Reciprocity gets out of committee - not sure if dupe

42! said:
I wish I was in a state where calling my senator might matter. Hopefully those that are will.

GOA has been talking this down from the beginning, I'd like to see them proven wrong. I don't know why they are so against it now that the bump stock ban is gone. Maybe they aren't, but it looks that way to me.
Click to expand...

LOL. You don't think that calling "Pocohontus" or the Ice Cream Man will do any good? They are both very reasonable. ;)

Saw an article today that said that ATF is looking at legality of Bump Stock.
 
Blitz1 said:
Does anyone actually think this will pass the Senate? Are we all arguing for nothing?
Click to expand...
No and I'm not arguing.

Lots of piss lip flapping by people who just don't care about us.

It's for the children and the votes. Kick the f***ing soap boxes out from under their feet and watch them crawl into their safe places.
 
42! said:
Why do I think he hasn't even read the bill.
Click to expand...

Given the NRA's activities a couple years ago in NH (against Constitutional Carry iirc) and Rep Gohmert's track record, I can respect his position. The NICS deal seems like it has morphed into a mistake and he is against the current configuration of the NICS and that is effecting his position on the 'fix'.

On to the Senate - lets see if they strip out the carry part and just leave the NICS stuff - it is McConnell after all.
 
jpk said:
The passage of combined NICS/Reciprocity bill isnt a dream.....its a NIGHTMARE

This bill needs to die
Click to expand...


I am not sure I followed. You mean more gun control in the states that doesn't require gun license? They can still withhold the current local gun law... just don't travel to our state.
 
'Shall not be infringed' has not gotten us very far. Even in the Heller case, the court declared 'we will allow some infringement, but we are not going to tell you how much and leave it at that for a decade or so'.
 
jpk said:
First and foremost the notion that the fed gov has the power/auth to force states to accept the permitting schemes of other states is BS.....its just another unconstitutional over reach.

The ONLY constitutional way to do it would be to make constitutional carry the law of the land (ie "Shall not be infringed"

Second, the dems added the poison pill NICS expansion.

As I stated previously the bill needs to die because its a bad bill that will screw us all in the long run
Click to expand...


Just from another angle to look at it: Isn't this the way that Fed Gov to ensure our constitutional right shall not be infringed by telling some states to compliant?
 
jpk said:
There are 16 states that say otherwise who have implemented Constitutional Carry or nearly its equivalent.......

Allowing the federal sausage mill to fark things up with unconstitutional over reach is just a BRILLIANT idea that could ONLY come from battered gun owners from progressive states.

You dont like your states gun laws then pack up and move......dont advocate that the rest of us need to give up OUR rights to improve YOUR lot in your farked up state
Click to expand...

Packing up and moving is not a viable solution for me. I live in CT, and I own a MA corporation. I am also licensed to practice in MA. While I could move to NH, and have things easier in my state of residence, I would still spend a large portion of my time in MA. Obtaining a license to practice in another state would be costly and time consuming. CT, for all of its other BS with regard to guns, is a shall issue state. MA is another matter. First, what is my status? Am I a resident by virtue of owning a MA corp and having my office in MA, or am I a nonresident by virtue of my domicile in CT? This is a bunch of unnecessary hoop jumping for something that is simple as recognition of my valid license obtained through a procedure which verified my good character. Some states will not change if they are not forced to. That is kind of like asking the 1850's south to voluntarily stop slavery.
 
another question is: Let's say, MA compliants...When NH gun owners pass through MA, what are they going to do with the hi cap mags?
 
jpk said:
Thats YOUR problem and a direct function of your choices in life.

Dont you think its more than a little selfish of you to try to drag the rest of the country down via unconstitutional over reach in order to make up for your own poor choices in life?
Click to expand...

Wow, that is the most douchebaggie response that had ever been directed to me.

Please school my ignorant little brain on how this is dragging the rest of the country down because I see it as an expansion of rights for people who have to cross state borders regularly.
 
jpk said:
When are people going to learn that once the fed gov digs its claws into something via unconstitutional over reach there's no going back
Click to expand...


No liberal controlled government had any trouble for unconstitutional over reach...just saying. You want to play the game clean, you lose. NH is not going to be the wonderland forever, since ma**h***s pack up and move there with the liberal disease.
 
gunofthrones said:
No liberal controlled government had any trouble for unconstitutional over reach...just saying. You want to play the game clean, you lose. NH is not going to be the wonderland forever, since ma**h***s pack up and move there with the liberal disease.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, not every escapee from Mass is is a liberal.

