House Committee to vote on CCW Reciprocity Soon! - Page 4

alloy · October 31, 2011, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Alloy

Quote:
How about removing restrictions @ post offices, to show how much they care.

Let's worry about one thing at a time.

Let me put it this way, to avoid any what if's or worry....I hope it fails. Because right now, some states need to get thier houses in order. And the Federal Government, needs to do the same.

JimPage · October 31, 2011, 08:18 AM

I stand by my original objection to HR822.

I think despite the well meaning intentions of it's authors and sponsors and supporters, that the NRA is making a huge mistake backing this bill. It's the camel's nose under the tent.

I can think of no program or law from the Feds that has not resulted in eventual interference, control, or sometimes a down right takeover of the program. Examples: Education department - supposed to "help" states with financing education. Sounds good and is well intentioned. Result is Feds dictate to states how they build schools, what curriculum is, even to what social and quasi political issues to promote.: Highway: Feds dictate to state what traffic laws they must have, what safety measures they must take, limit speed limits, how to build roads.: Environment: dictate how much water to use, limit shower head production to conserve water, dictate fuel mixes (ethanol), even banned some light bulbs (Congress did that beauty), mandate toilet tank capacity making toilets that have to flush at least twice to work, ad nauseum

These are just three examples. I can think of no programs the Feds are involved in that has not resulted in various degrees of Fed control, and the control is always advancing, rarely if ever decreasing.

Reasonable people can disagree without vitriol and belittling those who have different opinions. It doesn't make them good or bad, or enemies.

oneounceload · October 31, 2011, 08:39 AM

Quote:

What will happen if NY is forced to accept out-of-state permits is they will start passing lots of laws to restrict carry in sensitive places. Overturning a sensitive place carry restriction would be very tough unless sensitive was so broad as to preclude carry at all.

Exactly - they will make it so impossible to have a loaded gun on your person that you might as well leave it at home

I have a FL CCW - combined with a Utah one I would have most states covered, WITHOUT the Feds getting into this

I agree with Jim - this is the camel's nose - those who think this is great must be younger then I am. The feds have screwed up EVERY social program since FDR and especially since LBJ's Great Society

This will give the gov't just another excuse for a President to appoint yet another "czar" to oversee the "fairness and reciprocity" while developing new programs and training and costs and fess and more taxes, etc......with way too much power and no checks and balances

Chaz88 · October 31, 2011, 10:11 AM

Quote:

I can think of no program or law from the Feds that has not resulted in eventual interference, control, or sometimes a down right takeover of the program.

I agree. The federal government was never intended to create such a huge imbalance of power between them and the states. They often do it indirectly so that they can say they are not infringing on state power. Case in point, for those of us that remember when 18 was a legal drinking age. The states did not have to adopt the Fed. mandate that it be 21 but if they did not the Fed. cut highway funding. Eventually every state caved to the power of the Federal money.

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 10:27 AM

If a state restricts where you can carry, the onus is on the state,not the Feds right? The point being that it would allow me to carry over state lines. If the state law restricts WHERE in that state I can or cannot legally carry, it becomes no different than the places that have signage now in the state in which I reside. It would be my choice to go in or stay out. I care about driving anywhere in this country I choose and not having to worry about being arrested for trying to protect my family by carrying a gun. If I have to defend, I'd rather have the means 20ft away in my car because I had to leave it in there, rather than 2000 miles away. I may be simplifying the law to a degree, but in the end, that's how I read it. The government already has it's nose in my business through the fed background checks. And I'm happy to let them. That process is designed to keep guns out of the hands of someone who shouldn't have them. does it always work? No. No system, state or federal is going to please everyone. If it takes a Federal law giving me the right to protect myself or loved ones outside of confines of my state, sign me up.

oneounceload · October 31, 2011, 10:33 AM

Quote:

If the state law restricts WHERE in that state I can or cannot legally carry, it becomes no different than the places that have signage now in the state in which I reside

They do it now, they will do it even to a greater degree (in those states where the restrictions are high), yet now you will also have the Feds involved

Once they are involved they NEVER go away - they only expand their involvement and then try to fit their insane "one size fits all" mentality - which is why nothing they do ever works. What's good in one area is not in another.

C0untZer0 · October 31, 2011, 11:29 AM

+1 on the Board of Education being an example of exactly why we don't want the Feds messing with gun rights.

The Board of Education has been so misused. At times it was almost turned into a propoganda machine, dictating what would be taught concerning homosexuality, abortion, and religion. At times it's been a force to try to change the history curriculum in our schools to cover less Northern European history and more Native American, South and Central American and African history. At other times it has been used as a force to expand the power of the NEA and AFT teachers' unions. You never know when it will run amok again.

I don't think the law will pass but if it does it amounts to an accural of power to the federal governmnet. If they can create this law - then they can modify it, mess with it, create others that deal with this same right. I don't think they should have the power to mess with it period.

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 11:45 AM

But that's an assumption. I can't imagine the NRA backing a bill that would be bad for gun owners. No, I don't believe everything I read but I'm not an alarmist calling for the Federal government's disbanding either. A bunch of people who live, work,and travel in my area echo the sentiments. We live in very close proximity to VERY restrictive states. As it stands now, if someone doesn't step in, we are basically forced to leave our handguns at home if we feel like going for a drive to see the kids grandparents in MA. So, restrict if you must. It won't be any worse than what we go through now anyway. And it will allow us to stop in to get an ice cream in RI on the way to MA while still being able to carry legally. We are not in the center of a large state where we don't have a need to leave it. It is absolute nonsense that my right to carry to protect myself stops 30 miles from my house. It is also nonsense that I can be issued a carry permit and 30 miles up the road, some will be denied a carry permit because he/she doesn't own a business(basically one of the only ways to get a carry permit in RI). And forget MA! That's the reason I moved to CT!

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 11:52 AM

Quote:

At times it's been a force to try to change the history curriculum in our schools to cover less Northern European history and more Native American, South and Central American and African history.

Probably due to the fact that demographics have changed more than anything.

C0untZer0 · October 31, 2011, 12:07 PM

^ It's just a textbook case of how good intentions eventually go awry at the federal level.

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 12:34 PM

Not sure how it went awry. What was the downside? Where were the negatives?

oneounceload · October 31, 2011, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Not sure how it went awry. What was the downside? Where were the negatives?

The completely rewritten, PC version of history in this country? The way the current and last few admins have accelerated the usurpation of power?

Soon CCW rules will be handled from the Federal level - and with this current admin, that would mean taking the most restrictive stances from every state to make it national policy - maybe they would still allow us to carry in our homes, but only if the gun was unloaded and secured so kids couldn't get it - types of restrictions...............

Or do you REALLY believe the statement: "Hi, I'm from the Federal Government and I'm here to help you"????

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 03:18 PM

History is written by the victors. True or not.
How much gov is too much? How much is too little? Who decides? Why is it that residents of one state get more freedoms than others? Are we not all Americans? Shouldn't we all be entitled to the same rights? If the fed gov passes a law that says my carry permit is good in any state, in effect trumping the state that says no you can't, I go with the gov. Popular with this forum or not.

C0untZer0 · October 31, 2011, 03:50 PM

Legislating it from the fed level amounts to an aggregation of power at the federal level.

I'd rather that 50 states have the freedom to be jackasses (I live in one of those states)

The people who live in those states can try to find remedy in the courts or work locally to fix things, but God save us from do-gooding Washington legislators.

If something like this ever did become law, a few states would line up to challenge it - California and Illinois for sure.

oneounceload · October 31, 2011, 05:01 PM

Quote:

History is written by the victors. True or not.
How much gov is too much? How much is too little? Who decides? Why is it that residents of one state get more freedoms than others? Are we not all Americans? Shouldn't we all be entitled to the same rights? If the fed gov passes a law that says my carry permit is good in any state, in effect trumping the state that says no you can't, I go with the gov. Popular with this forum or not.

