pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
National Right to Carry
#1
Never was a fan of it because I didn't feel that the .gov should have any say in who what and when and how someone should carry

until I moved out here to Commiefornia and there are only 56 approved carry holders in the entire freaking county and unless your a big donator to the Sheriff's election fund . . . you don't get squat
Honesta Mors Turpi Vita Potior - 3%
Reply
#2
Yes, I've heard this a lot from gun people...if the LTCF goes national, then we have the feds controlling our carry rights! So I'm not sure if it is a good idea, a GREAT idea or do not want!
___________________________________________________________
A Reading from the Book of Armaments, Chapter 4, Verses 16 to 20:

Then did he raise on high the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, saying, "Bless this, O Lord, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the people did rejoice and did feast upon the lambs and toads and tree-sloths and fruit-bats and orangutans and breakfast cereals ... Now did the Lord say, "First thou pullest the Holy Pin. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Hand Grenade in the direction of thine foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it."
Reply
#3
(09-07-2012, 12:53 PM)RocketFoot Wrote: Yes, I've heard this a lot from gun people...if the LTCF goes national, then we have the feds controlling our carry rights! So I'm not sure if it is a good idea, a GREAT idea or do not want!
But the only thing the Feds would be controlling is National Reciprocity. They wouldn't have any affect on to whom the State Shall or Shall not issue to. So not really a whole lot of "control" being given to the Feds.
[Image: 5c220c63-8b97-4da9-ab3c-287f26620991_zps529d180f.jpg]
Reply
#4
(09-07-2012, 02:00 PM)mrjam2jab Wrote: But the only thing the Feds would be controlling is National Reciprocity. They wouldn't have any affect on to whom the State Shall or Shall not issue to. So not really a whole lot of "control" being given to the Feds.

Yes, from what I remember of the bill the only thing the fed law would do is force states that issue a license/permit to reconize other state licenses/permits.

.
Reply
#5
It would be better if the states would just agree on the issue. I don't like the idea of the federal government being involved in this at all. When was the last time they did something without screwing it up and wasting billions of dollars doing so?
My guidance counselor said I wouldn't amount to anything... Lucky guess! Dodgy

[Image: mikey1j.jpg]

Reply
#6
I think it is a great idea, but the problem is implementation and I do not trust the fees to implement anything of any real importance.

Plus, I expect they will choose the strictest method of approval, not the most lenient. Well all be more like NJ than we would be VT.

camper
Reply
#7
(09-07-2012, 02:54 PM)mikey Wrote: It would be better if the states would just agree on the issue. I don't like the idea of the federal government being involved in this at all. When was the last time they did something without screwing it up and wasting billions of dollars doing so?
(09-07-2012, 04:41 PM)Camper Wrote: I think it is a great idea, but the problem is implementation and I do not trust the fees to implement anything of any real importance.

Plus, I expect they will choose the strictest method of approval, not the most lenient. Well all be more like NJ than we would be VT.

camper
^This. Additionally we would be dealing with incrementalism, but at the federal level now. We can barely
keep Philly in check. What are we supposed to do when some President decides to make changes through
Executive Order like what's happening now?

I'm in favor of taking power, money, and size away from the fed, not adding to it.
.
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

William Pitt
Reply
#8
Im not sure if its a good or bad thing. I do think that any law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry in any state if they have a LTCF. I do see the points that others have posted so I guess Im kind of undecided at this point.
das, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#9
(09-07-2012, 05:12 PM)das Wrote: Im not sure if its a good or bad thing. I do think that any law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry in any state if they have a LTCF. I do see the points that others have posted so I guess Im kind of undecided at this point.
To be clear, I think we are all in favor of the goal of nationwide reciprocity. But having the fed step in
and exercise powers that it has not been granted by the Constitution is not the way I would
want to go about it.

With just PA and UT permits I can carry in more states than I have ever been or will likely ever be.
For the most part, nationwide reciprocity will not provide the right to carry to people who do not already
have it, and it will not allow carry in states or municipalities that prohibit it. Precious little is gained
by yielding so much more power to an already out of control government.

We have nationwide reciprocity of driver's licenses without any help from the fed, we can do it with carry
permits as well. It will take a lot of time and money to accomplish it, which is exactly why we need to keep
our rights free from .gov intrusion as much as possible. Once government acquires power, it is not so quick
to surrender it.
.
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

William Pitt
Reply
#10
(09-07-2012, 06:15 PM)Curmudgeon Wrote:
(09-07-2012, 05:12 PM)das Wrote: Im not sure if its a good or bad thing. I do think that any law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry in any state if they have a LTCF. I do see the points that others have posted so I guess Im kind of undecided at this point.
To be clear, I think we are all in favor of the goal of nationwide reciprocity. But having the fed step in
and exercise powers that it has not been granted by the Constitution is not the way I would
want to go about it.

With just PA and UT permits I can carry in more states than I have ever been or will likely ever be.
For the most part, nationwide reciprocity will not provide the right to carry to people who do not already
have it, and it will not allow carry in states or municipalities that prohibit it. Precious little is gained
by yielding so much more power to an already out of control government.

We have nationwide reciprocity of driver's licenses without any help from the fed, we can do it with carry
permits as well. It will take a lot of time and money to accomplish it, which is exactly why we need to keep
our rights free from .gov intrusion as much as possible. Once government acquires power, it is not so quick
to surrender it.
.
You are absolutely right Crumudgen I would just love to see N.J. and Cal. have to accept us carrying. Not that I will be going to Cal. but N.J. is so close if I wanted to work there it would be grat to able to carry.
das, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  National Reciprocity petition soberbyker 1 388 07-23-2017, 11:45 AM
Last Post: mpan72
  Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 soberbyker 2 427 01-24-2017, 10:57 PM
Last Post: sgtsandman
  Ohio Passes Radical Concealed Carry Reform: Reciprocity Momentum Growing! soberbyker 0 320 12-10-2016, 08:57 PM
Last Post: soberbyker
  Virginia to end concealed carry reciprocity soberbyker 38 4,207 03-04-2016, 03:22 PM
Last Post: gascolator
  NC National Guard carry bill passes. Rosco the Iroc 1 682 08-24-2015, 10:02 PM
Last Post: sgtsandman



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.