What the government gives, the government can take way. I'm not so much in a hurry - though national legal, loaded OC would be a tasty morsel indeed.
For CC, I prefer the system of reciprocity as is working for driving licenses.
I keep hearing this concern about "what the government gives, the government can take away" and yet I've yet to have anyone tell me what constitutional or civil rights the federal government has moved to protect that has later resulted in the loss of such rights. Besides which, what makes a right protected by SCOTUS ruling any better than a right protected by congressional action per the 14th amendment?
Has the court prohibition on inter-racial marriage bans resulted in anyone losing his ability to get married? In theory we could reverse Roe at some point, but after 40 years, if the ruling were reversed tomorrow, would we end up with more or fewer State where elective abortion is legal than we had pre-Roe? How about federal anti-discrimination laws? Or federal civil rights laws? Which of these have resulted in the federal government first giving something and then taking away more than was there before?
More importantly, on what basis do you think that lack of a nationwide respect for RKBA acts as any kind of a bulwark against gun grabbers in congress taking everything they want anyway? We didn't have any kind of national carry/possession protection when we got the '94 gun ban.
I don't much care whether congress acts to protect OC nationally, or CC. They could chose to require States to recognize all permits. There are a lot of ways congress could act to extend some semblance of protection to RKBA that would not be harmful. Some might offend those who think that shouting "P4P" amounts to intelligent and informed political discussion. But for the thoughtful and sane what is the offense so long as congress didn't presume to make permits more difficult to get?
Or, depending on the outcome of the election, congress could act to ban entire classes of guns, outlaw possession in most public places just by extending the 1000' federal GFSZ to something like the 5,000 feet for which a bullet is credibly dangerous, and odds are that the courts would not overturn them. That they've never protected RKBA nationwide in any form would have zero effect on congress' ability to act if the gun grabbers get the votes in November.
As for voluntary recognition "working", that clearly isn't so when a half dozen States will readily impose felony level penalties for the crime of being on the wrong side of a line on a map with a gun on your hip.
What is the point of a federal constitution with specific protections for our rights, and specific power for congress to secure those rights against State and local infringement, if we are too scared of some boogeyman that nobody can point to materializing in the past to make use of such provisions?
Where is the objective evidence that congress exercising duly delegated 14th amendment powers would create any more risk to the 2nd amendment than exists today and will exist tomorrow and henceforth for so long as evil men desire to enslave others?
Charles
