Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

H.R. 822 Carry Reciprocity Bill

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Cavalier Knight, Nov 10, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cavalier Knight

    Cavalier Knight Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    New York NY
    H.R. 822 - National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

    As of this posting:

    85% Users Support Bill
    417 in favor / 72 opposed

    Contact here: OpenCongress.org
     
  2. henschman

    henschman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,880
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    No thanks... under our Constitution, things like Concealed Carry are none of the Feds' business. You are fooling yourself if you think you are protecting your rights by giving the Federal government more power and authority.
     
  3. hermannr

    hermannr Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    976
    Location:
    Okanogan Highlans
    henschman: HR822 does not give the feds any more power. All HR822 is doing is telling the states to recongnize that there is a right to travel, unfettered, between the states.

    It is no different than saying...you states that have a drivers license allow licensed drivers to opperate on your roads, under your laws, but recognize the license from their home states.

    We now want you to recognized a traveler from another state's license to carry, in the same manner.

    It does not set a federal standard, just like there is no federal standard for automobile driver's licenses. It does not say that a state must have a permit, it only says, IF you allow (any) of your citizens to carry with a license, then you must allow a traveler that has a permit granted under another states law, to carry under the same conditions you allow your citizens to carry.

    David Kopel did a bang up job of explaining it here: http://davekopel.org/Testimony/HR822-Kopel.pdf
     
  4. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I've had to post this response so many times, I've made it canned response:

    Woody
     
  5. oneounceload

    oneounceload member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,710
    Location:
    Hot and Humid FL
    This is just another form of the one previously closed. Say NOP to the FEDS being involved in anything.,

    Anyone who really thinks this is going to work has not been around to see how well LBJ's Great Society has worked out
     
  6. Neverwinter

    Neverwinter Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,049
    No, I would not support it. I also would not support a bill to enforce constitutional carry on all of the states, as it would be expanding federal power by getting them involved where they are currently not.
     
  7. Bubba613

    Bubba613 member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,953
    Gun guys opposing RKBA. Who'd a thunk it?
     
  8. AirForceShooter

    AirForceShooter Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    Central Florida
    My rep keeps sending me e-mails how he's supporting this and is a co-sponsor of the bill.
    I write back telling him I don't want the feds in my gum world and to start addressing serious problems, not this crap that will never go anywhere.

    AFS
     
  9. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    +1 Cowboy. The only Federal law we need or want regarding any aspect of our RKBA is 2A, and we already have that.

    Bubba13,

    That's not opposition to RKBA. It's recognition that, in this case, the ends do not justify the means.
     
  10. Waywatcher

    Waywatcher Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,563
    Location:
    WI
    I hope the Senate takes this up.

    Threads with comment strings like this make me glad to be an NRA member.

    Absolute, uncompromising ideology isn't going to get us anywhere.
     
  11. oneounceload

    oneounceload member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,710
    Location:
    Hot and Humid FL
    Nope, gun guys opposing Federal involvement in what is, essentially, a state's rights issue
     
  12. Bubba613

    Bubba613 member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,953
    Wait, if the 2A now applies to states, as per McDonald, then how is that a states' rights issue? I assume everyone here applauded McDonald and no one claimed the Feds were encroaching on states' rights, which was the anti-gun position.
     
  13. Birch Knoll

    Birch Knoll Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    943
    Location:
    China, ME
    You guys gotta make up your minds. It's either the 2nd Amendment, or it's state's rights. It can't be both.
     
  14. Bubba613

    Bubba613 member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,953
    A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.....
     
  15. oneounceload

    oneounceload member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,710
    Location:
    Hot and Humid FL
    and you two are turning this thread right back into the circular urinating contest that you did the other one

    NO ONE is going to change any one's mind here, so it might as well be closed like the last one

    and Bubba, your snarky immature insults are not OK on this forum
     
  16. usmarine0352_2005

    usmarine0352_2005 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,797
    I heard it was likely to pass in the House but not the Senate.




    Is that correct?





    When will the next vote be?
     
  17. Birch Knoll

    Birch Knoll Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    943
    Location:
    China, ME
    I am? I didn't join this thread until post #13, and then not to argue in favor of HR822, but to point out the logical inconsistency in the arguments posted against HR822.
     
  18. Cavalier Knight

    Cavalier Knight Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    New York NY
    Meeting Time: Monday, November 14, 2011 at 5:00 PM in H-313 The Capitol

    LINK
     
  19. ATBackPackin

    ATBackPackin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,125
    Location:
    Valley Forge, PA.
    Being honest, I am a little confused by this as well. I would love for someone to explain this to me. For those thinking that I am being sarcastic, nothing could be further from the truth. I am being completely sincere.

    Shawn
     
  20. gbw

    gbw Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    605
    Location:
    Deep South
    In case no one has pointed this out the odds of this actually becoming law are zero. That doesn't mean it isn't a fight worth the effort if the goal is to raise awareness about responsible excercise of RKBA, but don't hold onto any real hope.

    In the most unlikely case the bill should manage to get to him, the President will NEVER sign it. Such a law would severely annoy very large states on whom he most counts for base support.

    There is not near enough senate support to override a veto.
     
  21. LemmyCaution

    LemmyCaution Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    Messages:
    890
    I've written and called my rep and both senators asking them to oppose this bill.

    I've said multiple times why I oppose it (same reasons Woody does) and been mocked and made the target of strawman arguments on multiple now closed threads for it.

    This subject has seemingly had enough debate, if we can't get beyond Bubba613's condescension and paternalism. He's offered very little rationale for supporting the bill and only strawmen to refute the opposition.

    Maybe the mods should put a stop to it.
     
  22. Hardware

    Hardware Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    606
    Location:
    Delaware
    If this passes a socialist, err... democratically controlled senate then you will be able to knock me over with a feather. Looks like a total waste of time.
     
  23. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    It's not a states' right issue. It's a 2A issue. It has for decades been treated as a states' rights issue, and it's convenient to see it that way, but it really isn't.
     
  24. Bubba613

    Bubba613 member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,953
    The issue has been discussed previously, agreed. I didnt start a new thread.
    There is no condescension or paternalism here. Opposition to the bill seems based on two things: a misunderstanding of what the bill does, and a strange belief that it means the Feds are intruding on states rights.
    For misunderstanding, someone posted a text of the bill.
    For the states rights argument, it seems inconsistent to argue the bill intrudes on states rights while applauding the Supreme Court's rulings negating Chicago's ban on handguns. No one has squared this obvious contradiction.
    The rationale for supporting it is that we believe in expanding the ability to carry firearms, which this bill does.
     
  25. Birch Knoll

    Birch Knoll Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    943
    Location:
    China, ME
    I agree with you. It is emphatically not a state's rights issue.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page