House Weighs Bill to Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines

[DontBeStupid]

which also means upgrades to keep up with the times

That would only apply if you believe the Constitution is a living document. As we all know, there are A LOT of people in this country who do not think that way. In fact, the vast majority of conservatives don't. They are the first ones to point out that the Constitution does not contain the word "abortion", so therefore, women don't have the right to have one. Nor "marriage" mentioned, therefore people do not have the right to choose who they want to marry. Also, "health care" and "education" are never mentioned, and therefore no one has the right to either.

So, taken that as our standard for applying the Constitution, we have to reason that since "M-16" is never mentioned, we therefore do not have a Constitutional right to own one.

 

[IndependntLogic]

It's about time

Lawmakers are considering a House bill that would give Americans who hold permits to carry firearms in their home states the right to carry their weapons across state lines.

Although many states have entered into voluntary agreements, there is no nationwide framework for honoring permits and licenses uniformly. A bipartisan bill, co-authored by Reps. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Heath Shuler, D-N.C., aims to change that.


Read more: House Weighs Bill To Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines | Fox News

One I will have to remember come election time

Seems reasonable.

 

[pgm]

On the other hand, Take the Gay marriage issue. I see no Power given to the Fed to Determine what Marriage is. Unlike gun ownership which has the 2nd amendment. So a Valid argument can be made that the Fed Does not have Supremacy in that case, and the powers fall to the states.

While one could make that valid argument, the full faith and credit clause of the constitution changes the whole game since South Carolina would have to respect a marriage contract from Connecticut.

Anyway, this law makes some sense - especially for truckers (as was said earlier). The main concern I have is that it would make it a lot harder to track guns that may end up in the hands of criminals. I think a state has a right to know what guns are being brought into the state and by whom. I'm not sure how you address this exactly. Also, I'm sure there's already some legal responsibility to report stolen guns, but this becomes even more paramount if it's across state lines.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

which also means upgrades to keep up with the times

That would only apply if you believe the Constitution is a living document. As we all know, there are A LOT of people in this country who do not think that way. In fact, the vast majority of conservatives don't. They are the first ones to point out that the Constitution does not contain the word "abortion", so therefore, women don't have the right to have one. Nor "marriage" mentioned, therefore people do not have the right to choose who they want to marry. Also, "health care" and "education" are never mentioned, and therefore no one has the right to either.

So, taken that as our standard for applying the Constitution, we have to reason that since "M-16" is never mentioned, we therefore do not have a Constitutional right to own one.

Which as absolutly nothing TO DO with a living breathing document,

So, taken that as our standard for applying the Constitution, we have to reason that since "M-16" is never mentioned, we therefore do not have a Constitutional right to own one

What part did you miss when the courts ruled
'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia'

This ruling if you notice was handed down in 1980 not before the invention of the M-16

 

[NYcarbineer]

Too funny for words.

 

[uscitizen]

So now beg reb is for big federal govt getting bigger in their powers?

 

[martybegan]

So now beg reb is for big federal govt getting bigger in their powers?

If its for a "power" that forces local and state governments to follow the consitution, then most federalists would be for it.

 

[Ringel05]

The Founding Fathers wanted every man to be able to have a gun, to be used for providing for his family and for defending his home and liberties. I agree. And one of the most common guns of the time was the Long Rifle.

So in this case, I agree. There should be no permits or limits on a man's right to own a Long Rifle. This should cross state boundaries.

Then the 1st amendment only applies to those methods of communication that were in existence at the time....... Oops.

 

[Ringel05]

Here's what's going on folks:
The incorporation of the Bill of Rights is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to the states. Under the incorporation doctrine, most provisions of the Bill of Rights now also apply to the state and local governments, by virtue of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
So it was ultimately the 14th amendment which opened the door.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So now beg reb is for big federal govt getting bigger in their powers?

No I am not, but a state must follow the Constitution and protect the rights of it's citizens.

 

[uscitizen]

The Founding Fathers wanted every man to be able to have a gun, to be used for providing for his family and for defending his home and liberties. I agree. And one of the most common guns of the time was the Long Rifle.

So in this case, I agree. There should be no permits or limits on a man's right to own a Long Rifle. This should cross state boundaries.

Then the 1st amendment only applies to those methods of communication that were in existence at the time....... Oops.

Well we do still have the electorial college which exists because of communication difficulties from the early days.

 

[uscitizen]

So now beg reb is for big federal govt getting bigger in their powers?

No I am not, but a state must follow the Constitution and protect the rights of it's citizens.

So all gun regulations are wrong and just anyone should be able to own/carry where they want, etc all firearms?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So much for the GOP loving states rights.

but don't you love the states' righters wanting the feds to step in when its an issue THEY like

So now beg reb is for big federal govt getting bigger in their powers?

I suggest you folks pick up a copy of the Bill of Rights and read it and maybe you'll stop engaging in such ridiculous hyperbole.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So all gun regulations are wrong and just anyone should be able to own/carry where they want, etc all firearms?

In my opinion, yes, with the exception of private property.

 

[signelect]

This is a states right issue not a Fed issue. Congress would love to tell us what to do and when to do it yet they haven't proved that they can do anything right except get a raise for themselves without our approval and better health care than we get but it is their right.

If you are going to carry a gun you have to accept responsibility for what the gun does not matter what state you are in.

 

[Full-Auto]

The Founding Fathers wanted every man to be able to have a gun, to be used for providing for his family and for defending his home and liberties. I agree. And one of the most common guns of the time was the Long Rifle.

So in this case, I agree. There should be no permits or limits on a man's right to own a Long Rifle. This should cross state boundaries.

How cute!!!!

 

[Ringel05]

The Founding Fathers wanted every man to be able to have a gun, to be used for providing for his family and for defending his home and liberties. I agree. And one of the most common guns of the time was the Long Rifle.

So in this case, I agree. There should be no permits or limits on a man's right to own a Long Rifle. This should cross state boundaries.

Then the 1st amendment only applies to those methods of communication that were in existence at the time....... Oops.

Well we do still have the electorial college which exists because of communication difficulties from the early days.

Eeeeeennnnnh that's not the entire reason for it's existence, but what the hell.

 

[Ringel05]

This is a states right issue not a Fed issue. Congress would love to tell us what to do and when to do it yet they haven't proved that they can do anything right except get a raise for themselves without our approval and better health care than we get but it is their right.

If you are going to carry a gun you have to accept responsibility for what the gun does not matter what state you are in.

My gun is communicating with me telepathically...... It's telling me to go out and start shooting......

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It's about time

Lawmakers are considering a House bill that would give Americans who hold permits to carry firearms in their home states the right to carry their weapons across state lines.

Although many states have entered into voluntary agreements, there is no nationwide framework for honoring permits and licenses uniformly. A bipartisan bill, co-authored by Reps. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Heath Shuler, D-N.C., aims to change that.


Read more: House Weighs Bill To Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines | Fox News

One I will have to remember come election time

So the Republican controlled House is now against states' rights - got it.

 

[Full-Auto]

It's about time

Lawmakers are considering a House bill that would give Americans who hold permits to carry firearms in their home states the right to carry their weapons across state lines.

Although many states have entered into voluntary agreements, there is no nationwide framework for honoring permits and licenses uniformly. A bipartisan bill, co-authored by Reps. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Heath Shuler, D-N.C., aims to change that.


Read more: House Weighs Bill To Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines | Fox News

One I will have to remember come election time

So the Republican controlled House is now against states' rights - got it.

Stay up all night thinking of that particular lie?

The drivers license is recognized why not he license for for concealed carry.