National CCW - Page 3
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 81

Thread: National CCW

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    How so?
    How so?? I've seen it a number of times where you've griped about people starting a new thread over a previously discussed topic. Heck, you even griped at someone for not using Google before posting here. That sounds like trolling to me.
    You have not contributed anything to this thread yet.
    I've contributed.

    Up until now, you ain't done nothing except whine.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2.   
  3. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    SC Lowcountry
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    Funny, whether the OP intentionally typed "CCW" or not, I knew right off what they meant.....
    Just another example that even concealed carry terminology is different from state to state.

  4. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    SC Lowcountry
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by SR9 View Post
    We now (or soon) the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches of the US Government all in Republican majority. There is no reason that the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act can not be passed in the next year.
    As is?

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...enate-bill/498

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    How so?? I've seen it a number of times where you've griped about people starting a new thread over a previously discussed topic. Heck, you even griped at someone for not using Google before posting here. That sounds like trolling to me.
    So, what are you saying is, you have no evidence of me trolling in this thread. Yet, you are still trolling this thread with an off topic discussion that has no basis.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    I've contributed.
    Please quote the post that shows your contribution in this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    Up until now, you ain't done nothing except whine.
    You apparently haven't read the post you quoted. Do you have anything to say that is on topic? Do you have anything on topic to say about my previous post? Have you actually even thought about the constitutionality of a nation-wide firearm reciprocity law that goes beyond the 2nd Amendment? May be instead of trolling me, you should start thinking about the topic of this thread?

  6. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    So, what are you saying is, you have no evidence of me trolling in this thread. Yet, you are still trolling this thread with an off topic discussion that has no basis.
    I posted evidence. Your very first reply was it.

    Please quote the post that shows your contribution in this thread.
    I have contributed to this topic other than sitting here senselessly arguing with you about your obsession with members posting new threads about previously discussed threads. Go back up there and look. There's no need for me to go through all the unnecessary time of pointing them out to you.


    You apparently haven't read the post you quoted.
    I read it. Apparently me saying "Up until now" flew right over your head...

    Do you have anything to say that is on topic?
    Again, I've said plenty that actually pertains to the topic. I actually tried to move on from this when I said, " moving on" yet, there you went again, blathering.

    Do you have anything on topic to say about my previous post?
    At the moment, no.

    Have you actually even thought about the constitutionality of a nation-wide firearm reciprocity law that goes beyond the 2nd Amendment?
    I have and I think it would be good to have a level playing field across the states. I don't think it'll happen but at least no one will have to keep up every state's differing laws.

    May be instead of trolling me, you should start thinking about the topic of this thread?
    I have been thinking about the topic. It's about time that you have as well instead of arguing about what was said in your first post.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    I posted evidence. Your very first reply was it.
    No, it wasn't. I am sorry if your feelings were hurt by that post, but this isn't a safe space with no micro aggressions. Get over your past run-ins with me!

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    I have contributed to this topic other than sitting here senselessly arguing with you about your obsession with members posting new threads about previously discussed threads. Go back up there and look. There's no need for me to go through all the unnecessary time of pointing them out to you.
    I don't consider your post #3 a contribution, since you didn't consider my post #2 one.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    I read it. Apparently me saying "Up until now" flew right over your head...
    "Up until now, you ain't done nothing except whine." didn't flew right over my head. May be you read my previous post, but you didn't understand it. You understand literally nothing about the topic, so any terse comment about it flies right over your head and you call it "whine".

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    Again, I've said plenty that actually pertains to the topic. I actually tried to move on from this when I said, " moving on" yet, there you went again, blathering.
    Your "moving on" post was "ring and run": Post an attack and then don't wait until the attacked has time to respond and call it over. You have nothing but attacked me in this thread. You have not said a single thing about the constitutionality of nation-wide reciprocity or the dangers of handing powers over from states to the federal government.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    At the moment, no.
    Well, take the time and think about it. This topic is not as easy as most think it is. May be actually read the threads that I linked, instead of complaining about my post in which I linked them. Read Blues' post #25, for example.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    I have and I think it would be good to have a level playing field across the states. I don't think it'll happen but at least no one will have to keep up every state's differing laws.
    Realize that there are states that do not have carry permits and they are now supposed to give power to the federal government to regulate them? What you call a level playing field, I call unified infringement by the federal government. We should fight getting rid of carry permits and not federalize them.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    I have been thinking about the topic. It's about time that you have as well instead of arguing about what was said in your first post.

    In contrast to you, I have thought about this topic for quite a while, which is why I pointed to the other threads in my post #2 and called the concept of nation-wide reciprocity idiocy
    . I have actually read the other threads.

  8. #27

    National CCW

    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    No, it wasn't. I am sorry if your feelings were hurt by that post, but this isn't a safe space with no micro aggressions. Get over your past run-ins with me!
    Seriously?? Your assumptions are just too much.

    Fine, I'll get over it, how bout you quit complaining and giving people grief about starting new threads on BS that's been discussed before?? What are you, the forum police?


    I don't consider your post #3 a contribution, since you didn't consider my post #2 one.
    I don't give a rat's furry butt what you consider. I don't post for your approval.


