Laws change rights don'tOriginally Posted by Skeeter
Laws change rights don't
Last edited by Arbninftry; 11-11-2016 at 11:48 PM.
The constitution (2A in this case) is obviously nationwide, and it's interpretation or practical application should not differ from state to state.
Last edited by Skeeter; 11-12-2016 at 12:08 AM.
Correct
But CONCEALING a firearm is still not offered in every state. The point you are missing is you consider them the same. They are not, and have not been interpreted the same by the Supreme Court. The point I am making-
Concealed carry will never be accepted in some states. It is a 10th amendment issue.
Keep it a State issue, when the federal government is involved it will eventually become so cumbersome that either only the rich will get that ability, or it will be regulated out of existence. If you doubt that, then look at how many pages are in the IRS Code. Senators and Representatives go to DC and make laws. Ask yourself, When is the last time you heard one proudly proclaim they removed laws?
Solidify the Second Amendment with Supreme Court Judges, and bring power back to the states.
Owning and shooting, and carrying a gun is not the same issue as CONCEALED CARRY.
Do not think they are the same issue. You have to fight them differently. State by State.
My Texas CHL allows me to bypass the metal detector in the capital building in Austin. Try that in DC! Don't fu&@ it up for the rest of us. Again when the federal government gets involved, it screws shit up.
Last edited by Arbninftry; 11-12-2016 at 02:05 AM.
Food For Thought-
If I was Soros or Schumer this would be a wet dream. Because eventually a Democrat will get in charge. And they will change the law.
Skeeter - Do you remember the last National Gun Ban?
I do 1994-2004. I was in the Army, and it was hard for us to get Mags. Enlisted and Officer. I was an Executive Officer (O-2) for an Infantry Company C Co 1-15 (Can Do, Audie Murphy) in 2001.
And it was a huge deal to order magazines. The battalion commander had to sign off. It's the little shit that will bite you in the ass. Keep .gov out of it. You will be better off.
Last edited by Arbninftry; 11-12-2016 at 02:32 AM.
I have read that LEOSA is cumbersome and burdensome, with requirement for annual qualification, often at considerable cost or/and with foot dragging by management.
Do we want that for everybody? Anybody?
Much wider spread constitutional carry seems unlikely, the ideal would be full reciprocity on permits just like your driver's license or marriage certificate. I don't think we will get that, either.
Code Name: JET STREAM
There are concealed carry licenses, or the equivalent, in every state. Whether you can get obtain one or not is a different story.
IThanks for saving me the typing. 100% this.....
Trump has a NYC permit but I can't?
Sounds like Trump thinks that's BS too.
Last edited by RoyGBiv; 11-12-2016 at 08:39 AM.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
I've never understood this argument. How does having a pro-gun federal law increase the probability of an anti-gun federal law if power changes in D.C.?
Also, the current proposals are not a federal carry system; the bills work more like preemption by restricting states from enforcing their laws against certain individuals (the same as LEOSA).
The 10th Amendment doesn't affect the power granted to Congress under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment.
AND.... This was supposed to be so simple...... I will believe it when I see it.
Some more food for thought...
Whether it's changing or creating a new federal law, it takes the exact same votes (in the House, Senate, and the POTUS). The process is the same. If the anti-2A politicians ever have the necessary votes, whatever they vote for happens.
To me, it's better to have some form of reciprocity/NRC in place because there's there's really no downside. And now is one of those rare times where the pro-2A side may have enough votes.
Last edited by Skeeter; 11-12-2016 at 09:06 AM.
Reply With Quote