House considers bill for for all states to recognize your home state permit - Page 10
Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 135

Thread: House considers bill for for all states to recognize your home state permit

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    OHIO
    Posts
    2,109
    Santa, I took your advice and actually read the 14th amendment... (I had forgotten what it said) and obviously, YOU have not read it yourself, either that, or you dont understand it....
    _______________________________________________
    Section 1.

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    _____________________________________________

    Isnt the 2nd Amendment one of the "Privileges or immunities" we posses by being a "citizen"?

    That right there proves that the States are going against the Constitution/2nd (and 14th!) Amendment by having/issuing CCW permits in the first place!


    That we even have to have permits is on its face an infringement, period...So, tell me how forcing each Individual State to allow UNCONSTITUTIONAL INFRINGEMENTS from other States isnt yet more infringement? How is this false logic allowed to stand? Because those like you, (and the nra) who think they are helping are actually aiding in our demise.......

  2.   
  3. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Axeanda45 View Post
    That we even have to have permits is on its face an infringement, period...So, tell me how forcing each Individual State to allow UNCONSTITUTIONAL INFRINGEMENTS from other States isnt yet more infringement? How is this false logic allowed to stand? Because those like you, (and the nra) who think they are helping are actually aiding in our demise.......
    I have some pretty good pain killers and muscle relaxers for my bad back, but I am going to need something a lot more powerful if I'm going to be able to follow your logic.

    I understand your gripe with the premise of permits. But how you think that a bill that will grant more opportunity to exercise our gun rights is an infringement of our gun rights is beyond my logical abilities. I have read your rants on this thread and I have to tell you that your attitude of "don't do anything if you can't do everything" only hurts our cause. This is a positive step in the right direction. Elitist attitudes that allow no room for differing opinions only cause more problems (look at the Obama administration for an example of the effectiveness of elitist attitudes).

    Well said, santa. I hope your math is correct when it comes to votes and veto override.

  4. #93
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    475

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by G50AE View Post
    I am sighting santa for a paragraphs violation. Please edit the previous posting to make it more readable by using paragraphs. If you do it well, I might even let you have a Sheepdog-snack.
    Quote Originally Posted by santa View Post
    My typing skills are limited to one finger on one letter at a time and I am still figureing out how the keyboard works. No kidding I never learned how to type. My typing is only marginally better than my SPELLUN. And as far as a snack I prefere Scooby-snacks.
    Being that I have nothing better to do I will try to fix it.



    I support the bill. It does NOT establish a Federal permit system. It simply says state must recognize other stateís permits if they issue them themselves. Only Illinois (and DC?) would we not be able to carry in. As far as the argument that it is a 'states rights' intrusion, the Congress does have that power in some circumstances already, this in my (and many others)opinion being one of them.

    Read the Fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution. This bill DOES NOT change the laws or standards or regulations in any state regarding issuing permits to its own citizens. States already recognize driver licenses from other states, this bill treats gun permits the same way. Out of state permit carriers would still have to obey the laws of the state they are visiting, for example no carry in a bar(21 and older). Will this bill cause some states like New York, Maryland, New Jersey and other 'hard to get permit state' to stop issuing? Not likely. Besides isnít it next to impossible already in New Jersey for instance for the average Joe Blow to get one anyway? What the bill WOULD DO is show the rest of the country how law abiding 99.99% of concealed weapon permit holders are and that the streets wonít 'run with the blood of innocents'. This might cause some 'hard to get permit states' to change their laws.

    As far as the idea that this opens the door for Congress to pass future intrusive gun laws that is poppycock. Say Congress doesnít pass this bill, whatís stopping them from passing a new gun-control bill requiring for instance all guns to be registered?

    Also check out section C of the bill which reads "A person carrying a concealed handgun under this section shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to THE SAME CONDITIOND OR LIMITATIONS THAT APPLY TO RESIDENTS of the state who have permits issued by the state or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the state". As I (and my lawyer) and many others read this, this section extends to out of state permit holders the same rights as local permit holders. This means the 'FEDERAL school exclusion' law would mean out of state permit holders would be legal driving by a school UNDER FEDERAL LAW just as local permit holders already are.


