National Firearms Reciprocity Bill JUST Introduced - Page 4
Page 4 of 25 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 243

Thread: National Firearms Reciprocity Bill JUST Introduced

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    Big whoop, you and everyone else know which government agency I am referring to, including you.... Mr. nitpicker

    Now do you have anything to contribute to the idea of allowing the BATFE, BATF, or ATF or any other federal government law enforcement agency to control when and where you can carry your gun?

    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    You mean anything more than I have already contributed? Nope.
    In other words, no, just the moot and useless point of stating your incorrect spelling of the acronym is all he has. Lol.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by corneileous View Post
    In other words, no, just the moot and useless point of stating your incorrect spelling of the acronym is all he has. Lol.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    But it's more than you have.

    Here's the deal - if someone wants their article or post to have credibility, it helps to have the correct acronym or spelling of the government agency they are writing about. It's not about nit-picking. It's about credibility - a subject you know very little about.
    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.

  4. #33

    National Firearms Reciprocity Bill JUST Introduced

    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    But it's more than you have.
    Wow look, another moot point.

    I never claimed, expressed or tried to have anything more..lol.

    Here's the deal - if someone wants their article or post to have credibility, it helps to have the correct acronym or spelling of the government agency they are writing about.
    Still knew what the heck he was talking about. I don't think the thread needed your spelling correction. Don't think his credibility was affected by it or else you would have had more to go on.
    It's not about nit-picking.
    Yah ok, says the nit-picker....
    It's about credibility.
    If he had a history of being wrong before or something of that nature, that's a question of credibility. Misspelling an acronym, is not.

    - a subject you know very little about.
    Yeah, whatever. Just because I've been wrong before, that we don't see eye to eye on a lot of things, all the sudden credibility is a subject I know little about...lol.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Corneileous, I see that you have now moved on to this thread with your useless off-topic tit-for-tat comments, after you managed to get the almost 2-year running Nationwide Reciprocity thread closed with similar behavior. I suggest you stay on topic in this thread.

    The National Association for Gun Rights (or NAGR) has been against a federal national reciprocity law, while the NRA has been advocating for a federal national reciprocity law. The different viewpoints on this issue by both organizations clearly show the differences in their stances on the Constitutionality of gun control laws.

    As I said before, national reciprocity is a complex problem. It goes actually beyond the simple argument by NAGR. With the current bill, a single state that simply gives out non-resident carry permits to everyone who applies for it essentially eliminates the carry permits of all other states. Apart from the fact that carry permits themselves are un-Constitutional, a single state overriding laws of all other states with the help of a federal law is un-Constitutional as well. The non-resident carry permit language will likely get deleted and is likely only in the bill to have something to trade off during negotiations. The final national reciprocity bill will be challenged by states, such as CA, NJ and NY, resulting in a SCOTUS decision. This SCOTUS decision will open the door for a federal carry permit if it allows to let the national reciprocity law go forward.

    As for NAGR not getting BATFE's latest acronym right. It is a common mistake. The agency itself still uses its own old acronym, ATF, and BATF isn't that far off, given that it used to be the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms until 2002.


  6. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,759
    I don't know this guy and hadn't heard of this petition to the NRA before accidentally landing on this page while searching for articles on something else gun-related, but apparently there is a legislative alternative to the Commerce Clause-based other bills that are simply all the rage amongst the phony, uninformed and liberty-hating gun owners who support national reciprocity as it is currently structured. The petition to the NRA linked above exhorts the Lairds of Fairfax to drop its support for national reciprocity and take up support for "Michael's Law Amendment" which is purported to be based wholly in Second Amendment original intent.

    I've got a doc's appointment here in a little bit, so I don't have time to read, research or try to analyze the text of Michael's Law, but just the text of the petition provides a basis for understanding the pink elephant in the gun room known as the Commerce Clause. Read it or don't. Lord knows that arguing ad infinitum over personality conflicts is just as important as educating one's self about proposed laws and how they might be affected by them if passed.

    Blues
    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...

  7. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    I don't know this guy and hadn't heard of this petition to the NRA before accidentally landing on this page while searching for articles on something else gun-related, but apparently there is a legislative alternative to the Commerce Clause-based other bills that are simply all the rage amongst the phony, uninformed and liberty-hating gun owners who support national reciprocity as it is currently structured. The petition to the NRA linked above exhorts the Lairds of Fairfax to drop its support for national reciprocity and take up support for "Michael's Law Amendment" which is purported to be based wholly in Second Amendment original intent.

    I've got a doc's appointment here in a little bit, so I don't have time to read, research or try to analyze the text of Michael's Law, but just the text of the petition provides a basis for understanding the pink elephant in the gun room known as the Commerce Clause. Read it or don't. Lord knows that arguing ad infinitum over personality conflicts is just as important as educating one's self about proposed laws and how they might be affected by them if passed.

    Blues
    I am not sure about that approach either. First, the language includes something really stupid: "American citizen". The 2nd Amendment applies to all people under US jurisdiction in the same way all of the other parts of the Bill of Rights apply. Even under current law, lawful permanent residents have the same 2nd Amendment rights as US citizens have. This law would change that.

    Second, under the proposed law, no carry permit whatsoever would be required while traveling outside one's sate of residence. It is, essentially a non-resident "Constitutional Carry" law. Apart from the fact that not many states would like that and would sue, it does create the odd situation that one would need a permit while within the state of residence, but not while outside.

  8. #37

    National Firearms Reciprocity Bill JUST Introduced

    Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    Corneileous, I see that you have now moved on to this thread with your useless off-topic tit-for-tat comments.....
    Oh and like you've NEVER done anything like that before, have ya boff? Don't even give me that crap about useless off-topic comments. You've been guilty of that yourself a time or two.

    But don't get your shorts in a square knot bud, I don't plan on hangin' around this thread too long anyways. I didn't wanna talk about it that other discussion and I certainly don't want to discuss it here.
    ......after you managed to get the almost 2-year running Nationwide Reciprocity thread closed with similar behavior.
    Oh sure, lay all the blame on me if it makes ya feel better. I ain't the only one at fault. I infact tried to back out of that childish argument several times. It sure is funny though about you're only pointing the finger in my direction. But it's cool, I get it, I'm not one of your little buddies.

    But besides, what are you complaining about, you got this thread to discuss the perils of nationwide reciprocity in.

    I suggest you stay on topic in this thread.
    Yeah ok, especially you have shown as has so many others that you can pretty much say whatever you want until being told not to, you're seriously gonna tell ME to stay on topic?? Either practice what you preach or keep your mouth shut.



    As for NAGR not getting BATFE's latest acronym right. It is a common mistake. The agency itself still uses its own old acronym, ATF, and BATF isn't that far off, given that it used to be the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms until 2002.

    Thanks for the history lesson but again, so what. We all knew who and what he was talking about. There's no need to nit-pick.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #38
    But whatever, carry on.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    SC Lowcountry
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Ummm.... it's not the BATF. It is BATFE. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
    According to their website, they call themselves ATF:

    https://www.atf.gov

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    SC Lowcountry
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    Here is a bit more to think about..... only a fool would hand their rights to the ebb and flow of self-serving greedy bastards in Washington. Nor am I the only one with this view....

    Seldom do I post a wall of text, but as nationwide repocity represents enought threat to cause me to post an email I received from the National Gun Rights Assn.


    People supporting this bill are wishing their right away..... NEVER let the BATF dictate where you can and CANNOT carry your gun.
    Yes, it was a wall of text but worth it. Something to think about. Thanks for sharing.

Page 4 of 25 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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