Quantcast

National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Petition

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by coswabbit, Jan 24, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. George P

    George P Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    4,696
    They may be the oldest and largest, but they haven't been very effective over the last 40-50 years or so.
     
  2. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    19,841
    Location:
    Deep in the Ozarks
    Then what are you complaining about? If the laws of anti-gun states will NOT be spread to other states, what possible objection can there be to a national recognition of concealed carry permits?
     
  3. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,696
    Location:
    CAAZ;TX?

    Your reply is not even remotely relevant to what you quoted.

    Are you trying to insinuate that what Frank cited supports any of your positions?

    Elaborate please.
     
    Theohazard likes this.
  4. Theohazard

    Theohazard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Western PA
    Vern, I continue to be amazed at how obtuse you’re being. You don’t appear to have any idea how laws are applied and how they’re deemed Constitutional, and your posts have been an endless stream of strawman and non sequitur statements.

    I (and others) keep repeating ourselves, but it’s clear from your posts that you have no understanding of why we should all be worried about a national reciprocity law. Let me try one more time to explain before I just give up.

    A national reciprocity law will mean that the federal government is now directly involved in state-level concealed carry issues. That law would also be very controversial and there would be strong pushback from certain states and localities.

    This means two things are likely: First, in order for a national reciprocity bill to pass, it would need votes from Democrats in the senate and from Republicans who are in areas that lean anti-gun. This means compromise. And what kind of compromise would we see? Nobody knows for sure, but I think it’s likely that we’d see further restrictions on carry that applied on the federal level.

    So imagine this scenario: In order to get enough votes to pass the bill, they’d add extra national restrictions on where we can carry. Or maybe we’d need to qualify with each gun we intend to carry. Things like that are likely to be included in any national reciprocity bill that passes. That’s how legislation works: Compromise is often needed in order to pass a bill.

    The second thing that would probably happen is a backlash of federal legislation after the passing of a national reciprocity bill. All of a sudden, anti-gun states and localities that restrict carry would have people carrying guns there. Many people and many politicians would look to pass reactive federal legislation as a reaction against it. So I think it’s likely we’d see follow-up federal legislation that restricts carry (or gun rights in general).

    Right now, politicians from states like NY, CA, and NJ have little pressure to push for national carry restrictions since so few people can currently carry in their state. But that would certainly change if national reciprocity was enacted.
     
    George P likes this.
  5. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    19,841
    Location:
    Deep in the Ozarks
    Okay -- you agree the restrictive laws of states like New Jersey will NOT be imposed on other states, or incorporated into federal law.
    So you now say the restrictive laws of states like New Jersey WILL be imposed on other states, or incorporated into federal law?
    And to pass restrictive gun laws in Congress votes from Republicans will be required.

    How is this different from the current situation, when we have no guaranteed reciprocity?
    So we're talking about imagination here?

    We can imagine anything -- but that doesn't make it real.
    Just like the backlash that has happened in every state that has passed "shall issue" laws?
    But you admit that's all just imagination?
     
  6. Theohazard

    Theohazard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Western PA
    I don’t even know how to respond to this. This is like arguing with my four-year-old.

    Yes. It would be required now. But don’t forget that this Republican majority isn’t permanent. And there are probably Republicans in Congress currently who would be willing to vote for a national reciprocity bill even if it included compromise restrictions.

    We’re talking about my informed opinion based on decades of observing Congressional politics.

    You really have no idea how any of this works, do you? You’re talking about state-level laws. I’m talking about federal-level laws. Do you understand the difference?

    Vern, along with your ignorance regarding constitutional issues and how they relate to the courts, you also appear to have zero understanding of how state-level politics compare to federal-level politics, and how the laws of each are applied. That, along with your complete inability to comprehend our various arguments, is making sure that this discussion goes nowhere. Maybe someone else will take over, because I’m done wasting my time arguing with you.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2018
    George P likes this.
  7. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    19,841
    Location:
    Deep in the Ozarks
    It is, but I try to be patient with you. :)
    You know what the Spartans said to Phillip II?
    Ah, and all along I thought we were taking about facts.
    Ah, because I don't agree with your convoluted arguments that predict disaster at every turn, there's something wrong with me?

    Here's the bottom line -- we have made great strides in regaining our freedom, and this is the next step.[/QUOTE]
     
  8. jdc1244

    jdc1244 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Location:
    Florida
    Disagree.

    Reciprocity has nothing to do with Federal regulation or restrictions.

    Indeed, the states will continue to be the sole regulators with regard to the concealed carry of firearms, as the proposed legislation contains no regulatory provisions.

    National reciprocity merely safeguards a citizen from being charged with the crime of carrying a concealed weapon in one state when he has a valid license issued in another state when a citizen is traveling through a state other than his state of residence or while staying a short period of time in a state other than his state of residence.

    A non-resident would be subject to the firearm laws of that state should he use his gun in self-defense; and if he become a new resident of that state, he would be required to obtain a new license pursuant to the laws of his new state of residence.

    And that would remain the case should National reciprocity become law.

    Again, National reciprocity concerns solely the carrying of conceal firearms, not their use; there would be no change to state laws with regard to the qualifications to obtain a carry license, and no new requirements imposed.
     
  9. jdc1244

    jdc1244 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Location:
    Florida
    This fails as a slippery slope fallacy.

    Linked below is H.R.38 - Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017

    Please cite any provision authorizing Federal regulation.

    Please cite any provision mandating one state ‘trade’ its gun laws with another state.

    Please cite any provision making ‘universal’ the criteria and qualifications for obtaining a conceal carry license, compelling the states to implement those criteria and qualifications, or invalidating state laws with regard to obtaining a concealed carry license.

    Please cite any provision requiring the more restrictive laws of some states be applied to all the states.

    Absent those citations, opposition to H.R. 38 is unwarranted and devoid of merit.

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th..."search":["concealed+carry+reciprocity+act"]}
     
  10. George P

    George P Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    4,696
    If you involve the Feds to implement a national reciprocity agreement, it WILL involve the Feds, they WILL insist on control, and the very anti-states WILL dictate the terms...........I live in a state that has fairly easy CCW requirements and few restrictions. I do not want my state's ability to govern things suddenly usurped by the folks in NJ, NY, CA, etc. You do NOT want that camel's nose creeping into the tent.
     
    Ttexastom and Theohazard like this.
  11. Theohazard

    Theohazard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Western PA
    Nobody is talking about any state laws changing, we're talking about federal laws changing.

    Again, nobody on our side of the argument has said anything about states "trading" gun laws. That's not a thing.

    You don't appear to understand how the federal legislative process works. Bills are changed multiple times from their original version as they make their way through the House and the Senate, and then again while one or both versions are again modified to match each other.

    Look how much the recent tax law changed as it made its way through the legislative process. That's how this whole thing works: Proposed legislation is changed, and compomises and concessions are made to garner enough votes for a bill to pass. If you honestly believe that HR 38 would make it though the House and Senate unchanged, you are obviously ignorant of the whole process.
     
    George P likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice