Bill Would Let Legal Gun Owners Carry Weapons Around Country

maybejim said:
There are people who like to live in the land of delusion and people who like to live in the real world. The real world has laws about firearms. This law would be a begining of returning to Constitutional law. It's not the best but a step in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Wow.... more infringement that violates even more rights than just the 2nd is a good thing and a step in the right direction??? l live in the real world where REAL MEN do not allow themselves to be pushed around by those who are their servants....

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app
 
Axeanda45 said:
Wow.... more infringement that violates even more rights than just the 2nd is a good thing and a step in the right direction???
Click to expand...


Violates even more rights?? Sounds like nonsense to me.
Axeanda45 said:
l live in the real world where REAL MEN do not allow themselves to be pushed around by those who are their servants....
Click to expand...


Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! I guess that makes you not a "real" man then.
 
BC1 said:
I would think the anti-gunner response would be to remove carry permits from dem controlled states. Consider places like NY and NJ. They'll invoke the "states rights" constitutional argument. I say this is never gonna happen.
Click to expand...

A handful of states, CA and many in the NE (NY, NJ, CT, MD, etc.) don't honor the US Constitution, why in hell would anyone expect to honor any other federal law?
 
Originally Posted by BC1 View Post
I would think the anti-gunner response would be to remove carry permits from dem controlled states. Consider places like NY and NJ. They'll invoke the "states rights" constitutional argument. I say this is never gonna happen.
Click to expand...
About the part of your post I put in bold for emphasis.....

If a Federal law for country wide reciprocity says anything about States that do not issue a concealed carry permit are exempt I also would expect a bunch of States to simply do away with their existing carry permits. This would negate any benefit for those who travel because they still would not be able to carry in those States......................

.............. and it would screw over those who already have carry permits in those States.

Actually it wouldn't surprise me if some gun owners/carriers supported doing away with carry permits in their State just so they wouldn't have to put up having people with less training/cheaper fees from other States making a mockery of their expensive/loads of hassle to get carry permits.
 
Bikenut said:
I also would expect a bunch of States to simply do away with their existing carry permits. This would negate any benefit for those who travel because they still would not be able to carry in those States......................
.............. and it would screw over those who already have carry permits in those States.
Click to expand...
The problem with that is the SC (and even the 9th Circuit) has ruled the states have to allow carrying. So all the whining about what negative problem might come up does nothing but gets in the way of gradually getting to legitimate Constitutional carry. We didn't get our rights stolen in one big swipe and we're not likely to get them back in one big swipe. This is a good step forward.
By the way while it is always a good idea to have training, there is no evidence that training over no training for a carry permit offers any improvement in anything. It does price many out of being able to utilize their rights however and makes it seem that "sensible" gun laws are the way to go ending up with the loss of our rights.
 
maybejim said:
The problem with that is the SC (and even the 9th Circuit) has ruled the states have to allow carrying. So all the whining about what negative problem might come up does nothing but gets in the way of gradually getting to legitimate Constitutional carry. We didn't get our rights stolen in one big swipe and we're not likely to get them back in one big swipe. This is a good step forward.
By the way while it is always a good idea to have training, there is no evidence that training over no training for a carry permit offers any improvement in anything. It does price many out of being able to utilize their rights however and makes it seem that "sensible" gun laws are the way to go ending up with the loss of our rights.
Click to expand...
States have to "allow" carrying.... but what has "allow" got to do with Constitutional carry? Constitutional carry is being able to carry in any manner wished without needing a permit of any kind.

A hypothetical as an illustration.... a State could do away with concealed carry yet still "allow" open carry.... perhaps even require a permit to do so and only recognize open carry permits from other States.... not to mention having a permit system that is so expensive and so difficult to qualify for that only the rich and connected can afford and take the time/effort to jump through the hoops that the common man is left out of the process altogether... yet that State still "allows" carrying.

And you mentioned what I was talking about when the government is in control of who is "allowed" then it is also in control of who is .. not.. "allowed". And that can be done simply by requiring a certain level of training (that costs money the poor don't have) and setting fees for the permit (that costs money the poor don't have).

When I look at the Federal government getting involved in mandating all States recognize concealed carry permits I do not see any incremental step towards regaining Constitutional carry. I see more government power to control with the only upside being a temporary convenience for those who travel. And I say a temporary convenience because once the Federal government gets a toe hold on controlling carry permits it won't be long before Obama and his anti gun supporters in Congress find a way to show "we the people" just how much power they have to....... not.... "allow".

