1911Forum banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,768 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm not sure if this article has been posted yet on here. I am still struggling to navigate the new forum format.

Nevertheless, if there is a reason to vote Trump, this is the probably the most paramount reason to do so. All other issues can fall to the wayside.


Excerpt:
Mr. President, each state’s driver’s license is honored across this great nation, yet a permit to carry a concealed gun — which, in contrast, is a right specifically protected in the U.S. Bill of Rights — is often not respected by other states. Will you support a national reciprocity act so that law-abiding gun owners can more easily travel with their freedom?
and Trump's response:
“Yes.” Trump then said, “I will support such legislation. If it comes across my desk I will sign it.”
... 'nuff said!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
That opportunity was in 2018-2019 when the GOP had the votes all around. No action promoted or even mentioned. While the NRA leadership was more interested in hob knobin around, buying suits and taking junkets to where ever. A golden opportunity wasted. NOW they want your vote. Like the last guy at the bar who will say anything to the remaining ladies to close the deal before last call.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
"National Reciprocity" should not be needed since states have no authority to regulate it any way. (Are you required to have a background check for free speech or religion? Background check for a fair speedy trail? Etc.) Hopefully the new SCOTUS will settle it...

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,768 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
That opportunity was in 2018-2019 when the GOP had the votes all around...
You are absolutely correct, lots of other opportunities on other issues were also missed. But that is the Washington swamp. Nevertheless, the fact that POTUS says that reflects his strong support of gun rights. Its the thought that counts. (y)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,000 Posts
I know some gunowners conflate "national reciprocity" - a simple recognition between the states of the CCW laws (including constitutional carry) for the other - with a "national CCW. It is not, and the latter can be very dangerous. But so can "national reciprocity" and I'll use a few illustrations.

With a caveat that I'm using simple language, it takes very little for Congress to change "each state shall recognize the public carry laws of the other to include constitutional carry" from good to bad simply by (a Democratic controlled) Congress adding "so long as the non-resident state has completed 40 hrs training, a background check and carries $1M of liability insurance". With a Democratic controlled House, possibly Senate and WH control too, does anyone want to open that door? Certain Democratic Party legislators who are virulently anti-gun, such as Senator Booker of NJ have already opened that door a bit.

We also have something a bit more devious and worrisome. True, the federal government controls many aspects of gun sales, what can be imported and possessed, who can purchase and possess, etc. But where it has no foothold, no "occupying the field", is carrying in public whether in one's own state or another. Do we really want the federal government doing for carrying in public what it has done for immigration? I certainly don't.

We should also consider that with piecemeal reciprocity between states it takes several states one at a time to move against us. Several legislative entities doing a bit of damage one at a time. As compared to a hostile Congress in one fell swoop wiping out whatever gain had been made under one friendlier to gun rights.

Finally, don't we as gunowners and (generally) conservatives support the 10th Amendment reserving rights to the states rather than the federal government? Or do we approve of that only when it comes to abortion, same sex marriage, religion in schools, etc as practiced by states like MS, AL, AR and so on against an over reaching federal government?

Due to my traveling and out of state family I currently maintain 4 non-resident CCWs - NH, MA, UT and OR. It's a pain in the fanny, especially MA. But I'd rather deal with what we have and not invite the federal government into an area it has thus far left alone.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
72,126 Posts
That opportunity was in 2018-2019 when the GOP had the votes all around. No action promoted or even mentioned. While the NRA leadership was more interested in hob knobin around, buying suits and taking junkets to where ever. A golden opportunity wasted. NOW they want your vote. Like the last guy at the bar who will say anything to the remaining ladies to close the deal before last call.
And what does Biden promise? Not national CCW reciprocity, that's for certain. And what he IS promising I can guarantee he will deliver if he gets a friendly Congress on his side as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dsf

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
935 Posts
All Politicians make BS promises before elections.
He should have got that accomplished in his first week in office.
Disappointing to say the least.
Dems are a total lost cause with the 2nd.
It was decided long ago that each citizen would be responsible for funding their necessary gear and be well regulated.
Really sucks having to be creative when business requires traveling around the nation and keeping firearms with you.

Vacationing in Upstate NY decades ago the kids took my car and were headed to a carnival near Buffalo.
A minute after they left I called them and said to come back. Then I pulled my M59/HS Derringer from a hidden but easily accessible compartment in the car.
My buddy's kids saw that and understood that national dilemma.