    "Up until now, you ain't done nothing except whine." didn't flew right over my head. May be you read my previous post, but you didn't understand it. You understand literally nothing about the topic, so any terse comment about it flies right over your head and you call it "whine".
    This ain't about that! Again, it's about you complaining and throwing your worthless two cents in whenever you see a brand-spankin' new thread about crap that's already been talked about!! Holy crap dude, how many times do I have to tell you that?

    But whatever man, keep raggin' on people for doing it. I'm not the only one who finds it annoying.
    Your "moving on" post was "ring and run": Post an attack and then don't wait until the attacked has time to respond and call it over. You have nothing but attacked me in this thread.
    Call it what you whatever you want. You brought this on yourself WHINING about the thread...

    Besides, your first post didn't contribute at all. What, telling the OP to add on to age old threads and correcting a possible spelling error is your idea of a contribution?? Hmm...

    You have not said a single thing about the constitutionality of nation-wide reciprocity or the dangers of handing powers over from states to the federal government.
    Of course I have. Just because it don't meet your approval don't mean it ain't so.



    Well, take the time and think about it. This topic is not as easy as most think it is. May be actually read the threads that I linked, instead of complaining about my post in which I linked them. Read Blues' post #25, for example.
    I wasn't complaining, I was just stating that those were old threads. I never said there wasn't anything good said in them.


    Realize that there are states that do not have carry permits and they are now supposed to give power to the federal government to regulate them? What you call a level playing field, I call unified infringement by the federal government. We should fight getting rid of carry permits and not federalize them.
    We haven't even heard what Trump plans to do when he takes office so, if you've heard something, enlighten us. Does anybody know?? Untill we know what he plans to do, why bicker about a bunch of ifs?

    When I said level playing field, I meant where your permit will work everywhere instead of certain states. As far as the states that don't require permits, I don't know what to say about that. I'd love to say do away with permits but I highly doubt that's gonna happen. There's too much money at stake that the government doesn't wanna lose.


    In contrast to you, I have thought about this topic for quite a while, which is why I pointed to the other threads in my post #2 and called the concept of nation-wide reciprocity idiocy
    . I have actually read the other threads.
    Good for you.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Instead of continuing this bickering that started with your post #4, how about focussing on the topic of this thread?

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    We haven't even heard what Trump plans to do when he takes office so, if you've heard something, enlighten us. Does anybody know?? Untill we know what he plans to do, why bicker about a bunch of ifs?
    Well, again, you haven't read those threads I posted? Otherwise, you would know about the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which Trump's "2A agenda" is based on.

    Provides that in a state that allows the issuing authority for licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms to impose restrictions on the carrying of firearms by individual license or permit holders, an individual carrying a concealed handgun under this Act shall be permitted to carry it according to the same terms authorized by an unrestricted license or permit issued by such state.
    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    When I said level playing field, I meant where your permit will work everywhere instead of certain states. As far as the states that don't require permits, I don't know what to say about that. I'd love to say do away with permits but I highly doubt that's gonna happen. There's too much money at stake that the government doesn't wanna lose.
    I fully understand what you meant by level playing field. You should try to understand how that "level playing field" is achieved. Again, read Blues' post #25 and you will.

    Edit: More info from Bearing Arms | Five Fast Gun Reforms President Trump Will Sign Into Law: There are also the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act and the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act.

  10. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    Instead of continuing this bickering that started with your post #4, how about focussing on the topic of this thread?
    That's a good idea but truth be known, it all started with your first, "so-called" contribution to this topic. Maybe I should have just ignored it but, we wouldn't have engaged in another argument had you just kept your keyboard shut if that was all you had to say at the time.


    Well, again, you haven't read those threads I posted? Otherwise, you would know about the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which Trump's "2A agenda" is based on.
    No, I haven't read them but how is all that the basis of what Trump wants to do?



    I fully understand what you meant by level playing field. You should try to understand how that "level playing field" is achieved. Again, read Blues' post #25 and you will.
    I read the post but again, that refers to the CCCRA. Is this what Trumps plans are? Is that how he plans to deal with all this?



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    Well, again, you haven't read those threads I posted? Otherwise, you would know about the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which Trump's "2A agenda" is based on.
    No, I haven't read them but how is all that the basis of what Trump wants to do?
    Trump's "2A agenda" comes right from the NRA: National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Legislation. This legislation has been discussed by gun rights advocates and by forum members for quite a while. It has been a major demand from the NRA during Trump's campaign.

    Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    I fully understand what you meant by level playing field. You should try to understand how that "level playing field" is achieved. Again, read Blues' post #25 and you will.
    I read the post but again, that refers to the CCCRA. Is this what Trumps plans are? Is that how he plans to deal with all this?
    A simple YES.

    Remember, Congress needs to pass such law and the President needs to sign it. Such laws originate in Congress as both houses need to agree on the language and need to find majorities. It is quite common to have laws like this being proposed by sponsors several years in a row with slight changes in language to appease individual Congress members.

    The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act is something that Congress could pass relatively quickly as it has a House and a Senate bill as well as a number of co-sponsors. Once passed, states, like California, New York and New Jersey, will likely sue. This would likely go to the Supreme Court. The arguments in front of the Supreme Court would be hilarious as the federal government and states fight over who is supposed to violate the 2nd Amendment under the disguise of improving gun rights.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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