-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Constitutional Carry tracker.
- Thread starter ChevyGuy91
- Start date
You're going to see this more and more as the transponder use becomes more prevalent and "required"/cost savings. Removing the data source won't hurt you.
I wonder what would happen if you removed the transponder completely and let the plate readers generate the toll for you.
You would have to deal with the pay by plate or similar and all the horrendous bullshit (and extra costs) that entails. It's not like theres a kiosk just off the offramp where you can just pay your tolls and get it over with.
-Mike
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
I know we have some good ladies like Anne Gobi representing us but I wish Massachusetts had a few more ladies like these to counter the likes of detestable lawmaker Sen. Cynthia Creem and usurper Maura Healey.
These are three of the four main sponsor of Michigan's constitutional carry legislation and what they said on the house floor when introducing the bill(s).
MI Rep. Michele Hoitenga - “Responsible people shouldn’t have to obtain a special permit from the government to exercise a right that is guaranteed in both the U.S. and state constitutions. Other states have recently passed full constitutional carry laws, and I plead to my colleagues and our governor to pass this common-sense package that will allow law abiding women, like myself, to protect ourselves and our families without jumping through bureaucratic hoops. Criminals don’t complete the permitting process before they commit a crime, and it’s time we level the playing field for lawful people who want nothing more than to protect their families.”
MI Rep. Sue Allor - "Under current law a person without a concealed pistol license could be legally carrying a gun openly on his or her hip and merely putting on a coat makes them in violation of the law. Simply put, that is nonsense. Whether or not a gun is concealed should have absolutely no impact on one’s right to defend them self. Responsible gun owners shouldn’t have to obtain permits before they’re allowed to wear jackets over their guns while hiking, or exploring the great outdoors.”
MI Rep. Pamela Hornberger - "People deserve to have the rights our Founding Fathers laid out for us in the U.S. Constitution, especially the right to bear arms. The fees required by the current law amount to a tax that infringes on this fundamental right.”
These are three of the four main sponsor of Michigan's constitutional carry legislation and what they said on the house floor when introducing the bill(s).
MI Rep. Michele Hoitenga - “Responsible people shouldn’t have to obtain a special permit from the government to exercise a right that is guaranteed in both the U.S. and state constitutions. Other states have recently passed full constitutional carry laws, and I plead to my colleagues and our governor to pass this common-sense package that will allow law abiding women, like myself, to protect ourselves and our families without jumping through bureaucratic hoops. Criminals don’t complete the permitting process before they commit a crime, and it’s time we level the playing field for lawful people who want nothing more than to protect their families.”
MI Rep. Sue Allor - "Under current law a person without a concealed pistol license could be legally carrying a gun openly on his or her hip and merely putting on a coat makes them in violation of the law. Simply put, that is nonsense. Whether or not a gun is concealed should have absolutely no impact on one’s right to defend them self. Responsible gun owners shouldn’t have to obtain permits before they’re allowed to wear jackets over their guns while hiking, or exploring the great outdoors.”
MI Rep. Pamela Hornberger - "People deserve to have the rights our Founding Fathers laid out for us in the U.S. Constitution, especially the right to bear arms. The fees required by the current law amount to a tax that infringes on this fundamental right.”
NC getting closer to permitless carry. Even with a Dem governor, people seem awfully optimistic. Of course, if our Dem governor was in massachusetts, he'd be considered a raging right winger by the libtards. And Lizzie Warren is considered a freaky nut job by all the democrats down here. Strange politics. Takes some getting used to.
http://nccapitolconnection.com/2017...ill-would-also-repeal-pistol-purchase-permit/
http://nccapitolconnection.com/2017...ill-would-also-repeal-pistol-purchase-permit/
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
Horrible
NES Member
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
I hope they get this through. SC has some stupid carry laws on the books.
MachineHead
NES Member
It's worked very well the last four times I passed through and passed a couple parked cruisers. The cops usually fly right past you the other times.
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
It looks like Texas is trying to figure out how to 'merica with the rest of us...
https://www.texastribune.org/2017/0...proves-modified-permitless-carry-legislation/
Kinda.
Then there is this, which leads me to believe that Constitutional Carry in Texas will only be for Texas residence. Not so Constitutional, IMO, but I am splitting hairs.
