Concealed Carry Reciprocity is CURRENTLY banned under Federal Law. (Important)


Bohemian

New member
We need to hold the Government Responsible for Virginia Tech and all the other shootings that occur in the UNCONSTITUTIONAL "Gun Free School Zones" AKA: "Kill For Free Zones" and leave our kids and their teachers defenseless act...

I am telling you, we are so long over due for a NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE...

"WE THE PEOPLE" NEED TO TAKE AMERICA BACK TO THE PEOPLE
 

Eagle2009

New member
The Tait case does indeed establish case law for permit holders in the Eleventh Circuit. However, only Alabama, Georgia, and Florida are in the Eleventh Circuit. Courts in the other circuits are not bound by it, and can rule however they please.

The Tait case did nothing to address permit reciprocity. The problem still remains... the GFSZA requires that the law enforcement authorities of the State in which the school is in verify that the individual they "license" is qualified under law before issuing the license. Some States recognize all CCW permits issued by any other State. So if you travel to one of these States, you would not be able to show that the law enforcement authorities of that State verified you (the individual) were qualified under law before issuing that "license." The reciprocity agreements accept that you are qualified... but a reciprocity agreement is in no way the same as law enforcement officers of the State actually "verifying" that the individual is qualified before issuing the "license," as required in the GFSZA statute.

To Congress's credit, I believe their intention was to exempt permit holders. However, when they wrote the law, reciprocity was not wide spread, and it did not occur to them that they needed to make provisions for it. A very simple amendment can fix this.
 

Eagle2009

New member
This thread has over 400 views now... so hopefully several letters have gone out to Congress? I've done most of the work for you, but I can't write people outside of my district. This is why I need your help. Please take the time to do this, it will only take five minutes if you use the letter I already wrote and included in the original post.

Visit this link to contact your Federal Representatives. Link Removed

Visit this link to contact your Federal Senators. U.S. Senate: Senators Home
 

Cooter

Liberty or Death
Patience Bohemian, the sheeple are awaking, it's no time to call for violence.
What we need to be doing is educating the people. If a violent revolt is to happen, then so be it, but that is the last thing anyone wants.
 

fredmaidment

Individuals Rule
US Constitution, Article. IV.

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.

Section. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

My interpretation of Article IV's meaning is that the rights granted by one state to its residents shall be available and permitted to the residents of the various states. This means that if one state offers a firearms permit, it must recognize the permit of another state. It also means that Congress cannot by law give special permission to ignore licenses, permits and contracts issued by one state in any other state.

But I'm no lawyer, just somebody who reads the Constitution a lot.
 
Before anyone starts flooding representatives concerning this law that has been on the books for over ten years research how many people were arrested only for carrying through a school zone. There are far worse matters coming about that need to be stopped. Examples are a treaty that would make reloading ammo all but illegal, continued talk of reinstating the AWB, etc. If you truly feel that this law is worth writing about, by all means do so. You may just want to pick your battles though and there will be many. Just an opinion.
 

Eagle2009

New member
Writing Congress wont hurt, I think we should be writing them about all the issues. This is a democratic society. The fact is, this is the worst law currently on the books. The current lack of strict enforcement is no reason to ignore it. The Justice Department has the ability to bring this into full enforcement whenever they choose to.

For example, the law that allows BATF to restrict the import of guns that don't have any "generally recognized sporting purpose" was actually signed into law in the Gun Control Act of 1968. That clause was ignored for over twenty years... until President George Herbert Walker Bush ordered that it be brought into full enforcement. This is why imports are so severely restricted today, because of a little known, little cared about law, that everyone ignored for over twenty years.
 

Bohemian

New member
Writing Congress wont hurt, I think we should be writing them about all the issues. This is a democratic society. The fact is, this is the worst law currently on the books. The current lack of strict enforcement is no reason to ignore it. The Justice Department has the ability to bring this into full enforcement whenever they choose to.

For example, the law that allows BATF to restrict the import of guns that don't have any "generally recognized sporting purpose" was actually signed into law in the Gun Control Act of 1968. That clause was ignored for over twenty years... until President George Herbert Walker Bush ordered that it be brought into full enforcement. This is why imports are so severely restricted today, because of a little known, little cared about law, that everyone ignored for over twenty years.

