G.W. Bush hinting at National CCW Reciprocity

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NationalCCW:
Trouble viewing? Click view on your web browser, then text size, then choose a medium or smaller font.
[/quote]


Evertime I see your problems viewing message my head spins... Why is it that your site needs to have a person make font adjustments? If there is a reason, there is not a problem with the browser, there is a problem with your site.

Maybe you should redesign it so that it works properly with all browsers.
 
Yes, CSS and maybe a browser detection script could do wonders....

------------------
I twist the facts until they tell the truth. -Some intellectual sadist

The Bill of Rights is a document of brilliance, a document of wisdom, and it is the ultimate law, spoken or not, for the very concept of a society that holds liberty above the desire for ever greater power. -Me
 
I'm only 31, but I've trouble reading the smaller fonts. Consequently, I rarely go to your page.

K.I.S.S.

------------------
"Anyone feel like saluting the flag which the strutting ATF and FBI gleefully raised over the smoldering crematorium of Waco, back in April of ‘93?" -Vin Suprynowicz
 
Notwithstanding any design flaws in the National CCW page, I could maybe back national reciprocity, IF it was accompanied by a total repeal of Brady and abolishment of NICS. That ain't gonna happen, so I can't see bargaining away my RIGHT to defend myself and getting nothing in return.
 
I don't get the rationale behind the moderator's response.

We already have the Brady and NICS systems.

If Bush put through national reciprocity,
how have we bargained away our rights to defend ourselves?

Given the laws are already in place, reciprocity is a plus rather than a minus.

It is also unrealistic to assume we would get reciprocity and get rid of Brady and NICS.

The implication of the moderator's statement is that reciprocity is a loss in some way that has to be compensated for by getting rid of Brady and NICS.
 
Enoch, concealed carry permits are an infringement of 2A and are therefore illegal. Why the hell should we be so happy to beg permission to exercise a right, paying money and being treated like criminals in the process?

The only realistic (meaning, in accordance with 2A) concealed carry reciprocity system would be Vermont-style across every state.
 
I am willing to bargain away my rights. My proposal would be as follows:

Repeal all federal gun control, in exchange for a national licensing scheme that will allow me to own and carry any gun I want, anywhere I want, any time I want.

This national license would be issued on demand. If an instant check is good enough for gun sales today, it's certainly good enough for a national licensing scheme. The license would be free, and good for life.

License could only be revoked/suspended after a hearing in court, and said hearing must be predicated on a disqualifying conviction.

See, I've compromised.

(Now that I think about it, my proposal sounds like the 2nd Amendment.)

[This message has been edited by deanf (edited August 16, 2000).]
 
"It is also unrealistic to assume we would
get reciprocity and get rid of Brady and NICS."

If we can't get Brady repealed with evidence from Jacobs & Potter of Northwestern University, the government's own General Accounting Office, and now two anti-gun "researchers" in Ludwig and Cook in JAMA all saying that Brady is worthless...when can we?

Rick
 
If we can't get Brady repealed with evidence from Jacobs & Potter of Northwestern University...

We can't, which is exactly my point. We'll have submitted to bowing and scraping to exercise our rights, and gotten nothing in return.
 
One small step at a time. Those who went after smokers and gun owners used this tactic. We must do the same. First a ccw reciprocity law, then repeals of federal gun control over a 10 year period, and finally vermont style national ccw over a 20 year period. It's time to turn the tables on them.

------------------
National CCW Reciprocity: http://www.homestead.com/njccw/nationalccw.html
 
National, your page came through fine on my machine.
Busch's plan is better than how it is now. Bad enough that the ccw thing is illegal let along restricted between states, if he wants reciprocity that fine for now, repealing the whole issue of having to have a license later. We aint gonna get it all at once short of geting uncivilized IMO.
 
It is better to make a small step towards the recognition of our rights and get the ability to carry then wait for some nationwide epiphany on the issue.

If one studies strategy and tactics, you know that the climactic battle may not be the best course to pursue.

Waiting for Vermont carry just means that we do nothing. Incrementalism in pursuit of the goal is a way to go about it.

Unless someone gives me a plan that will convince the country to go Vermont, I think the suggestion that only Vermont is acceptable is counterproductive.

Folks working in state legislatures across the country have gotten legal carry privileges for folks. It has saved lives and reduced crime. That's what Lott has given us.

Keep using him. When such system are successful across the country you have fertilized the ground and sown the seed such that the Jama studies can sprout like the Lott study did.

Every analysis suggests that getting national CCW is a good thing, except for folks who are so absolutist that they can't stand not getting their way immediately.
 
Folks working in state legislatures across the country have gotten legal carry privileges for folks.

Legal carry WHAT?
 
>>Unless someone gives me a plan that will convince the country to go Vermont, I think the suggestion that only Vermont is acceptable is counterproductive.<<

Well put, Enoch.

------------------
Private gun ownership is the capital sin in the left's godless religion. Crime is merely a venial mistake.

Check out these gals: www.sas-aim.org

Get some real news at www.worldnetdaily.com
 
Quite wrong rigby14.
Supporting groups that only beleive in 'carry permits' as the way for us to be able to bear arms in public is counterproductive.
The only group that regularly pushes for
vermont style carry and gives attention to
candidates that do is GOA.I cant remember when the last time the NRA did that.Im sure Im simply wasnt reading into my NRA 'gaurdian's as much as I should.
As a not too old post brough out titled 'whats up with the NRA' I belevie brought out how the NRA continues to in different ways support the NICS system
THAT is counter productive.
We can talk and yes I do see the pro-gun things the NRA does add's and what have you,
but a step forward with a lie or step backward gets you how far?
Keep supporting groups that say 'we need to be allowed to?'
Its already on the books why doesn the NRA ask for that one to be enforced'
the right to keep and BEAR arms'
does it say where?
National reciprocity the way GOA has been pushing it would force other states to recognize vermont/constitutional style carry.
As far as breaking the law their are many criminals here,the ones making these very unconstitutional laws.
Who calls them unconstitutional you ask?
Not the one's calling for their enforcement.
In fact they may very soon be getting money spent by congress to make sure your locked up if you do dare carry with out a permit
for that 'right'.
www.gunowners.org www.jpfo.org

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
GWB said in a reply letter to me :

Governor Bush's record:
"Allowed law-abiding citizens to protect themselves - Similar to 31 other states, Texas law allows responsible, law-abiding citizens to protect themselves"

My momma only raised ugly children..., not dumb ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top