So you want national CCW permits? Expect: federal guidelines, regulations

[RayMel1]

More Big Brother

 

[Gray Peterson]

More Big Brother

I guess reading comprehension is lacking.

 

[pacodelahoya]

Real high road there Bob, calling someone juvenile.

You are being intelectually dishonest when you say that there is no right to bear arms in NYC. The right is there, it's just that a government more powerful than the individuals infringe on it. That would be like saying that if NYC taxed air tommorrow and you didn't pay the tax, that they could put a baggie over your face.

Tell you what, you go ahead and trust the feds to do the right thing, me, I'm gonna keep on doing what I've been doing.

I am willing to live and die for my principles. I will not lick anyones boots. I am quite in touch with reality, hence I am not in an asylum or the "joint". However, I do appluad the likes of Mr. Fincher etc.

There are worse things than being thought of as a 2a nut.

 

[Outlaw Man]

Robert,

I was actually enjoying this discussion for a while. Then I get attacked. Let me know when you want to continue this like an adult. I'd like for you to understand where I'm coming from, but you, at this point, don't really seem to be interested.

 

[the naked prophet]

As I stated before, and I'll put this in upper case letters letters to get everyone's attention because it's obvious that some peole cannot read:

THERE IS NO PENALTY AS FAR AS THE FEDGOV IS CONCERNED IF YOU CARRY AGAINST THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE BILL. THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENS IS THAT YOU LOSE THE NOTWITHSTANDING PROTECTION AGAINST THE STATE CRIMINAL LAWS AGAINST CONCEALED CARRY, WHERE YOU WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CHARGES BY THE STATE THAT YOU'RE CARRYING IN! JUST LIKE IF YOU LOADED YOUR GUN THAT'S IN YOUR TRUNK WHEN THE FOPA INTERSTATE PROTECTION LAW (18USC926A) ONLY PROTECTS UNLOADED TRANSPORT ACROSS STATE LINES AGAINST STATE LAWS LIKE NEW YORK AND MASSACHUSETTS WHERE ALL POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED/UNLICENSED HANDGUNS IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL. IF YOU DECIDE TO LOAD UP THAT GUN IN YOUR TRUNK, YOU FALL OUTSIDE OF THE PROTECTION AND SUBJECT TO STATE LAWS AT THAT POINT.

YOU NEED THE FOPA LAW FOR TRANSPORTING ACROSS PLACES LIKE NEW YORK STATE AND MASSACHUSETTS, NOT PLACES LIKE LOUISIANA AND NEW MEXICO WHERE YOUR VEHICLE IS CONSIDERED AN EXTENSION OF YOUR HOME AND THAT YOU MAY CARRY WHATEVER YOU WISH INSIDE OF YOUR VEHICLE IN THESE STATES.

If you still do not understand, or still oppose this bill, then call your Congressman and tell them to repeal 18USC926A so New York can charge people for unloaded trunk carry again, just like they did before 1986.

And your little rant relates to what I said... how? I didn't say anything about federal penalties for not having a CCW or drivers license. I didn't say anything relating to federal penalties at all.

I said that just as the feds have mandated requirements on the drivers licenses that they force all states to recognize, they will mandate requirements for CCW licenses as well. This has nothing to do with state law and your favorite word "notwithstanding" does not have anything to do with this.

If you still do not understand, or just didn't bother to read anything that I wrote, feel free to ask for federal restrictions on all state CCW licenses in exchange for being able to carry concealed in one or two states.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Anyone who talks about "the uninfringed Right to Keep and Bear Arms" is simply not in touch with reality. Individuals have no right to keep and bear arms in the entire State of New York. It can't be infringed there because it doesn't exist there. Federal Judge Norman A. Mordue ruled that it didn't in Bach v. Pataki, a case decided in 2003.

Robert, you have this exactly backward. Everyone in this country has the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It's no different than everyone's right to a fair and speedy trial by a jury of their peers. It's no different from everyone's right to be free from double jeopardy. Regardless of how you perceive things, the truth about the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in New York is that it is infringed. I take the word of our Founding Fathers and the ratification of the Second Amendment by the several states over the machinations of one judge. Not only that, I understand why the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has been protected as it is in the Constitution. It makes sense.

Besides, the inability of Judge Mordue to read and understand the Second Amendment is not cause to accept his misreading as fact simply because he is a judge. On his power to interpret the law there is little question. He has no power to interpret the Constitution, however. The Constitution has been written in plain language. "...shall not be infringed" is not in any way unclear.

In all the text in that case, there is no explanation as to why the judge said the Second Amendment does not protect a right of the individual("people" being the plural of "individual"). He simply threw that statement out there, just like the Court in US v. Miller pulled the statement out of thin air that arms must meet some useful militia purpose to be included in any arms the keeping and bearing of which would be protected by the Second Amendment.

Any such call would be in the purview of Congress(Article III, Section 2, Clause (2)), but since Congress is among those prohibited to infringe upon the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, there can never be any such call.

If enough gun owners continue to behave like lunatics and threaten people whose goodwill and votes they desparately need, the chances are very good that federal courts in even more states will rule as Mordue did. Even the most objective and learned jurist is a person too. Never threaten people who can decide your fate, and never call them names. It is Not Real Good Thinking to do so.

You got that backward, too. Those who are in those positions hold those positions at the mercy and good graces of the people who put them there. That's US. We the People. Anyone in such a position who would take offense and exact personal revenge upon anyone for standing up for their rights needs to be removed from office immediately. Such a person in such a position obviously cannot apply the law with proper discretion and is not of good character, nor is such a person acting in good behavior. That behavior is cause for impeachment and subject to prosecution as well in good order.

Is there any such employee of the people you are aware of? Let the rest of us know so we might throw the bum out.

Woody

God gave us guns for a reason. It wasn't so we could lament the lack of them when we need them. B.E. Wood