Birch Knoll
Member
Does that make you a free man or are you still a prisoner but in a larger cage?
I'm still a prisoner. But I'm more free than I was before.
Does that make you a free man or are you still a prisoner but in a larger cage?
If I don't have a warden or guard standing over my shoulder telling me what to do, I'm free. I haven't seen anyone standing over my shoulder, except Mrs Bubba maybe.Does that make you a free man or are you still a prisoner but in a larger cage?
And it doesn't set any "precedent".
Legislation is law. The fact that this is a new law would make it in and of itself a precedent, the first time there has ever been a Federally mandated reciprocity law.
The legislative branch writes the laws (Congress), the judicial branch defines both the meaning & application as well as approves the law (SCOTUS), and the executive branch enforces the law.
That said, I must applaud your coming to the right inference by questioning the efficacy of unconstitutional law instituted by Congress forcing the several states to go beyond their own unconstitutional law and accept permits issued by other states via their unconstitutional law.
Let's say you are a normal, law abiding citizen but you and everyone else has been thrown in prison only because other citizens have been bad and your government doesn't want to sort you out to lock up only the bad people. You have the opportunity in this prison to wear green overalls instead of brown if you pass a background check, and can visit other prisons if the other prisons accept the disciplinary standards in your prison.
So, some prisons make reciprocity agreements to allow prisoners in green overalls to visit. Other prisons with different disciplinary standards don't allow visitors from other prisons.
Along comes the Pardon and Visitation Agency and passes a law forcing all prisons to accept visitors regardless of disciplinary standards as long as their home prisons have issued green overalls to those who wish to visit and have passed the background check. Does that make you a free man or are you still a prisoner but in a larger cage?
Does that make you a free man or are you still a prisoner but in a larger cage?
danez71 said:Woody, what constitutional law would HR822 break?
danez71 said:Woody... seriously....?
If I was on the fence in regards to gun control in general, your posts would be pushing away from the pro 2A group.
These extremely exaggerated analogies arent helping you or our cause IMO.
I've gone from 'Woody's really smart... not sure I 100% agree... but probably someone Id like to have 'beer-gate' with and toss ideas back and forth with' to 'I'm not sure I want to be around Woody with a beer let alone a gun'.
Its the extremist attitudes, whether pro or con, that is drives the masses away.
I know you're better than that.
We need the masses on our side. We need to conduct ourselves to accomplish this.
(some of this was said with tongue in cheek... woody seems like a nice guy from what I can tell)
Give me an example of what you would consider a constitutional law in this instance. As far as I know, the only "constitutional" law HR 822 would break would be something in the Constitution itself, like the Second Amendment; and if the Second Amendment didn't exist, it would violate the Tenth Amendment.
Yeah, I'm a nice guy. And, I'm deadly serious with that 'extremely exaggerated' analogy. It's meant to place what HR 822 would accomplish in a different light so as to more vividly demonstrate the inefficacy of HR 822. You'll end up in a bigger cell - or cage - with more powerful and less friendly gate keepers.
Let's not forget that HR 822 is unconstitutional - as well as dangerous!
Woody
Prince Yamato said:It doesn't change the fact that we have to work within our current system of laws.
Rail Driver said:...and there are too many sheep in this once strong nation for that to happen.
Give me an example of what you would consider a constitutional law in this instance.
And, I'm deadly serious with that 'extremely exaggerated' analogy.
It's meant to place what HR 822 would accomplish in a different light so as to more vividly demonstrate the inefficacy of HR 822.
You'll end up in a bigger cell - or cage - with more powerful and less friendly gate keepers.
Let's not forget that HR 822 is unconstitutional - as well as dangerous!
..............but instead it incorporates unconstitutional state laws..........
Give me an example of what you would consider a constitutional law in this instance. As far as I know, the only "constitutional" law HR 822 would break would be something in the Constitution itself, like the Second Amendment; and if the Second Amendment didn't exist, it would violate the Tenth Amendment.
The passage of HR 822 doesn't constrain future bills or endorse the passage of future related laws
The bill clearly states on what basis it is passed.
And I don't know who "Bird" is.
Bird was well known for carrying a pocket copy of the Constitution all the time, and actually objecting to bills that he thought did not comply.
ttolhurst said:Very interesting! I wonder if Maine would actually accept that training? Since the documentation of training is essentially a self-certified document, I'd be a little skeptical. I will contact the Maine State Police lieutenant responsible for weapons licenses and see what he has to say.henschman said:The Maryland Police Training Commission offers an online gun safety course that only takes 20 or 30 minutes to complete, and includes handgun safety. It even prints you out a nice nifty certificate of completion at the end.