Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

National Reciprocity Amendment Possibly Up for Vote Today

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Gunny_2008

unread,
May 14, 2008, 9:18:38 PM5/14/08
to
Senator submitting amendment to a bill that would require other states to
honor your valid CCW permit. But you need to hurry. According to GOA, this
issue could be up for a vote as early as today.


Check out:
http://www.gunowners.org/a051308.htm

and either call your senators today or email them using the links provided
on that page. We need to start barraging them whenever a congressman gets
the balls to submit one of these bills. One of them just might pass. Yeah,
I know, slim chance. But, I'll take that over none any day.


-----------------------------------------------------------
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.net
Win a Fulton Armory "Classic" AR-15 with Black Hills Ammo
while supporting our RKBA. Details at http://www.myguns.net
-----------------------------------------------------------

D. Parker

unread,
May 16, 2008, 7:29:43 AM5/16/08
to
On May 14, 8:18 pm, "Gunny_2008" <patmagroin...@hotmail.com> wrote:
# Senator submitting amendment to a bill that would require other states to
# honor your valid CCW permit.  But you need to hurry.  According to GOA, this
# issue could be up for a vote as early as today.
#
# Check out:http://www.gunowners.org/a051308.htm
#
# and either call your senators today or email them using the links provided
# on that page.  We need to start barraging them whenever a congressman gets
# the balls to submit one of these bills.  One of them just might pass.  Yeah,
# I know, slim chance.  But, I'll take that over none any day.

I'm not sure that would be such a victory, as it would represent yet
another increase in federal power at the expense of states' rights.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for pro-2A legislation (although it's
difficult to argue that CCW is specifically protected by 2A)...but not
at any/all costs. It doesn't really make much sense to me to protect
a constitutional right (assuming that CCW *was* a constitutional
right) by violating a fundamental constitutional principal. Don't
lose sight of the forest in order to focus on our tree...even as
important a tree as it is.

D. Parker

unread,
May 16, 2008, 7:29:58 AM5/16/08
to
On May 14, 8:18 pm, "Gunny_2008" <patmagroin...@hotmail.com> wrote:
# Senator submitting amendment to a bill that would require other states to
# honor your valid CCW permit.  But you need to hurry.  According to GOA, this
# issue could be up for a vote as early as today.
#
# Check out:http://www.gunowners.org/a051308.htm
#
# and either call your senators today or email them using the links provided
# on that page.  We need to start barraging them whenever a congressman gets
# the balls to submit one of these bills.  One of them just might pass.  Yeah,
# I know, slim chance.  But, I'll take that over none any day.

After further review I wish to retract my previous response, as I
appear to have jumped the gun (horrible pun intended) in concluding
that the amendment in question represents a violation of states'
rights. I'm afraid I appear to be having one of those "need more
caffeine before speaking further" days ;-)

nick hull

unread,
May 17, 2008, 7:15:20 AM5/17/08
to
In article <g0jr7m$ir7$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>,
"D. Parker" <DanPark...@yahoo.com> wrote:

# On May 14, 8:18 pm, "Gunny_2008" <patmagroin...@hotmail.com> wrote:
# # Senator submitting amendment to a bill that would require other states to
# # honor your valid CCW permit.  But you need to hurry.  According to GOA, this
# # issue could be up for a vote as early as today.


# #
# # Check out:http://www.gunowners.org/a051308.htm
# #
# # and either call your senators today or email them using the links provided

# # on that page.  We need to start barraging them whenever a congressman gets
# # the balls to submit one of these bills.  One of them just might pass.  Yeah,
# # I know, slim chance.  But, I'll take that over none any day.
#
# After further review I wish to retract my previous response, as I
# appear to have jumped the gun (horrible pun intended) in concluding
# that the amendment in question represents a violation of states'
# rights. I'm afraid I appear to be having one of those "need more
# caffeine before speaking further" days ;-)

We don't need a national CCW amendment, we need enforcement of the
contract clause. If your marriage license and your drivers license is
good nationally, your CCW should also be upheld by the courts./

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
.

Offbreed

unread,
May 17, 2008, 1:01:11 PM5/17/08
to
Gunny_2008 wrote:
# Senator submitting amendment to a bill that would require other states to
# honor your valid CCW permit. But you need to hurry. According to GOA, this
# issue could be up for a vote as early as today.

