House considers bill for for all states to recognize your home state permit - Page 2
Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 135

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

  1. #11
    Somebody explain to me the 10th Amendment issue that so many are complaining about.

  2.   
  3. #12
    The overview of the bill I read didn't mention any additional federal oversight, only that states that offer permits would have to recognize permits from other states. The states would still have their own requirements for their permit process, and permit holders would have to adhere to the laws of the state they are visiting.

    If there is an opportunity for federal interference with this bill then it should be opposed, even if it means I can never carry in California or New York (two places I feel I need a gun more than anywhere else).

  4. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by olsparky View Post
    The overview of the bill I read didn't mention any additional federal oversight, only that states that offer permits would have to recognize permits from other states. The states would still have their own requirements for their permit process, and permit holders would have to adhere to the laws of the state they are visiting.
    Exactly. Feds aren't "taking control"...

  5. #14
    On one hand we all complain about the Feds prohibiting the transfer or shipping of guns across state lines. We complain about them banning certain types of weapons. We complain about the BATFE and NICS with all their little "gotchas" and empire building. We complain about everything the Feds do when it comes to guns.

    We declare that 2A is part of the constitution and should be always upheld. The last time I looked 10A was just as much a part of the constitution as 2A and this bill clearly violates 10A.

    We declare that 2A should apply to all states equally. Yet this bill does not cover all states. It leaves loopholes for states and municipalities to opt out if they want to.

    We want the Feds to stay out of the gun-control business yet right here we are giving the camel even more leverage in getting under the tent. This bill nullifies many of the laws that states have made about training or knowledge of the laws before carrying a gun. This bill is thumbing their noses at state legislatures in deciding state issues. It is not just about reciprocity but about the Feds taking over the gun-control decision from the states. Now if you want the Feds to take over gun "regulation" and rights then this is for you. For me I want the Feds out of it completely.

    Remember that if they say a state has to accept another states permission they can also say they have to accept their restrictions. Do you want your state to have to accept New Jersey's restrictions?

  6. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Just remember---republicans say night, almost all democrats say day. The House passes bills, the Senate could not care less. As a separate "rant", I find this disconnect difference between repubs and dems to be the most disgusting display of partisan politics that does a complete disservice to the citizens of this country and, personally, I lay this all on the back of the king with no clothes and his lackeys whose noses are so brown it disgusts me.

  7. #16
    I want the feds out of the gun control business entirely. But I also want the states to get back in line with the 2nd Amendment. This bill looks promising in the short run, but its the long run im worried about. I have not read the bill, but what's to stop the states from shutting down completely? Man, I just wish people had the collective balls to relocate out of states where their rights are stripped away. States can't operate with no populace to leech from.

  8. #17
    [quote]Subcommittee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) opened the hearing by saying the legislation is needed because state laws on right to carry reciprocity are "confusing, vary widely and can subject otherwise law-abiding citizens to frivolous prosecution."* He also argued that permit holders' fundamental Second Amendment rights were at stake, noting that "this legislation recognizes that the right to bear arms does not stop at the state line."[\quote]

    That last line interprets to me, "we need Federal legislation to control state legislation". I could be misinterpreting it but that is my initial reaction.

    It's mainly a wait and see scenario from this point forward IMO.
    Last edited by Deafninja; 09-16-2011 at 07:37 PM. Reason: Full quote inserted

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    Quote Originally Posted by FN1910 View Post
    I am against any bill that violate the 10th amendment
    I am against any bill that does not apply equally to all 50 states
    I am against the Feds getting involved in gun control
    I am against H.R. 822 and have been since it was introcuced and all other
    attempts at this same BS legislation

    I am not happy with the state laws of most states but I would rather
    put up with them than anything that comes out of Washington.

    If you are in favor of this bill then you are either anti gun rights or a
    hypocrite.
    I have to call you wrong on this one. There is no excuse for someone having to obtain 2 or 3 "licenses" or more just to travel while utilizing a Constitutionally guaranteed Right. I have a son and a place in Idaho so I have Kalifornia, Idaho, Oregon (where the shopping is near Idaho), Utah, and am looking to get Arizona because it's recognized in Nevada (that I travel through to get to Idaho). It's expensive and ridiculous. All states should recognize all other states carry permits even if they have to be forced. The easiest way for that to happen is a simple Federal law (which shouldn't be needed since the 2nd Amendment and/or the Full faith and credit clause of the Constitution should cover it).
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

    What you say isn't as important as what the other person hears

  10. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    but what's to stop the states from shutting down completely?
    The Constitution and this law which would tell them they have to recognize the permits from other states.

    I just wish people had the collective balls to relocate out of states where their rights are stripped away.
    Easier said than done. I have a business in Kalifornia (that mostly I've cut back) and a wife who is being treated for brain cancer at UCLA. We had talked about making Idaho our home of record when I retired but that just isn't working out right now. It is stupid to have to change states to enjoy a Constitutionally guaranteed Right. We need to take back the Constitution.
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

    What you say isn't as important as what the other person hears

  11. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Hey Y'all: The problem with almost all of the comments on this thread is that they make absolute constitutional sense. We are talking about state and federal governments run by politicians who could not give a rat's ass about common sense and the constitution and make sense over something like this. Of course all states should be the same. It was always the intent of the framers of the constitution to ONLY have the federal government supercede individual states when a hodge podge from state to state impeded or destroyed the rights of its citizens to conduct its legally recognized business. This CC business is classic crapola at the state level that should be fixed by the feds but, the way things go in this country these days, never will.

Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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