Those kids shoot competitively these days and run 1911s, ARs and Dillons.
Trap, Skeet in the vineyards and Axe throwing at parties.
Sadly only my kids own revolvers as the others are only autoloader kids. :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,066 Posts
A good thing, but NOT good enough, until all us living in lefty states get Carry Rights, whether by action from a so far dysfunctional and derelict Supreme Court (maybe +Amy will change this, but not something I would bet the farm on, the S.C. in total is masterful at finding ways to disappoint 2A rights proponents, and Justices don't always live up to the "Model" of a Crusader of 2A we envision of them), or through a newly elected House and Senate Majority, or via Executive order (better than nothing), we will not have 2A justice FOR-ALL in this country.

And I would further postulate, that until the above is resolved on the side of 2A, you lucky Gunners living in Free-States now, will never get National-Reciprocity (Not with LEFTY-States, that is). These two notions, Sever Restrictions of carry-rights in Lefty States, vis-a-vis, National-Reciprocity, cannot-legally, and likely will not, coexist in space and time.

Reciprocity is a side-show to what should be addressed by our politicians and the judicial system, the right for all people's to keep and BEAR arms.

What we can say about POTUS, he has done his part to fortify the judicial system up and down the hierarchy, from Federal-District, Appellate, and 3 in the Supreme Court. Now it is up to these judges and Justices to live up to their sworn duty to protect the Constitution, and give equal time in the SC to 2A cases...Until that happens all this other stuff is just noise and chatter.

(BTW, I don't see "Federalism" as an argument related to carry rights...May issue states, who virtually issue only to retired cops and others who are well connected, are grossly violating the Constitution (the Bear part, even when they allow guns in the home). There really is no wiggle room on this.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
There are a couple of problems to Nation Reciprocity. First of all I think we all agree that we do not want a "Federal Permit". So we would want to be subject to each states laws when we travel. Now initially no a big deal to learn the state's laws that you are going to travel to BUT will they remain the same. For instance; Since states like NY and NJ do not concern themselves that much with concealed carry their laws are VERY liberal with few restrictions. Now if all of a sudden they had to allow all us nasty gun loving assholes into their state carrying maybe even multiple guns I would bet their laws would change in a second. It would probably be hard to keep track of how quick the rules changed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
331 Posts
"National Reciprocity" should not be needed since states have no authority to regulate it any way. (Are you required to have a background check for free speech or religion? Background check for a fair speedy trail? Etc.) Hopefully the new SCOTUS will settle it...

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Yessir, you are right as rain, but if you travel to New Jersey, your rights don't follow you...I am NOT prepared to spend any money for bail, or to stay in jail in that blighted state...so...perhaps the President does have us in mind, and hopefully, it works! New Jersey isn't the only state with anti second amendment government...there are several others, but the horror stories from those folks that were incarcerated there are enough for me to make a WIDE detour around the place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
There are a couple of problems to Nation Reciprocity. First of all I think we all agree that we do not want a "Federal Permit". So we would want to be subject to each states laws when we travel. Now initially no a big deal to learn the state's laws that you are going to travel to BUT will they remain the same. For instance; Since states like NY and NJ do not concern themselves that much with concealed carry their laws are VERY liberal with few restrictions. Now if all of a sudden they had to allow all us nasty gun loving assholes into their state carrying maybe even multiple guns I would bet their laws would change in a second. It would probably be hard to keep track of how quick the rules changed.
There would not be a national permit. But a national recognition and acceptance of one state's permits in other states. Just like there are no national driver licenses or marriage licenses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
755 Posts
The Const & BOR applies to all of us, as a nation. EOS. Every state not only agreed to that, they have their own const and were "ratified" by congress.

The only "power" here is for us: the feds need to tell the states to gottverdamnt follow the BOR and that's the end of that. If they do not, they are violating the BOR and their contract with the nation and the citizens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,849 Posts
The problem with repeating "Shall not be infringed" is that it
HAS BEEN infringed
so many times in so many ways that the phrase has become meaningless.
We need a new mantra.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cannibul

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,206 Posts
The problem with repeating "Shall not be infringed" is that it
HAS BEEN infringed
so many times in so many ways that the phrase has become meaningless.
We need a new mantra.
No, what we need is to elect representatives that UNDERSTAND what it means!
 
  • Like
Reactions: henryt and seagiant

·
Registered
Joined
·
755 Posts
While electing sane politicians is an interesting idea, I'd be happier if a pile of judges could - strongly, forcefully - explain "shall not be infringed" and "god-given rights" to the numbnuts.

If that isn't going to happen... ROpe remains plentiful; as do overpasses and lampposts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,849 Posts
No, what we need is to elect representatives that UNDERSTAND what it means!
Make no mistake: all politicians — even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership — hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it’s an X-ray machine. It’s a Vulcan mind-meld. It’s the ultimate test to which any politician — or political philosophy — can be put.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top