House Weighs Bill to Make Gun Permits Valid Across State Lines

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.

First tell me why you're against state's rights.
 
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.

so no suspension of constitutional rights for prisoners. Have voting booths in prison and let prisoners have guns when they get out. Same with mental patients, etc?

That Glock might weight down little timmys backpack at grade school too.


No limits is no limits, no picking and choosing.
 
Don't come to New York.

You'll spend a year or two in Jail.

If this law passes, NYC and State officials will have no choice but to recognize All States Gun Permits. Federal Supremacy and all.

As a former Truck Driver I can tell you people in that Industry want this law. Currently no CDL carrying Driver can carry a weapon in their Truck, Simply because some states will not recognize their Permits while others will. Believe me, as a truck driver, a gun for Protection, Is a very good idea.

Even though I agree with the bill I don't think the feds have any right telling another state how to gov. itself

Neither the State of NY nor its citizens can prevent me from defending my right to life.

.
 
Seems to me the right to bear arms should supersede any state law.

Every other right guaranteed by the constitution is valid across state lines so why not this one?
 
Seems to me the right to bear arms should supersede any state law.

Every other right guaranteed by the constitution is valid across state lines so why not this one?


Constitution allows states to regulate firearms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
 
Never going to pass the Senate and it would be vetoed by the President!

Well at least we will have something on paper with obama's veto on it. As for the senate not all are democrats are gun grabbers. If the demoicrats in the senate want to save their ass they will vote for it's passage.
 
Seems to me the right to bear arms should supersede any state law.

Every other right guaranteed by the constitution is valid across state lines so why not this one?


Constitution allows states to regulate firearms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The right to bear arms is separate from the militia. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is what is stated not the right of the state.

People were expected to furnish their own weapons hence the right to bear arms. And isn't the state "regulating" an infringement on that right?

Isn't the state requiring me to pay for the right to bear arms via permits akin to a poll tax or forcing one to pay to exercise their right to free speech?
 
Last edited:
Seems to me the right to bear arms should supersede any state law.

Every other right guaranteed by the constitution is valid across state lines so why not this one?


Constitution allows states to regulate firearms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Regulated does not mean banned, in fact regulated at the time implies more about training than proscribing which arms the milita could carry.

New york city has a de facto ban on concealed carry by anyone except police, retired police, and a chosen few that have to prove a reason to carried a concealed firearm. To me that is not regulation, it is prohibition, which is prevented by the second clause that gun banners LOVE to forget about, "the right of the people to keep and BEAR arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED.

If all the framers wanted was for the states to maintain a milita, and be able to make rules prohibiting a certain class from having weapons, than the phrase would have read "the right of the STATE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." It however, does not, it says PEOPLE.
 
Seems to me the right to bear arms should supersede any state law.

Every other right guaranteed by the constitution is valid across state lines so why not this one?


Constitution allows states to regulate firearms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Words mean everything. Regulate back in 1791 does not mean what it does to dat. Well regulated to the signers of the constiution meant as to be expect in working order.
If the signers of the Constitution meant the regulate to mean what you suggest they would have said
A Militia well regulated by the Congress, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

They said
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
 
To me, it makes sense to have gun licenses valid across state lines

I also think Gay Marriages should be valid across state lines
 
Oklahoma Legislature Approves Second Amendment Day

A bill authored in the House by Steve Vaughn and in the Senate by Frank Simpson ultimately garnered a total of fifteen co-sponsors as it sailed out of committee with a unanimous “do pass” recommendation. It passed by wide margins in both chambers. Governor Mary Fallin signed the bill into law on April 14, 2011.

An “emergency” provision of the bill places the act into immediate effect, meaning that beginning this year and every June 28 thereafter will be the official Oklahoma Second Amendment Day.
Oklahoma Legislature Approves Second Amendment Day - HUMAN EVENTS
 

Forum List

Back
Top