Possible Nationwide CC Coming????

[Pudge]

I don’t know why anyone would want the .gov to regulate their rights for them.

While I do not disagree with that sentiment, I believe that the highest purpose of government, is to protect the rights of the individual. It is the duty of the federal government to protect my rights from tyrants that would deny me my civil rights for crossing an imaginary line.

 

[kwguy]

While I do not disagree with that sentiment, I believe that the highest purpose of government, is to protect the rights of the individual. It is the duty of the federal government to protect my rights from tyrants that would deny me my civil rights for crossing an imaginary line.

Sure. Ideally you are correct. I would love for the .gov to have that sentiment as well. But regulating rights certainly isn’t protecting them.

 

[theotherwaldo]

If the Bill of Rights is to be accepted as valid then the federal government has no say regarding the right of the individual to keep and bear arms... .

 

[Autodidactic]

If you had watched the Mark W. Smith video, you would have heard his argument that SCOTUS specifically said "You can't do that" without violating a citizen's civil rights. I strongly recommend watching his short video. It is very informative, IMHO.

They sure are trying

 

[Poper]

They sure are trying

Of course they are. But I believe the courts will pound the point down on their heads.
Just because they pass a law, it does not mean they can enforce said law and if they attempt to do so, they will be abridging the person's civil rights. Most courts do not normally approve of such things.

 

[Poper]

While I do not disagree with that sentiment, I believe that the highest purpose of government, is to protect the rights of the individual. It is the duty of the federal government to protect my rights from tyrants that would deny me my civil rights for crossing an imaginary line.

Yes, of course.
However, "the government" is composed of individuals that have an agenda of their own. And THIS is where we must remain diligent and unwavering. To allow "the government" to erode The People's rights is to allow tyranny to rule The People, which is the opposite of freedom and liberty.
Whenever a law is proposed, one's first question should be "where is the freedom in this bill?".
JMHO, of course.

 

[rambo2_981]

I’ll believe it when it happens, although CC reciprocity between States sure would be nice. I have to be careful when I drive across the border from PA to NJ.

 

[mljdeckard]

Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it.

Good and hard.

 

[Shanvanvocht]

Setting aside the question of wanting the Feds to be involved in permit issue, as I stated in an unrelated thread, the Federal Government has no Constitutional authority to order the States to do anything (New York vs United States [1992]), nor to require States or their political sub-divisions to enforce Federal law (Printz vs United States [1997]). Thus, they cannot force reciprocity on the States, although they could, perhaps, follow the 55mph example and threaten to withhold Pittman-Robertson funds for non-compliance. Yeah, no; can't see that happening.

 

[buck460XVR]

Nationwide constitutional carry is what we need.

^^^ I agree.

I also believe it will be here in the not too distant future. Most folks either don't remember or realize, that civilian CWC is a fairly recent phenomenon. Even in those states where it was legal before 1990, it was not common. Not only were the appropriate guns for CWC far and few, but the appropriate holsters were rare. This was mostly because public sentiment did not feel that the average civilian needed to EDC. This was not just the anti folks, but hard core gun enthusiasts. This is why it took till 2013 for the last state in the Union to legalize CWC for civilians. While gun forums like this preach about how many gun rights we are loosing, sentiment of the average American, many who are new gun owners and many who don't even own guns, is accepting the fact, that while guns are dangerous in the wrong hands, law abiding folks should have the right to protect themselves. Right or wrong, the average person in the U.S., no longer looks at concealed carry as a threat, like they do with availability of high capacity military style rifles. IMHO, it is this fear of those high capacity military firearms in the hands of the mentally incompetent, that has driven many folks to buying their first CWC firearm for personal protection.

 

[Capybara]

Commie states like California, NY, NJ, Mass, Hawaii are already doubling down on their tyranny, completely ignoring the NYSRPA Ruling and SCOTUS. I wouldn't hold your breath that states like these will ever do anything but infringe and rip away Constitutional Rights from their subjects. Until we have a Federal Government Administration who will send US Marshals to arrest politicians who keep up this tyranny, these states will continue to ignore SCOTUS and rulings they don't like.

Without consequences to their own freedom, why would tyrants enforce the law of the land?

 

[JN01]

I have no doubt they will continue to find ways to resist, but can't see how they would be able to successfully prosecute someone for violating any particular law that has been found unconstitutional.

 

[Capybara]

I have no doubt they will continue to find ways to resist, but can't see how they would be able to successfully prosecute someone for violating any particular law that has been found unconstitutional.

True dat. We are looking forward to the first ones that come up. Theoretically, in court, if the DA knows it will lose based upon the ruling, that could be the tide turner needed. We need lots of test cases! That could be the longer, slower, yet effective way to get the idiot legislators in these states to stop trying to Unconstitutionally disarm their populations.