I keep seeing this compared to drivers' licenses. Just how different are
the requirements for DL's between the states, anyhow?

nick hull

unread,
May 18, 2008, 10:09:09 AM5/18/08
to
In article <g0n30n$g54$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>,
Offbreed <offbre...@hotmail.com> wrote:

# Gunny_2008 wrote:
# # Senator submitting amendment to a bill that would require other states to
# # honor your valid CCW permit. But you need to hurry. According to GOA, this
# # issue could be up for a vote as early as today.
#
# I keep seeing this compared to drivers' licenses. Just how different are
# the requirements for DL's between the states, anyhow?

How different are Marriage licenses?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
.

Topp@Work

unread,
May 20, 2008, 7:06:32 AM5/20/08
to

"nick hull" <nh...@isp.com> wrote in message
news:g0meo8$bc8$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...

#
# We don't need a national CCW amendment, we need enforcement of the
# contract clause. If your marriage license and your drivers license is
# good nationally, your CCW should also be upheld by the courts./

AMen.

Gunny_2008

unread,
May 21, 2008, 7:40:21 AM5/21/08
to

"Topp@Work" <topp...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:g0ubbo$rev$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
#
# "nick hull" <nh...@isp.com> wrote in message
# news:g0meo8$bc8$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
#
# #

# # We don't need a national CCW amendment, we need enforcement of the
# # contract clause. If your marriage license and your drivers license is
# # good nationally, your CCW should also be upheld by the courts./
#
# AMen.
#
It's a good avenue of attack, i.e. the clause that says each state will give
full faith and credit to the legal proceedings of all other states. That
actually has a chance of winning in the courts. The judges like it because
it honors them. No judge likes to be told that his rulings are worthless in
the next state. So far states do honor on many things and they don't on
others. For example, everyone likes to list driver's licenses, divorces,
and marriages. But even that isn't 100%. Think, gay marriage. If a gay
couple is legally married in any state, say CA, that clause will require all
states to recognize it. I'll bet that goes to court several times before
every state honors that marriage. Another example is a hunting license. If
the clause is absolute, how come my NV hunting license isn't honored in
every other state? So, there are loopholes and exceptions. I hope the NRA
takes a shot at using the full faith clause. Who knows, it might just work.

Offbreed

unread,
May 21, 2008, 8:48:06 PM5/21/08
to
Gunny_2008 wrote:
# For example, everyone likes to list driver's licenses, divorces,
# and marriages. But even that isn't 100%. Think, gay marriage. If a gay
# couple is legally married in any state, say CA, that clause will require all
# states to recognize it.

That's a good issue to bring up. I think there is usually an inverse
relationship between CCW support and gay marriage support, by region.
LOL, it might even cause some migraines in that California court.

Herb Martin

unread,
May 21, 2008, 8:48:28 PM5/21/08
to

The NRA (leadership) is not particularly motivated to remove stupid gun
laws.

They tried to ruin Heller (then called Parker), they tried to build a
parallel case (after ignoring the DC gun ban for decades), and then
they tried to join in on Heller against the wishes of the litigants.

At one point they were speeding up Congress' overriding the DC
gun ban -- which they could have more easily done in the past --
which would have rendered Heller moot.

Whether the NRA leadership is consciously trying to maintain the
status quo, bad gun control, or not it is absolutely clear that they
would lose a LOT OF POWER and JOBS and MONEY if
all the unconstitutional gun control laws were shot down.

This is just a simple fact and we should remember it whenever we
wonder at the motivation of strange NRA behavior.

None of the CDC, the National Academy of Sciences of Sciences, nor DoJ
were able to find that ANY gun control reduces VIOLENT CRIME,
SUICIDE or ACCIDENTS in any significant manner.

Owning and carrying firearms is a fundamental and enumerated right
and any infringement on this right is subject to strict scrutiny; while no
gun control laws can even be shown to be effective meaning that no such
laws can pass scrict scrutiny.

Furthermore, there is strong evidence that "Shall Issue" Concealed Carry
and removing the "Gun Free Zones" reduces both violent crime in general
and rampage murders in specific.

Don Lampson

unread,
May 21, 2008, 8:48:56 PM5/21/08
to
Gunny
Bringing up hunting, and fishing licenses into the "full faith" arena
opens a can of worms for CCW reciprocity, don't you think?
I wouldn't be surprised if after considering your idea, individual
states might start charging a "user fee" for out of state drivers, to
use their highways, and rest areas, while driving through them?
Got any more revenue increasing ideas for cash strapped states?
HawHawHaw!
Don

http://www.donlampson.com

0 new messages