I am glad they are jumping on the band wagon, but part of me sees some humor that Texas is behind the Northern New England states on the 2A power curve.
Cool points for numbering the bill HB1911, I guess.
https://www.texastribune.org/2017/0...proves-modified-permitless-carry-legislation/
Kinda.
Then there is this, which leads me to believe that Constitutional Carry in Texas will only be for Texas residence. Not so Constitutional, IMO, but I am splitting hairs.
I am glad they are jumping on the band wagon, but part of me sees some humor that Texas is behind the Northern New England states on the 2A power curve.
Cool points for numbering the bill HB1911, I guess.
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Setting aside the South Carolina H.3930 constitutional carry bill which is now in Senate committee -- I noticed that the earlier house bill H.3240 was taken up by the House again yesterday.
That bill (H.3240) is what they are calling their version of the National Concealed Weapons Permit Reciprocity Act.
A new sponsor was added to the bill before debate was adjourned until today.
I am wondering if the renewed interest in this bill is preparing it as a "consolation prize" should the constitutional carry bill fail to pass the Senate?
That bill (H.3240) is what they are calling their version of the National Concealed Weapons Permit Reciprocity Act.
A new sponsor was added to the bill before debate was adjourned until today.
I am wondering if the renewed interest in this bill is preparing it as a "consolation prize" should the constitutional carry bill fail to pass the Senate?
I'm pretty sure their statute that dictates the size, placement, color and text of a sign prohibiting carry on a private business to be legally enforceable is Section 30.06 of their criminal code.
Even before we had constitutional carry NH was more pro 2A than Texas, plus VERMONT had us all beat for a long time. Ain't that some shit.
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
You should have seen the mind explosion of a Texan I was drinking beer with a few weeks ago when I explained that a LTC holder in MA has it better then they do in TX. Total melt down and then back peddling into defending TX's retarded laws. I spiked the football with how awesome NH is now and he changed the subject.
Did you tell him that the upper 3 new england states are all pretty much free carry by default now? (something they've never had there, LOL).
An LTC holder does not have it better though, not by a long shot. Not with suitability and all that other horseshit in play. Yeah TX has binding signage, but who even pays attention to that crap?
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Not to mention no safe storage BS, which makes it easier to stow your gun if you had to anyways. Before the 90s though, it is kinda funny that MA residents were better off for carry, for a long ass time. A lot of the southern and western states basically had no legal concealed carry up until the 80s came around, FL was the one that kind of kicked the whole thing off.
-Mike
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
Did you tell him that the upper 3 new england states are all pretty much free carry by default now? (something they've never had there, LOL).
An LTC holder does not have it better though, not by a long shot. Not with suitability and all that other horseshit in play. Yeah TX has binding signage, but who even pays attention to that crap?
whole thing off.
-Mike
Texan's, apparently. This dude went blue in the face defending that law.
Wow. that's kinda mind numbing that someone would "defend" that BS, since there's no real need for it. He probably doesn't even know why it was put in the
law, either- EG, that it was a "throwaway" to antis and other limpwrist types to get the bill to pass easier. I bet he doesn't even know that PC 3006 fails if even one provision of the law isn't met. A lot of the places that post, apparently, don't have compliant signage, and if the signage isn't compliant, the law is not binding.
-Mike
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Damn, sounds like they have quite the legislative fight brewing down there -- thanks for the link Ed.
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Today the SC House passed H.3240 The National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act by a rollcall vote of 85 Yes to 23 No ![[banana]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/029.GIF "Banana [banana]")
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Also yesterday the Senate subcommittee passed out S.449 their version of constitutional carry, although a report I read said that it was thought to be unlikely to go much further this session.
I agree with Ed - MA is better for carry than TX. Not for application, purchasing, or storage, but specifically for carry MA wins. No binding signage, no duty to inform, can carry in bars/hospitals/etc, it's really not bad at all. It's the other stuff that blows.
Rick1987
NES Member
But what if you had to use your gun in self defense?
Would you be in jail living in Texas? Us MASS folks would most likely be behind bars.
ChevyGuy91
NES Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
- Messages
- 22,924
- Likes
- 23,531
You should plan on going to jail for shooting someone regardless of where it happened. Your statement is full hearsay fantasy for both states. If you are affraid of going to jail after a clean defensive shooting, you should probably leave your guns at home, in any state.
Similar threads