This is why we need to push for bringing the country back to the Unabridged Second Amendment, pushing for the repeal of the 1968 GCA, 1934 NFA, FOPA 1986, et.al., and basically rolling back 22,000 plus unconstitutional second amendment infringements and counting...
Link Removed

The fact that the BATFE a division of the IRS implemented by the un-ratified 16th amendment...
is allowed to write, implement, IMPOSE laws at their whim that have not been legislated or voted on is not only UNCONSTITUTIONAL ITS DOWN RIGHT CRIMINAL!

This is the capstone of what we need to educate our Representatives in Washington and elsewhere on ASAP! get the facts and keep them handy and start educating politicians and fellow citizens...
 

abock33

New member
We need to hold the Government Responsible for Virginia Tech and all the other shootings that occur in the UNCONSTITUTIONAL "Gun Free School Zones" AKA: "Kill For Free Zones" and leave our kids and their teachers defenseless act...

I am telling you, we are so long over due for a NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE...

"WE THE PEOPLE" NEED TO TAKE AMERICA BACK TO THE PEOPLE

I think the one we have is good. The Govt just needs to actually follow it.
 

Bohemian

New member
I think the one we have is good. The Govt just needs to actually follow it.

True enough, but it needs to be updated, to include the new TYRANTS...

Hence, the need for a NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE...

for starters...

E.G.:
...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...

...Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies (States); and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain (President of the Untied States) is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation's, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good...

...He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance....

...For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent...

...He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power...

The Declaration of Independence
 
Writing Congress wont hurt, I think we should be writing them about all the issues. This is a democratic society. The fact is, this is the worst law currently on the books. The current lack of strict enforcement is no reason to ignore it. The Justice Department has the ability to bring this into full enforcement whenever they choose to.

For example, the law that allows BATF to restrict the import of guns that don't have any "generally recognized sporting purpose" was actually signed into law in the Gun Control Act of 1968. That clause was ignored for over twenty years... until President George Herbert Walker Bush ordered that it be brought into full enforcement. This is why imports are so severely restricted today, because of a little known, little cared about law, that everyone ignored for over twenty years.

Severely restricted imports? Once the AWB was lifted I obtained a Russian made AK-47 and an Israeli made 9mm. Here's a list of dealers and importers still in business:

Link Removed
 

Eagle2009

New member
ATF, can still, at their discretion deny import of any semiautomatic rifle, or any shotgun they don't feel is suited to "sporting purposes." The Gun Control Act of 1968 allows them to do this.

This is why all the "assault rifles" on the shelves today, are either made completely in America, imported as parts and then assembled such that they only have 10 or less foreign parts, or were imported before 1989.

Here is the law regarding the 10 or fewer parts: Link Removed


This is the news article regarding the import ban http://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/08/us/import-ban-on-assault-rifles-becomes-permanent.html (This was in 1989 and had absolutely no relation to the AWB of 1994, this 1989 ban is still in effect today)


This is why you don't see brand new "assault rifles" sitting on store shelves hot off the factory lines in Germany, Switzerland, Austria etc.
 

Bohemian

New member
ATF, can still, at their discretion deny import to any semiautomatic rifle, or any shotgun they don't feel is suited to "sporting purposes." The Gun Control Act of 1968 allows them to do this.

This is why all the "assault rifles" on the shelves today, are either made completely in America, imported as parts and then assembled such that they only have 10 or less foreign parts, or were imported before 1989.

Here is the law regarding the 10 or fewer parts: Link Removed


This is the news article regarding the import ban
U.S. Company Eluding Assault Rifle Import Ban - The New York Times


This is why you don't see brand new "assault rifles" sitting on store shelves that were made in Germany, Switzerland, etc.

Sorry, will have to agree to disagree with you on this at the moment, as in the last 3 months I have personally bought multiple brand new, manufactured this year, 100% made in Russia assault weapons, Sniper rifles etc, in the box from the factory with the Russian paper work from the oldest firearms dealer in Las Vegas...

With 22,000 plus and counting firearms laws (AKA: Second Amendment Infringements), I can not personally tell you off the top of my head which one(s) allows me to legally purchase what I have in direct contradiction to what you have posted... But I can tell you the the BATFE and the Clark County, Nevada Sheriff's office know I have them...
 
