Trump - 2nd Amendment

carguychris said:
True, but I think things could get sticky with regards to registration. I expect restrictive states to ratchet up their registration requirements in an effort to keep non-resident CHL holders out.
Click to expand...
I don't think that would work. I think that would be covered by the "Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, ..." language.

In other words: I know that NY state requires permit holders to register the gun or guns they will carry, and those guns are listed on the actual permit. Neighboring Pennsylvania doesn't require that. The Pennsylvania permit (actually, PA calls it "license") is a fully valid permit without any registration involved. If the proposed law calls for universal reciprocity, that means NY would have to recognize the PA permit -- without any registration of the guns. A PA licensee carrying in NY would still be subject to the magazine capacity limit and other relevant provisions of the SAFE act, but I don't think NY would be able to require PA to register guns to licensees and to enter that information on the permit.
 
...AND to ensure that a vehicle can be quickly and easily traced back to its owner in the event of an accident, theft, or driving-related crime such as DUI.
Click to expand...

Ok, this brings up an interesting point. Sticking with cars, for a moment, you can drive in another state with your out of state plates & registration, and license. For a visit. Even for a few weeks, but, when your stay approaches the residency requirements, you are no longer a visitor, and you are expected to get the proper state license and register your car in that state.

I would say the same should apply to an out of state carry permit. If you stay in the state long enough to establish residency, your out of state permit is invalid, and you need one from your new state of residence. (exceptions for military personnel, ect.)

Note also that the state you are visiting does NOT have your information (car registration) nor are you required to give it to them, if they even take it. If the police run your plates or registration, they don't have your info in their system, their system asks your home state for it.

Such a system cannot work the same way for firearms. Because the basic framework (database of owned arms) does not exist. Most states track permit holders, NOT the individual guns they own. I do know of one exception, though, there may be more...

I believe NY state does. I know that they DID, in the 70s, and I doubt the system has given up on that since then...

I got my NY state pistol permit in 1975 at age 18. I clearly remember the 5 sets of fingerprints, 4 photographs, and 3 character references I had to submit, though I do no longer recall what the fee was at the time.

The permit was to possess, and allowed open carry. There were no concealed carry permits for ordinary citizens where I lived, at that time.

The gun(s) I was allowed to possess were listed on the back of the paper permit, listed my make, caliber, barrel length, and serial number. Those guns, and only those guns were covered by the permit. (I had all my father's and Mom's pistol listed on the permit, to protect them incase something happened to Mom & Dad, a lesson we learned from an auto accident a few years earlier).

Also, at that time, the permit was good for life, unless revoked.

I left NY in 79, permanently. About 2000, NY sent me a letter, telling me, that since I was no longer a NY resident my permit was now invalid, and, they wanted to know where the guns listed on it were...

Trust me on this, any kind of registration with the state of New York is as permanent a thing as a temporary government building and stop gap spending!

I am opposed to any registration requirements on general principle, and if they aren't required in my home state (and they aren't) I'm not giving them to any other state so they can sleep better at night...
 
Trump didn't win so he could give us back all the rights that have been stolen from us over the last few decades. He won because more people felt Hillary would be worse!
Click to expand...

I agree. Much of the reason for Trump's victory was anti Hillary on a number of issues. In addition, people were voting for growing the economy, for immigration reform and dealing will people entering the USA illegally, and for bringing jobs back to the USA (part of the economy but more specific). I didn't sense a huge groundswell of support for the RKBA and less gun control. Although, on black Friday, there was a record set for background checks conducted. It still remains to be seen how supportive of the RKBA Trump really is, now that the campaign is over and his job is to "govern".
 
I also agree that Trump may not push any new polices that provide more firearms freedom, but I feel pretty confident that he won’t implement more restrictions. Also, much of what trump does to uphold the Second Amendment will be with his appointment of Judges at various levels from the Supreme Court on down.
 
Short. Simple. Covers the necessary bases. And NO federal requirements or registrations.

Now, we need to keep the pressure on the Republicans in Congress to keep it simple, and to resist the Democrats' almost certain attempts to kill it with poison pill amendments.
 
Assuming this bill were to pass as written (and that's a big "if"), this part will be used against us:

b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that—

‘‘(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property;
Click to expand...

Expect to see just about every business in California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and Hawaii get posted. Politicians in those places will have signs already made and ready for distribution.
 
^^^ Good point. But there may not be any way around that problem without trampling property rights. Unless the law defines "private" in a way that excludes places open to the public for profit-making enterprises.
 
I think I might be in the minority here, but I don't see property rights as something that can be "used against us" or something we have to "work around".

I know certain people will be frustrated about it, but the simple fact is that we do not have a legal right to carry a firearm everyplace, just because we feel like it. NOR SHOULD WE.

Just as we don't have a legal right to go anywhere we feel like. (trespassing)

personally, I could care less if every shop in the metro north east and west coast post no gun signs. Affects me personally not in the least.