Don't like the rules in your state? VOTE THEM OUT
You can't displace some Federal "czar", and once they pass a law, it is extremely hard to "unpass" it

you sound very young, and like I said, probably never had a civics class - they don't teach that anymore

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 06:58 PM

Its not my state I need to vote out. If you read my posts you will see that I am in CT and already have a carry permit. It's the other states I have the problem with. And I did have a civics class. Back in high school which I graduated in '90. Also served 12 years in USMC. Didn't go to college but my daughter is in her second year So no whippersnapper here. I find your assumptions about me that you gathered, not even reading my posts, humorous in the least. Because someone disagrees with your opinion, it sure doesn't mean they are wet behind the ears. Read someone's posts before commenting on them. It helps when you want to have a meaningful discussion.

oneounceload · October 31, 2011, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Its not my state I need to vote out. If you read my posts you will see that I am in CT and already have a carry permit. It's the other states I have the problem with. And I did have a civics class. Back in high school which I graduated in '90. Also served 12 years in USMC. Didn't go to college but my daughter is in her second year So no whippersnapper here. I find your assumptions about me that you gathered, not even reading my posts, humorous in the least. Because someone disagrees with your opinion, it sure doesn't mean they are wet behind the ears. Read someone's posts before commenting on them. It helps when you want to have a meaningful discussion.

wow, you graduated high school in 90?...........nice to see your youth here

and you ARE wet behind the ears young man - I read your BS, and it is wrong, misguided, and full of "hope and change"
which in reality, doesn't happen

but I am glad YOUR rose-colored glasses have blocked your view of reality

Before you accuse ME or anyone else, first - grow up

then gather your FACTS and we will have a meaningful discussion

icedog88 · October 31, 2011, 07:47 PM

Perhaps before you start a personal attack on a member of this forum, you might consider consider that with age comes wisdom, and after that, senility. I wonder wich stage you are in. Holding to your views in the face of reality just means the world has passed you by. Not exactly sure what you think I accused you or any member of this forum of. But again, I may have to chalk that up to your age.

Al Norris · October 31, 2011, 07:57 PM

When we get to the point we have to argue personalities, instead of the issues,

Out Go The Lights.

Say Goodnight, Gracie....

October 31, 2011, 10:27 AM	#80
icedog88 Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: norwich ct Posts: 737	If a state restricts where you can carry, the onus is on the state,not the Feds right? The point being that it would allow me to carry over state lines. If the state law restricts WHERE in that state I can or cannot legally carry, it becomes no different than the places that have signage now in the state in which I reside. It would be my choice to go in or stay out. I care about driving anywhere in this country I choose and not having to worry about being arrested for trying to protect my family by carrying a gun. If I have to defend, I'd rather have the means 20ft away in my car because I had to leave it in there, rather than 2000 miles away. I may be simplifying the law to a degree, but in the end, that's how I read it. The government already has it's nose in my business through the fed background checks. And I'm happy to let them. That process is designed to keep guns out of the hands of someone who shouldn't have them. does it always work? No. No system, state or federal is going to please everyone. If it takes a Federal law giving me the right to protect myself or loved ones outside of confines of my state, sign me up. __________________ "The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949 Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]

October 31, 2011, 11:45 AM	#83
icedog88 Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: norwich ct Posts: 737	But that's an assumption. I can't imagine the NRA backing a bill that would be bad for gun owners. No, I don't believe everything I read but I'm not an alarmist calling for the Federal government's disbanding either. A bunch of people who live, work,and travel in my area echo the sentiments. We live in very close proximity to VERY restrictive states. As it stands now, if someone doesn't step in, we are basically forced to leave our handguns at home if we feel like going for a drive to see the kids grandparents in MA. So, restrict if you must. It won't be any worse than what we go through now anyway. And it will allow us to stop in to get an ice cream in RI on the way to MA while still being able to carry legally. We are not in the center of a large state where we don't have a need to leave it. It is absolute nonsense that my right to carry to protect myself stops 30 miles from my house. It is also nonsense that I can be issued a carry permit and 30 miles up the road, some will be denied a carry permit because he/she doesn't own a business(basically one of the only ways to get a carry permit in RI). And forget MA! That's the reason I moved to CT! __________________ "The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949 Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]

October 31, 2011, 12:34 PM	#86
icedog88 Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: norwich ct Posts: 737	Not sure how it went awry. What was the downside? Where were the negatives? __________________ "The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949 Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]

October 31, 2011, 03:18 PM	#88
icedog88 Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: norwich ct Posts: 737	History is written by the victors. True or not. How much gov is too much? How much is too little? Who decides? Why is it that residents of one state get more freedoms than others? Are we not all Americans? Shouldn't we all be entitled to the same rights? If the fed gov passes a law that says my carry permit is good in any state, in effect trumping the state that says no you can't, I go with the gov. Popular with this forum or not. __________________ "The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949 Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]

