Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    southern Missouri USA
    Posts
    712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    This isn't a gun forum, so I will do my best not to condescend about what the problems with the reciprocity bill are for those who carry in the first place, or cross state lines often enough for the bill to give them any benefit, if indeed, there are any benefits to be had in the second place.

    First, the following language clearly establishes HR 38 not as a bill steeped in adherence by government in The Peoples' rights under the Second Amendment, but as one firmly planted in the authority of government to regulate under the Interstate Commerce Clause:



    The problem as I see it is not so much about states' rights as it is about unwitting gun owners not realizing that when they support this bill, they are supporting a defacto repeal of the Second Amendment that will be consumed by government's powers of regulation under the Commerce Clause. As literally every ruling which expanded the very limited intended authorities of the Commerce Clause quite clearly demonstrates, government never stops at simply getting its camel's nose under the tent, in fact, they don't even stop once the whole camel gets inside that tent, they only stop once another bureaucracy is created that has total control over the issue(s) that seemed so innocuous and limited in scope when it was first passed and/or ruled on by the Supremes. As the Commerce Clause can give, so too can it taketh away. Passage of this bill will eventually strip the Second Amendment of all power and meaning once the Supremes uphold it, and after the baseline case upon which all Commerce Clause overreach has been based ever since, the Commerce Clause will do to gun owners and (perhaps especially) carriers what Wickard v. Filburn did to intrastate family farming, which I'm sure several members here can attest that it quashed many of their previously-enjoyed freedoms.

    There are no rights being expanded or protected within HR 38. It's just another among many Trojan Horses government has created intending to get gun owners to volunteer to have their rights (such as they are) replaced by the authority of government to regulate. Don't be fooled. Don't consent. Don't cheer if/when HR 38 passes, mourn the death knell for the Constitution that passage will represent. I am not engaging in hyperbole here. Research how abused the Commerce Clause has been if you don't already know. You will rue the day this passes without your strong and loud voices against it.

    Blues
    They have all read the memo and know what this bill actually is. It matters not if we yell and scream against it - they will pass it. BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHAT IT ACTUALLY DOES!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories, Former USA
    Posts
    2,736

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by somoprepper08 View Post
    They have all read the memo and know what this bill actually is. It matters not if we yell and scream against it - they will pass it. BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHAT IT ACTUALLY DOES!
    You are right, they will most likely pass it. Like I said though, the problem as I see it is that so many gun owners and carriers don't know what it actually does, so I keep pluggin' away at trying to warn them. On the gun forum I frequent most regularly, one that has almost no moderation, a guy who does fully understand the implications, but doesn't maintain control of his impulses to name-call and demean those who don't, recently got banned. Meanwhile, the supporters of national reciprocity also engage in name-calling and demeaning against opponents, but nothing ever happens to them. The owner of the site and his one very nearly completely absentee moderator are both life members of the NRA and both have written blog posts about their own support for HR 38 using the NRA's support as justification. No surprise that pulling the trigger on the ban-gun is reserved only for opponents. The sycophancy towards the NRA by the owner and few mods he's had over the years has been rather stunning in light of betrayal after betrayal by them of gun owners. There are sunshine patriots everywhere though. Can't do much about 'em, but the attempt to reach the reachable seems worth the effort. I felt like most folks around here already more or less got it, so I just wanted to clarify my position(s) after seeing my name mentioned in relation to the bill. I didn't/don't think anything I say here or elsewhere will stop the bill from passing, but I do want folks to understand what it is about it that I oppose. That's all.

    Blues
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to Police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Sanctuary
    Posts
    10,660

    Default

    The point is, the Federal and state governments are regulating something that the Constitution specifically says they are prohibited from regulating in any way.

    Now, who is really breaking the law? Those who refuse to comply with the "laws" which are contrary to the letter, spirit and original intent of the Constitution, or those who pass the laws which are contrary to the letter, spirit and original intent of the Constitution?
    Pastor Guest

    Free E- Book!

    "Steps Toward the Mark of the Beast"
    The Christian's Guide to the How and Why of
    the Coming Cashless/RFID Economic System


  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    southern Missouri USA
    Posts
    712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    You are right, they will most likely pass it. Like I said though, the problem as I see it is that so many gun owners and carriers don't know what it actually does, so I keep pluggin' away at trying to warn them. On the gun forum I frequent most regularly, one that has almost no moderation, a guy who does fully understand the implications, but doesn't maintain control of his impulses to name-call and demean those who don't, recently got banned. Meanwhile, the supporters of national reciprocity also engage in name-calling and demeaning against opponents, but nothing ever happens to them. The owner of the site and his one very nearly completely absentee moderator are both life members of the NRA and both have written blog posts about their own support for HR 38 using the NRA's support as justification. No surprise that pulling the trigger on the ban-gun is reserved only for opponents. The sycophancy towards the NRA by the owner and few mods he's had over the years has been rather stunning in light of betrayal after betrayal by them of gun owners. There are sunshine patriots everywhere though. Can't do much about 'em, but the attempt to reach the reachable seems worth the effort. I felt like most folks around here already more or less got it, so I just wanted to clarify my position(s) after seeing my name mentioned in relation to the bill. I didn't/don't think anything I say here or elsewhere will stop the bill from passing, but I do want folks to understand what it is about it that I oppose. That's all.