There ARE libs moving from MA to NH but they're moving for cost of living or scenery reasons.

There are ALSO a ton of escapees that despise MA politics and culture and want something else. Which has not yet been lost in NH/ME/VT.
 
jpk said:
Hey, sorry if your feelings were hurt but you made choices in life deal with it like the rest of us.

If you havent picked up on the arguments previously presented as to WHY this bill is a bad idea and WHY it will end badly now and in future then why should I expect that reiterating those points AGAIN would produce a different outcome for you?

I'm really not trying to insult you.....only pointing out the simple fact that we all make choices in life and we all have to deal with the consequences of those choices.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

My point is: "shall not be infringed", while correct, is not a winning argument - particularly while our best SCOTUS case to date had said 'f-it, lets infringe.' Most states in the US have some type of licensing scheme, the law will allow those licenses to be recognized all over the US without a reciprocity pact between states. The states that do not have a licensing scheme can still carry on in the manner they have chosen for residents within the state, but would only need to adopt a scheme for their residents when they start making poor life choices by venturing out to other states.
 
16 out of 50 is not a great model of success. Our federal system sometimes has to force states to do things that they do not want to do. If 'shall not be infringed' is a winning argument, but states go and infringe anyway, shouldn't the federal government step in and tell those states to knock it off? Yes federal laws are not a perfect solution, but they are much better than having the states, such as MA, continue to do nothing.
 
Can someone answer this question? Name one other right that can not be exercised in all 50 states. some of the comments on here are gold. Even when we win, it's not good enough.
 
eboos said:
Fair enough.

My point is: "shall not be infringed", while correct, is not a winning argument - particularly while our best SCOTUS case to date had said 'f-it, lets infringe.' Most states in the US have some type of licensing scheme, the law will allow those licenses to be recognized all over the US without a reciprocity pact between states. The states that do not have a licensing scheme can still carry on in the manner they have chosen for residents within the state, but would only need to adopt a scheme for their residents when they start making poor life choices by venturing out to other states.
Click to expand...

Arguing with him is pointless, he is arguing philosophy while everyone else lives in reality. It would be great if things worked that way, but they don't. Here in reality we want to use the fed to force compliance with our basic rights, which gets us closer to the utopia he thinks will spring forth on it's own somehow. He acts like the combined bill is a poison pill when it contains no expansion of NICS, just a mandate for people to share info that already makes people PP's, just isn't in the fed system yet.

This bill has nothing that hurts us, and worst case could be repealed later (Much harder to repeal something than pass it). It only expands rights.

gunofthrones said:
another question is: Let's say, MA compliants...When NH gun owners pass through MA, what are they going to do with the hi cap mags?
Click to expand...

The law defines handguns under that law as including the magazines and ammo, and that it covers you for posession of both.
 
So, what is the deal with this 'Fix the NICS' poison pill that was dropped into this thing?

GOA says that unpaid traffic tickets could lead to a NICS denial if this goes through.

S.446 is a clean CCW Reciprocity Bill in the Senate
 
jpk said:
Who's living the fantasy......you live in mAss roflmao

Those of us that live in the ~16 states that have passed constitutional carry are the one living in reality

Keep your delusional fantasy in mass and leave the rest of us alone
Click to expand...

Does this bill, as written, expand or contract rights? How does this bill, as written, hurt con carry states?
 
Horrible said:
So, what is the deal with this 'Fix the NICS' poison pill that was dropped into this thing?

GOA says that unpaid traffic tickets could lead to a NICS denial if this goes through.

S.446 is a clean CCW Reciprocity Bill in the Senate
Click to expand...

GOA says a lot about this thing, these problems they have found do not seem to actually exist in the bill.
 

Similar threads

I'm not sure what to think of this
2
Replies
33
Views
694
chris_1001
chris_1001
Worcester Police Suspends-DUPE
Replies
3
Views
131
chris_1001
chris_1001
MA Out of state LTC
Replies
19
Views
366
drgrant
drgrant
Preban or not
2 3
Replies
65
Views
1K
not new guy
N
MUST WATCH IF YOU ARE SELLING OR PLANNING TO SELL A FIREARM AND ARE NOT AN FFL
Replies
19
Views
584
Bigfudge16
Bigfudge16
Back
Top Bottom