October 31, 2011, 06:58 PM	#91
icedog88 Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: norwich ct Posts: 737	Its not my state I need to vote out. If you read my posts you will see that I am in CT and already have a carry permit. It's the other states I have the problem with. And I did have a civics class. Back in high school which I graduated in '90. Also served 12 years in USMC. Didn't go to college but my daughter is in her second year So no whippersnapper here. I find your assumptions about me that you gathered, not even reading my posts, humorous in the least. Because someone disagrees with your opinion, it sure doesn't mean they are wet behind the ears. Read someone's posts before commenting on them. It helps when you want to have a meaningful discussion. __________________ "The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949 Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]

October 31, 2011, 08:18 AM	#77
JimPage Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2010 Location: Rome, NY Posts: 941	I stand by my original objection to HR822. I think despite the well meaning intentions of it's authors and sponsors and supporters, that the NRA is making a huge mistake backing this bill. It's the camel's nose under the tent. I can think of no program or law from the Feds that has not resulted in eventual interference, control, or sometimes a down right takeover of the program. Examples: Education department - supposed to "help" states with financing education. Sounds good and is well intentioned. Result is Feds dictate to states how they build schools, what curriculum is, even to what social and quasi political issues to promote.: Highway: Feds dictate to state what traffic laws they must have, what safety measures they must take, limit speed limits, how to build roads.: Environment: dictate how much water to use, limit shower head production to conserve water, dictate fuel mixes (ethanol), even banned some light bulbs (Congress did that beauty), mandate toilet tank capacity making toilets that have to flush at least twice to work, ad nauseum These are just three examples. I can think of no programs the Feds are involved in that has not resulted in various degrees of Fed control, and the control is always advancing, rarely if ever decreasing. Reasonable people can disagree without vitriol and belittling those who have different opinions. It doesn't make them good or bad, or enemies.

October 31, 2011, 11:29 AM	#82
C0untZer0 Junior member Join Date: April 21, 2011 Location: Illinois Posts: 4,555	+1 on the Board of Education being an example of exactly why we don't want the Feds messing with gun rights. The Board of Education has been so misused. At times it was almost turned into a propoganda machine, dictating what would be taught concerning homosexuality, abortion, and religion. At times it's been a force to try to change the history curriculum in our schools to cover less Northern European history and more Native American, South and Central American and African history. At other times it has been used as a force to expand the power of the NEA and AFT teachers' unions. You never know when it will run amok again. I don't think the law will pass but if it does it amounts to an accural of power to the federal governmnet. If they can create this law - then they can modify it, mess with it, create others that deal with this same right. I don't think they should have the power to mess with it period.

October 31, 2011, 12:07 PM	#85
C0untZer0 Junior member Join Date: April 21, 2011 Location: Illinois Posts: 4,555	^ It's just a textbook case of how good intentions eventually go awry at the federal level.

October 31, 2011, 03:50 PM	#89
C0untZer0 Junior member Join Date: April 21, 2011 Location: Illinois Posts: 4,555	Legislating it from the fed level amounts to an aggregation of power at the federal level. I'd rather that 50 states have the freedom to be jackasses (I live in one of those states) The people who live in those states can try to find remedy in the courts or work locally to fix things, but God save us from do-gooding Washington legislators. If something like this ever did become law, a few states would line up to challenge it - California and Illinois for sure.

October 31, 2011, 07:47 PM	#93
icedog88 Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2011 Location: norwich ct Posts: 737	Perhaps before you start a personal attack on a member of this forum, you might consider consider that with age comes wisdom, and after that, senility. I wonder wich stage you are in. Holding to your views in the face of reality just means the world has passed you by. Not exactly sure what you think I accused you or any member of this forum of. But again, I may have to chalk that up to your age. __________________ "The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps"-LtGen. Holland M "Howlin' Mad" Smith, USMC,1949 Have you forgotten yet? Look down and swear by the slain of the War that you'll NEVER forget. [Siegfried Sassoon,"Aftermath,"1919]

October 31, 2011, 07:57 PM	#94
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	When we get to the point we have to argue personalities, instead of the issues, Out Go The Lights. Say Goodnight, Gracie....