Gold Supporter
- Messages
- 24,888
- Reactions
- 37,786
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I agree. I am all for States going their own way managing their affairs but not when it violates or infringes up on our constitutionally protected rights. A law abiding citizen of this country should be able to carry open or concealed in the entire country. National Reciprocity would be a compromise. A right to defend ones self should not end at a State line.I think the states, like the federal government should stick to their business as outlined in the National and State Constitutions and let the people make their own decisions and lead their own lives. In return we will provide funds and sadly our Blood and Treasure. Capisce?
In other words, we'll do our part as we always do but it's time to back off because people are pissed.
Today I read a comment on a thread here regarding a member approving of States being able to decide their own rules on reciprocity. How many others here share this view? If you share this view what other rights do you think the States should be able to infringe up on?
I believe that the rise in (small L) libertarianism has pushed much of the evangelical authoriarianism out of conservative politics and my personal opinion is that we are better for it. The examples posted above seem extreme and outdated.The only real thing that really differentiates conservatives and liberals is what rights they believe the government should infringe.
Neither. We should have the freedom to carry without a license.So, to quantify my understanding of your post - you feel the federal legislators should decide reciprocity not states?
If that is your perspective, pray tell which State's CC training standards would be mandated by the Federal Legislators, NM's 16 hour, w/ live fire, course which includes deconfliction segment as well as limits NM's citizens to a singular caliber to carry unless another segment is added to the course; NC's 8 hour + live fire exercises; oh perhaps UT or VA's 4 hour w/no live fire exercises; perhaps any of those states which has no training whatsoever - pays ur $$$ get ur CC!
Speaking of $$$, like I was...how much goes to the state's profit center and how much goes to the Fed's profit center?
Sorry, with limited exceptions the states have done a fine job of buggering up citizens firearm carry rights, now you wish the Feds to intercede and str8en out the mess for the wellbeing of the nation's citizens - really?
I believe......... I made my views known in the other thread.
I agree about your tax issue.........but you are confusing rhetoric designed to attract opponents to your side with principle. The fact is, tax cuts do usually increase revenue but they also increase liberty and freedom. So, allow the tax cutting politicians there arguments, the bottom line is, tax cuts improve the quality of life for everyone.I've read it stated here on NWFA (and other fori... ?) that locals could and/or should be leery of "out-of-staters" walking around armed. Why?
When discussing "public safety", funding government through taxation*, entitlement programs, health care, etc, people (even "conservatives") tend to lose sight of the fact that we are a free society. We're not subjects, we're not run by the government. We... run... it. And if we have the will and some backbone it will continue that way. The Constitution was written by men who were suspicious of government and it's inevitable tendancy to overreach. We owe them nothing.
*It always infuriates me (overstatement, it's actually just very annoying) when proponents of a tax cut claim it will increase revenues to the Fed, therefore it's a great idea. Newsflash: I DON'T CARE if it increases revenue. I do not exist in this world to provide revenue for the government machine! If revenue goes down, CUT Spending! Deal with it. If it goes up, cut taxes MORE! I could give a sh*t what it does to revenue as far as my participation goes... I am not a human battery in your Matrix machine and you are not entitled to the fruits of my labor simply because you want it.
I haven't seen anyone attempting to shut-down left-wing speech. Plenty of instances of the reverse....the document can be a two edged sword, Freedom of speech for instance requires allowing people to talk even on subjects you disagree with...
It has been looked into. On college campuses almost all protests regarding speakers comes from the "left" of the speaker in question. Very sharp on one side and not the other. Also with "free speech" you allow violent rape porn, intentional and efficient propaganda, etc.I haven't seen anyone attempting to shut-down left-wing speech. Plenty of instances of the reverse.
I don't live in a vacuum or echo chamber, I view and listen to as much leftist propaganda as I can, and I can't recall a single valid example of conservatives attempting to stifle a liberal's 1A rights.
OTOH, a quick Google search will net you dozens of conservative speakers being shouted-down, run out of town, having their events cancelled, as well as Google itself, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram censoring right of center speech.
The sword seems to be a little dull on that second edge, brother.