• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

H.R.402 - To amend title 18

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,449
Location
Valhalla
National carry or national forced resciprocity scares the snot out of me.

It's bad enough that each of the 57 states makes their own rules that do not play very nicely with the rules of all the other states. But at least one state cannot completely wipe out the way some other state does things. Put it under the feds and not only will there be a bureauracracy erected to operate/enforce the program but the whim of one set of idiots (as opposed to needing the whims of all the sets of idiots) can bring about unintended (but perfectly forseeable) consequences.

Thanks, but no thanks.

stay safe.
 

georg jetson

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,415
Location
Slidell, Louisiana
National carry or national forced resciprocity scares the snot out of me.

It's bad enough that each of the 57 states makes their own rules that do not play very nicely with the rules of all the other states. But at least one state cannot completely wipe out the way some other state does things. Put it under the feds and not only will there be a bureauracracy erected to operate/enforce the program but the whim of one set of idiots (as opposed to needing the whims of all the sets of idiots) can bring about unintended (but perfectly forseeable) consequences.

Thanks, but no thanks.

stay safe.
Exactly. The only fed legislation Id be comfortable with is a bill that repeals other legislation.
 

Jeff Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,569
Location
Long gone
If national reciprocity is passed, will Congress amend the 1000' school zone law? If the school zone law is not amended reciprocity is a mute point.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,449
Location
Valhalla
If national reciprocity is passed, will Congress amend the 1000' school zone law? If the school zone law is not amended reciprocity is a mute point.
I'm not sure it will remain quiet, but it certainly will be irrelvant.

stay safe.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Too bad the system is so inept and corrupt because the scotus could easily recognize national unlicensed open carry as the law of the land subject to the "sensitive" places restrictions set forth in Heller. For those who know the history of the 2nd Amendment you know that it does not apply to concealed carry (which is stupid, but that's the legal precedent) and that the right is to openly carry a firearm. This is admitted in many cases, as recently as 2013 in the Colorado post office case.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,833
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
Too bad the system is so inept and corrupt because the scotus could easily recognize national unlicensed open carry as the law of the land subject to the "sensitive" places restrictions set forth in Heller. For those who know the history of the 2nd Amendment you know that it does not apply to concealed carry (which is stupid, but that's the legal precedent) and that the right is to openly carry a firearm. This is admitted in many cases, as recently as 2013 in the Colorado post office case.
It doesn't apply to open carry, either. The fact that it does not stipulate either mode of carry means that both modes are to be protect as an inherent civil right.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
It doesn't apply to open carry, either. The fact that it does not stipulate either mode of carry means that both modes are to be protect as an inherent civil right.
Well, that's what I think. But that's definitely not what the courts have said in this country.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Well, that's what I think. But that's definitely not what the courts have said in this country.
Given the judicial track record of batting way less than 1.000, with countless overturns over the years, my faith in any given court, including the Supreme Court, to properly decide "the supreme Law of the Land" is precisely SQUAT.

"Shall not be infringed" means precisely what it says. Yes, it really is that simple. The courts have gotten it wrong since about the time the ink dried.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,833
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
Well, that's what I think. But that's definitely not what the courts have said in this country.
Given the judicial track record of batting way less than 1.000, with countless overturns over the years, my faith in any given court, including the Supreme Court, to properly decide "the supreme Law of the Land" is precisely SQUAT.

"Shall not be infringed" means precisely what it says. Yes, it really is that simple. The courts have gotten it wrong since about the time the ink dried.
Simply put, the courts are wrong.
 
Top