Nationwide Carry- Sign the Petition!
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 43

Thread: Nationwide Carry- Sign the Petition!

  1. Nationwide Carry- Sign the Petition!


  2.   
  3. We already have National Reciprocity, it's called the Second Amendment and least I be mistaken, the Federal Government has no authority to infringe upon it.

    Now, if people would wake up and realize this, things would go so much smoother..


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,762
    "Nationwide Carry- Sign the Petition!" No thanks. See here for lots of good reasons why, or here for more updated reasons why.
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  5. #4
    NOPE!

    Only idiots want to give control to a federal law enforcement agency as to when and where they can carry a gun, and where they CANNOT carry their gun.
    “Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,800
    First of all National Reciprocity is being sold as the lie that it has something to do with the right to bear arms. Consider this, if a person must ask permission from the government to carry concealed then carrying concealed isn't a right but is a privilege granted by the government. And the government that grants a privilege can revoke that privilege whenever it wants to.

    If the Federal government passes a law that decrees all states must honor each other's carry permits the Federal government will have just given itself the power to standardize what the criteria are to qualify for a permit and also where it is legal, and where it is illegal, to carry. Rest assured the most restrictive states like California will demand the Federal government adopt qualifying criteria and restrictions that are the most restrictive. That means ALL the states will eventually end up with the same restrictions that the most restrictive states have.

    Is that just fear mongering? Well remember that "elections have consequences" and then imagine what would happen if someone like Hillary were elected in 2020 and there were an existing law on the books that the Federal government can ... reinterpret... what that reciprocity law really means.

    There is another thing to consider. Folks who want that nationwide reciprocity because they travel will cause everyone who doesn't travel to suffer new restrictions. And as it stands right now there are plenty of non resident permits available to allow state to state travel in almost all states. So... to my mind... those who travel need to accept the responsibility to go through the hassle and expense of getting those non resident permits because it is they who travel... not everyone who doesn't travel.

    Think beyond the promise of the convenience of carrying across state lines and carefully consider the possible pitfalls of handing this, or a future, administration an easy way to seize total control of the carry permit process.
    Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J. C. Watts

  7. #6

    National Carry

    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    First of all National Reciprocity is being sold as the lie that it has something to do with the right to bear arms. Consider this, if a person must ask permission from the government to carry concealed then carrying concealed isn't a right but is a privilege granted by the government. And the government that grants a privilege can revoke that privilege whenever it wants to.

    If the Federal government passes a law that decrees all states must honor each other's carry permits the Federal government will have just given itself the power to standardize what the criteria are to qualify for a permit and also where it is legal, and where it is illegal, to carry. Rest assured the most restrictive states like California will demand the Federal government adopt qualifying criteria and restrictions that are the most restrictive. That means ALL the states will eventually end up with the same restrictions that the most restrictive states have.

    Is that just fear mongering? Well remember that "elections have consequences" and then imagine what would happen if someone like Hillary were elected in 2020 and there were an existing law on the books that the Federal government can ... reinterpret... what that reciprocity law really means.

    There is another thing to consider. Folks who want that nationwide reciprocity because they travel will cause everyone who doesn't travel to suffer new restrictions. And as it stands right now there are plenty of non resident permits available to allow state to state travel in almost all states. So... to my mind... those who travel need to accept the responsibility to go through the hassle and expense of getting those non resident permits because it is they who travel... not everyone who doesn't travel.

    Think beyond the promise of the convenience of carrying across state lines and carefully consider the possible pitfalls of handing this, or a future, administration an easy way to seize total control of the carry permit process.
    YOUR ARE WRONG! How many of your carry rights have been changed since the Federal Government passed HR218 in 2004? The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act was passed in 2004 that allows Law Enforcement Officers (Active & Retired) to carry in all 50 states and US possessions with some restrictions. This law did not affect CCW in any state.

    It is not that a law could not affect your CCW, but it does not have to. It all depends on how the law is written. As an example, we are not allowed to carry anywhere a state does not allow it's CCW holders to carry. We can not carry guns not allowed or large capacity mags. Orginially in 2004 we could not carry restricted ammo (hollow points in NJ), but they revised the law in 2008 and now it has been exempted also.

    Each state could still have their "No Gun Zones", restrictions on age, alcohol, you name it. They would just have to accept the CCW permit holder. He would have to know the states restricrtions just like now.
    "Lets Be Careful Out There!"

    Ron

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Oh, good. Yet another National Reciprocity thread. I was already worried when we fell to have only one. Let's discuss the same topic in as many threads as possible.

    Seriously though, Blues already posted the links to y=the two previous threads, one of them is still active (excluding the trolling by a certain forum member): National Firearms Reciprocity Bill JUST Introduced.

    To those who simply don't get it, under which Constitutional authority is the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 supposed to work. Hint, it is not the 2nd Amendment.

