Reciprocity gets out of committee - not sure if dupe

[amm5061]

Why the Fucckk NC reciprocates with MASS and MASS does not back is beyond me, take MASS off our list, calls and letters out tomorrow.
Not that I would ever want to go through the gauntlet surrounding, but damn!!! Screw MASS!!

That's not reciprocation. Reciprocation requires both parties to be a part. NC just chooses not to be a bunch of dickbags and recognizes that MA LTCs require a lot of hoops to jump through and are valid. Several other states do the same.

MA chooses to be a giant bag of dicks, so f*** the rest of the country. Though at least MA will issue a non-resident license, but still. Dick move not to reciprocate.

 

[42!]

Agreed

But then there's the question of whether or not the ends justify the means......ie pandoras box of encouraging runaway fed gov to usurp ANOTHER power.....

It WILL end badly if thats the route folks advocate

I fail to see the difference between the fed forcing the states to comply with the 2a and forcing them to honor other state's laws, effectively setting the bar at the 2a. Or is it just a difference between it being done via SCOTUS vs Congress?

 

[Dennis in MA]

NC doesn't reciprocitize. They just recognize that other jurisdictions issue permits and allow those permit-holders to carry in a state. Not a reciprocity agreement at all.

MA would like to believe that other SCARY states issue gun permits only to those most dangerous. Hardened criminals. Convicted rapists. Serial killers. Ergo, MA should NOT recognize any permits from ANY other state.

As far as State vs. Federal, there IS a fear that the Federales would come down on this. I think a few more positive USSC cases and the matter would be firmly settled for my lifetime and that of my children. I'd be good with that.

And while carrying elsewhere WOULD be nice, I rarely leave my home state anyhow. BUT. . . I think if you asked G-Dub or TJ in 1795 if a resident of Massachusetts could carry arms in Virginia, they'd look at you like you had 3 heads - because "why would you not???"

 

[Tallen]

Here is the compromise for removing every single gun law on the books in this country: I won't demand financial recompense for the years the RKBA has been infringed.

 

[tuna]

Here's my compromise: Start with a clean slate, "shall not be infringed". You want to compromise? Fine - Take away violent felons' right to own firearms, no carry (concealed or otherwise) or purchase before 18 without parental permission and criminalize the use of a gun to commit a crime.

As a bonus because I feel generous right now, if you insist on registration I will agree to Non-Military arms being registered. The 2A is NOT about hunting. I'll register my beloved 16ga A5 and my Single Action Revolvers. 1911s, ARs and the like are off limits on government interference.

 

[namedpipes]

Here's my compromise: Start with a clean slate, "shall not be infringed". You want to compromise? Fine - Take away violent felons' right to own firearms, no carry (concealed or otherwise) or purchase before 18 without parental permission and criminalize the use of a gun to commit a crime.

As a bonus because I feel generous right now, if you insist on registration I will agree to Non-Military arms being registered. The 2A is NOT about hunting. I'll register my beloved 16ga A5 and my Single Action Revolvers. 1911s, ARs and the like are off limits on government interference.

Criminalizing use of a gun in commission of a crime is silly and only allows the da to stack charges and force you into a plea bargain.

Retracting "spot on" based on closer reading.

 

[drgrant]

Here's my compromise: Start with a clean slate, "shall not be infringed". You want to compromise? Fine - Take away violent felons' right to own firearms, no carry (concealed or otherwise) or purchase before 18 without parental permission and criminalize the use of a gun to commit a crime.

Guns are already extra special modifiers, at least under most realms of law. "Assault with a deadly weapon" or "Armed Robbery" etc, or "Armed/Forcible Rape" etc.

Making guns "special" vs other kinds of deadly force does not help us at all. It just further creates and perpetuates more problems. A gun shouldn't be any more "special" from a baseball bat or a
knife, frankly.

-Mike

 

[strangenh]

Here's my compromise: Start with a clean slate, "shall not be infringed". You want to compromise? Fine - Take away violent felons' right to own firearms, no carry (concealed or otherwise) or purchase before 18 without parental permission and criminalize the use of a gun to commit a crime.

As a bonus because I feel generous right now, if you insist on registration I will agree to Non-Military arms being registered. The 2A is NOT about hunting. I'll register my beloved 16ga A5 and my Single Action Revolvers. 1911s, ARs and the like are off limits on government interference.

Heh. That is a lot closer to the "not quite a decision but cited sometimes like it was a decision" in US v. Miller than almost anyone on the left will admit.

 

[UncleDuke]

Guns are already extra special modifiers, at least under most realms of law. "Assault with a deadly weapon" or "Armed Robbery" etc, or "Armed/Forcible Rape" etc.

Making guns "special" vs other kinds of deadly force does not help us at all. It just further creates and perpetuates more problems. A gun shouldn't be any more "special" from a baseball bat or a
knife, frankly.

-Mike

As far as I know maimed or dead is maimed or dead, it doesn’t make any difference what the weapon is that the assailant uses. In my home state of Ohio, there is a gun specification for crimes like Robbery. Charges for personal offenses that are prefaced with “Aggravated” involve grievous/serious bodily injury, and do not necessarily involve the use of a firearm.