GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-09-2011, 11:56   #26
David Armstrong
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lake Charles, LA
Posts: 11,125
As mentioned before, driver's licenses are recognized through an interstate compact among the states themselves, not through a federal law.
David Armstrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 12:02   #27
btj
Senior Member
 
btj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: On The Road
Posts: 101
In a perfect world, I'd love to see this pass, but given that the world is not so perfect... I think I'd definitely rather see this left to the individual states to do as they see fit.
btj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 12:21   #28
Brucev
Senior Member
 
Brucev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,189
Leave it to the states. Do not at all trust anyone in the fed. govt. to have such power. Some states will not agree to cc. Tough for citizens of those states. Good for those in states that do agree to cc. Not willing to jeopardize things for all.
Brucev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 13:33   #29
TSAX
USAF Vet
 
TSAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,123
Blog Entries: 2
Some states now recognize others currently but if state A allows a permit from state B to M but not states C from N to Z then that is hypocritical. When I was in AZ and wanted to take a permit class I was told that I would have to get 3 from certain states that would have reciprocity with 33 states. Then the instructor said it was because of money, thats mainly why its like this.





__________________
IAVA (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) Member
http://iava.org/
GSSF Member http://gssfonline.com/
NRA Member http://home.nra.org/#/nraorg
TSAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 14:34   #30
redbaron007
Lifetime Membership
A Nice Prick
 
redbaron007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southwest Missouri
Posts: 6,281
First, drivers licenses and such are a 'Priviledge' under that states rules, not a consitutional right.

Second, the 'right to bear arms' is a consitutional issue. Two completely different issues.

After briefly reading the bill, it appears it's just consolidating all the CCW permits to make them equal in all states in the states that issue CCWs. Meaning, if I have a MO permit and I am in AL, my permit is reciprocating with AL and I am bound by AL guidelines. It doesn't force the state to accept CCW, unless they already have it.

I have mixed feelings. Since most of the states have different parameters for CCWs, I tend to side with it should be left up to the different states to either accept or not accept another states CCW. I don't feel comfortable letting Uncle Sam make that blanket acceptance. Seems like it could be a slippery slope after that.

On the other hand, I think every state should offer the individual to purchase, retain and carry firearms.

Just my .02.




red
__________________
TopGun *357sig* Club - #2632


R.I.P. Cajunator® ~ R.I.P. Mullah (aka El Ron)
R.I.P. GioaJack ~ R.I.P. Okie
redbaron007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 15:11   #31
usmc4641
NRA member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,832
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
__________________
This is my rifle...
usmc4641 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:09   #32
Toorop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The Midwest.
Posts: 3,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock30user View Post
As much as I would enjoy being to carry anywhere…it is a violation of states rights.
So is FOPA and LEOSA.
Should we repeal those laws as well?
Toorop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:12   #33
Dragoon44
Lifetime Membership
Unfair Facist
 
Dragoon44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24,167
This abomination pases and you can expect in a few years they will amend it. To "standardize" carry requirements like training etc. Then before long it will have it's own bureaucracy whose only purpose is to promulgate rules and regulations whether they are needed or not.
__________________
“Right is still right, even if nobody is doing it. And wrong is still wrong, even if everybody is doing it.”—Texas Ranger saying.
Dragoon44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:15   #34
Toorop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The Midwest.
Posts: 3,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by A6Gator View Post
Kinda like Obama-care?

While driver's licenses and marriages are privileges, this would provide an interesting 2A question. Are states not doing this "infringing?"
Marriage is not a privilege. In many religions you can only have sexual relations with someone whom you are married to. If you forbid people from marrying you are violating their religious beliefs in my opinion.
Toorop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:24   #35
vram74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 756
How about instead of this we get a law spelling out and reaffirming the 2nd amendment as a right, the complete nullification of any Local/State/Federal law that restricts the 2nd amendment and a permanent ban on the possibility of it ever being brought up again in the future?
vram74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:33   #36
Toorop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The Midwest.
Posts: 3,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by vram74 View Post
How about instead of this we get a law spelling out and reaffirming the 2nd amendment as a right, the complete nullification of any Local/State/Federal law that restricts the 2nd amendment and a permanent ban on the possibility of it ever being brought up again in the future?
Then they will just repeal that law.
Toorop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:50   #37
Oso
Senior Member
 
Oso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sturgis Michigan
Posts: 790
I think the whole point has been missed. The bill is for Reciprocity of CCW licenses. This means that the states have to recognize the CCW license as valid, not the issuing states laws. A state like New York could still limit your possession of "high"capacity magazines and where and how you can carry. I personally think it would become a logistic nightmare and anti-gun states would make it miserable enough that even valid CCW carries would be afraid to carry in that state.
Oso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 16:54   #38
Gokyo
Senior Member
 
Gokyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington
Posts: 2,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock30user View Post
As much as I would enjoy being to carry anywhere…it is a violation of states rights.
I like the idea. But it does violate states rights. I would not vote for it.
__________________
Character is what you are in the dark



Courage is grace under pressure
Gokyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 17:00   #39
Kegs
Ol 8 fingers ;)
 