  9. #8
    The naivety of those that don't see the danger of having the federal government controlling carry when the next anti-gun zealot administration comes into power is stunning.
    “Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,800
    Quote Originally Posted by RonM0710 View Post
    Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    First of all National Reciprocity is being sold as the lie that it has something to do with the right to bear arms. Consider this, if a person must ask permission from the government to carry concealed then carrying concealed isn't a right but is a privilege granted by the government. And the government that grants a privilege can revoke that privilege whenever it wants to.

    If the Federal government passes a law that decrees all states must honor each other's carry permits the Federal government will have just given itself the power to standardize what the criteria are to qualify for a permit and also where it is legal, and where it is illegal, to carry. Rest assured the most restrictive states like California will demand the Federal government adopt qualifying criteria and restrictions that are the most restrictive. That means ALL the states will eventually end up with the same restrictions that the most restrictive states have.

    Is that just fear mongering? Well remember that "elections have consequences" and then imagine what would happen if someone like Hillary were elected in 2020 and there were an existing law on the books that the Federal government can ... reinterpret... what that reciprocity law really means.

    There is another thing to consider. Folks who want that nationwide reciprocity because they travel will cause everyone who doesn't travel to suffer new restrictions. And as it stands right now there are plenty of non resident permits available to allow state to state travel in almost all states. So... to my mind... those who travel need to accept the responsibility to go through the hassle and expense of getting those non resident permits because it is they who travel... not everyone who doesn't travel.

    Think beyond the promise of the convenience of carrying across state lines and carefully consider the possible pitfalls of handing this, or a future, administration an easy way to seize total control of the carry permit process.
    YOUR ARE WRONG! How many of your carry rights have been changed since the Federal Government passed HR218 in 2004? The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act was passed in 2004 that allows Law Enforcement Officers (Active & Retired) to carry in all 50 states and US possessions with some restrictions. This law did not affect CCW in any state.
    The reason the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act didn't affect concealed carry permits in any state is because that law specifically states it applies to only the narrow group of law enforcement officers and not carry permits in general. And it was intentionally written that way so as not to be able to be reinterpreted to apply to all concealed carry folks.

    Quote Originally Posted by RonM0710 View Post
    -snip-It is not that a law could not affect your CCW, but it does not have to. It all depends on how the law is written. -snip-
    You are correct that it all depends on how the law is written as I mentioned in my reply above in reference to law enforcement officers. But not only does it depend on how the law is written but also depends on how a poorly written law is interpreted. And whether the interpretation is that a law that affects all concealed carry permit holders in the entire country allows the government the authority to extend that law to include instituting more restrictions upon those permit holders depends on the agenda of who is reading it. And who is reading it depends on the next election. That is the danger I am pointing out.

    Quote Originally Posted by RonM0710 View Post
    -snip-Each state could still have their "No Gun Zones", restrictions on age, alcohol, you name it. They would just have to accept the CCW permit holder. He would have to know the states restricrtions just like now.
    However the most restrictive states like California are not going to be happy if someone from a state where it is easy to get a carry permit can now carry without having to qualify under the most restrictive state's criteria. And those restrictive states for sure will complain loudly for Daddy Fed to use it's Commerce Clause authority to step in and make all carry permit criteria/restrictions standardized nationwide.

    And if/when a future election results in rabid anti gunners interpreting the law that, as you said and I quote: "It is not that a law could not affect your CCW, but it does not have to." into:

    -- This law can be interpreted so that, even if it doesn't have to affect carry permits, we (the new anti gun government) can use it as a legal basis to institute restrictions upon carry permits to satisfy the concerns some states have with folks from other states who didn't qualify for a carry permit under their more restrictive laws."--

    It is that part of.... can use it as a legal basis .... that is the danger.

    Please understand I am saying that considering how Daddy Fed has used the authority of the Commerce Clause in the past there is a clear danger that once there is a national reciprocity law on the books a future anti gun administration will use it in ways never intended but certainly more restrictive.

    Let us not let the carrot of the convenience of carrying across state lines blind us to the danger of handing Daddy Fed the power to become the entity that controls all carry permits nationwide.
    Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J. C. Watts

  11. Really? From your link:

    "Congress has already authorized US citizens the right to bear arms."

    Congress did not authorize US citizens the right to bear arms. And here's a shocker for you, neither does the Constitution of the United States! The Constitution prohibits government from infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms. The Constitution protects the right that was preexisting to it. The very first sentence of your petition is a complete and utter FAIL!

    The second sentence:
    "Therefore the current president, through executive action, should put in place an identification system which authorizes holders to carry a concealed firearm for self defense in all 50 states."

    Really? Sure, let's enact a national registry of armed citizens. You bet! What do you want to next - make people show a Federal government issued identification document to vote? Oh, no, we couldn't do that because that would infringe upon the right of people to vote - even when they are not legal to vote in this country to begin with. Maybe make it a law that if you want to carry a gun you must wear a yellow badge on your chest? Look that one up.

    I don't know who T.C. is who started this petition, but they should move to Seattle. They would be right at home with all the other liberal progressive morons there that want the Federal and state governments to control every aspect of their lives. You really want us to sign a petition that completely nullifies the 2nd Amendment in it's first two sentences? But I'll bet SR9's is one of the first signatures on it.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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