As I stated earlier my AK-47 was manufactured entirely in Russia and then imported. This was after lifting of the AWB and during the law you refer to. Of those prosecuted for carrying through a school zone, all that I could find were arrested for another offense and had that tacked on. I honestly believe, at least for now, this law has had no impact on law abiding CCW or firearms owners. I know from my travels that I haven't been prosecuted under it. The law concerning ten or more parts is for assembling a weapon in the U.S.
 

Eagle2009

New member
I'll trust you on the AK-47. However, only semi-automatic rifles which are "generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes" are imported. This is highly discretionary, so I guess somebody decided to let them in.


But let's try to stay on topic... Yes, all of the people I've found convicted of GFSZA were charged with it as a secondary charge to something more serious. I think law enforcement officers and prosecutors generally use good common sense and discretion while performing their duties. They put their lives on the line every day to make our society a better place. I have a great deal of respect and admiration for them, they generally don't put good people in prison.

But occasionally there is a bad apple. Someone who is not out serving justice, but instead, is using the trust society has bestowed upon them for their own selfish desires. This is why it is extremely important for our Congress to amend bad laws, such as GFSZA, instead of relying on law enforcement's discretion. I don't think GFSZA was ever intended to put permit holders in prison, but one bad apple can destroy many lives before the system weeds him/her out.
 

TatankaGap

New member
the original quote referred to "a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone." - this means that you have to have reasonable cause to believe there is a school zone - you can't be arrested for accidentally driving through one of those dots and get 5 years - remember, the Due Process clause still applies.....
 

Eagle2009

New member
You are correct, the law requires a "knowing" element. So the question becomes, does the jury believe you "reasonably" knew you were within 1000 feet of a school? You may be able to make an argument at 999 feet with a forest between you... but you will have extreme difficulty claiming you didn't know, when you are in sight of a school..

So who has written their Representatives? I took several hours of my personal time to write the letter for you, so please send it out. =)


If you don't know how to contact your elected officials, follow this link: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
 

Bohemian

New member
You are correct, the law requires a "knowing" element. So the question becomes, does the jury believe you "reasonably" knew you were within 1000 feet of a school? You may be able to make an argument at 999 feet with a forest between you... but you will have extreme difficulty claiming you didn't know, when you are in sight of a school..

So who has written their Representatives? I took my personal time to write the letter for you, so please send it out. =)

Existing Precedence has shown Ignorance of the law is not a viable argument, unless the particular law is very obscure, even then it is seldom acceptable...

The Unconstitutional BATFE and IRS routinely beat Ignorance of the Law (tax code, etc) Arguments in court by citizens they have chosen to victimize...

Although, Even the Supreme Court Usurped their power of Judicial Review due to ignorance of Congress, The States and People of the United States, that have allowed it to go on...

Chief Justice John Marshall crafted the most famous and precedent-setting assumption of judicial power in 'Marbury v. Madison'. In writing the majority opinion, Justice Marshall concluded that the Congress had granted the Supreme Court jurisdiction that the Constitution expressly denied it. He convincingly argued that the statute at issue had the effect of altering the Constitution (without following the amending process prescribed in the Constitution) and therefore, the Supreme Court was obliged to declare it unconstitutional. Thus, in one decision, the Supreme Court refused to accept a power given to it by the Legislative Branch, while at the same time it assumed the power of judicial review, something that no legislative body would have ever contemplated granting.

Therefore, the Supreme Court NEVER had the last word, that POWER WAS EXPRESSLY GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE...

The fact that we as citizens in all but 2 states are required to have a CCW is a Second Amendment Infringement in itself...
 

Eagle2009

New member
And in those two States (Alaska and Vermont) you are breaking this federal law every time you drive down the road and pass within 1000 feet of a school. ;)
 

Bohemian

New member
And in those two States (Alaska and Vermont) you are breaking this federal law every time you drive down the road and pass within 1000 feet of a school. ;)

And the Gun Free School Zones and other purposes act (AKA: The Kill for free and leave our kids & their teachers defenseless and other Second Amendment Infringements act)

Is also unconstitutional...

Link Removed
 

New Threads

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,495
Messages
624,308
Members
74,339
Latest member
homeopposition
Top