House considers bill for for all states to recognize your home state permit - Page 5
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 135

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

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    699
    Wow you guys really know how to confuse a situation. Its simple;

    It forces all states to recognize permits from other states, it doesn't matter if they have a permit system or not.

    It is constitutionally mandated that the Fed can enforce compliance with the Bill of Rights, state rights notwithstanding, end of story.

    They've got it right this time, this is a good thing.

  2.   
  3. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfettered Might View Post
    Wow you guys really know how to confuse a situation. Its simple;

    It forces all states to recognize permits from other states, it doesn't matter if they have a permit system or not.

    It is constitutionally mandated that the Fed can enforce compliance with the Bill of Rights, state rights notwithstanding, end of story.

    They've got it right this time, this is a good thing.
    If the state, IL, does not have a permit system in place, it does not effect them. If this bill passes you can NOT carry in IL. Or DC...even tho DC is not a state and should not be separated as such.

  4. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Off of I-80 between Des Moines and Cheyenne
    Posts
    1,207
    Blog Entries
    1
    How about a bill that tosses out all federal gun laws, along with all state, county and municipal gun laws, er, infringements? Or is the Second Amendment a hollow shell of an idea that nobody really understands or cares about? Needing to get a boot-lick permit in the first place is an infringement.

    Radical? Can you imagine how radical those crazy forefathers of ours were when they wrote it into the Bill of Rights? Yeah, those same all-or-nothing types that faced death in creating our founding documents that gave us our unique freedoms. And now we are discussing to what level trashing our freedoms is acceptable. Permits, concealed carry or not, what ammo we can have, what caliber, permit reciprocity... One step at a time those bent on taking our liberty away are succeeding by having us keep our eyes off the prize, off the real fight that they may be winning, while most of us have no idea we may be losing.
    1)"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty." -Thomas Jefferson.
    2)"Imagine how gun control might be stomped if GOA or SAF had the (compromising) NRA's 4 million members!" -Me. http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/nraletter.htm

  5. #44
    Yeah. Here's the scary scenario. Right now we have 1 state in our nation that denies its citizens the right to carry. The powers that be in that state would like nothing better than to keep it that way.

    I'm all in favor of being able to carry from my home state to any other carrying state.

    But... if this law is voted in so that carrying is a federal matter, then the possibility of a federal BAN on carrying is also a possibility. Who knows what kind of congress we'll have 5 or 10 years from now. Frightening.

    I'll always vote for the party that expands my freedoms, rather than contracts them. I just don't know that I am comfortable with all the power being situated in one lawmaking body.

  6. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    If the state, IL, does not have a permit system in place, it does not effect them. If this bill passes you can NOT carry in IL. Or DC...even tho DC is not a state and should not be separated as such.
    ^ This is absolutely correct. Nor can you carry in your home state without a permit from that state. It's not rocket science folks.

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Honolulu, HI & Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    2,797
    Contrary to popular belief, this could turn out to be one HUGE nightmare. I'm always skeptical of laws that have the support of BOTH major political parties.
    "A few well placed shots with a .22LR is a lot better than a bunch of solid misses with a .44 mag!" Glock Armorer, NRA Chief RSO, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Muzzleloading Rifle, Muzzleloading Shotgun, and Home Firearm Safety Training Counselor

  8. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    "But... if this law is voted in so that carrying is a federal matter, then the possibility of a federal BAN on carrying is also a possibility. Who knows what kind of congress we'll have 5 or 10 years from now. Frightening."

    A whole bunch of people have tried to make that same point. It still has no logic or sense. It doesn't make carrying a federal matter. It doesn't change the possibility of the Fed's trying to make carrying a Federal matter one iota. It is one small step towards removing the unconstitutional body of gun laws.
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

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

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab:231763
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfettered Might View Post
    Wow you guys really know how to confuse a situation. Its simple;

    It forces all states to recognize permits from other states, it doesn't matter if they have a permit system or not.

    It is constitutionally mandated that the Fed can enforce compliance with the Bill of Rights, state rights notwithstanding, end of story.

    They've got it right this time, this is a good thing.
    If the state, IL, does not have a permit system in place, it does not effect them. If this bill passes you can NOT carry in IL. Or DC...even tho DC is not a state and should not be separated as such.
    Sorry, I should have said states that allow CC.

  10. The only real benefit that I can see is that it will force some states, (California and Illinois specifically), to actually have legal concealed weapon holders active in their populations even though they have specifically refused to allow their own citizens to exercise their rights.
    California is a "may issue" state, (which means that only those VERY politically connected with lots and lots of money will ever be considered for a permit). Illinois, on the other hand, is the only state out of 50 that does not allow for ANY type of concealed carry that I am aware of. The state of Illinois does not even bother with the blatantly false "lip service" to allowing this basic human right to self defense as they do in California, (which is in direct contradiction to the latest Supreme Court rulings on the subject).
    If this bill passes, then these states, (and the District of Columbia I believe), would be in the rather ridiculous position where they do not allow their own citizens to carry, but out of state visitors can due to a superceding federal law that crosses state jurisdictional boundaries.
    On the one hand, I like that notion as many California residents could apply for and receive a permit from a state such as Utah for example and then use that permit to allow thier concealed carry rights back in California, (in theory anyway, I am sure there would be some legal wrangling around this possibility that will be fought over in the courts).
    On the other hand, however, I also have to agree in principle with others who have posted stating that they do not want ANY new law or federal control over this issue since getting the government involved, no matter how well intentioned, is a universal recipe for disaster and meddlesome ninnying.

  11. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnDPMP View Post
    The only real benefit that I can see is that it will force some states, (California and Illinois specifically), to actually have legal concealed weapon holders active in their populations even though they have specifically refused to allow their own citizens to exercise their rights.
    California is a "may issue" state, (which means that only those VERY politically connected with lots and lots of money will ever be considered for a permit). Illinois, on the other hand, is the only state out of 50 that does not allow for ANY type of concealed carry that I am aware of. The state of Illinois does not even bother with the blatantly false "lip service" to allowing this basic human right to self defense as they do in California, (which is in direct contradiction to the latest Supreme Court rulings on the subject).
    If this bill passes, then these states, (and the District of Columbia I believe), would be in the rather ridiculous position where they do not allow their own citizens to carry, but out of state visitors can due to a superceding federal law that crosses state jurisdictional boundaries.
    On the one hand, I like that notion as many California residents could apply for and receive a permit from a state such as Utah for example and then use that permit to allow thier concealed carry rights back in California, (in theory anyway, I am sure there would be some legal wrangling around this possibility that will be fought over in the courts).
    On the other hand, however, I also have to agree in principle with others who have posted stating that they do not want ANY new law or federal control over this issue since getting the government involved, no matter how well intentioned, is a universal recipe for disaster and meddlesome ninnying.
    Bolded incorrect. Because they have no permit system in place this bill would NOT have any effect on them. You could NOT carry in IL or DC.

Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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