To my amazement, a sizable percentage of gun forum contributors (those living in free States with less gun regulations) oppose such a law on the premise that once the Federal Govt regulates CCW issuance by law, when the next Democrat majority Congress takes charge it can use the same law to restrict CCW issuance nationally. [More]As a rule I steer clear of such places. They make my head hurt.
Tuesday, December 06, 2016
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
A discussion elsewhere opined that gun owners in less free states will support this because it means regaining a significant portion of their rights, and they are willing to sacrifice some of everyone else's to do it. Freer states' gun owners oppose it because they could potentially lose much but gain very little (Who travels to New York or New Jersey willingly, anyway?).
Personally, I'm on the fence about it. I see the potential for great good, but also the potential for a future Congress (or Executive Order) to use it to restrict everyone simultaneously. Also, while this would make my CHL valid in all 50 states, my carry gun is still illegal in several of them. I personally stand to gain very little, so I'm trying to approach it as philosophically (based on principle) as possible.
I'm in favor of a federal law forcing states to recognize all carry permits, but I think the actual permits should be state issued like driving licenses and carry permit are now. This way the worst that could happen is that we'd lose reciprocity and we'd be back where we are now. But the feds could not rescind permits.
I've had folks say that the state's recognition of drivers licenses is a voluntary agreement among the states rather than federal law,and that's true. They say the feds can't force a state to accept another states carry permit. I say look at the LEOSA, all states must abide, but the IDs are issued at the local law enforcement level.
The logical solution to all this is for Congress to pass a law reiterating that the 2nd Amendment means exactly what it states - that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Consequently, all Federal, state and local laws or executive orders that infringe shall be considered unconstitutional, unenforceable, null and void. Further, all those who do attempt to enforce these unconstitutional laws and orders shall be arrested and prosecuted in Federal courts under Section 242 of Title 18 - deprivation of rights under color of law.
https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law
In other words - no CCW licenses or peculiar weapons configurations needed in any states, territories or possessions of the United States, especially in those hotbeds of liberty like California New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts that would refuse to comply.
Post a Comment