Now... to clear up any possible misconceptions... I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a universal right that all people the entire world over have just because they are human beings. It is governments that impose penalties ranging from training costs/fees, to imprisonment, to death, for actually exercising that right. So I just can't support giving more power to the government to have a chance to impose new/more penalties bolstering the permit system that really strengthens the government's power.... in exchange for convenience.

Not to mention the whole permit thing only penalizes the law abiding.... criminals are the one's who actually exercise the right to bear arms by bearing arms in spite of any laws that say otherwise. Imagine that... our government has set up laws that infringe on the right to bear arms by making the good guys criminals while the criminals are the one's who are living "shall not be infringed".

And, my personal opinion, if a person wishes to be able to travel from State to State the right to bear arms would be better served if they put their efforts to helping gain true Constitutional carry in those States instead of helping the government have more power to do away with "shall not be infringed" by begging Daddy Fed for permission.
 
Unfortunately it is the attitude of we have to get everything we want or nothing that leaves us with nothing. It is a shame that people who are for gun rights are such a detriment to our getting our gun rights because we can't get everything at one time.
 
maybejim said:
Unfortunately it is the attitude of we have to get everything we want or nothing that leaves us with nothing. It is a shame that people who are for gun rights are such a detriment to our getting our gun rights because we can't get everything at one time.
Click to expand...

Small steps in the wrong direction are worse than no steps in either direction.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
 
Might, could, but actually has nothing to do with the Fed's taking over or making things worse. We have met the enemy and it is us. A carry permit is unconstitutional. Having to have multiple carry permits to simply travel is unconstitutional and a disaster. This law brings us to a situation similar to a drivers license reducing the insanity of requiring multiple licenses to simply having one. Let's take this first step and then go after the unconstitutional requirement of being "licensed". It is a crime that some gun owners are our own worse enemy.
 
maybejim said:
Might, could, but actually has nothing to do with the Fed's taking over or making things worse. We have met the enemy and it is us. A carry permit is unconstitutional. Having to have multiple carry permits to simply travel is unconstitutional and a disaster. This law brings us to a situation similar to a drivers license reducing the insanity of requiring multiple licenses to simply having one. Let's take this first step and then go after the unconstitutional requirement of being "licensed". It is a crime that some gun owners are our own worse enemy.
Click to expand...

Taking one step in the wrong direction, makes it that much harder to turn around and take two steps back in the right direction. We will never have the Right to travel by personal vehicle again...you really want the Right to keep and bear arms to be the same? There is point of no return, before we reset the gps all together...

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
 
maybejim said:
Violates even more rights?? Sounds like nonsense to me.



Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! I guess that makes you not a "real" man then.
Click to expand...
Nonsense? by REQUIRING States to do something that the federal govt has NO CONSTITUTIONAL power to make them do isnt ANOTHER infringement on RIGHTS? You really are a stupid one arent you....
 
Actually the Constitution under the full faith and credit clause calls for the states to recognize one another's laws, that includes drivers licenses. So this law is nothing more than calling for a part of the Constitution to be followed (while still ignoring the 2nd Amendment). It is a step in the right direction being fought by the anti-gun nuts and foolish gun owners.
 
maybejim said:
Actually the Constitution under the full faith and credit clause calls for the states to recognize one another's laws, that includes drivers licenses. So this law is nothing more than calling for a part of the Constitution to be followed (while still ignoring the 2nd Amendment). It is a step in the right direction being fought by the anti-gun nuts and foolish gun owners.
Click to expand...
It is a step in the WRONG DIRECTION..... Anyone who cannot fathom that simple little FACT is, like I said already, DELUSIONAL..... ANYTHING the govt tries to do about firearms is a BAD THING... it is also UNCONSTITUTIONAL.... ANY TYPE OF INFRINGEMENT IS STILL AN INFRINGEMENT....
 
maybejim said:
Unfortunately it is the attitude of we have to get everything we want or nothing that leaves us with nothing. It is a shame that people who are for gun rights are such a detriment to our getting our gun rights because we can't get everything at one time.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between working to lessen the power of government to control the right to bear arms and handing more power to the government in the hopes of gaining some convenience while thinking the government being in control of carry ... permits.... has something to do with wresting Constitutional carry from the government.

Working to gain true Constitutional carry instead of furthering the power to control exercising the right to bear arms is not expecting an all or nothing approach. But asking Daddy Fed for permission isn't working to further the right to bear arms either. All that does is put Daddy Fed in control of concealed carry nationwide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

Total: 533 (members: 1, guests: 532)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,531
Messages
610,692
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6

Share this page

Back
Top