    Blues
    And I appreciate you speaking out about it! Cause most folks I see are gung ho for it to pass. This is not good....

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    southern Missouri USA
    Posts
    712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pastor Guest View Post
    The point is, the Federal and state governments are regulating something that the Constitution specifically says they are prohibited from regulating in any way.

    Now, who is really breaking the law? Those who refuse to comply with the "laws" which are contrary to the letter, spirit and original intent of the Constitution, or those who pass the laws which are contrary to the letter, spirit and original intent of the Constitution?
    Yes, and they have the support of the NRA! Will we keep on 'complying' with every new encroachment? I think we will. We may bitch and moan about it but we will do whatever TPTB tell us to do...... Until we don't/won't.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories, Former USA
    Posts
    2,736

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pastor Guest View Post
    The point is, the Federal and state governments are regulating something that the Constitution specifically says they are prohibited from regulating in any way.

    Now, who is really breaking the law? Those who refuse to comply with the "laws" which are contrary to the letter, spirit and original intent of the Constitution, or those who pass the laws which are contrary to the letter, spirit and original intent of the Constitution?
    It's not that simple. National reciprocity legislation is built upon a permitting scheme that, itself, is unconstitutional if one takes the "bear" part of keep and bear literally. Those who wish to carry concealed (and in rarer cases, openly) have already long ago acquiesced and actively consented to that infringement in every state except for Vermont at one time or another. Now gun owners, led down the primrose path (again) by none other than the NRA, GOA and SAF (among other less significant .orgs), are wanting to trade what little is left of their Second Amendment privileges for the authority of government to nationalize, centralize and control concealed carry out of existence, but apparently most of them don't know that indisputable fact.

    It's not wrong to say that feds and states are usurping the right to keep and bear, but it lets the uninformed millions off the hook for their own ignorance. The two issues are just as important that they be discussed to my way of thinking. The points are both relevant to the issue(s).

    Blues
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to Police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Up North
    Posts
    1,229

    Default

    I find all the talk about who allows a concealed weapon to be carried and who doesn't kind of funny. If anyone is in a situation or an area where safety is a concern, conceal carry authority be damned. The operative word is "concealed." If I'm carrying a concealed weapon, apart from specific areas where x-rays or searches are conducted, such as going through an airport, who's to know? I've packed when necessary, and in those few times when I didn't have the permit, nobody knew but me.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    8,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer
    Now gun owners, led down the primrose path (again) by none other than the NRA, GOA and SAF (among other less significant .orgs), are wanting to trade what little is left of their Second Amendment privileges for the authority of government to nationalize, centralize and control concealed carry out of existence, but apparently most of them don't know that indisputable fact.
    You're so right, Blues. Well said.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Sanctuary
    Posts
    10,660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    It's not that simple. National reciprocity legislation is built upon a permitting scheme that, itself, is unconstitutional if one takes the "bear" part of keep and bear literally. Those who wish to carry concealed (and in rarer cases, openly) have already long ago acquiesced and actively consented to that infringement in every state except for Vermont at one time or another. Now gun owners, led down the primrose path (again) by none other than the NRA, GOA and SAF (among other less significant .orgs), are wanting to trade what little is left of their Second Amendment privileges for the authority of government to nationalize, centralize and control concealed carry out of existence, but apparently most of them don't know that indisputable fact.

    It's not wrong to say that feds and states are usurping the right to keep and bear, but it lets the uninformed millions off the hook for their own ignorance. The two issues are just as important that they be discussed to my way of thinking. The points are both relevant to the issue(s).

    Blues
    Actually, it is that simple. There is only one legitimate law for keeping and bearing arms. The Second Amendment. No other law is needed, no other law is valid.
    Pastor Guest

    Free E- Book!

    "Steps Toward the Mark of the Beast"
    The Christian's Guide to the How and Why of
    the Coming Cashless/RFID Economic System


  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    9,877

    Default

    Call me cynical, but if the NRA and many establishment Republicons support reciprocity, it's a bad deal and a scam.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •