National CCW - Page 4
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 71

Thread: National CCW

  1. #31
    Again, don't get me wrong, I carry. I am happy that my state laws say that I have the right to use a hand gun to defend my life, and that I can conceal it.

  2.   
  3. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    286
    I agree. This smells of a legal trick. Use something we would support without really looking at it and really asking what the consequences will be in terms of forcing a states hand in other ways on other issues. If a state wont accept my gun then screw'em.

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    Passed the house no problem look at NRA ILA and see all the good Dems that tried to add amendment preventing or changing the law all lost, Senate another problem, our pos president is never in town and can't seem to remember to hold his hand over his heart when the National Anthem is played, the simple answer would have been to force all states to recognize the license just like the drivers license. Hope all goes well.

  5. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by snatale42 View Post

    As far as the Permitless states, I'm sure they'll start to offer permits for those who choose to get them for reciprocity reasons. Just like they have to get letters and documentation already for applying for Non-Res permits.
    The only permit-less state is VT. The rest with ConCarry still have the permit option. VT residents can just get a permit from another state. VT the State doesn't have to change anything.

  6. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by alduane View Post
    "Those who would trade liberty for security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
    Thomas Jefferson

    Very true, but the actual quote is "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." and is attributed to Benjamin Franklin, not Jefferson.
    Yeah, it's the shortened version and many argue who actually said it Franklin or Jefferson. I really don't care as it makes a powerful statement
    "Those who would trade liberty for security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
    "The original point and click interface was a Smith & Wesson".

  7. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by RRrider:245223
    Quote Originally Posted by snatale42 View Post
    SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, is pretty clear language. If a state says, "You can carry BUT........" How is that not infringing?
    Some would argue that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with personal self defense and the right to conceal carry...

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    I get asked in discussion about how my Militia is doing by gun hating liberals.


    Don't get me wrong here, I am better trying to understand. I support gun laws in general, in fact I wrote my Congressman about this bill.
    Sometimes I wish the Founding Fathers had wrote it like this;

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,, shall not be infringed.
    The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Just so the frickn illiterate morons could understand it....

  8. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Southwestern, MI
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by longslide10 View Post
    Yeah, it's the shortened version and many argue who actually said it Franklin or Jefferson. I really don't care as it makes a powerful statement
    Yes it is a powerful statement that I thought about many times during the Bush years. Many may argue whether Jefferson or Franklin said it but there really isn't any doubt it was Franklin. If Jefferson said it he was quoting Franklin.

  9. I don't think Senate or the empty suit in the White House will let it pass. It does not affect CPL standards any more than 50 state recognition affects drivers license standards. I HOPE it passes, but I am not optimistic.
    “The police of a State should never be stronger or better armed than the citizenry. An armed citizenry, willing to fight is the foundation of civil freedom.” Heinlein

  10. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamilton Felix:245298
    I don't think Senate or the empty suit in the White House will let it pass. It does not affect CPL standards any more than 50 state recognition affects drivers license standards. I HOPE it passes, but I am not optimistic.
    They will if its attached to another bill that they really want, though I'm not a fan of bipartisan bills.

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Chandler
    Posts
    221
    The vote on H.R. 822 was 272 to 154. there were 43 Dems voting for the Bill and 7 Republicans voted against it. If the winning ratio of 64 percent held in the Senate, it would be a "filibuster-proof" majority but not a "veto-proof" one. It would only take 2 or 3 more "Aye" votes in the Senate to make it "Obama-proof".
    MOLON LABE

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

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