I was not aware that there are states that issue concealed carry permits to convicted felons. In any case, said felons are prohibited from coming within spitting distance of a gun anyway (under federal law) so it's hard to imagine what the use right to carry a gun in another state would be to them.
Contact your representative now for ccw
- Thread starter Daugherty16
- Start date
I was not aware that there are states that issue concealed carry permits to convicted felons. In any case, said felons are prohibited from coming within spitting distance of a gun anyway (under federal law) so it's hard to imagine what the use right to carry a gun in another state would be to them.
I listened to that argument during the House debate and scratched my head. According to opponents, drug dealers, violent criminals and other unsavory characters have easy access to concealed carry permits all over the country, except for those few states that are "forward thinking" enough to protect their citizens by making it darned near impossible to get a permit.
But I don't know of any state that allows those people to get permits. It was about as much of a red herring as the liberal opposition raising the states' rights issue. The former was a lie, the latter was insincere.
oneounceload
Moderator
It truly is amazing how many here think the Federal Government, and especially THIS administration is their friend when it comes to gun ownership
Here's a hint - they AREN'T, and unlike the Chicago article saying how the laxest state will set the rules, it will be the opposite - the strictest state will for "uniformity", and we will lose much more than we could possibly gain. The potential restrictions that can be easily imposed while still following the "letter of the law" can turn most CCW guns into expensive paperweights
Here's a hint - they AREN'T, and unlike the Chicago article saying how the laxest state will set the rules, it will be the opposite - the strictest state will for "uniformity", and we will lose much more than we could possibly gain. The potential restrictions that can be easily imposed while still following the "letter of the law" can turn most CCW guns into expensive paperweights
therealdeal
New member
fear is a funny thing
ahh, that is sortof why the president would veto the bill if given the opportunity. I don't recall anyone saying this, but check ourt the reps who SUPPORT the bill and get back to me.
why do you think the antis are against this bill? You might want to ask yourself this question because the main reason is this bill will do wonders for the CCW movement and open up many doors for the legal CCW and it WILL gain support and momentum when given the chance.
**I feel the chicago argument is just as bad as your argument and actually more plausible. The truth is neither will happen, and states will still manage their constituents their own way while adhering to the federal law imposed(which absolutley no anti gun states want to!!) watch how fast state reps move to adhere to the law when it comes down. then and only then will you truly understand because you feel they will move quick magically somehow to thwart the fed govt, all CCWs, and so-on
ahh, that is sortof why the president would veto the bill if given the opportunity. I don't recall anyone saying this, but check ourt the reps who SUPPORT the bill and get back to me.
why do you think the antis are against this bill? You might want to ask yourself this question because the main reason is this bill will do wonders for the CCW movement and open up many doors for the legal CCW and it WILL gain support and momentum when given the chance.
**I feel the chicago argument is just as bad as your argument and actually more plausible. The truth is neither will happen, and states will still manage their constituents their own way while adhering to the federal law imposed(which absolutley no anti gun states want to!!) watch how fast state reps move to adhere to the law when it comes down. then and only then will you truly understand because you feel they will move quick magically somehow to thwart the fed govt, all CCWs, and so-on
oneounceload
Moderator
MY rep, the man who wrote the bill and whose office is across town from me?
Yep, checked him out
I see this going wrong in so many ways - just like the healthcare that no one read - this is one camel you do NOT want sticking its nose under the tent
Really? And you've got a crystal ball with that kind of accuracy?
First off, it's not going to get signed, so all we're doing is armchair quarterbacking. What is going to get the ball rolling is a Supreme Court decision affirming a right to carry. From there, the states and courts will fight it out over what constitutes a defensible infringement on that right.
The difference is huge. HR 822 simply asks that a certain kind of permitted privilege be transferrable from state to state. That's a whole different enchilada. Furthermore, HR 822 leaves the door open for states like Illinois to continue to deny the right altogether.
Just for fun, let's say we live in a land of magical unicorns and elves that don't steal my shoes and burn them. HR 822 gets signed into law. It will be challenged in the courts by New York, California, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, or some combination thereof.
Then, the question before the court will not be one of rights, but of a restricted activity. That could set disastrous precedent for us.
Like it or not, the Supreme Court decides what the 2nd Amendment means, and right now that's limited to the right to keep a handgun in the home, subject to fees, registration, and approval.
For those who don't follow the news. Last night it came across on the banner at the bottom of the screen. The feds are suing UT as they did AL with regards to immigration laws enacted by the states preempting federal laws. Now lets put in the H.B.822 context Do you really think if a state just stops issuing CCW permits that the feds will bring a law suit against that state. I think not. It is already being talked about that if the current administration is re-elected that will be the time they go after the 2nd amendment with a vengeance. Again we are better off with out this bill so we will still have SCOTUS to go to. I still think that H.B. 822 will remove SCOTUS from the equation
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
It's been a fun debate. But a warning - do not use terms like 'libtards'.
We don't do childish partisan insults.
Discuss the merits of the bill and practical details.
GEM
We don't do childish partisan insults.
Discuss the merits of the bill and practical details.
GEM
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Good article! Just a warning - if you comment don't get into general politics or insults about this or that political issue. 
I travel to NY frequently. Let's say H.R. 822 does pass and gets signed into law; I could then carry in NY "subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State."
New York code section 400.00.7 states "Such license shall specify the weapon covered by caliber, make, model, manufacturer's name and serial number."
Since my carry permit does not list specific weapons I am licensed to carry, it does not seem to me that I would be able to meet the "same conditions or limitations that apply" to NY residents.
I suspect many people from other less-restrictive states would be totally unable to meet quirky requirements in the more-restrictive states. If true, how much of the promise of H.R. 822 is just an illusion?
New York code section 400.00.7 states "Such license shall specify the weapon covered by caliber, make, model, manufacturer's name and serial number."
Since my carry permit does not list specific weapons I am licensed to carry, it does not seem to me that I would be able to meet the "same conditions or limitations that apply" to NY residents.
I suspect many people from other less-restrictive states would be totally unable to meet quirky requirements in the more-restrictive states. If true, how much of the promise of H.R. 822 is just an illusion?
Aguila Blanca
Staff
You are confusing conditions of the license with conditions applicable to carrying pursuant to the license. If your state doesn't require listing your eligible carry weapons, they would not have to be listed. If NY prohibits carrying in pet stores operated by female owners -- your home state license would not authorize you to carry in a NY pet store operated by a female owner.gc70 said:
therealdeal
New member
it keeps coming; I guess an election is near. the comments are interesting @ the end
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...ea-of-curbing-target-practice-on-public-lands
gc70. keep it simple(referring to your last post//above article and my post's title are seperate entities). that is small potatoes. It really isn't that complicated and those little things would be ironed out.
Actually it wouldn't even be an issue as already explained: your state - not the federal government - would be in charge of the CCW process. Your CCW might be different, look different, and so-on from NY's. This wouldn't change the fact that your state issued CCW would be recognized & legally binding.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...ea-of-curbing-target-practice-on-public-lands
gc70. keep it simple(referring to your last post//above article and my post's title are seperate entities). that is small potatoes. It really isn't that complicated and those little things would be ironed out.
Actually it wouldn't even be an issue as already explained: your state - not the federal government - would be in charge of the CCW process. Your CCW might be different, look different, and so-on from NY's. This wouldn't change the fact that your state issued CCW would be recognized & legally binding.