Kegs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cold side of conus
Posts: 2,682
We already have that - it's called the 2nd amendment.
__________________
"What's the down side to 10mm again? Oh, that's right, there isn't one."" Carrier21
Kegs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 09:55   #40
David Armstrong
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lake Charles, LA
Posts: 11,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by vram74 View Post
How about instead of this we get a law spelling out and reaffirming the 2nd amendment as a right,
I think we have that now as a result of the Heller and the McDonald cases.
Quote:
the complete nullification of any Local/State/Federal law that restricts the 2nd amendment
All amendments are subject to reasonable regulation and restrictions.
Quote:
and a permanent ban on the possibility of it ever being brought up again in the future?
No such thing possible, as it unlawfully restricts the actions of a future elected body to consider and pass legislation.
David Armstrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 10:01   #41
uhlawpup
Gentle Soul
 
uhlawpup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 5,297
Send a message via Yahoo to uhlawpup
Quote:
Originally Posted by vram74 View Post
How about instead of this we get a law spelling out and reaffirming the 2nd amendment as a right, the complete nullification of any Local/State/Federal law that restricts the 2nd amendment and a permanent ban on the possibility of it ever being brought up again in the future?
The permanent ban itself would be unconstitutional, and unwise. Things can change...greatly.
__________________
uhlawpup - deep in the heart of Downtown Houston

CRUX SANCTA SIT MIHI LUX
NUNQUAM DRACO SIT MIHI DUX
uhlawpup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 10:03   #42
uhlawpup
Gentle Soul
 
uhlawpup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 5,297
Send a message via Yahoo to uhlawpup
I'm still on the fence about this one, too. The vast difference in the requirements from state to state to obtain a permit makes this problematic for me, as does the federalist intrusion. Then, again, there must be some way of achieving the goal of universal carry without endangering the fragile framework of laws and the balance that we have among rights, duties, and necessities.
__________________
uhlawpup - deep in the heart of Downtown Houston

CRUX SANCTA SIT MIHI LUX
NUNQUAM DRACO SIT MIHI DUX
uhlawpup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 10:12   #43
BailRecoveryAgent
Rude Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,066
I would be fine with abiding by the states laws that you're visiting, like carrying 10 rounders in states that prohibit anything over that, I just think that eventually we would see some federal restrictions that would result in the loss of some freedoms in order to gain one.

Like I said in my first post in this thread, I don't want to have to abide by restrictive gun laws in my home state just so I can carry in another no more than once or MAYBE twice a year.
BailRecoveryAgent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 16:00   #44
snubfan
Giant Member
 
snubfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Omaha
Posts: 1,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oso View Post
I think the whole point has been missed. The bill is for Reciprocity of CCW licenses. This means that the states have to recognize the CCW license as valid, not the issuing states laws. A state like New York could still limit your possession of "high"capacity magazines and where and how you can carry. I personally think it would become a logistic nightmare and anti-gun states would make it miserable enough that even valid CCW carries would be afraid to carry in that state.
So if I have a permit from a "shall issue" state, does a "may issue" state (like New York) have to accept my permit and allow me to carry even though they deny most of their own citizens that right?







.
__________________
http://www.lp.org/
snubfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 16:25   #45
glock30user
Senior Member
 
glock30user's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 315
To all of those who mentioned drivers licenses or marriage licenses, a marriage is a religious union which has been around forever…even before the US, so that is a moot point because they have always been recognized and don’t always need a govt. issued permit to be recognized. As for drivers lisc. the federal govt does all kinds of crazy things that don’t make sense…and that is the best I’ve got.
__________________
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
glock30user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 16:30   #46
glock30user
Senior Member
 
glock30user's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 315
Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The federal govt. can’t tell one state to recognize a CCW permit from another because it is unconstitutional just like obamacare. I would love to carry in any state but that doesn't make it right by the constitution. When the fed govt. starts regulating it never stops and will overstep its bounds very soon. Look at income taxes - not equally applied to all the people - violation of the constitution, but generally accepted as ok.
__________________
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
glock30user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 16:41   #47
Donn57
Just me
 
Donn57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 1,066


History has shown us that a federal law that has anything to do with guns or gun ownership is likely to turn out badly for gun owners.
Donn57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 16:47   #48
StarfoxHowl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The middle of Nowhere, Afghanistan.
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Machinist View Post
That was my immediate thought, but then again, states don't have a right to strip the lawful among us of our right to carry concealed.
I don't recall that there ever was a separate 'right to carry concealed'. If there is, could you enlighten me?
StarfoxHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 17:04   #49
kensteele
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Leawood, KS
Posts: 7,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donn57 View Post
History has shown us that a federal law that has anything to do with guns or gun ownership is likely to turn out badly for gun owners.
You mean like National Parks Carry?
kensteele is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 17:10   #50
glock30user
Senior Member
 
glock30user's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toorop View Post
So is FOPA and LEOSA.
Should we repeal those laws as well?
In short YES!
__________________
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
glock30user is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:54.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 654
213 Members
441 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42