Discussion in 'Legal' started by bjs1187, Sep 9, 2011.
But I don't think Congress is quite ready to jump on that just yet. So, we get a proposal for a bill that does part of something good but in a more dangerous, Constitutionally questionable way.
Like I said, I'm not sure whether I support this or not. I sure want to, but I don't like what comes along with it.
I don't see it as Constitutionally questionable. I would like to be cautious till it makes it through both houses of Congress just to be sure some dangerous amendments don't get attached, and I would like to see more clarity on the fact that only resident permits apply, but overall I see this as Constitutionally sound. And I'm big into Constitutionality.
That is what you want? To let those of us in shall issue states carry in the May Issue states while the residents there are still forbidden?
Yes... as long as permitting isn't prohibited by the Courts under the 2nd Amendment, or forced to be Shall Issue by the same, forcing a state to recognize a permit issued by another state for a resident they have denied themselves does end up being a States' Rights issue.
If my own state tells me no, my state should not be forced to allow me to carry if I get a Florida permit. OTOH, if my state denies me, I see no problem with other states who have recognition agreements in place with Florida allowing me to carry... just as it is now.
Of course... if the SCOTUS would do their jobs, none of this would be an issue.
Well, it's true... if SCOTUS would just apply the 2nd Amendment under P&I like they're supposed to, this would be a non-issue. Then CCW permits would be eliminated or forced to be shall-issue, and all states would have to recognize any other state's permit under Art4,Sec1.
Since they won't do it, then the Legislature has to do it.
what the potential federal law does, and doesn't, do?
Perhaps you should think about starting a new thread on P and I, or on selective incorporation via the 14th amendment, or the FF&C. Wanting this law because the SCOTUS 'isn't doing its job' is kinda indicative of your understanding of the SCOTUS' job.
The states are doing just fine. Not that SCOTUS telling us the 2A means what it says wouldn't be welcomed, but still...
(note that Wisconsin should now be blue)
I'm just saying since SCOTUS isn't doing it, there's no reason why the Legislature can't.
The states are doing just fine in what regard? Recognition? Maybe some states are, but you tell me when I should be able to expect to carry into California, and then we can talk about have a conversation on how well the states are doing on their own...
What people really mean when they say such things is "if the SCOTUS would agree with my opinion..."
The senate will not pass, and the president will not sign into law a bill that forces states into CCW reciprocity.
But if he did, then a state government could sue saying that the federal government had no power to do so, and the case would eventually go to the supreme court where the question would be decided.
The state government would say that Full Faith and Credit didn't apply, the federal government would say it did, and it would be up to the supreme court to decide which way it went. Regardless of their decision, they'd be doing their job.
STAY AWAY FROM FRONT SITE ACADEMY!!! The founder is a known scam artist! Just google Ignatius Piazza Front site scam.
Which branch of gov is responsible for making sure the states honor the BOR?
I think there's a better chance of it passing than you think. The Senate is probably pro-gun in the majority now (I've found that 3/4 of Repubs and 1/2 of Dems are pro-gun), and the Pres will sign it if he thinks it's prudent to his re-election campaign. I have come to the conclusion that he has no opinions of his own, and just does what he thinks will get him re-elected.
Judicial, but the Legislature can as well as long as it will pass Constitutional muster if it ends up before the SCOTUS.
Well, that's the way it was designed. Anymore, they all seem to be making it up as they go along.
Well we'll see won't we.
That depends on whether gun owners whining to their pro-gun legislators to succeed in scuttling it before it gets that far.
From the sounds of things on this forum and others, a lot of supposedly pro-gun people are writing their legislators telling them to shut this bill down.
I would support a bill that both forced Full Faith and Credit reciprocity for CCW and gay marriage though.
Phenomenal opportunity for a big compromise.
I'm with you... but that's the kind of thing we could get through the courts, I doubt it would pass the legislature... too many purists in office.
I would be more in support of a bill that prevents the federal government from interfering with same sex marriage than one that forces reciprocity on the states
Unfortunately state government has an abysmally awful record with civil rights. It's the duty of the federal government to right state wrongs.
State and municipal government has always far outshone the federal government when it comes to passing repugnant anti-gun laws.
Laws which would be indefinitely in effect if not for the good offices of the federal government, most recently the judiciary in Heller and McDonald.
In fact it would be the overthrow of the republic, and the final end of the constitution to prosecute any legislator for proposing any sort of legislation.
Separate names with a comma.