.

[Rusty35]

icedog88
Senior Member

In a few of my earlier posts, I believe I did state those same inferences. Judging by most of the forum members "location" on their profile. Why would anyone who already has reciprocity want this bill? Those of us who don't have it, want it. Seems to be the Northeast primarily in favor.

Its not the bill I am opposed to, it the wording in the bill.

I am sure location has something to do with "for or against".
Those with reciprocity have something to lose, those that dont have it, have nothing to lose.

[oneounceload]

I am not worried about losing reciprocity - I am worried about letting the Fed get involved in this - because they only know how to do things in a one-size-fits-all mentality - whether it is education, welfare, health, etc. - the gov't devises one solution - but what might work well in one area may not be feasible in another - but that doesn't matter to them. Secondly, once you let this camel's nose under the tent, it will soon be in bed next to you - this can easily go completely against everything with an edict or decree made by some newly appointed "czar of whatever" that will now be in control of CCW. If you really think DC, NYC, and the rest are going to allow you from out of state to carry more freely than they do their own residents, you are kidding yourselves. Things will become more strict, not less.

[Tom Servo]

at the moment it is as good as it gets. I'll take what I can get & the good w/the bad.

Why would anyone who already has reciprocity want this bill? Those of us who don't have it, want it. Seems to be the Northeast primarily in favor.

Forgive the rest of us if we're not so eager. Taking a meager victory now isn't practical if it comes at the expense of even worse grief later. If the bill were to pass, it would be whittled down to an ineffectual splinter by subsequent legislation and local ordinances. A few states might gain reciprocity with a couple of others, but they're not the brass-ring ones you seem to think.

If you really think you're going to be able to carry in New York City, Baltimore, or Washington DC with the passage of this bill, I've got some oceanfront property in Nevada you might like.

[youngunz4life]

If you really think you're going to be able to carry in New York City, Baltimore, or Washington DC with the passage of this bill...

Yes, I honestly believe this as stated before. Unfortunately, you can not conclusively say otherwise. "That's why they play the game" is a 'shoe' that fits. There was a time that the thought of medical marijuana was a pipe dream(coincidence on example//just a reminder that things can and do change//the draft for War as another example).

Taking a meager victory now isn't practical if it comes at the expense of even worse grief later. If the bill were to pass, it would be whittled down to an ineffectual splinter by subsequent legislation and local ordinances.

You know to put the same phrase back on you basically, you are making an assumption here. You have no evidence of this. It is extremely easy for the federal law to trump state and obviously local ordinances. At the moment(easy fix and something they wouldn't forget when they're tying the shoe), the only escape would basically be to cancel CCW completely. Do you think every anti-state is going to do this even if they have the option and even if there is no consequences set forth by the fed govt? Most are all bark and no bite. They will not bite that hand that feeds them. They are all family and stick together anyways(except when they are fighting).

[youngunz4life]

guyz, these scotch drinkin, cigar smokin, revolver weildin dudes didn't put this bill together to play games or control you. They did it to help their constituents for the greater good and because they can. Do you really trust them all alone at the state level but think they're picking on you when they get in a pack. Roll with it. There is more power in numbers!

now for what I just remembered why I came back for another post:

as for the camel nose and it is amazing how people can honestly see things completely differently, I see it as a foot in the door when this bill passes & that is why the antis hate it. They don't want to give it up because by that point they will know THEY'RE SCREWED(but of course they can huff and puff to get some votes when it happens + I'm fine with that

[icedog88]

How much for that property?

And yes, I do forgive you.

[Tom Servo]

You know to put the same phrase back on you basically, you are making an assumption here. You have no evidence of this.

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.

We're still living with the fallout from that.

[youngunz4life]

sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. there are examples when it went the other way. we might have to put a bottle of scotch on this one someday.....

[youngunz4life]

DAUGHERTY16 (original poster), get back in here

[therealdeal]

We'll see what happens.

[Aguila Blanca]

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.