    As far as the bad amendments to the bill, they were defeated. There is over 250 co-sponsors in the House and if you want a veto-proof number it takes (if all members are voting) 290 to override an Obama veto. It is likely the bill will get more than that anyway. Considering the changed make up of the Senate in the last election the bill will pass there also even allowing for stopping a filibuster, which takes 60 votes. However if ALL the Senators are voting it would take 67 votes to override an Obama veto, not impossible but iffy. Do remember this (2012) is an election year so it stands a good chance. Also remember Obama signed the bill allowing for National Park carry. True that bill was 'tacked on' an unrelated bill, but there are some plans that due do the same in this case. Now to all of you who are mistrustful of anything that comes out of Washington DC? SO AM I! But now and then good things do happen. This is one of them. It would stop the inequalities at many state lines.

    Many of you (including me) have complained bitterly about how we canít legally carry on our out of state vacations. This bill would change that. To those who think the answer is in changing state laws I say great and how many decades will this take? By the way I am NOT a member of the NRA, but considering their support of this bill I will join. Do NOT let the 'Brady Bunch' and their propaganda against this bill Fool you. They would like nothing better and indeed have made it a top priority to defeat this bill. If this means dividing gun owners, they will rejoice. Donít help the 'Brady Bunch'. Letís support this bill. Oh and "this is NOT a paid political advertisement".

    I tried my best but this new web design does weird things when you paste your paragraphs from word into it. But I think you will be able to find it easier to read.

  5. #94
    OK, thanks Kasper. Looking at Santa's post gave me a headache at line three. Your rewrite clarified things for me. I'll send you a Sheepdog-snack.

    P.S. Sheepdog-snacks are a lot better than Scooby-snacks, because Sheepdog-snacks are "tactical".

  6. #95
    I hope this can get done before Thanksgiving. I will be heading back to my home state of Oregon and would feel a lot better if I could carry there like I used to when I was a resident.

  7. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    OHIO
    Posts
    2,109
    Quote Originally Posted by olsparky View Post
    I have some pretty good pain killers and muscle relaxers for my bad back, but I am going to need something a lot more powerful if I'm going to be able to follow your logic.

    I understand your gripe with the premise of permits. But how you think that a bill that will grant more opportunity to exercise our gun rights is an infringement of our gun rights is beyond my logical abilities. I have read your rants on this thread and I have to tell you that your attitude of "don't do anything if you can't do everything" only hurts our cause. This is a positive step in the right direction. Elitist attitudes that allow no room for differing opinions only cause more problems (look at the Obama administration for an example of the effectiveness of elitist attitudes).

    Well said, santa. I hope your math is correct when it comes to votes and veto override.
    My logic is flawed? Sorry that you seem to misunderstand... Let me try AGAIN..... PROMOTING MORE UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, no matter if they might possibly be good in one area (lessen the infringement in one area) BUT, by doing so, they infringe on ANOTHER AREA of our rights or the Constitution is NOT a good thing, sorry..... I dont care how wonderful the "un-infringement" is, if it accomplishes this by further infringements in another area, it is just as bad as or worse than the initial problem.....

    Those of you in the "gun rights" arena who are promoting this are in actuality PROMOTING MORE UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS....

    Cant you understand that at all?

    If you want to fight for our "Rights", then fight for ALL of them..... DO NOT promote ANYTHING that infringes (Goes against Constitution or BOR) in ANY WAY AT ALL, or you are actually doing the opposite of what you think you are accomplishing...


    Your logic = lets fight for this because it is good for the 2nd Amendment (all the while ignoring all other "rights" it infringes on by doing so)

    My logic = lets fight for NO FURTHER INFRINGEMENTS AT ALL......... Otherwise, we are part of the problem, not the solution....

