A Trojan Horse for gun rights?

[Doubletap]

Some well-meaning, but in my opinion very misguided pro-gunners are working to pass a bill that could turn into a Trojan Horse for more gun control....


<broken link removed>

Read More

 

[Cougfan2]

I have to say I agree with the article. Granted we should have the right to carry without a permit in all 50 states, but since it doesn't look that will happen any time soon I'll settle with the states controlling CCW rather than let the Federal Govt get their grimy paws on my CCW rights. H.R. 822 scares me.

 

[jimwsea]

I also agree. I've always felt that the states should meet and come to some agreement. I don't like giving more decision-making power to the federal government (which was formed with a limited set of powers).

 

[Father of four]

"Once the Federal Government is in the business of setting the standards for concealed carry permits, it's only a matter of time before they start using that power to restrict our rights."

They already have. The sheep/people will keep asking for permission to do something that they already can do.

 

[Father of four]

Granted we should have the right to carry without a permit in all 50 states, but...

Right!

 

[JackFrost]

I am curious, if something like this bill passes or does come to fruition, will any of you that have active ccw permits let them expire? I know I will get cr@p for this but, I did not renew my ccw when the dead fish wrapper was trying to sue Multnomah county to make the records public.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

First, this law doesn't create a Federal CPL, nor does it create a Federal standard. All it does is say that my CPL from WA is valid in, for example, NY IF I follow NY law (just like driving).

Second, this is an express, specific and Constitutional power of Congress.

Third, we need to stop reading the anti press and believing all the doom and gloom.

 

[Father of four]

Second, this is an express, specific and Constitutional power of Congress.

Please explain.

I would love for you to show us where in the Constitution it states that Congress has the right or authority to regulate Our 2nd Amendment Rights.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

Article IV - The States

Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

This is a specific example of the Congress may "prescribe the manner in which such acts, records and proceeding shall be proved and the effects thereof". It is not in any way regulating the 2nd amendment, just ensuring that "Full faith and credit" is given.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

Article IV | LII / Legal Information Institute

reference for above post

 

[Father of four]

Alright I apologize. I jumped the gun.

I took your quote out of context. Sorry.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

not an issue, FofF. I believe that is what is happening a lot with this issue. People aren't looking at what the law is really all about before they get upset....it is, however, just like driver's licensing or any other license...

 

[Father of four]

I understand but I think it should have never been an issue. The Constitution of all 50 States say We The People have the right to bear arms and it shall not be infringed. Well, they have infringed that right and people are upset about it. Why did the people ever let it get to this point?

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

because we live in a republic. Each state makes laws to fit them (which was the intent). The Fed Constitution, though, has a bar that we aren't supposed to go below. This law would just start to redress some of those issues.

 

[pchewn]

The Constitution of all 50 States say We The People have the right to bear arms and it shall not be infringed.

On the issue of the right to bear arms, there is a HUGE difference between state constitutions. Some state constitutions don't even mention this right. On the issue of concealed carry, some state constitutions specifically say that CONCEALED carry may be regulated by the state.

Oregon: The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power

Colorado: The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.

 

[saxon]

said this on another board

"so what about the free states taht do not need a CHL and have a RIGHT to carry??.
how will they get to "carry in another state UNLESS they make it so every state has to have a chl.
that in and of it's self means it is not a RIGHT! for those free states"

so yes a trojan

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

It is my understanding that those states will print a license for use in outside states.

Why, oh why, don't you want to be allowed to carry evertwhere?

 

[Father of four]

On the issue of the right to bear arms, there is a HUGE difference between state constitutions. Some state constitutions don't even mention this right. On the issue of concealed carry, some state constitutions specifically say that CONCEALED carry may be regulated by the state.

It is either the United States Constitution being the Supreme law of this land or is it each individual States constitution?

The Constitution would be useless if ALL the States didn't abide by it. It wouldn't be worth anything.

 

[Father of four]

The Constitution was ratified in 1788.
The Oregon constitution was enacted in 1857.

The Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. The states should not be able to superseded it.

 

[Father of four]

Oregon Constitution

"Section 27

The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power."

Funny. In Portland, Oregon I have the right to bear my firearm in public unconcealed, unloaded, my firearms magazine in my pocket, unloaded. Ammunition in the other pocket.

I guess that's what the Oregon Constitution thinks the right to bear arms means.

It should read: The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defense of themselves if they ask for permission to obtain a CHL permit.