If this passes, and we get nationally recognized carry, accept the bitter with the sweet and don't whine about it. Nor brag.

OK, we get legally recognized carry in public, but business owners can post and prohibit being armed on their property, a right that they have always had!

It may be there is even a new business opportunity here. Armored cars, fitted with lockboxes and armed guards, to act as mobile vaults, parked outside businesses, where CCW could be secured for the duration of your shopping. Sure, there are a few legalities to work out (one of them being legal recognition that it is NOT a "transfer" of the firearm), permits, licenses, insurance, etc., but I see no reason it couldn't be done.

As far as I can see right now, that's the only ethical "work around" that doesn't infringe on property owners rights.

Thoughts?
 
Maybe build into the national reciprocity bill language similar to the Missouri House Bill 96, being discussed in another thread;

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=582169

Make it less attractive for property owners to ban the public -- whom they want in their businesses -- from carrying. In other words, "Sure, you can prohibit people from carrying legally, but then you accept the responsibility for protecting them." I think that's a fair exchange. (In the engineering world, it's called "apportioning risk." Client wants the engineer to carry a bazillion dollars in professional liability insurance -- to protect the client, not to protect the engineer. Engineer says, "Okay, I'll buy the policy, but you want it, so the premiums get added to the fee." Client hears what the premium is, and quickly decides that maybe a bazillion dollars in coverage is more than what's actually needed.)
 
44amp said:
It may be there is even a new business opportunity here. Armored cars, fitted with lockboxes and armed guards, to act as mobile vaults, parked outside businesses, where CCW could be secured for the duration of your shopping. Sure, there are a few legalities to work out (one of them being legal recognition that it is NOT a "transfer" of the firearm), permits, licenses, insurance, etc., but I see no reason it couldn't be done.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. In fact, a business in St. Louis attempted to set up this exact thing outside Busch Stadium. So, what happened? Anti-gun forces stopped it from happening.

http://fox2now.com/2016/07/15/entre...down-his-mobile-gun-locker-business-downtown/
 
NJgunowner

NJ', is it really the WHOLE N.E. or just the misguided legislative few? I haven't lived "up-north" since 1979 (Rhode Island). Does the general populace really have an aversion to firearms? I read that Vermont is an open carry state, Maine has a strong streak of conservatism and NY (above NYC) is pro-gun. Is there hope for the NE? I know there is NO hope for California.
 
Is there hope for the NE? I know there is NO hope for California.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there is no hope, but as long as we follow the rules of democracy, there is little hope for those (and other) areas.

Simply put, the metro/big city areas have the numbers of votes, often equal or even greater than the entire rest of the state combined, so essentially, they rule.

I grew up in NY, and left back in the late 70s. I'm sure its worse today than it was then, but back then, people's attitudes about guns didn't start to get sane until you got about an hour's drive north or west of Albany.....

Same thing in Illinois, and on the west coast, the big cities, who are overwhelmingly politically "progressive" (they certainly aren't liberal, by the dictionary definition of the word) use their numbers to pass what they feel is best.

In WA, we got a ridiculously unworkable back ground check law, because the 5 counties in the Sea/Tac corridor passed it. ONLY those 5 counties, passed it, the other 30+ counties in the state did not pass it, but democracy simply isn't about right or wrong, its about numbers. 3 wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner is democracy. The assumption is that the majority will choose what is right, but history shows us that to be a fallible assumption.

Democracy also relies on informed voters making educated choices. The public getting accurate information (about nearly everything) seems to be becoming a deliberately lost art these days.
 
PolarFBear said:
NJ', is it really the WHOLE N.E. or just the misguided legislative few? I haven't lived "up-north" since 1979 (Rhode Island). Does the general populace really have an aversion to firearms? I read that Vermont is an open carry state, Maine has a strong streak of conservatism and NY (above NYC) is pro-gun. Is there hope for the NE? I know there is NO hope for California.
Click to expand...
It's extremely unfair to lump all the NE states together and just write off the entire region. Each state is different.

Pennsylvania has unlicensed open carry outside of Philadelphia, and carry licenses are nearly shall issue in most counties (a few still -- illegally -- require letters of reference).

New York is hit and miss -- carry permits are more available in the up-state counties than closer to NYC, but may be restricted.

New Jersey ... is, well, New Jersey.

Connecticut is pretty close to shall issue. Yes, they have a magazine capacity limit and an "assault" weapon ban, but just about anyone who isn't a felon can get a carry permit.

Massachusetts also issues, but they may be restricted.

Rhode Island -- dunno.

Vermont - unlicensed carry is legal, and that includes both concealed and open carry.

New Hampshire -- pretty much shall issue.

Maine -- pretty much shall issue, and Maine recently went to permitless carry. The catch is that you can't carry in state or national (Acadia) parks without a carry permit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top