[oneounceload]

I see it as a foot in the door when this bill passes

If you like foot in the door over camel's nose - OK..........but it will be the FED'S foot in the door to gun control, not gun freedom

Nationalization is not the answer, nor is allowing the feds the authority to control it - which is what will happen here

We let the feds start to control schools and education some decades back and the kids are dumber than ever - they screw up things very easily and then build a bureaucracy to control and oversee it - we do not need that with gun ownership or carry

[Don P]

I don't think any of the above make sense. But, given the lousy wording of the law,

As a side note, here in FLA when the CC laws were written and introduced into law they were anything but perfect.
Before the laws were amended, If you lived across the street from a school or were driving past the school you were in violation of the CC law providing you had a CC license. Duh-huh jeez we didn't think of that. Big whoops. As it stands looking at things as I approach 60 years old the federal government has done plenty wrong/get plenty wrong and when it is realized it takes forever to correct it or they just say screw it and do nothing.
Living in FLA I am more than happy with the current respiratory agreement that FLA has with other states.
Born and raised in NYC I have no desire to go back to the big apple, NJ, DC, IL, CA. This again as others have stated is NOT THE MAGIC CURE ALL PILL. Folks that are so engraved in the 2 nd. amendment and have had no luck getting CCW permits laws changed can always move if it means that much to them.

[icedog88]

Folks that are so engraved in the 2 nd. amendment and have had no luck getting CCW permits laws changed can always move if it means that much to them.

That's not even a realistic option for a lot of people. That's akin to throwing the baby out with the bath water. My entire family is around my area, have an extremely well paying job, and own a pretty nice house. No thanks. Hopefully the one issue I have will change by either HR822, SCOTUS favorable decision, or the states collectively agreeing, rather than me creating other issues for myself and family.

[C0untZer0]

U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson from IL, tried to get an amendment to H.R. 822 that would state that Illinois citizens could carry.


http://www.pantagraph.com/news/local...cc4c03286.html

Only the first 1/3 of the article is about H.R. 822 the remainder is just other politics...

[C0untZer0]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1138835.html

This would over-ride Illinois state law and would honor non-residents's carry permits and allow them to carry in Illinois. But Illinois citizens still would not be allowed to carry.

I just can't take it. It's bad enough that the cheeseheads won the Superbowl, and knocked us out of the playoffs in the process. But now they're going to be able to come to Illinois armed when we're not even allowed to be armed?

It's too much

[alloy]

Sounds like a bad precedent altogether having DC vote on my state's policy regarding Cheeseheads with guns.

That aside...is he trying to let Illinois citizens get non resident permits from another state, and then use that to carry in Illinois?
Are there states that will issue Illinois citizens a non resident permit, currently?

[C0untZer0]

Yes there are a lot of states that issue non-res permits. In fact in some cases it's easier for me to get a non-res permit in PA than it is for someone who lives in a state that issues.

The PA statute reads:

(e)(1) A license to carry a firearm shall be for the purpose of carrying a firearm concealed on or about one's person or in a vehicle and shall be issued if, after an investigation not to exceed 45 days, it appears that the applicant is an individual concerning whom no good cause exists to deny the license. A license shall not be issued to any of the following:
...
(ix) A resident of another state who does not possess a current license or permit or similar document to carry a firearm issued by that state if a license is provided for by the laws of that state, as published annually in the Federal Register by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms of the Department of the Treasury under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(19) (relating to definitions).

So if you live in a state that issues, you have to have a CCW permit from that state.

The state that doesn't issue CCW permits of any kind to anyone, no way no how:

ILLINOIS

If you live in a state that issues without too much hassle then there is no advantage, but in some cases it is easier for me to get a PA CCW than it would be, for instance for someone who lives in CA and is being hassled and denied their CCW by their local anti-gun constabulary. I think NJ might be another example of how it would be easier for me to get a PA permit than someone in NJ.

[youngunz4life]

just a matter of time

[billtheshrink]

If there is a reciprocity law passed, could not New York Calif and Ilannoy require all other states adhere to THEIR policy of no guns unless you are a criminaL?