  8. #97
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    OHIO
    Posts
    2,109
    Let me add one thing to this that I have failed to mention... It would be nice if we didnt have to worry if we were breaking some "law" when we cross any State line while armed...... That would be wonderful. but the reality is we cannot.....

    Those who are working to change this have their heart in the right place, dont get me wrong.... But they have it in their head that all those UnConstitutional "laws" are valid..... that is the wrong place to start, and is not a valid/strong foundation at all...

    You need to get down to the root (foundation) to be able to do things correctly, otherwise you are just wasting time and giving your approval of those false "laws" and defeating yourself before you even begin...

    There is US Supreme Court precedent that ANY "Law" that does not line up (infringes) upon the Constitution and BOR is invalid on its face, and we dont have to follow it... So, WHY are you FIGHTING FOR something that only FURTHER validates this so-called laws power when it has none to begin with?


    *steps off soapbox and goes home*


    If you dont understand it by now, I fear that you never will... and it proves that we are further down the road to tyranny than even I thought possible........ because those that think they are helping are actually hurting our cause...... and refuse to see /acknowledge that truth.

  9. #98
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaucho View Post
    I hope this can get done before Thanksgiving. I will be heading back to my home state of Oregon and would feel a lot better if I could carry there like I used to when I was a resident.
    Can you tell me how you can carry in a federal gun free school zone in Oregon without a Oregon CCW license, because 822 does not vacate federal law, I have a license in Texas and AZ only because I do not wish to be arrested, I am pro unabridged 2nd amendment and support open carry, when at vacation home in AZ I open carry, when in Texas my primary home I have to CC. Olsparky tell me where 822 vacates federal gun free school zones. In a recent talk with the NRA, brouht this up and the answer was it does not protect you from federal prosecution.

  10. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by Axeanda45 View Post
    My logic is flawed? Sorry that you seem to misunderstand... Let me try AGAIN..... PROMOTING MORE UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, no matter if they might possibly be good in one area (lessen the infringement in one area) BUT, by doing so, they infringe on ANOTHER AREA of our rights or the Constitution is NOT a good thing, sorry..... I dont care how wonderful the "un-infringement" is, if it accomplishes this by further infringements in another area, it is just as bad as or worse than the initial problem.....

    Those of you in the "gun rights" arena who are promoting this are in actuality PROMOTING MORE UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS....

    Cant you understand that at all?

    If you want to fight for our "Rights", then fight for ALL of them..... DO NOT promote ANYTHING that infringes (Goes against Constitution or BOR) in ANY WAY AT ALL, or you are actually doing the opposite of what you think you are accomplishing...


    Your logic = lets fight for this because it is good for the 2nd Amendment (all the while ignoring all other "rights" it infringes on by doing so)

    My logic = lets fight for NO FURTHER INFRINGEMENTS AT ALL......... Otherwise, we are part of the problem, not the solution....
    With the 14th amendment in place (whether you like it or, like me, dislike it) and the "Full Faith and Credit" (Art4, Sec1)clause solidly in place, I just don't see the infringement here.

    If it were a bill creating a national CHL, I would agree with you...but this bill would just reinforce full faith and credit (which is the basis under which such state acts such as driver licensing and marriages are recognized by other states) by specifying that 2nd amendment rights (such as they are at this point) must also be included.

    The law should not even be needed if the SCOTUS had any kind of real consistency in interpretation.

  11. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare45 View Post
    Can you tell me how you can carry in a federal gun free school zone in Oregon without a Oregon CCW license, because 822 does not vacate federal law, I have a license in Texas and AZ only because I do not wish to be arrested, I am pro unabridged 2nd amendment and support open carry, when at vacation home in AZ I open carry, when in Texas my primary home I have to CC. Olsparky tell me where 822 vacates federal gun free school zones. In a recent talk with the NRA, brouht this up and the answer was it does not protect you from federal prosecution.
    The wording of the bill specifies that CHL holders will have the same rights as holders of resident licenses...in Oregon, a CHL holder is exempt from the federal restriction against carrying on school property.

Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast