Could push for gun control yield National Concealed Carry?

[Texan Scott]

^ One more clear example of how easily that whole "constitution" thingy is ignored whenever an irrational bias rears its ridiculous head.

 

[joeschmoe]

joeschmoe,
Then why do we have the big debate about same sex marriage in various states and the associated reciprocity issues? If the citation you provided governs a license to operate a motor vehicle, then why not a license to marry?

It does.

ETA; unless their law forbids it.

 

[beatledog7]

Article. IV -Constitution for the United States of America

Section. 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

But if one state allows same-sex marriage, and another state can forbid same sex marriage, the cited portion doesn't really compel a state to recognize the "public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State," does it? If it did, the feds would charge in and make every state recognize a same sex marriage performed in another state, which is a public act and record.

I'm not a lawyer. But I can read, and I can do arithmetic. Something doesn't add up.

 

[joeschmoe]

But if one state allows same-sex marriage, and another state can forbid same sex marriage, the cited portion doesn't really compel a state to recognize the "public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State," does it? If it did, the feds would charge in and make every state recognize a same sex marriage performed in another state, which is a public act and record.

I'm not a lawyer. But I can read, and I can do arithmetic. Something doesn't add up.

Unless the state's laws forbid it. If Texas does not allow same sex marriage, then they don't have to recognize WA's same sex license. But if WA does allow it, then they can be required to recognize MA's same sex license. But Texas can't pass a law that says people from WA are not allowed to drive in Texas, because they allow same sex marriage in WA.
Mainly it applies to records, official acts and things that are not so controversial. States can't say we don't accept Hawaiian birth certificates because of Obama.

 

[beatledog7]

But Joe, the wording of the cited article doesn't allow for a state to forbid something another state allows.

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

How does that leave room for forbidding anything?

 

[joeschmoe]

Older common law "public policy" exception (also 10th amend). States generally have a sovereign right to dictate their own internal public policy on most matters, unless that power has been specifically given to the fed, and never by another state.

the Clause is a rule of evidence designed to facilitate interstate comity without infringing on the sovereignty of the states, states are obliged, by virtue of res judicata, to “recognize” most out-of-state records. However, states can refuse, by virtue of the public policy exception, to “enforce” almost all out-of-state records. The public policy exception, traditionally limited to public acts, therefore applies to the full spectrum of state records covered by the Clause. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2046047

 

[jbrown50]

So... "Universal background checks, but we STILL don't trust you!" ... is that it?

This amendment won't get passed if it gets in the bill. It's a poison pill, plain and simple.

And... I'm ok with that. "Your bill fails along with mine" sounds like a compromise I can live with.

My thoughts exactly Texan Scott.

Ole Chuck Schumer's hypocrisy is already showing.

"Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the measure this week as “the most pernicious” proposal under consideration and said approving the plan would mean that “Somebody could come from Wyoming to the big cities of New York or New Haven or Bridgeport and carry a concealed weapon, which is so against our way of life and the needs here in New York.”

Wow......the nerve of you people in Wyoming to have a lower crime rate than New York City with all of those people walking around with legally carried guns.

 

[bushmaster1313]

"Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the measure this week as “the most pernicious” proposal under consideration and said approving the plan would mean that “Somebody could come from Wyoming to the big cities of New York or New Haven or Bridgeport and carry a concealed weapon, which is so against our way of life and the needs here in New York.”

So why do they get to impose their way of life on the rest of the country?

 

[joeschmoe]

So why do they get to impose their way of life on the rest of the country?

They don't.

 

[wally]

We've got to push for real compromise, we give up a lot effectively banning private sales, and just how much of a "tax" will it be to have a dealer run the check? Pre-paid drop ship to dealers here run $20-30 transfer fee to pick up the gun, although the dealer is providing a minor service being available to sign for the package.

I'd like to see the any or all of the following:

Expand the C&R FFL-03 to be a non-commercial FFL-01 equivalent with no increase in fees or difficulty obtaining.

Reopening the NFA registry.

Universal concealed carry.

Any of these would be something gained for something lost.

 

[X-Rap]

Wally, your first two points would be a genuine improvement on a bad law. The third will be a net loss and a bad law.

 

[beatledog7]

Joe,

Post 31 proves my original point. There is no Federal requirement for state DL reciprocity.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

I would happily trade universal background checks for universal carry as long as my out of state ccw counts in my home state.

 

[X-Rap]

I would happily trade universal background checks for universal carry as long as my out of state ccw counts in my home state.

Yes that is an important matter for those in tough states and the weasel words the politicians would put into such legislation might take years to sort out. Still say these things are best left to the states.

 

[joeschmoe]

Joe,

Post 31 proves my original point. There is no Federal requirement for state DL reciprocity.

No.

 

[Godsgunman]

Kinda sad how divided even we (gun-owners) are. Look its this simple, you are either 100% pro-2a or you're not and you are willing to compromise and allow infringement. It says "shall not be infringed". You do realize any "compromise" IS infringement. One infringement leads to another and to another until "poof" bye bye freedom. I for one am not OK with that. Even if a compromise lets me enjoy what I have for the next 50 yrs, its not worth it. Its not about me, its about my daughter and my son when they are older, ensuring their freedom, not just my own. NO COMPROMISE EVER! Unless they want to pay for it with blood. Compromise is made by the loser, not the winner.